All in all reflections for the year: really strong, tons of great releases. I don’t think it was *quite* as good as 2009, but it was pretty close. I say this all the time: right now is an amazing time for music. Some people are stuck in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and somehow, even the 90s… but I think the 00s and beyond have become goddamn amazing. A lot of that is thanks due to the Internet. It’s possible for the smallest, most obscure artist to gain national acclaim with relative ease. The best of the best ultimately surfaces. There is still the mainstream and there is still a lot of money controlling what is dominant in that arena, but ultimately if you love music you will find the good stuff with ease.

Orlando got a surge of great shows in the Fall. Favorite shows I saw live, starting with the best: Beach House, Phantogram, LCD Soundsystem, Vampire Weekend, and Phoenix. Beach House was absolutely fucking incredible live. Most spellbinding show I have ever been to.

Now comes the hard part: rereading several times over the weekend and finding typos and sentence fragments and other goodies. I revise constantly and sometimes this leaves things in disarray on accident.

50. Dr. Dog – Shame, Shame

49. Sage Francis – Li(f)e

48. Menomena – Mines

47. Violens – Amoral

46. Kanye West – My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy

45. How To Dress Well – Love Remains

44. School of the Seven Bells – Disconnect from Desire

43. Tame Impala – Innerspeaker

42. Shy Child - Liquid Love

41. HEALTH – Disco2 (remix album)

40. Blood Red Shoes – Fire Like This

39. Drake – Thank Me Later

38. Joanna Newsom – Have One On Me

37. Flying Lotus – Cosmogramma

36. Wild Nothing – Gemini

35. Fang Island – Fang Island

34. Gorillaz - Plastic Beach

33. Emeralds – Does It Look Like I’m Here?

32. Belle & Sebastian - Belle and Sebastian Write About Love

31. Matt & Kim – Sidewalks

30. Best Coast – Crazy For You

29. MGMT – Congratulations

28. Woods - At Echo Lake

27. Wavves – King of the Beach

26. Surfer Blood – Astro Coast

25. of Montreal – False Priest

24. Wolf Parade – Expo ‘86

23. Janelle Monáe – The ArchAndroid

22. The Drums – The Drums

21. Twin Shadow – Forget

20. Caribou – Swim

Caribou, formerly known as Manitoba (Daniel Snaith), has an imperfect but respectable and high quality musical career thus far. His albums have felt ambivalent ever since he released Up In Flames; it’s like he feared that he would not be able to top it, so he would do something slightly different and therefore not able to fail. His albums almost always contain some top notch singles mixed in with some more dissonant, psychedelic experiments. The creative drain is a disarming one, and perhaps some people are only capable of putting together an “Odessa” once or twice a year. Whatever the case, Swim is one of his most consistent releases since Up In Flames, and certainly has songs like Sun that challenge its quality. I think he still has a lot of potential in him and eagerly anticipate future releases.

19. Hot Chip – One Life Stand

One Life Stand is easily Hot Chip’s most consistent album in mood and quality. Perhaps as an unfortunate result they are starting to feel a bit more methodical, but that has not hurt their style. Given the strange mix of apathy and emotion electronic music can often have, it seems to fit. The album has well-contemplated motifs in its style and lyrics.

The album was released early on in the year, but I feel it is now a great album to return to for the holidays. It is a warm album full of love and joy, but also darkness. Though it always approaches the romantic, it feels fleeting and fickle even when adamant. Perhaps that’s the cynic in me. You hear what you want to hear.

18. Big Boi - Sir Lucious Left Foot: The Son of Chico Dusty

I recently got called out on the fact that I don’t seem to be into hip-hop anymore. This isn’t true as I still do like hip-hop quite a lot. I just feel like the ‘scene’ of underground hip-hop needs a resurgence of innovators and progress. It has become rather stale. But we thankfully have veterans like Big Boi of Outkast still assembling great quality albums. While it relies heavily on its roots, it shines with style and sound production judgment. The immaculate finesse in both rhyme delivery and production on songs like Tangerine and and Shine Blockas carry with them better flow and rhythmic pulls than anything on My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy. And it reaches that point without feeling so desperate to be relevant.

17. ceo – White Magic

One of the more difficult artist names to look up on Google: ceo is a (surprise) Swedish electronica duo with an impeccable knack for gorgeous, layered electronic rhythms. The only shortcoming of this album is its length, but I suppose they went for quality over quantity. It feels somewhere in-between an EP and an LP. If the album were longer and maintained the quality, it could easily have been top 10 material. But here is close enough. It’s a tiny epic of an album.

16. Owen Pallett – Heartland

Owen Pallett, having been forced to revert his artist name of Final Fantasy back to his fortunately palatable (bad pun certainly intended) given name seems to be carrying a bit of a silly chip on his shoulder. I was not a huge fan of his work in the past, but this album he seemed like he was finally finding the right footing. He’s not exactly Michael Giacchino when it comes to composing, but sometimes I swear he comes close.

The splashes of electronics fit so well. His music is so mysterious and adventures in a lighthearted but compelling way. I suppose that’s why he originally went with the name “Final Fantasy,” referencing the video game series. E is for Estranged ranks up with one of my favorite songs of the year with its marvelous crescendo and perfect apex. I am excited for the prospect of Pallett’s maturing composition abilities because he could easily be scoring films.

15. Maximum Balloon – Maximum Balloon

TV on the Radio member/producer David Sitek gave us quite a treat this year with Maximum Balloon. He gathered up some amazing vocalists like Karen O from Yeah Yeah Yeahs and the venerable David Byrne of Talking Heads, making it not quite a ‘solo’ album but it’s absolutely driven by him all the way. It is certainly not out of place in 2010 and in many ways represents the year quite definitively in style. Its effortless mesh of genres and vocalists somehow coalesces together into something consistent in sound. Indie, disco, R&B, electronica… it’s not so much trying to be any one of those things, but amalgamating them into one perfect blend that just seems right.

14. Clogs – The Creatures In The Garden of Lady Walton

This album is out of time. It’s apparent that the album is a cooperative work of many musicians, and it feels much in the way that ‘real’ folk music should. It is not the expose of a single individual. It is about community and sharing. It is about understanding each other through visceral music. This album is enchanting and lovely in ways that few others albums today are. It feels untouched by more modern influences like the New Weird America/psych folk scene. It is pure. It is wonderful.

13. Phantogram – Eyelid Movies

Certainly one of the “surprise” hits of the year. Phantogram are a duo that have quickly gained acclaim through this strong release. Though weak in the middle section of the album, the quality is hard to deny, especially considering their limited experience. Sarah Barthel’s voice is undoubtedly one of their strongest assets, next to their lovely and melodic song production. I’m rooting for these two to become great.

12. The National - High Violet

Never was a fan of this band in the past. They always bored me. Not gonna lie about that. Yet with all of their modern rock conventions intact, they’ve created something uncannily beautiful and sad. It’s the kind of album that can make an indifferent day and turn it deeply introspective, which can be good or bad depending on the mood you’re looking to go. That is a key feature of great music–its facile capability to shift emotion and make you feel. This is that kind of album. It is haunting and despondent. It doesn’t try to push the boundaries, but it finds places within them we never knew were there.

11. Girl Talk - All Day

Although being released in the latter portion of the year, this album has quickly shot up to one of my most listened-to of the year. The album is better than Feed the Animals, but not quite as good as Night Ripper.

Unabashedly, All Day is addictive and genius much like the rest of Girl Talk’s material. In a time of ironic juxtapositions, Girl Talk is king. Yet, it is not just for the sake of juxtaposition. Mixing Talking Heads with Skee-Lo, T’Pau, and Notorious B.I.G. isn’t just ironic or strange or funny. It’s somehow good. This has been a constant through Girl Talk’s last four albums, and it hasn’t gotten old quite yet. I don’t think there is anyone that is tired of it yet — just people who never got into it in the first place. It’s not for everyone.

