anders, subject-positions

* some anders parker tunes from the forthcoming lp are available on his ‘radio.’ i really respect the guy’s songwriting, though his tunes always seem a little too up-the-middle at first. he writes the kind of songs that everybody thinks they can write. i’d say i bet he gets laid a lot, but i don’t know the guy. he seems like the bearded, denim-clad but still poetic and approachable song-warrior.  he’d make you breakfast or whatever. raenie famously described anders as “dude rock for chicks,” in a cool inversion of her take on jay farrar (“chick rock for dudes.”) the second track has interesting sally timms vocs attached.

* lately the term ‘hipster’ gets thrown around like people could define it if put on the spot, but i’m not so sure. wouldn’t “scumbag” be an equally adept description for most vice he-dos? and what material benefits do these annointed ones enjoy as the fruits of their hipness? a sense of belonging? as if… like you, i begrudge all identities forged upon exclusion (read: i loathe identity as such, whenever it allows me to). but if it’s exclusivity we’re all pissed about, why not give the sophomores in thrift-store tees a break, and save that contempt for nationalists, married couples, captalists and the nuclear family.

are you all referring to indie rockers when you conjure hipsters? are indie rockers hegemonic in the popular imaginary? cuz all the indie rockers i know got the shit kicked out of them in high school and have eventually, almost-totally succumbed to the same flip-flops, fast food and Fox as the rest of us.  hipsters hate themselves, too. they’re as bored as we are, prolly, but no more – or am i insane? what’s the difference between you and them, for reals? what a silly brand of straw man!

now somebody catalog the typical blogger’s semio-mannerisms and contrast ’em with yr average decemberist fan!