Aridi Writes

As of right now I’m listening to a Spotify playlist made up for my current book project, Minute Silence. (Specifically book one, subtitled The Death Of Stars.) It’s got me thinking about how I pick songs for playlists, how they affect what I write and inform my choice of scene and character.

This has basically led me to pick out each song on that playlist and put it into context – where am I going to use it? What scenes, what characters does it apply to? One or many? Why is it thematic? If Minute Silence ever makes it to a movie, will this song be used in it for this scene?

Here’s a smattering…

30 Seconds To Mars – Kings And Queens

Aside from having a deep personal love for this song, it applies to the world of the Enhanced in a very poignant fashion. Singing about the cast-off slice of society, a group that nobody quite knows how to handle, Jared Leto probably didn’t have my motley collection of super-powered people in mind when he wrote it; but talking about those who were the “kings and queens of promise” and the “victims of ourselves”, it puts me firmly in the Enhanced frame of mind – simply as a collective of outsiders. Also I get chills when I hear about the age of man being over; truly, the point of view of more than one Enhanced. Perhaps, in the movie, this would make an ideal End Credits song.

Alter Bridge – One Day Remains

Perhaps a no brainer. One Day Remains is about living as if it was your last day on earth; leave the fear and the ennui behind and do something. Don’t give up, don’t stop, just go, go, go. Fast-paced and powerful. There’s a scene that goes with this song, a running battle on the highway of Steel Mountain between Cory “Trailblazer” Mallory (who can run at 300mph) and Mark “Juggler” Jugg (fast, strong, flies), against two or three other Enhanced – Renegades, bad guys – who are abducting a comatose man from a hospital. The fight is fast, and the two good guys need to be both strong AND fearless to win. The song is perfect.

Down – On March The Saints

As well as being as heavy as a panzer column driving through a steel mill, the song is about gritting your teeth, digging in your boots and rising above the tragedies and frustrations that litter life. The connection between the song and Hurricane Katrina’s devastation of New Orleans is up for debate, but the chorus – “We have been through change, by the season of storms” – implies the steadfast refusal to buckle under great duress. A real mark of a hero. No scene in particular exists for this song, yet, but I’m sure one will come about.

Five Finger Death Punch – Bad Company

Aggression, a somewhat mournful realisation that one is a violent outcast, but an unrepentant reliance on the gun and the fist to get the job done. The original song – by the band Bad Company, on the album Bad Company – is good enough; but the Five Finger Death Punch cover is awesome; and when one William McMillan and his squad of mercenary asskickers get their hands on several suits of powered armour, well…let’s just say them mounting up and moving out would be best served by this playing in the background. McMillan (played by Ray Winstone in an ideal world) used to be a Royal Navy Commando. He knows he’s a badass. And he hates the Enhanced because they don’t need to try to be better than everyone else – so when the opportunity comes along to get even…he’ll happily crack the skull of any that get in his way.

A little background on this:

The Independent – Anti X-Factor Christmas Campaign Is “Stupid”, Says Simon Cowell

The Guardian – Simon Cowell: Rage Against The Machine Campaign “Stupid”

Yes, that same story twice. Just for completeness.

So. Mister Cowell. To clarify…you are irked that a campaign to get a specific song to Christmas #1 is “stupid”, and “cynical” and “dismissive” of the competition. You also state that people have a “distorted view of Christmas number ones being incredible”. You make a point of mentioning Bob The Builder and Cliff Richard.

Those two points put together can be taken in many different ways, Mister Cowell.

I might imply that your own campaign to get a specific song to Christmas #1 – a campaign that involves a massive media push on all fronts to get the show X Factor into the lives of as many people as possible in the advertising equivalent of the firebombing of Dresden – is “cynical” and “dismissive” of competition. Especially competition that happens to fall outside of your corporate influence.

I might also imply that your apparent claim that “it just so happens that our record, to coincide with our show, goes out at Christmas” is at best ignorant, and at worse, a complete fabrication. “Just so happens”? So there was no plan AT ALL that the final would occur so close to what the marketing companies call the Prime Gifting Period? Any vertebrate with more than seven brain cells can understand the incredulity I’m expressing at this point in time.

Last year, the reaction to Alexandra Burke and her unfortunate cover of Jeff Buckley’s Hallelujah was on the spur of the moment, something that leapt fully-formed out of the hearts and minds of music lovers everywhere in immediate rebellion against a machine that had pushed too far, this time. Churning out bland, inoffensive pop songs and force-feeding it down the gullets of those who for the past three months have been absolutely drowned in the media coverage of those singing them was one thing. Doing THAT to a beautiful song was quite another.

This time, there is actual resistance. This time, people have stood up and said that, no, they won’t just let this continue. No competition to the complete TV domination of X Factor could happen in the domain of broadcasting, so two people formed a facebook group. Just two people. Does anyone else think that maybe the sheer numbers of respondents speaks for itself? Nearly 600,000 people, and it’s still three days BEFORE the number one slot starts being contested?