There are some really amazing “I can’t believe he just sampled that” moments on the album. My biggest was definitely Arcade Fire’s “Wake Up” mixed with Birdman. It proves the Why? maxim that “against a blue sky almost anything seems cinematic” by giving these ridiculously bad hip-hop lyrics the ostensible feeling that they are in fact important and compelling. They aren’t. But Girl Talk is a master of facade, and that is part of the awkward yet ceaselessly enjoyable aspects of Greg Gillis’s work.

10. Vampire Weekend - Contra

The sophomoric slump has plagued countless artists, and VW was not impervious to its power. But they mitigated its stereotypical effects extremely well. They did not choose to follow the same template as their self-titled. They chose to experiment with new sounds. I think that will be consistent throughout their career, although they will always have a refined indie-pop aesthetic attached to them. But they are always out for new textures, which I appreciate much.

“Horchata,” the album’s opening song, is also one of the album’s standout songs along with “Cousins” and “Giving Up the Gun.” Their ability to write great melodies while hooking you with soothing rhythms has remained a constant. My only complaint was that the production could have been a little better. I don’t mind lo-fi, but parts of the album just felt unfinished and unrefined. My favorite song here is probably the under-appreciated “Taxi Cab.”

9. Broken Social Scene - Forgiveness Rock Record

Rhythm. Beat. The connection between these things and our heart is part of the origin and magic of music. We sometimes take this fact for granted and do not always take the time to realize what makes a song we like enjoyable. This is a recurring theme of this year in music for me, but I feel like often some of their best songs are the most simple–such as “Sweetest Kill.” I feel like these simple songs are so mysteriously enjoyable because we connect with them on a deeper level that we know. Not deep in an intellectual way, but a visceral one. It’s like Sigur Rós: even if we didn’t understand the words, we’d still understand what the song was about.

Time is a weird thing. This album feels like it came out forever ago, but it was this year. Yet, the year went so fast. It’s an uncanny contradiction, but there it is. It must be difficult to gather up the many musicians a part of BSS, but every few years they manage to put together some wonderful songs.” Forced to Love,” “Art House Director,” and “Ungrateful Little Father” are a few songs that really grabbed me this year. The album certainly has missteps, though, such as Water in Hell. But all in all it is an exceptional album that deserves many re-listens.

8. Arcade Fire – The Suburbs

This is an album that is easily making #1 on many lists. It’s an exceptional album–ultimately about on par with Neon Bible, but does not top Funeral. If the entire album was consistent in quality with songs like “The Suburbs” and “Sprawl II (Mountains Beyond Mountains)” it would quite easily be my favorite album of the year. It’s not that the rest of the album is bad–it’s consistently good. Just not consistently fucking amazing.

But still, the album DOES have great quality. It wouldn’t be in my top ten otherwise. Songs like “Rococo” have wavering, addictive rhythms. “Month of May” is satisfyingly upbeat and insatiable. Will Butler is perhaps maturing as a vocalist, learning how to rely less on shouting to convey intensity. He still has room to grow, even though he was already great. There’s a plethora of good tracks on here–enough to more than satisfy the hunger of the many Arcade Fire fans out there.

Truthfully, most of the songs are not instantly gratifying. “Modern Man” I used to skip over, but after several listens I found myself enjoying it quite a lot. I may do this with the album as a whole. It took me a while to get into Funeral, too.

7. Deerhunter – Halycon Digest

Lost. We are are all lost in our minds, struggling to grip the slippery edge of reality with our sensory system. Bradley Cox understands this perhaps too well, and thus understands the world around him with a slightly more acute perception of the innate absurdity and contradictory nature of reality. In Halcyon Digest, we’re given a kaleidoscope to peer into the many colors of darkness. We are given the Rosetta Stone of the recondite. It is not a weird as we expected. That’s what makes it unbelievable. It is somehow familiar. We approach it with a nostalgia we haven’t felt in forever. We remember long lost loved ones. We remember pain, but also hope and joy.

Now that my deconstructive, postmodern puke is out of the way, I can say plainly that this album is strikingly and unrelentingly great. The layered production is subtle but somehow dense and intricate. The rhythms are intoxicating. Songs like “Revival,” “Memory Boy,” and “Desire Lines” are uncannily constructed with perfection. This album is god damn amazing, and that’s all that really needs to be said. There are some weak points, but the good far outweigh them.

6. Robyn – Body Talk (Series)

One thing I learned this year: Robyn doesn’t fuck around. Her fleeting moment as a pop star in the 90s is something that most of us hardly remember, but for her it must seem like yesterday. And just because we have seen her sparingly since then, you get the feeling that she has never lost her passion and her drive. She has just been battling against many barriers: untrustworthy friends, mercurial lovers, despicable labels, and most importantly, herself. The latter is made vividly clear in the song “Don’t Fucking Tell Me What To Do” in which she lists the many things that are ‘killing her.’ At least half of them are her.

I appreciate the template of Body Talk. I think more artists should follow this. Robyn did not hype everything up into one single, solitary release. She released it into three components: Part 1, Part 2, and then finally realizing everything into a final LP. Some tracks were made acoustic or produced differently, adding more life into what are delicately crafted songs. It’s essentially what artists do with EPs and singles, but much more focused and coherently focused around the album’s theme. For a former pop star (now pop sage) it feels refreshing and slightly adventurous.

At the end of the day, these are lovely songs with unforgettable melodies and goosebump-inducing sincerity. I hate to use the word “honest” but you can really feel the turmoil of her success and passion. It’s a connection that pop artists attempt to make but feels feigned and drained after all the production. Not true here with in Body Talk. It is the real deal. This is a paragon of pop music.

5. The Tallest Man on Earth – The Wild Hunt

I don’t know how many times I’ve heard someone be called “the next Bob Dylan.” I don’t think it’s ever rung true. And although some have applied the title to Kristian Matsson (The Tallest Man on Earth) I’m not sure agree with him, either. Not yet, anyway. There’s something mercurial and strange about Dylan that eludes most. It’s more than just a voice. It’s more than just great lyrics. It’s a particular mood and a prolific, progressive aesthetic working against all expectations. Dylan/Matsson comparisons are inevitable due to the similarities of voice, folk style (especially early 60s Dylan), and simultaneously surreal yet mundane lyrics.

All of that aside, though, this is an irrefutably high-caliber release from a lesser-known but amazing musician. It is challenging to write acoustically-driven songs catchy, melodic, and memorable. They don’t get stuck in your head like songs driven by softer instruments (mainly the piano). But that’s part of the genius of these songs. There is hard edge to them. It is wild in this respect. It is raw and unfiltered. Yet, somehow, extremely polished. He is a relatively new musician, but seems so seasoned.

I feel the need to also mention Sometimes the Blues is Just a Passing Bird, which is a more blues-oriented EP release from TTMOE this year. It’s not a companion release to The Wild Hunt and very much stands on its own. I’m picky about letting EPs onto my “favorite” lists because of their length (I believe the difficulty in making 50+ minutes of continuously compelling music is an important part of the wow-factor). However, the EP is definitely on the same level of quality as The Wild Hunt. It shows versatility in style and is no doubt among some of the greatest of the year as well. Maybe he’s closer to Dylan than I thought.

4. Beach House – Teen Dream

This album is like a well-crafted baguette fresh out of the oven.

Let me explain. Like many other albums on this list, the sound is not complicated, but it is complex. I’m appropriating the aforementioned baguette analogy from a 2010 TED Talk (hipster overload reached) by Eric Berlow in which he discusses how simplicity leads to complexity. Berlow insists, “So for me, a well-crafted baguette, fresh out of the oven is complex. But a curry onion green olive poppy cheese bread is complicated because it is all mixed and cooked together, which is hard for me to understand what is inside it. So it is complicated.”

