The Wet Spots work up a Blather

Incredibly Strange

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:28:00 +0000

When I was a teenager in the late 80s, I remember seeing my first copy of Re/Search Magazine. It was the classic W.S. Burroughs, Brion Gysin, Throbbing Gristle issue. In one small biannual, I was exposed for the first time to cut-up poetics, the dreamachine and extreme industrial music. This was like a sampler pack of the most vibrant, confrontational alternative art forms around.

In the 80s, for many people in smaller communities Rocky Horror Picture Show was their first glimpse into a freak world. A reassurance that they were not alone. An invitation to a larger, more colorful party. For me, living in a small midwestern Canadian city, Re/Search was a grittier version of this correspondence - more like a clipped-letter ransom note from a Lower East Side postal code.

(While I was pretty clueless when it came to culture, I was fortunate to have an expert guide in my friend Chris Olson. He introduced me to Re/Search, among many other cool things like local punk bands, xeroxed fanzine writers, and playing hooky at the art gallery.)

Several years later, Re/Search put out a couple of volumes entitled Incredibly Strange Music. These were somewhat more accessible, mainstream catalogues that came out during the height of the exotica & lounge revival. They highlighted the careers of once-popular, now-obscure entertainers such as Rusty Warren and Esquivel, and interviewed contemporary artists like Jell-o Biafara whose extensive, eclectic, record collections influence their own eccentric output. In some cases, like Esquivel, exposure in these volumes led to a critical and popular revival.

At the time these books came out, I was in an up-and-coming pop band. We had a lot of momentum and an eye on mainstream commercial success, but I was feeling a bit stifled by the parameters of the form. What struck me most about the artists featured in Incredibly Strange Music was the freedom of their absolute originality. Sometimes it was self-aware and defiant, and sometimes it was naive - perhaps even slightly autistic. I envied that. And while I don't recall specifically trying to emulate these artists, it's clear that Rusty Warren and Esquivel were both early influences on The Wet Spots.

Today, the Incredibly Strange Music torch is being carried by a website called The Weirdest Band in the World. Recently, the author proposed The Wet Spots as candidates for that title. I am truly honored, and I recommend you follow the link to that page. Because, you know, his final decision is based on page traffic :).

Cat and Mouse With the Hackers

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Fri, 29 Oct 2010 03:22:00 +0000

Hey folks,

No doubt you will have noticed the ads for Rolexes and Lo-Cost Pharmaceuticals that have been proliferating here lately. Somehow, somewhere, someone's hacking us. We have been taking progressively more heroic measures to keep these jerks out of our Blogger and Twitter feeds, but they're damn crafty. So far virus scans, changing passwords, security questions and browsers have all proven ineffective. The good news is, their spam comes frequently so we know quickly if we've failed to block them. Sorry that this means you have to see it in your inbox, and thanks for sticking with our blog. We will have some entertaining and scandalous content up here again soon enough!

John

How To Create Community In Three Not-So-Easy Steps

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 18:59:00 +0000

I read this today and had to re-post. Wise and concise words from my friend Marcia Baczynski - so very relevant to cultural creators. (As a sidebar, Marcia is an amazing relationship coach who has a lot of experience working with people in nonmonogamous configurations.)

How To Create Community In Three Not-So-Easy Steps

Hackers locked out - no more spam for now.

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Mon, 04 Oct 2010 00:05:00 +0000

Hey folks,

Sorry for the last couple of spam messages. I got hacked. I've changed a few things up in my account so it shouldn't happen again.

The Artist as Healthy Taxpayer

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Sun, 20 Jun 2010 16:31:00 +0000

Recently there was some Facebook commentary on a Wikipedia article which trotted out the conventional notion that there is a correlation between creativity and mental illness. Here's the article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creativity_and_mental_illness

My (unsolicited) contribution to that discussion forms the original basis of this blog post - with a few subsequent additions:

People with mental illness are often drawn to recreational drugs not just for self-medication, but also for a particular social piece. If you have strange associations and behaviours because of your mental illness, you may find it easier to fit in amongst people who are tripping balls. They won't spot your eccentricity as quickly if they, too are seeing dayglo pink gerbils hula-dancing on the bedside dresser.

So I've often wondered if the art scene has a lot of folks with addictive personalities and mental illness in & around it because these people are artistically creative, OR because the art scene has less strict norms of appropriate behaviour, belief, dress, substance use and abuse etc. than 'straight' society. Perhaps each is a factor. Perhaps the factors inform each other.