You may claim, Mister Cowell, that not having a number one record at Christmas is not going to change your life. I daresay you might be fibbing. Given the figures from last year – if every single member of the facebook group bought a copy of Killing In The Name, or the Children In Need single, or the Muppets version of Bohemian Rhapsody, or ANYTHING other than whatever X Factor gushes out into the pipes, then they’d actually knock you off the top spot. And that is a sudden spanner tossed into the works of the machine, isn’t it? Because that’s what X Factor is meant to do. It’s meant to produce Christmas number one singles, because Christmas number one singles sell albums, and promote DVDs and books, and sell magazines.

It was very gallant of you to hide behind the contestants, Mister Cowell. The workhorses that you throw into the mill wheel to churn out your paycheck. To use them as a reason for your apparent displeasure was a brave move. Apparently this facebook group will “spoil the party” for the three finalists.

The utter arrogance of that statement takes my breath away.

Am I right in thinking that, in your opinion…the moment it looks like a group of people that aren’t a multi-million pound media machine actually threatens the imminent, almost-undeniable Christmas influx…your contestants are actually going to feel disillusioned? Perhaps somewhat jaded?

And they aren’t at all jaded by the fact that the twins – who, lest we forget, were voted off the show – were signed by Louis Walsh, regardless? Thus somewhat cheapening the entire process of being paraded in front of a studio audience for one minute forty-five to sing a horribly cut-down version of a classic song, and hope that your less-than-two minutes of fame on that particular evening were enough to save you from the public’s depradations?

Likewise, they aren’t disillusioned by the notion that last year, Alexandra Burke was made to sing a song she didn’t like, and didn’t want to sing, and was still number one for it? A song that faced equally stiff – though not terribly pre-emptive – resistance? And it was still number one? They might wonder if their actual talent is what truly drives them forward, or if it wouldn’t matter who they were or what they could do with a microphone. They might wonder if all that is needed is the deft touch of SyCo, and they SHALL go to the ball.

If it is so immaterial when the single is released, Mister Cowell…then release it as the first single of the New Year. A week later, two weeks. Talk to the lovely people in FremantleMedia that you produce the show with, and see if you can’t arrange the show to “just happen to be” aired away from Christmas. I dare you, nay, DOUBLE-DARE you to back up the hot air that you spout so readily with action. And perhaps then, six hundred thousand people will have a reason to be less cynical.

You were right, at least, on one aspect of this entire situation.

It is aimed at you. ENTIRELY at you.

It was aimed at you last year, it will be aimed at you next year. It will be aimed at you until you stop choking our charts with crap. It will be aimed at you until people can listen to the radio for half an hour and hear one original and well-written song, with some actual talent behind it. It will be aimed at you until this music business is more about the music than the business.

I’m sure we all wish the three finalists the very best of luck. We don’t want to see THEM fail. And it will be YOUR failure if, should the unthinkable happen and your hit machine produces…less a Hit, and more a Shit…they suddenly find themselves bereft of recording contracts.

But then I’m sure you’ll do quite well off the next crop.

I wonder, Mister Cowell, if that thought alone will spoil this year’s party.

Coming soon.

I have to say, immediately after I hit the halfway point (notably at work), I felt relieved. I didn’t know if I’d reach this point at all, let alone at about the right kind of time in the month; because we’re about halfway through November, right? I think it can work.

It’s going places, this book.

Hell yes I just hit 10k. I did so right at the end of a war with Relly. My main character is having a bit of a discussion with a forthcoming spook.

I’m hopeful. Second day, ten thousand words. If I keep up this pace, it means I’ll have hit the 50k goal by the end of my two weeks off work. Probably a bit more besides.

Woot.

New idea. It’s growing on me. Check the banner.

UK To Get Tough On File-Sharers.

Before I get into the meat of this rant I’d like to suggest a few alternative headlines:

- “Mandelson U-Turn On Net Neutrality Expected To Be Rushed Into Law”
- “Victory For The Dinosaurs As Idiot Lord Accepts Bribery”
- “So Much For Progress”
- “Who Is This Guy Anyway?”

If you aren’t sure where I stand on this issue, then this rant is probably not for you.

Okay, so. If Johnny Reb, your average internet user, is caught using torrents or the Pirate Bay, then his ISP will be bound by law to bar him from the internet? That’s…kind of what I get from this. Because, see, there’s not a lot of ways that your ISP can identify what you are downloading. Oh, I’m sure they would be able to monitor traffic in terms of data flow and bitrate etc. But can they pinpoint each file and piece of information that ends up on Johnny Reb’s computer, AND find out if he has the legal right to have it on his computer?

I would suggest…probably not. Which would in turn raise the question – how WILL Johnny Reb’s downloading habits be monitored? I’m far from an expert on this, but all I can think of is two options:

1) A system is created by which all web traffic is monitored in-depth, thus breaching untold privacy laws and effectively creating massive demand for anonimity (which will of course be made illegal, otherwise the system won’t work), OR

2) The assumption is made that if your traffic LOOKS like you are downloading illegal files, then you are assumed to be downloading illegal files, and are thus guilty until proven innocent.

As much bullshit as both of those options are, the results of either of them being adopted is the same.