The sounds and arrangements of Teen Dream are not complicated. Yet, they seem so dense and satisfying. They are complex. Victoria Legrand’s voice is the definite vehicle propelling the sound, and she sounds like a virtuoso country-singer whose hometown is Wonderland.

The only thing more entrancing and enticing I heard this year other than this album was hearing Beach House live. Their sound filled the entire venue with majestic, intoxicating layers of organs and distortions. Legrand’s voice was equally as good as her recorded material, which was relieving. The songs they played from Teen Dream stand out as their most successful and mature songwriting: “Silver Soul,” “Walk in the Park,” “Used to Be,” “Norway,” “Better Times.” We haven’t seen better times in music. Thanks.

3. Diamond Rings – Special Affections

The basics can be surreal. How can something so obviously catchy sound so new and unfamiliar? How did it take it this long to exist? Special Affections is by no means an original album. Influences including everything from Casiotone for the Painfully Alone to 80s pop is present.

So while its lo-fi synth-pop palette is nothing out of the ordinary, the songwriting is what carries it gracefully into ears. Almost every song has at least one unforgettable melody that runs the risk of getting stuck in your head. Some songs more than others, perhaps, such as the immaculate “You & Me” and standout singles “All Yr Songs” and “Something Else.” This isn’t an album you want to hear again and again. This is an album with songs you want to hear again and again. The weakest track is the first, but after that, it is consistently strong throughout. Each song is like a crayon. They may have a similar shapes, but the mood changes and strikes you differently. Every color in the crayon box is worth wielding in your heart.

2. LCD Soundsystem – This Is Happening

James Murphy’s “Sound of Silver” was a difficult album to follow. This Is Happening manages to, at the least, parallel its quality and acclaim. He does this by following essentially the same template for the album–and perhaps I would have preferred a little more uniqueness there, it’s hard to reject the consistent quality. The immaculate production, offbeat humor, occasional profoundness, and get-stuck-in-your-head-all-day addictiveness culminate into something spectacular.

The album is started, much similarly to “Get Innoculous!” with the slow yet aurally insatiable “Dance Yrself Clean.” Even the metaphor of purging through dance is there again (Innoculous/Clean). Attempting to match the intensity of Sound of Silver’s “All My Friends” we have tracks like “All I Want” and “Home.” They don’t disappoint. Even a track like “Drunk Girls” which appears like a gimmicky single has compelling and emotional moments. And of course, we have an amusingly awkward and funny track “Pow Pow” (which is probably most similar to LCD’s eponymous album’s “Losing My Edge”). But the most underrated and subtle song on the album is “You Wanted A Hit.” It’s not a song that jumps out at you at all, and the intro is still a little boring to me. But once it “hits” you, it’s incredible. It took me several listens and a remix to realize its potential.

This album is a rare exception in quality and musical–dare I say it–craftsmanship. James Murphy clearly has LCD Soundsystem down to a science, which is perhaps why he claims to be moving on to a new project. He needs to move onto a fresh start, now that he has finally danced himself clean. If that is the case, he has left the perfect punctuation mark on LCD Soundsystem’s discography.

1. Sufjan Stevens - The Age of Adz

I honestly haven’t liked anything Sufjan has done since Michigan in 2003. But he has returned with a refreshingly new but well-calibrated aesthetic.

I think when searching for the greatest (oops, I mean, favorite!) albums of the year, the word ‘zeitgeist’ comes to mind: something that captures the spirit of our collective consciousness. We’re sprawling out of identity crises with hope and fear of the future. We’re finally embracing and integrating new technology seamlessly into our organic lives. This is a thematic remnant of the 80s, which is an era of influence we can find in almost everything today from popular styles of dress to the ubiquitous post-punk influence present in current popular music. In the 90s, we seemed to repel against this idea: we had albums like OK Computer which took a more cynical approach to globalization and automation. But today, we are more relaxed. We understand we ultimately have control over technology and our entanglement within it. The only thing to fear is ourselves.

Like my favorite album of 2009 (Sunset Rubdown’s Dragonslayer), Age of Adz is a confounding juxtaposition of things–perhaps even more so. The mix of organic, orchestral sounds and vocals and robotic electronics creates something unexpected. It is not some basic genre-hybrid indie pop we’ve become comfortable with ever since The Postal Service became a mainstream smash hit. It is something new–something emerging from a pattern of entertaining yet increasingly dulling quaintly melodic popular songs. It seems so trite at this point to even talk about such juxtaposition because it in itself has become so commonplace in today’s music. What Sufjan has done here, however, is not some novel hybrid. It is symbiotic. It is oneness. It is a natural extension of what already exists. Yet, it is so unlike anything right now. It is mercurial and often misunderstood.

I think, somehow, we are like this. In a world of Reddit, iPhones, YouTube, and of course Facebook, we’re allowing technology into our lives in a seamless and compelling way. But not in a way that de-humanizes us. We’re the same, flawed people we’ve always been. We’re perhaps more fast-paced, but we’re also more expressive about our identity. With Age of Adz, Sufjan has fully embraced the electronic, but still stays close to human. The album begins and ends acoustically: purely organic and visceral, much like our own lives. Everything in-between, all is dream. The album’s lyrics are and allusions to Royal Robertson’s artwork are simultaneously esoteric and familiar. The album feels like a beautiful mess of at least half of the albums on this list. You can feel everything from Owen Pallett to Clogs to Arcade Fire to Twin Shadow.

The troubling part of this write-up, upon my own self-critical review of it, is how much I focus on culture, influence, and high-level aesthetic. On a a lower, more visceral level, I know this album is my favorite of the year because it has given me the most goosebumps. The album’s darkest moments are full of shivering echoes, lovely distortions, and ghastly pianos: a dark clambering upon whatever metaphoric soul I have. The album’s hopeful moments are uplifting (“Boy, we can do so much more together / Better get a life.”) and triumphant. But most of the album’s time is spent in a powerful grey area, toying with emotion and expectation.

All in all, there’s not much more you can ask from an album. The track quality is consistent throughout Age of Adz. There are countless amazing melodies tucked pleasantly within epic, experimental songs. Pop and avant-garde are merged without a flinch and not simply for the novelty value. The album’s beauty comes from the songwriter being true to himself and simply forging gorgeous sounds regardless of the timbre’s origins: vocal cords, instruments, computers. It doesn’t matter. What matters is how we use these things. The only thing that matters is ourselves.

But don’t take my word for it. Listen. After all, words are futile devices.

I don’t usually have favorites. I’m restlessly indecisive when it comes to choosing things in life that seem to stand out above the rest. I don’t have a favorite movie. I don’t have a favorite album. I don’t even have a favorite color. But a favorite TV show I can announce with absolute confidence and certainty: LOST. It’s a curiosity to some friends and co-workers of mine that I find myself so obsessively drenched in loving this show. After all, television as a medium still suffers from the state of being commercially driven, and thus is understandably dismissed as inartistic, meaningless entertainment. Most TV shows are exactly that, after all. It’s frustrating because LOST is the diametric opposite. In fact, I think it’s more than a great TV show. It’s one of the single greatest artistic creations of the decade. That’s quite a claim, I know, but throughout this post I’ll explain why.

“In 2004, ABC called on producer J.J. Abrams to create a prime-time drama that capitalized on the success of Survivor: something tropical, Cast Away-ish, and closer to Lord of the Flies than Gilligan’s Island. Oh, they asked, and could you make it a towering, mainstream megahit, please? What executives got from the guy best known for a brainy college soap (Felicity) and an even brainier spy soap (Alias) was Lost, a fiendishly obscure, cast-of-thousands epic about … well … to say it’s about people on a magic island is selling it short. To say it’s about Everything — which its adherents swear it is — is a bit grandiose. So let’s just say it’s about destiny. And metaphysics. And quantum physics. And leadership, torture, time travel, synchronicity, Skinner boxes, geodesic domes, polar bears, doomsday equations, comic books, the Casimir effect, and the no-less-potent Cass Elliot effect. It was weird. Even weirder: It was a hit. A towering, mainstream megahit. You’d think a show like this could happen only in some alternate television universe. Maybe so. Maybe for the past six years we’ve been living in that universe. That would be so Lost.”

