going to see spoon tonight, and i got tickets this morning to see tori amos in early november at the vic (which is general-admission and only fits about 1,000 people, including balcony). i saw her twice in high school: once in july of 1994 at the barrymore in madison that was great, and then a shitty one in october of the same year at the madison civic center. the show was cut real short, as she stopped playing about a half-hour after coming on stage, clutching her chest and walking off, and some dude came out and apologized and said that she wasn't feeling well and that we'd "have to do it again some other time," but there were never any refunds or rescheduled dates with these tickets honored. when we left, confused and disappointed, we (i went with a friend whose name was, seriously, aura) saw her loaded into an ambulance out back. this was very pre-internet, so we never found out what that was all about - i think i read somewhere that her management team cited food poisoning, but someone told me she did too much coke.
tori's best albums (boys for pele and from the choirgirl hotel) came out when i was in college, and i still listen to them, but i stopped caring for a long time. i'm pretty sure i went and saw her in college because i have a "raspberry swirl girl" necklace (which i obviously don't wear anymore), but i've blanked out on when and whre that was. i got the new album this summer and while i haven't bothered to look into her five personalities (i guess they all blog or something) and feed into the tori fanaticism, the album is okay and it ought to be a cool show.
wow, nice tangent. i guess i still am a superfan! or just pissed that my teenage high schooler self paid a lot of money to see a musician she loved and was treated to a shitty show and no refund. and never got any good gossip about what happened, which probably bothers me most of all.
on to the linx:
yay! michael k (my favorite blogger) interviewed in gridskipper here about why new york rulz.
the wapo reviews the new radiohead - they like it fine, but have a lot more to say about how it's being distributed (free, or pay what you want, or be a superfan and spend $80 for a deluxe cd/vinyl/book extravaganza). pjl ordered the boxset and burned me a copy of the 10 tracks and while i will always favor bends and ok computer era (and i do really like kid a and amnesiac, though it took me a few listens to get into them), hail to the thief and thom's solo album were dense and boring, and i was worried that this would continue the trend. it's not amazing, but i like it. you can buy/not buy it here.
this is a great project - people submitted what they thought the cover art for in rainbows should be and some of them are total radness.
two mysterious deaths (one a drag queen, one a twink drifter) in four days at a disabled gay man's apartment who wanted company and probably paid for theirs - sounds like a bad episode of law and order. click here.
i think that real dolls are gonna be all the rage (as a topic, at least) when lars and the real girl comes out, and as more and more articles and documentaries come out. i'm fascinated/totally creeped out by them. they now have a MALE real doll, for the lonely gay men and straight ladies out there who are too awkward to even be able to convince a real person to sex them up (or maybe they just prefer the latex silent version). why did they have to make the male "real doll" look like such a fratastic douche? also, i think he is named after charlie sheen, who, i learned this week, hacked up his real doll and threw it in a dumpster - pure class, and the picture of sanity, that one. click here for a very nsfw (BUT ITS NOT EVEN REAL, BOSS!) view of rubber charlie.
oh, and and for your average lonely social reject into japanese animation, or "anime," as the kidz call it, there is - anna mae! get it? the huge eyes and tits scares me. there is nothing "real" about that one. the whole thing is too creepy. which is worse, gross exaggerations of the female body or eerily realistic ones? shudder, either way.
cuteness overload: tiny baby animals on fingers just a click away.
slate has a new, interesting slide show: the history of the vibrator! here's a sample: "Vibrators came back into the mainstream in the 1990s, thanks not to radical feminists but to the Reagan administration. With the public health threat of AIDS looming, Surgeon General C. Everett Koop mailed out a list of safe-sex options to every household in the land in the late 1980s. Vibrators were on it." it's, uh, nsfw.
new horrible tattoo, courtesy of death from above - click here.
we almost lost a musical genius last week. and no, it wasn't mandy moore (my OTHER equally embarrassing guilty pleasure).
okay. have a good weekend.