Let me put it this way. I DO know people that download EVERYTHING illegally and never pay for a damn thing. But they’re the types who won’t get caught. They’re the ones that know how to hide, or how to masquerade as a different user, or how to bamboozle automated systems into believing they are common-or-garden consumers.

So it won’t be those people – the ones that the record and film industries seem to think everyone with broadband aspires to be – that actually get caught and pay the penalty. No; it’ll be average downloaders like Johnny Reb, who actually purchase more media than those who don’t download anything (The Guardian – Study finds pirates 10 times more likely to buy music, BBC News – Downloading ‘myths’ challenged).

To outline how this works: Johnny Reb hears a snippet of the latest Random Band CD on the radio. The radio cuts it short of course, and might not mention the song title, so after a little research he finds out what the song is called. He takes the effort to download it, plus a couple more. He listens to the songs, and if the music is good – would it be bad if he went through the effort? – he buys the CD, either in his local record store, or online.

Johnny Reb then tells his friends about Random Band. Some of them have never heard of Random Band. He sends them the songs he has downloaded. A proportion of his friends dislike – and thus delete – the songs. Another proportion of his friends just keep the songs, listen to them, and don’t buy the CD. Yet another proportion of his friends DO buy the CD. And in return, Johnny Reb is sent a few songs by Other Random Band. Does he like them? If he does, he’ll more than likely buy the CD.

Some people will dismiss that little story as being purely fantasy. I don’t blame them. They believe whatever they are told by the people that own the media, and what they are told over and over is that pirates never pay for anything and keep everything for themselves, thus crippling the industry, starving actors and musicians to death, actually murdering puppies, defecating in police helmets, etc etc.

But I digress. It’s people like Johnny Reb – who, statistically speaking, contribute more monetarily speaking than people that don’t download anything – that will be banned from using the internet.

What does that tell you, boys and girls?

My figures here are fast and loose but they will serve as an indication of the statistical trend here. If someone else has actual verifiable figures, please provide them, otherwise…observe.

Out of 1,000 people, 400 are Johnny Rebs, 5 are non-buyers that download everything and never pay. On average, your normal punter – 595 of them – spends around £2 a month on legal downloads, while Johnny Reb spends £5 a month. The 5 non-buyers don’t spend anything. That’s (595X2) + (400X5) + (5×0) = £3,190 a month.

Now assume the law is passed. All of the Johnny Rebs are banned from using the internet, so they actually CAN’T legally download anything. And if the non-buyers get caught or not, their statistical input remains unchanged at 0. So let’s simply assume that we have our 595 normal punters who spend their £2 a month. That’s (595X2) = £1,190 a month. A rather catastrophic drop of £2,000, almost two thirds of the original monthly sum.

“But John, you raging pro-scurvy stallion of the seas,” I hear you cry. “What about actual CD sales?”

You have me there. Or, as the case may be, not. Because as described earlier, one of the least-advertised but most prevalent forms of CD advertising is what people like Mandelson would have us call piracy. Also, lending people a CD (which doesn’t seem to cop as much raging angst from the RIAA and its worldwide equivalents) and playing music at them in your own homes. Speaking personally, some 70% of my most recent music purchases have been due to a download, a file transfer, or a CD lend.

I can see why it would be embarassing for, say, Warner Music Group to admit that having a song on a popular video on YouTube might increase their sales – after all it is that kind of thing they want to crush out – but wait a minute. Haven’t Universal Music Group effectively turned that to their advantage by allowing the music to remain in videos, as long as a link is placed to allow its purchase? Thus becoming an instant FREE advertisement? And thus making a ton of money for ALLOWING an action that Warner refuses to allow?

I wonder how musicians that can sell records based on the quality of the record feel about one of their primary sources of advertising and marketing being curtailed by a rather dubious law. I wonder how record companies can’t see from the figures that their audience WILL SPEND LESS if this law passes. I wonder how Johnny Reb will react when, trying to download Random Band Part Deux, his internet access is taken away.

And I wonder how many people need that internet access on a daily basis. Recently the Constitutional Council, the highest court in France, actually ruled internet access to be a basic human right. And having looked through the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights, I find Article 19 to be pretty interesting:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Italics added by me, for emphasis.

The Conservatives have been lambasted for suggesting they would remove the Human Rights Act and replace it with something else, but at least they want to replace it with something else. Peter Mandelson’s new web law seems to indicate that, either by massively intruding on Johnny Reb’s privacy (a breach of Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) or by assuming guilt without true evidence (a breach of Article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), a “media by which Johnny Reb is entitled to seek, recieve and impart information and ideas through” will be removed from him (as mentioned, a breach of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights).

To summarise:

• The law itself breaches the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
• The law will severely affect both CD and digital music sales, in a negative fashion.
• The law will criminalise otherwise legal, competent computer users.
• The law is counter to the interests of 99.9% of the nation.

Even if we ignore the fact that Mandy changed his mind after having a rather expensive dinner on a rather expensive yacht with David Geffen, we can’t ignore just how toxic Mandelson’s law will be if enacted and enforced.

Something must be done.

Suggestions in writing.