–Wired Magazine, April 19, 2010 (http://www.wired.com/magazine/18-05/)

I think firstly it’s reasonable to agree on what makes something a great piece of art. Wikipedia says, “Art is the process or product of deliberately arranging elements in a way to affect the senses or emotions.” That’s a fairly broad and ambiguous definition, and rightfully so; the spectrum of what is defined as art has been stretched to new limits, especially since the 20th century.  However, I think we can agree that historically some of the greatest works of art–be they plays, paintings, or poetry–have deeply explored the human condition. The human condition “encompasses the totality of the experience of being human and living human lives.”  From a literary perspective, it’s what supposedly separates “classic fiction literature” from “genre fiction.” Of course, there are authors who have straddled that fence such as Kurt Vonnegut (an acknowledged inspiration to LOST), who constructed works of science fiction but also explored aspects of the human condition such as war, fate, and the overall purpose of human life.

In essence, that is LOST. Yes, it is a drama/science fiction show. But it is also a meticulously crafted work of art that explores timeless themes and questions. Just a few of  the topics explored in LOST include: determinism vs. free will,  science vs. faith, game theory, the ambiguity of good vs. evil, behavioral conditioning, the supernatural, parent/child issues and countless other motifs spread ubiquitously over its six season run.

Never Judge a Show by Its Uninteresting Premise (Or at least keep an open mind)

More than just a plane crash.

Like many other LOST fans, though, I did not discover my appreciation for it during its premiere in 2004. In fact, I ignored watching it completely. I thought to myself: “A drama with people stranded on an island? Sounds like Laguna Beach meets Survivor.” However, after a long discussion about some of my favorite TV shows like Firefly, Babylon 5, and Battlestar Galactica, a college classmate recommended LOST. I initially snickered; I thought he was a sucker. Then he made the outrageous claim: “It’s possibly the best show ever on television.” I responded, “How can it be better than Star Trek: The Next Generation???”

Obviously I gave the show a chance, and the rest is history. I became absolutely enthralled. It didn’t take long to start agreeing with his outrageous claim. If you decide to try to get into LOST, I cannot stress how important it is to start from the beginning in Season 1. LOST is the epitome of  serialized drama for a reason: you must watch it in order to experience it correctly. Some view this as a crutch versus shows which each episode is a self-contained story, but it’s simply the shape of LOST’s narrative. They’re apples and oranges. It’s like comparing a collection of short stories to a 300-page novel. You can’t complain that you cannot skip around chapters in the novel because that’s simply not the way it was intended to be experienced. But that doesn’t mean that the novel is better than the short stories, either. They’re just different.

A Seemingly Quixotic Conundrum

Changing the show from a simple group of battered island castaways to an epic, science fiction story exploring deep themes about life and purpose drove much of the mainstream viewers away. But the mainstream’s exodus was the genesis for an intense cult following as the show’s fans created thriving Internet communities of web sites, blogs, forums, wikis, tweets, and every other 21st century buzzword you’ve grown to love and hate. The show’s complex plot and mythology almost demands repeat views in order to fully understand and appreciate, just like literary analysis demands re-reads.

LOST has ubiquitous literary references.

This becomes a frequent excuse for people who refuse to get into LOST: “I don’t have the time. It’s too much.” Maybe that’s an excuse if you work 14 hour days every day with no days off and a family of 10 to take care of, but otherwise it’s just cowardice. Sure, LOST is an exercise in patience. Unlike most media today, LOST demands an attention to details. It’s the reason why many people don’t enjoy reading books: you have to put forth effort to obtain enjoyment.

Don’t get me wrong: there’s something to be appreciated about good shows that provide for a more comfortable escape. A couple of my favorite TVs shows right now are ‘Community’ and ‘Castle.’ They’re more episodic shows I can simply watch and enjoy without a second thought. But you’re cheating yourself of a great experience if you ONLY watch those kinds of shows. You shouldn’t be daunted by the challenge of keeping up with LOST, especially when you can take your time with DVDs/Blu-ray/etc. In fact, I recommend watching LOST slowly and giving yourself breaks in-between episodes and seasons. It allows you time to digest and think about what you’ve seen rather than soaring through it all at once.

Most LOST fans would agree that half of the fun of the show took place outside of the show itself. Simply theorizing with others about the show and what direction we thought it would go in has been a rewarding experience. There are LOST podcasts out there whose running duration is longer than LOST itself! Some fans even started up LOST Book Clubs to read all of the books mentioned on LOST, and comparing them to the show’s themes. The writers have graciously acknowledged LOST’s many influences, from film (Star Wars) to games (Myst). This just reinforces LOST’s epic quality. LOST is full of so many ideas and questions that it’s impossible to keep track of them all, much like life itself. LOST tangles together a cultural web of reality and dreams and ideas. And now LOST is a part of that web.

I was recently reading some dated LOST theories that were conceived back during Season 2 or 3, and it’s amazing how different the direction the show ended up going. But those theories were compelling, and many people really did believe these theories would prove to be true. Perhaps some of them would have been even more interesting than what really happened. For example, I thought the popular Time Loop Theory (which had an entire website devoted to its detail) even if proved wrong would have made for an amazing narrative regardless of its truth in the show.

I want to acknowledge the title of this section’s header, “A Seeming Quixotic Conundrum.” This is more than me being a pedantic ass with words. I want to emphasize the moments in Season 3 (and to a small extent, Season 2) where the writers seem to be going off on extravagant tangents and the show had no direction. This was due partially to the fact that the writers were unsure of when the show would end. It forced them to go down paths that may not have been necessary to go down. Toward the end of Season 3, though, the writers realized they needed an end date to the show in order to drive toward it. ABC agreed to keep the show on for 3 more seasons. That birthed new life into the show and invigorated it. In fact, the end of Season 3 contains some of the best episodes ever of the show (The Man Behind the Curtain, The Brig, etc). I love the fact that the show is ending with artistic intent, instead of like most shows which are forced to end the show unexpectedly. This is why, though I’m sad to see LOST end, I’m glad it will end gracefully.

A Visceral Experience

Returning to its Wikipedia definition, recall that art often “affect[s] the senses or emotions.” Almost everyone I know who watches LOST has had one more moments of “choking up” or crying. Some easily affected people tear up at every little kiss or embrace they witness, but others like myself are rarely pushed to such emotions through stories in any medium. This is a testament mostly to LOST’s great character development and ensemble cast. Characters die, and dead is dead. But LOST covers the entire spectrum of emotion so thoroughly: curiosity, grief, anger, compassion, despair, fear, guilt, happiness, hysteria, lust, shame, apathy, hatred, love. For fans of LOST, each one of these words can conjure up countless scenes from the show in which they or a character experienced respective emotions deeply.  As you grow attached to the characters, like any good show, you gain a sense of sympathy–even for some of the show’s notorious villains such as Benjamin Linus.

There are scenes in LOST that have impacted its collective viewership with unanimous awe. Obviously to keep this post spoiler-free I can’t dive into specifics. But as far as good dramatic television goes, LOST hits emotional beat with finesse. There are few shows that have people jumping out of their chairs in excitement as frequently as LOST has. The characters are a part of something epic, but the audience is along for that ride.

The Show About Nothing or The Show About Everything

Earlier in the post I made the claim that LOST was one of the greatest artistic creations of the decade. I’ll admit that sounds a bit outlandish, and certainly makes me seem narrow-minded. I’m not saying it’s *the* best; I only ask that it be considered among the best. After all, in the past decade in novels there been profound social commentaries such as Zadie Smith’s White Teeth and Cormac McCarthy’s The Road. In television along with LOST, Mad Men has been a triumphant success and an artistic masterpiece, delivering superb drama, striking characters, and compelling insight into American culture’s past and present.  Gripping films like No Country for Old Men, There Will Be Blood, and The Departed stand draped sanguine (pun intended) success, while others like Waking Life and Eternal Sunshine kept us existentially in check. And of course, let’s not forget the most important medium of the decade: gaming: Half-Life 2 represents an astonishingly successful hybrid of intense interactivity and compelling narrative.

