l0calnerd

l0calnerd:

Interesting read. 

This essay was written in response to this article: It is Finally Time to Stop Caring About Lauryn Hill

https://medium.com/cuepoint/its-finally-time-to-stop-caring-about-lauryn-hill-e822d4dc22db

Before, I critique Schumacher I will be completely open with my bias.  I respect Lauryn Hill as an artist for her lyrics, her talent & her vision. I admire Hill’s live performances for not merely regurgitating the same version of a song, but allowing for the unique and genuine transformation of live music.   Essentially, I think she is the bees knees and there isn’t a person out there who could convince me otherwise. I am also fully willing to understand when other people do not agree with me.  However, this article, because of all the buzz, stuck to my brain and I could not get it out of my mind.

And so begins my own [informal] essay. 

Schumacher writes an article delineating the reasons why he “no longer cares” about Lauryn Hill’s music. Ironic, considering he spent the time to write this article which begins with an entire section dedicated to what her music meant to him.  That is, before he criticizes her in a personal and unacceptable fashion. 

At one point Schumacher states, ” More importantly, her most dedicated fans (myself included) have wondered when she will produce another great piece of art?” Considering the title of his article, this man is truly a walking contradiction. Talib Kweli concisely responds to this mentality in his defense of Lauryn Hill, stating ” Lauryn’s greatness does not diminish because of lack of commercial output. A “dedicated” fan would never suggest something so disrespectful.”

I understand that Schumacher is entitled to his own opinion.  However, his opinion and critique of Lauryn Hill’s music blurred lines and turned into a personal attack on Lauryn Hill. He is completely out of line questioning Hill’s relationship and family life as a reason for her career not living up to his standards. He writes “Some have blamed Lauryn’s relationship and family life…” as if the opinion is not one shared by himself and randomly stumbled into his article. Semantics aside, it is entirely inappropriate to base unsolicited criticism of a person’s professional life on their personal life.

First of all, it is more than unsettling that women are regularly placed under fire for their family lives effecting their career.  It is a standard practically never held to men, a  standard which needs to be torn down from its unfounded origins. It is absolutely none of his, or to be more specific, any fans business what the state of her personal relationships or family life is. The only thing of concern should be her art. HER ART. Which brings me to my second point. It blows my mind, that fans believe they have some kind of copyright ownership on an artist, just because the artist’s music resonated within them.. It is a beautiful thing to be touched by art, but it does not mean you own the artist and can dictate the means or direction of their art: present, past or future.  This kind of treatment in another context would be considered harassment and abusive. 

At the end of the article, he cites public statements and erratic behavior  meant to undermine Lauryn Hill’s mental state and provide a reason for the lack of “great art” production on her end. I am again blown away by this man’s audacity. We are human fucking beings, and to publicly and disrespectfully question a person’s mental stability in a childish rant about how her music isn’t what he wants it to be is UNBELIEVABLE. I would hope he gains some semblance of humanity and retracts these statements and issues an equally as public article apologizing for his insensitivity. He claims, “I really don’t care about her public statements or even her indiscretions with the law (certainly other artists are guilty of far worse). I just want the music.” A statement, I find hard to believe after reading an  article that utilized an entire section to dissect her public image, statements and personal life. 

On a side note, something which annoys me personally and beyond:  Schumacher whines about paying $88 for a ticket to see Lauryn Hill at the beginning of his article. It is a pet peeve of mine to hear of fans complaining about the price of a ticket. No one is holding a gun to your head to force you to see your “favorite” artist. If you pay the money, you could afford it/ thought it was worth it. If you don’t pay the money, you either couldn’t afford it/ thought it wasn’t worth it. At the end of the day it was YOUR decision, so quit your whining. I am also very stubborn about this rule and believe it applies to AFTER a show too. I don’t want to hear about how you wasted your money on a terrible show. You knew the risk.

And lastly.. this is why complaining about ticket prices truly bothers me. I realize that my phrasing will come off as a huge wide spread generality, however in my experience (which may be skewed), I find this to be pretty much true. People complain about paying $10-20 to go see a local band and literally stab the local music scene in the back with their frugality.  People complain about paying $88 to see an artist of substance, because apparently it is only worth it to shell out money for “a band they really want to see.” What does that even mean Schumacher, I thought you were one of her most “dedicated fans”? People literally will complain about EVERY COST except paying hundreds of dollars to see the next pop sensation or the old pop sensation, which boils down to  what is “hot right now.” A concept applicable to most aspects of our consumer driven lives.

So. I guess what I’m trying to say is, I am with Talib Kweli. Leave Lauryn Hill alone. She owes you nothing. It is something to be grateful for that she shared her art with the world. 

gurl
gurl:

Everything You Need To Know About Anorexia

One of my friends in high school had anorexia. Neither I nor our friends had a clue until she was suddenly taken out of school and thrown into recovery. You’re probably wondering how it could have possibly escaped our notice when we had lunch with her every day. Honestly, I still ask myself this question from time to time. But it did, because eating disorders are sneaky. On top of being sneaky they’re also devastating and so hard to overcome.
The culture surrounding anorexia is toxic, from thinspo to fast fasting to starvation tips. This might seem ridiculous to someone without anorexia or an ED to wrap their head around, but that’s because at the end of the day anorexia is a mental illness which needs to be approached the same way any other mental illness should be approached: With understanding, love and a fighting spirit.
If you thought you knew the ends and outs of anorexia, you might find yourself surprised after you read this.

gurl:

Everything You Need To Know About Anorexia

One of my friends in high school had anorexia. Neither I nor our friends had a clue until she was suddenly taken out of school and thrown into recovery. You’re probably wondering how it could have possibly escaped our notice when we had lunch with her every day. Honestly, I still ask myself this question from time to time. But it did, because eating disorders are sneaky. On top of being sneaky they’re also devastating and so hard to overcome.