So, why LOST? Perhaps because of its thematic epicness. Perhaps because of its intricate and painfully flawed characters. Perhaps because of its unparalleled rich backstory and mythology. Perhaps because of its emotional impact on millions of viewers who honestly, after six seasons, still get butterflies in their stomach at the thought of every new episode. Perhaps all of the above. And the fact that it’s fucking amazing.

The Enigma of Life

Questions. So many people have become frustrated with LOST because it often answers questions with questions. Many people distanced themselves from the show around Season 2 or 3 because of this. I don’t want to repeat things I said in the previous section entitled “A Seemingly Quixotic Conundrum” but many of those thoughts apply here. In addition to those thoughts, however, I want to emphasize how important the questions are. Some of the questions are wildly open-ended like, “What is the Island?”; “Did they crash on the Island by accident or was it orchestrated?”; “What is the ‘monster’?”

The answer is not the answer.

Everyone alive wants answers. Not just about LOST, but about everything. But answers aren’t that easy, and sometimes the search for those answers is more important than the answers themselves.  Questions like, “What is life?”; “Do I have free will or are we all part of some cosmic plan?”; “Who am I?” People have spent their entire lives searching answers to questions like that. Sometimes the answers aren’t always fulfilling. Sometimes they don’t always make sense. Sometimes they just lead to new questions. Sound familiar? LOST’s constant obfuscation is part necessity (keeping the show interesting) and part fact of life.

I think by the show’s end we will have a lot of answers. But we will still have questions. And I wouldn’t have it any other way. Intrigue and imagination are two of the aspects that have made the show enjoyable. The theorizing, the debating, and the dreaming. If we’re left with question neatly answered, it ruins that boundless curiosity. One of my favorite TV show conclusions is Star Trek: The Next Generation, in which its final episode “All Good Things…” ends during a poker game in which Captain Picard optimistically remarks, “So, five-card stud, nothing wild. And the sky’s the limit.” Now, I’m not expecting something as facetious as that, or as random as The Sopranos’ ending. I think LOST’s end will feel very final. But I also think it will leave a lot of room for our imagination to continue to run as wild has it has since the show’s beginning. That’s all we can ask for. And if you haven’t seen LOST… what are you waiting for!

Stay LOST.

Here they are: my favorite albums of the year. It’s been a tradition of mine since 2003 but it’s the first time I’ve posted it in this particular blog. Formerly I housed them in my LiveJournal (seriously, who has one anymore???) but usually link it to the normal social networking spots. I created this list a little earlier than usual. I usually wait until the last few days of the year to post this list in case there are any more that sneak in at the end. But I think at this point there isn’t enough time for me to fall in love with an album as much as I have any of these. I might do some last minute edits if something comes up, but for the most part, I consider this list complete.

This year was exceptionally strong for new music. There were a lot more albums that didn’t make this list that I thought were mediocre. Usually I make a list of 10-20 albums, but this year there were just so many I fell in love with. It really is a great time for new music, and anyone who thinks otherwise has their head in the sand. I created a playlist linked below containing some standout tracks of the year, but I advise just getting the full albums, especially the top 10 or so.

Playlist containing various tracks from these albums.

50. Sing Fang Bous – Clangour

49. Nosaj Thing – Drift

HONORABLE MENTIONS:
Bill Callahan - Sometimes I Wish I Were An Eagle
This album stands out so much that it feels totally out of place in my list. I think it’s because it doesn’t even feel like a 2009 album. It feels old and new at the same time. I was never a big fan of (Smog) though there are some standout tracks in his discography. It’s great that he finally got it right with this album, creating a strong and consistently good album while maintaining his lo-fi style. It feels wrong to stick this in the list with a number next to it, trying to compare it to other albums when it’s really just its own thing. It’s an eagle flying above everything else, but not because it is trying to be better than it. It flies above and alone simply because that’s what it does.

In Part 2, I take an in-depth look at the new Star Trek (2009) movie. It obviously represents an important part of the evolution of science fiction. It’s an exciting time for the prospects of both new show concepts and the relaunching of old, familiar ones. But, as always, I have my doubts.

Part I: The New Face of Sci Fi

President of Sci Fi, David Howe, noted that, “By changing the name to Syfy, which remains phonetically identical, the new brand broadens perceptions and embraces a wider range of current and future imagination-based entertainment beyond just the traditional sci fi genre, including fantasy, supernatural, paranormal, reality, mystery, action and adventure.”

My knee-jerk reaction to this change was disdain. It’s kind of offensive that after all these years of holding onto the Sci Fi brand that they’d just drop it and try to be something else. It feels like they’re abandoning their core audience in favor of larger numbers. But the more I considered it, the more it makes sense and the less it seems repulsive. They are actually in-tune with genre and its evolution. Now, I’m not trying to give NBC/Sci Fi some free marketing copy; in fact, I don’t really care about the channel that much because I watch most of my media on my computer. I just think that the change parallels with the genre’s change as a whole.

Sci Fi Channel just enjoyed its most watched year ever. This is probably attributed to the addition some of this less “geeky” programming. I am sure the rebranding is just the focal point of it all: a complete relaunch to grab media attention as well as propel the entire company toward its new direction. Now, as an avid fan of science fiction, I have a lot of mixed feelings about this transition. It’s not mixed feelings toward the Sci Fi Channel specifically as much as it is about how sci fi is transforming entirely. Overall, my feelings are positive, though.

I think this all represents a long development of sci fi over the past decade. In 1999, Babylon 5 and Deep Space 9 had just ended. These two shows undoubtedly stuck to the then-current science fiction television paradigm initiated Star Trek: The Next Generation. But B5 and DS9 also contained more dark and consistent drama, as well as overarching plot that spanned the entire series. Sound familiar? This trend of having season-long plotlines and episodes that bleed together is something that countless shows do today including LOST, Heroes, 24, Prison Break, and of course, Battlestar Galactica.

Another crucial factor is realism. Fans of science fiction don’t necessarily mind the quirkiness of past shows. In fact, they often embrace it and joke about it. But there are many fans who do get irked about more than the questionable “science” in sci fi. But more importantly, the believability of sci fi tends to waver when this realism is put in jeopardy. Ronald D. Moore, who created the reivisioned Battlestar Galactica, wrote and produced for Star Trek: Deep Space 9 and Voyager. About Star Trek: Voyager, Moore had this to say in a January 2000 Cinescape interview:

“The premise has a lot of possibilities. Before it aired, I was at a convention in Pasadena, and Sternbach and Okuda were on stage, and they were answering questions from the audience about the new ship. It was all very technical, and they were talking about the fact that in the premise this ship was going to have problems. It wasn’t going to have unlimited sources of energy. It wasn’t going to have all the doodads of the Enterprise. It was going to be rougher, fending for themselves more, having to trade to get supplies that they want. That didn’t happen. It doesn’t happen at all, and it’s a lie to the audience. I think the audience intuitively knows when something is true and something is not true. Voyager is not true. If it were true, the ship would not look spic-and-span every week, after all these battles it goes through. How many times has the bridge been destroyed? How many shuttlecrafts have vanished, and another one just comes out of the oven? That kind of bullshitting the audience I think takes its toll. At some point the audience stops taking it seriously, because they know that this is not really the way this would happen. These people wouldn’t act like this.”

Moore  achieved this goal of sci fi realism with “Battlestar Galactica.” In Season 1 especially, it really felt like we were along for the ride with a ragtag fleet trying to survive in space. I think the show’s downfall in quality (Season 3 and onward) can be attributed somewhat to Moore and the other Battlestar writers moving away from the show’s focus on realism and becoming entrenched too much in the show’s complex mythology. We no longer felt like we were along for the ride; it felt more like we were mice being led through a maze with a piece of cheese that we could never eat. And when we finally got to that cheese, it tasted oh-so bittersweet. Similar analyses are being drawn to LOST, although I haven’t given up hope there. Indeed, however, it is experiencing the exact same problem: it went from a show about people trying to survive on an island, to being completely wrapped up in mystery. It wasn’t only the mainstream audience feeling alienated, either.

It’s a delicate balance. Ronald D. Moore’s next project following Battlestar Galactica, entitled Caprica is a prequel to the series that focuses even more on character drama. The pilot for Caprica presented us with a more subdued, less intense science fiction show. Perhaps Moore has some regret about the last few seasons of Battlestar and hopes to return to a more visceral character drama with Caprica. The show has promise, but I’m wary.

While Ronald D. More has stressed intense drama and realism, J.J. Abrams has focused on enrapturing mainstream audiences. This is where the new Star Trek movie comes in. I have a post that specifically addresses my reactions to the Star Trek franchise reboot in more detail. But in the context of this post, I’m quite ambivalent about what this means for sci fi. The rest of my thoughts regarding the direction of sci fi will be followed up in Part 2, where I take a more in-depth look at the once flagship of science fiction television: Star Trek.

Part II: The Next Next Generation

How did we get here?

Star Trek, the once thriving and seemingly indomitable sci fi franchise, has been a joke for years. Now, I don’t mean the joke of the stereotyped geek audience of unkempt basement dwellers. Star Trek had  become a joke of a franchise that some thought might not even revive. That’s where J.J. Abrams comes in to save the day. But is it what Trek fans wanted? Is this where we want Star Trek to be? It’s out of the basement and into the ballpark of cool. Is it simply arrogant of sci fi fans to dismiss its mainstream success as betrayal, or is it truly something good?

I’ve been my reserving my thoughts regarding the Star Trek (2009) movie until it actually came out and I watched it. There’s no doubt that Star Trek is a great movie. It is a superb work of entertainment. It’s already being hailed as the summer box office hit of the year. But was it a great sci fi movie? I certainly didn’t feel like it. It felt more like an action movie. That’s not bad by any means–I like action movies when they’re well done. But I’m left feeling quite ambivalent in the context of science fiction. The movie is more in the direction of Star Wars, which represents a more traditional “good vs. evil” hero story. I’m actually not much of a Star Wars fan for this reason. Star Trek’s (2009) plot similarly feels a little flat. The character drama and story is predictable. It redeems itself with great direction and amazing special effects.

I didn’t feel like I was on the edge of my seat. The drama just wasn’t there for me. But that would fine if it at least sparked my imagination, as all great science fiction should. But that didn’t even happen. Maybe I’m a little weird because my favorite episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation aren’t some of the epic season finales like “The Best of Both Worlds” but are in fact the more absurd episodes such as Timescape, Schisms, Cause and Effect, Emergence, Frame of Mind, and Where No One Has Gone Before. I also loved thought-provoking episodes such as The Measure of a Man and Justice. These episodes, even when they were slow-paced, showed me things that made my imagination run wild. Star Trek (2009) made my visual perception run wild, but that’s about it.

I know I’m asking for too much in a single movie. There was no way for J.J. Abrams to appease every kind of sci fi fan out there, let alone all mainstream audiences. Paramount enlisted him with the task of reinvisioning the franchise, making it feel fresh and obtaining a new audience. This goal was undoubtedly achieved with the grace and excellence we’ve come to know from Abrams. Not only has the series been reignited, it’s even been riddened of much of the geek stigma. Despite the fact that I didn’t love the movie as much as I hoped I would, I’m very excited for the franchise as a whole. There’s now a great chance for a new Star Trek series. I know a new series will have room for many different kinds of episodes and larger, more epic character drama. I’m excited about the new audience because I do think sci fi can and should be enjoyed by more people. I just hope it doesn’t lose its depth in the process.

I’m willing to overlook the whole timeline divergence of Star Trek (2009) because it wouldn’t be the first time it’s happened in Star Trek as a whole. However, I do hope in any future series they return to the “normal” timeline and don’t revisit this alternate version. I’m not the kind of person dismiss the movie because of small little details that aren’t consistent with Star Trek mythos. I’m more concerned with the big picture.  I just want to see the evolution of the Trek universe after the events of “Nemesis”. I’m tired of prequels like the movie and “Enterprise.” Oh, Enterprise. I haven’t mentioned that yet.

The failed series “Enterprise” was actually an attempt at a correct step forward. The blunder, in my opinion, was bad writing. But the direction style showed us a Star Trek that tried to be more real and modern than its predecessors. In a sense, it was what they wanted to do with the new movie. They wanted to get a new audience and make Star Trek hip and fresh. They failed because the show ended up somewhere in-between. It felt a little too fake. Now, I actually liked Enterprise to some extent and thought the show had its ups and downs. Seasons 2 and 3 were pretty good, actually. But the mini-arcs the writers tried to do in Season 4 led to the show’s quick demise. These story arcs failed because they weren’t interesting enough to prolong for 5 or 6 episodes straight. There were single episodes of The Next Generation that were more interesting and epic–and those were wrapped up in a succinct 45 minutes. If an episode was going to be a 2-parter, it had better be damned good. That was the genius of The Next Generation’s writing. They could cram so much into one episode. That is what good writing is.

So, here we are. Star Trek (2009) is right on the cusp of a new generation of sci fi. This includes Battlestar Galactica, Fringe, Caprica, and even LOST. I think longtime science fiction fans are experiencing a lot of mixed feelings about this evolution. I think we are content with where Battlestar went, but I’m not so sure about Star Trek (2009). My primary concern is the loss of depth. I don’t just want intense action in space with phasers and time travel and explosions. I want mystery. I want ethical dilemmas. I want intergalactic diplomacy. I want my mind blown by things I never imagined. I need depth.

However… I also welcome warmly the greater realism and intense drama that has come from the new evolution of science fiction. The corniness of much past sci fi is something I’ve never personally understood or thought was necessary. I welcome new audiences. But I don’t want the things that originally got me into science fiction to go away. That’s what I’m afraid of. In the end, though, I do think the frontier of science fiction looks more bright than bleak.

I’m not an expert on feminist theory, and I don’t want to act like I am. But I do have a lot of thoughts on it. I’m a guy who grew up with feminist values (at least the core belief in gender equality)–but I didn’t even know what the word “feminist” truly meant until high school. I don’t think it was detrimental not being specifically taught the concept of feminism because I was also not taught typical patriarchal attitudes in my household, where both my mother and father seemed equal. Sure, my dad did typical “guy” stuff like work on things in his garage and take care of the lawn. My mother cleaned the house and did the laundry. But they both seemed to make important family decisions together.

My mother and my father both worked full time jobs and they both were active in raising my sister and me. My sister was good at math, and I was good at writing–the opposite of the stereotype. The idea that women are capable of achieving everything men can was something I never questioned until I started to grow up in the world and actually see how slanted things were (especially certain occupations)  towards the benefit of men. The explanations given to me regarding this were either “because women are inferior to men,” or something like “Western society continues to perpetuate patriarchy through society, culture and media.” I believe it’s the latter, though there are quite a few people who believe in the former. But referring to the latter, out of those three potential vessels of patriarchal attitudes (society/culture/media), I think media is the one we need to be concerned about the least.

Men and women are undoubtedly different, but you can’t measure whether one is inferior to the other. But whatever you believe, when it comes down to it, the most important and indisputable thing is that women, men, or any kind of transgendered persons (for brevity’s sake, in the future, you can assume I’m including transgendered when I say “men and women”) are more alike than they are different. If you are misogynist or misandric, you’re probably hating more of yourself than you realize.