The culture surrounding anorexia is toxic, from thinspo to fast fasting to starvation tips. This might seem ridiculous to someone without anorexia or an ED to wrap their head around, but that’s because at the end of the day anorexia is a mental illness which needs to be approached the same way any other mental illness should be approached: With understanding, love and a fighting spirit.

If you thought you knew the ends and outs of anorexia, you might find yourself surprised after you read this.

thegetty

thegetty:

Banned Books Week—History Edition

Giordano Bruno revealed ancient secrets of improving memory by writing about the method of loci, also known as the memory palace.

This technique is still used today as a way to memorize vast amounts of information. By “putting away” information into the drawers and rooms of a familiar place in your mind, you can access this info later by mentally “opening” the right drawer. 

Unfortunately, this idea was not accepted during the Roman Inquisition. Bruno was burned at the stake in 1600 and his book was on the Vatican Index of Prohibited Books.

Enjoy a completely digitized copy: De umbris idearum, 1582, Bruno Giordano. The Getty Research Institute

Banned Books Week celebrates the freedom to read. This week we’re sharing examples of books from cultural history that have been attacked, vilified, or otherwise banned.

dreamgener8tion
dreamgener8tion:

Here’s the 2nd song released off the new album. I’ll be releasing a new song each week up until the album release date November 11. Each song will be accompanied by an artists interpretation. Below is yet another breathtaking interpretation by Sudarsana Mohanty. 100% of proceeds for the download of each song will go to a different charity each week. The main character in this weeks song, “The King Of Montana”, is a veteran. Therefore I chose a veterans charity. The Artemis Rising Invisible War Recovery Program is a recovery program for veterans living with MST (Military Sexual Trauma). Learn more here: http://www.notinvisible.org/recovery_program 
20% of service women & 1% of service men have been sexually assaulted while serving. In 2013 12,000 service women & 14,000 service men said they were assaulted. There is only a 4% conviction rate for reported assaults. If you can, help these brave women & men out. Any and all money you pay to download “The King Of Montana” will be donated: https://dreamgeneration.bandcamp.com/track/the-king-of-montana   
- Chris / DG

dreamgener8tion:

Here’s the 2nd song released off the new album. I’ll be releasing a new song each week up until the album release date November 11. Each song will be accompanied by an artists interpretation. Below is yet another breathtaking interpretation by Sudarsana Mohanty. 100% of proceeds for the download of each song will go to a different charity each week. The main character in this weeks song, “The King Of Montana”, is a veteran. Therefore I chose a veterans charity. The Artemis Rising Invisible War Recovery Program is a recovery program for veterans living with MST (Military Sexual Trauma). Learn more here: http://www.notinvisible.org/recovery_program 

20% of service women & 1% of service men have been sexually assaulted while serving. In 2013 12,000 service women & 14,000 service men said they were assaulted. There is only a 4% conviction rate for reported assaults. If you can, help these brave women & men out. Any and all money you pay to download “The King Of Montana” will be donated: https://dreamgeneration.bandcamp.com/track/the-king-of-montana   

- Chris / DG

scientific-women
prairiefunk:

Barbara McClintock by chid0 :
Barbara McClintock, who won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1983 for her discovery of transposable genetic elements. The remarkable thing about her discovery is among other things the fact that she did so as early as the 1940’s. Way before anyone had an idea about molecular structure of DNA. Genetics was an obscure and unfashionable field at that time. Noone really believed her. Until all those famous others like Morgan, Watson, Crick, Pauling etc. made their discoveries - and her work was reestablished.But there is another reason why I chose her, one that is even more important for me. Howard Green, a colleague, wrote this about her after she died in 1992:"Barbara McClintock was a woman who rejected a woman’s life for herself. She began to do it as a small child and never deviated. Her childhood was not a happy one, and perhaps this provided the force, the moral tension that was so strong in her and so necessary for the life she lived. And we must not forget that at the foundation of every creative life there lies a sense of personal inadequacy that energizes the struggle. This sense was strong in Barbara."

prairiefunk:

Barbara McClintock by chid0 :

Barbara McClintock, who won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1983 for her discovery of transposable genetic elements. The remarkable thing about her discovery is among other things the fact that she did so as early as the 1940’s. Way before anyone had an idea about molecular structure of DNA. Genetics was an obscure and unfashionable field at that time. Noone really believed her. Until all those famous others like Morgan, Watson, Crick, Pauling etc. made their discoveries - and her work was reestablished.

But there is another reason why I chose her, one that is even more important for me. Howard Green, a colleague, wrote this about her after she died in 1992:

"Barbara McClintock was a woman who rejected a woman’s life for herself. She began to do it as a small child and never deviated. Her childhood was not a happy one, and perhaps this provided the force, the moral tension that was so strong in her and so necessary for the life she lived. And we must not forget that at the foundation of every creative life there lies a sense of personal inadequacy that energizes the struggle. This sense was strong in Barbara."