We’ve come a long way as a society in a relatively short amount of time considering our long history of unwavering patriarchy, save for a few exceptions. But from first-wave to third-wave feminism to today, it’s a struggle that continues. If you think men and women are pretty much on an equal playing field today, that’s symptomatic of feminism’s (as a movement) current failings. The original concept I had for this post is where men are today. But I can’t talk about that without also talking about women because I risk belittling the feminist movement. I’m also drawing parallels between the sexes and both of their struggles with gender identity. I’m not creating this post demanding sympathy for men–just understanding between everyone. We’re all in this together, after all.

Where Almost No Man Has Gone Before

Growing up in the 90s, one of my most important fictional role models was Captain Picard.  Here was a man who didn’t achieve victory through brute force (though, when faced with the absolute necessity to apply it, he could). Picard used diplomacy and multifaceted tactics to overcome difficult situations. Picard was more than a ship’s captain; he was an archaeologist, a philosopher, an intellectual. You could often find him reading a book in his quarters during his off-time. He rode horses and directed Shakespeare plays on the Holodeck. He practiced fencing. He was intensely introspective. These things are far, far from your typical male protagonist–especially the lead role. Compare Picard to Kirk and you’ll see that it’s quite a step for man.

Hopefully the creators of Star Trek weren’t suggesting it would take until the 24th century for these attributes to be unquestioned by any of his crew, though. I think if Picard were a military captain in modern society, they’d be joking about him behind his back that he was some kind of fairy, and maybe some quips about the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy. Now, another important captain (this one of the Obvious) reminds us all: Gender roles are not something that can change overnight.

The whole concept of gender equality isn’t that women should start acting like more manly or the vice versa. It’s about eliminating that concept altogether. People can be all sorts of things–assertive, confident, emotional, compassionate, apathetic, angry, passive. These things aren’t and shouldn’t be viewed as more exclusive to one gender than another.

Smoke and Mirrors

The direct statement that I’m making is beyond saying it’s OK for a guy to be feminine. It’s that whether something is feminine or masculine should be irrelevant. If I want to listen to an artist like Feist, I don’t care about whether or not it’s girly or listen to in the eyes of society. If you do, you have some self-image issues. But that’s not to say I haven’t got any issues myself. Copious amounts of men in Western society are struggling with their own gender identity, asking questions like: How manly is too manly? How girly is too girly? How do I treat women with respect but also appear confident and in control? How do I not appear too arrogant? Is chivalry just as bad as misogyny? (OK, maybe that last question is just me.)

No Cure For Macho

I’m reminded of Denis Leary’s rants in No Cure For Cancer when he recounts his own (albeit spontaneous and facetious) reflections on the transformation of what it is to be a “macho” man in current times: “It’s completely out of fashion. You all know that–you’re not supposed to be a macho guy any more. You’re not supposed to smoke or drink or eat meat or any of that stuff.”

Denis later continues: “It’s tough, you know, for guys right now ’cause in spite of Iron John and Fire In the Belly and the whole men’s movement, it’s tough to be a guy because you’ve got to balance that macho thing. You’re supposed to have all the other elements in place and the macho thing is in the background–just a little bit of macho. We were supposed to be involved in equal rights; we’ve had like 20 or 30 years to get used to the idea of being sensitive guys and to help women out with their equal rights. But we haven’t done a goddamn thing, have we, guys? We just sit around and wait for them to get paid the same amount as us.”

I think Leary’s comments could be a little misinterpreted. I don’t think he meant to trivialize the feminist movement or suggest that it was offensive men had to change at all. But it is definitely true that, for gender equality to work, men and women both must change. Men have certainly been resilient to this change. Sometimes it’s just the peer pressure of acting like a man so they don’t look like a fruit in front of their friends. Sometimes it’s just because it’s the way their fathers raised them. Girls are in the same boat; if they act too assertive, they get labeled as a bitch or a dyke.

The truth is, there are millions out there who would be perfectly comfortable acting more feminine or masculine than their gender role dictates. Even the people who waltz around hating on feminism were probably secretly blown away by a few Anne Sexton poems in high school, or maybe they have a few Pet Shop Boys albums they keep hidden away in an enigmatic maze on their hard drive. The thing that is mostly keeping our gender roles from becoming more homogeneous any faster is fear: fear of what others will think of us.

TV Killed the Cowboy Star

Media can both help and harm the process of removing that fear. It all depends on the message being sent, of course (Sidenote: The message is the message, McLuhan-lovers). In the case of Captain Picard, it obviously helps more than hurts. Today, we enjoy watching a variety of men in the television. LOST‘s ensemble cast include two very different lead male characters, Jack and Sawyer, whose conflicting personalities are as caustic as can be. Kiefer Sutherland’s take on Jack Bauer (24) shows us a badass that has intense convictions, strong emotions, and has even briefly cried (gasp!). And, of course, Mad Men‘s Don Draper shows us a mercurial man in the 1960s whose consistently contradictory actions toward women make him a complex, conflicted and dark character indeed.

Fringe's Olivia Dunham

There are also shows with powerful female leads. Fringe features the keen, intelligent and emotional Agent Olivia Dunham. 30 Rock features the eccentric and delightful Liz Lemon played by Tina Fey, who also created the show. United States of Tara brings us one of the most intricate and interesting main characters on a show regardless of gender (If Toni Collette doesn’t get an Emmy for it, the contest is a sham).

Now, sure, if you change the channel over to MTV, you may get a slightly different perspective on gender roles. For the most part, it’s only the subtle elements that entrap the concepts of patriarchy in media. Anything outlandish like Don Imus’s “nappy headed hoes” comment gets shot down and destroyed faster than a new Uwe Boll movie. You can’t purge the subtleties from media because they’re still so embedded in our society. We still mostly see male leads because of that. It’s even why you see the “Best Actor” category presented after the “Best Actress” category in every major award show. Subtle things like that aren’t individually an atrocity, but they collectively represent something symptomatic of a greater problem.

Video Games and the Internet

Games: this is where media is doing more harm than good. The role of many video game lead characters is still to this day your typical brainless “kill ‘em first and sort it out later” alpha male. One genre we’ve seem more variation than that is probably from Japanese console RPGs, but the conflict of gender roles over there is a little different than ours in the West (though certainly just as much of a crucial issue).  Don’t get me wrong; I love video games. I grew up with them. But I don’t think they enriched me deeply, except for maybe a few of the Final Fantasy games.

The problem with many games is their target audience: young men. Many developers simply aren’t concerned with gender roles as much as they are with selling titles. If young men generally want a strong and dominant main character and not some wimpy, sulking wuss, that’s what they’ll give them. The characters rarely have any complexity, and the audience is OK with that. They just want a fun game. They don’t (usually) want to think much.

I know there are a lot of games out there that defy this stereotype and actually do have some intricate characters, but by far most of the mainstream successes are without depth. Like I said, this isn’t a problem with the medium as much as it is the current video game industry. It is too much of a costly gamble to make big budget games, so the developers create characters they know will be the safest bet with their target audience in order to make the most profit. The same problem generally exists in big budget cinema.

Throughout most of the Internet–including the blogosphere–you’ll find mostly liberal attitudes and a general acceptance of what I’m saying here. In fact, blogs about feminism and gender identity are probably a dime a dozen. But one place on the Internet I frequent that has an intense amount of misogyny and clings dearly to patriarchal attitudes is the gaming scene. In MMORPGs, for example, girls are consistently treated with disrespect, especially if they’re not interested in the many passes they’re receiving from guys. They’re treated like incompetent, useless pieces of garbage (and that’s of course the ‘PG’ version of the diction). It sometimes makes me ashamed I even associate with these guys. I know they aren’t bad, though; they’re just vapid.

Now, I could go on and on about the perception of gender roles in video game and some other areas of Internet culture. But I think I will save that for an entire post of its own one day because it is far too much to capture in just a section.

To Boldly Split Infinitives No Man Has Split Before

Denis Leary thought that men deserved at least a “smigin” of credit for the little we’ve progressed. Will it really the length of time between Don Draper’s 1964 to Captain Picard’s 2364 to dissolve the barriers of our gender roles?  Of course these fictional worlds, albeit one based on more fact than the other, are no measure at all. More importantly are the times the shows were created in (1987 and 2007, respectively). I think they bode positively, but it definitely doesn’t mean the work is done. We all need to be who we want to be regardless of how our gender roles traditionally are. The more widely it’s accepted in a way that isn’t viewed as idiosyncratic or odd, the more we will transcend who we are.

I hate to sound melodramatic, but we have a lot of challenges ahead of us if we hope to survive as a species. This is far beyond just stabilizing our economy. We’ve got to achieve peace. Fuck, we need to colonize space eventually or we’re done for. We need every scientist, every writer, every diplomat and every soldier regardless of what’s between their legs. We can’t be held back by some petty misunderstandings regarding gender or race. We need more than to simply be accepted by others in our fields; we need to feel no fear or shame in we are doing. If we do, we may not even try in the first place. A potential scientist who could cure a rampant pandemic might end up instead working as a nurse simply because of unnecessary fear. But, in the same way, a man who could change the world with a poem might refrain from publishing because it’s seen as too “feminine” of an activity.  The point is–as long as it’s not hurting anyone else–do what you want and don’t look back.

"I don't think I realized it until this moment... but it must be hard, being a man, too." --Rachel Menken, Mad Men

I don’t completely agree with the above quote. Part of me is quite annoyed by it, actually. However, there are undoubtedly millions of people out there that consume media with an insatiable hunger, and digest it as quickly as they devour it. There are some would say that this is the fault of new popular media specifically, but it can easily be universal. It is the ubiquitous, fast-paced and accessible qualities of today’s media that makes it so easily consumable. Also, just because something can be quickly consumed does not necessarily diminish its merit. After all, brevity is the soul of wit, right?

The television programs, movies, and games of today’s popular culture are often watered down to appease obsessive advertisers, paranoid parents, cantankerous critics, and even their own touchy audiences. Thus, many elitists tout the print form as the last remaining academic beacon of higher learning. But let’s not forget about the genre fiction and magazines these highbrow academics unfairly toss aside like some unrelated, arbitrary, inane waste of time. Print form can be “corrupted” by the good old dollar bill like any other medium.

Cerebral Core Meltdown has a primary objective of analyzing this conflict that is occurring both internally (my own personal tastes and reflections) and externally in the world of new media, or the “Global Village.” The connotative differences between the words “movie” and “film” is one example where our culture has collectively divided a medium by assumed intent and aesthetics. But everyone knows it’s not that simple–especially the hardworking people who are creating these great works regardless of their profitability.

Many television shows such as LOST have transcended this so-called dichotomy between profitable media and artistic merit. In fact, it’s even worth noting that–in some ways–it is more demanding to write for a critically acclaimed television show than it is to write for something more open-ended an independent film. Never would I make the claim that one is superior to the other in artistic quality; after all, that is completely subjective. What I mean is that the constant requirement of getting the attention of people who are furiously flipping through channels is a burden that few can handle.

Creating a show that is compelling on an intellectual level is usually counter-productive to a goal mass marketability. Thus, we have MTV. Critically acclaimed (and rightfully so) programs like Mad Men don’t always see the numbers they deserve. These shows also don’t always get the artistic credit they deserve from observers outside of their own community. To many, television is garbage, no matter what the content.

Some topics I’m interested in covering in future blog posts which may or may not be related to the above over-arching theme:

• Video/Computer Games (in general). Just the name alone sounds childish. They’re just games–how could they be worth my precious time as a scholar? While the stigma of stupidity surrounding television is starting to decay, the stigma of video/computer games is still strong. The Digital Media program where I went to college gave credit to the medium where it was due, but beyond that, you’ll find little intellectual appreciation for video games. Understandably so–the target audience usually isn’t looking for enlightenment; they’re looking for entertainment.Console RPGs such as Xenogears, Chrono Trigger and the Final Fantasy series do provide storylines which can be compelling. The immersion of the users can become deep, and has a greater potential for them to take a perspective outside of their own. I don’t think these previously-mentioned titles are Shakespearean in quality, but I do think that games (or “interactive media”) absolutely have the capability to become much more than simply a game. It the collective fault of our expectations of what games are that prevents them from becoming so. It has little to with the medium itself other than the fact that it is such a complex and expensive medium to create works for (which automatically makes it difficult to create ‘intellectual’ works (that would conflict with their profitability–same problem with television).

• MMORPGs. I’ve been playing them since 1998, starting with EverQuest. Since then, I’ve played just about every major MMO title: Asheron’s Call, Anarchy Online, Dark Age of Camelot, Star Wars Galaxies, EverQuest 2, Lord of the Rings: Online, too many others including free Korean MMOs to count and–of course–World of Warcraft. When it comes to these topics, I’ll probably be emulating Lum the Mad (a past blogger who covered Ultima Online and EQ). I’m very opinionated when it comes to them. I think WoW is a plague that made the genre both explode in popularity and death simultaneously. Yes: the history and future of MMOs will probably be one of the first things I tackle.

• Science Fiction (Television). What has Star Trek (including TNG, DS9, and Voyager) said about the human condition? Are they ever going to reboot the Star Trek franchise successfully? How fucking hard does Picard own Kirk? Why do I like Babylon 5 more than DS9? What are the most important metaphors in LOST? Why do I think Season 1 of Battlestar Galactica is some of the best sci fi ever made, but almost everything afterward was total dogshit? When the hell is Joss Whedon just going to devote his life to reviving Firefly? I’ll be discussing all of these things and more. The first topic I’m interested in when it comes to Sci Fi is how the stereotypes of the genre (from the perspective of television) have evolved from the days of The Twilight Zone to shows like Stargate: SG1. What has changed and what has remained the same? Are the viewers of yesterday’s sci fi looking for the same things as the viewers of today? Tomorrow?

• Internet Culture / Net Neutrality: The Internet is without a doubt the most important vessel for expression which has fully realized itself in my lifetime (albeit I’m only 23). For example, just YouTube alone is quite possibly the epitome of our culture’s endless desire to consume more and more as quickly as possible. Our collective attention spans are diminishing every minute. Unfortunately, there might come a time when we have to tell our children about “the goold old days” when the Internet used to be free. I hope it never comes to that.

• Music. I will occasionally talk about music on here and make recommendations. I annually created “top albums” lists, for examples. I may discuss overarching music trends, especially concerning the independent/underground/artsy faux-ass nonsense scenes, but I probably won’t spend much time dissecting individual albums. I’m not trying to be a critic, but we all are to some degree. If you want to know what my music taste is like, I have a last.fm located @ http://www.last.fm/user/aleatoric.

• Various other works of fiction, comedy, documentary, etc. I am a big fan of comedy, especially dry, witty comedy and satire. My favorite comedians include Steven Wright and George Carlin (I’d say “RIP” but he’d probably fucking hate that). My favorite comedy TV shows include Seinfeld, Curb Your Enthusiasm, 30 Rock, The Office (UK and US), It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, Extras, How I Met Your Mother, etc.

This all might seem too random and diverse for one single blog. It probably looks like I should have an entire batallion of blogs. But I think what will tie it all together is not only my insatiable ability to consume, but my insatiable ability to understand. There are universal qualities I look for in art regardless of medium.

Imagination and inspiration are two things that keep me ticking. I need to stop ranting to friends about these topics and organize them as best that I can on this blog. I’ve got many insights to reveal and many pet peeves to fucking self-destruct over. Oh, and welcome to the first post of my blog: Cerebral Core Meltdown.