But I think that genius in various fields (math, too) is associated with mental illness and addictive personality because you have to be a full-blown genius if you're gonna succeed despite your mental illness or your addiction. You can succeed as a sane, pretty-good guitarist but it's unlikely people are gonna put up with unpredictable, unreliable bullshit in any discipline unless there is remarkable talent that goes along with it. That sort of talent is available to only a few.

We all know lots of people who are unremarkable talent-wise. It's less likely that we know lots of people who are seriously mentally ill or in the midst of active, chronic addiction and who are unremarkable talent-wise. As a society we tend to segregate such folks into day centers and care facilities and slums. I've had occasion to work with a lot of these people in my day jobs. They are as varied in their strengths and weaknesses as those who don't suffer from their particular diseases. But as a rule it's harder for them to succeed. So we only see the geniuses from these populations succeeding in their various disciplines. And we draw the false conclusion that the disease is the cause of their genius.

There's also the "Behind the Music" effect. Stories about fucked-up creative people are sexy. Stories about responsible, deadline-meeting, tax-paying creative people are sort of boring. But
creating art requires a whole raft of boring, unsexy talents like promptness, budgeting skills, tact etc. Look at Duke Ellington versus Thelonius Monk. Each one is undoubtedly a creative genius. But Ellington had the opportunity to write and arrange for larger, more varied groups in part because he had the organizational and interpersonal skills to keep a big band together. There were eccentrics and addicts in his band but he wasn't one of them.

Monk, on the other hand, was pretty out there. Many speculate that today he would be diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder. He was only able to hold small combos together. So he only got to write & arrange for small combos. The parameters of his creativity were limited, rather than enhanced by his eccentricity.

My own experience is like this: I have been both depressed and extremely anxious. This ran the gamut from general sarcastic-dick-to-be-around resentfulness to unable-to-get-out-of-bed-for several-days paralysis. I never sought treatment and never received a clinical diagnosis. In retrospect it looks like for-real mental illness. I have used substances - usually alcohol - addictively. When I stopped using alcohol and drugs, my depression and anxiety eventually abated.

I was working as a creative person throughout that period. I'm OK at being a creative person. I have some skills. I certainly don't have any sort of parameter-shifting, game-changing native ability. And I experienced a bit of success in those days. And I hit a big, scary wall. I had ideas of what I wanted to do but not the motivation, courage, or general shit-togetherness to realize these plans. What I had was an acute and rapidly growing pool of fear and resentment at an unfair world.

I got past that period by committing to abstaining from booze and drugs, and by committing to a personal spiritual practice. It was only when I was stopped suffering from mental illness and addiction that things started to roll for me artistically. I felt better in myself. More willing to try and fail. I managed to pull bigger, more complex projects together because I wasn't sleeping it off until 3pm on Sundays. But a much more profound shift occurred in the work I was doing:

The message I was putting out into the world became less self-referential and more generous. I stopped believing that happy endings were a pandering sop for suckers. I stopped believing that archness, hipness and urbanity were the ultimate aesthetic qualities. I started to want to celebrate things like hope and dreams in an unironic fashion. A new goal became to tell stories that could uplift without sacrificing grit. This was quite different from my previous goal - which was to show you how edgy and clever I was. Not that I have abandoned satire or darker themes. I've just added new ones. My parameters widened when I stopped being mentally unhealthy.

I'm moved to blog about this because when I started out in the music & art scenes I was most attracted to the craziness of bohemian life. The late nights shouting at the bar. The fights. The extreme personalities. The excitement. The sense that we were different and special. I thought all this was feeding my creative output.

The bohemian party lifestyle may well have been my main incentive to start down a difficult, worthwhile path in music and theater. But living this lifestyle was in fact hampering my creativity. And I think I tolerated my less-than-optimal mental condition for much longer than I would have were I living in the 'straight' world. I told myself it was an essential part of my artistic voice - the price of admission. But it wasn't. It was the bar on the door. The artist as crazy, hard-partying, opium-revelator genius is a rare, troubled model. Realizing your skill set, dedicating yourself to expanding it, trying and failing repeatedly with prosaic, valiant attempts until something magic happens... Most successful people in any field are following this model. And you don't have to be an addict or mentally ill to make it work. In fact, being healthy helps.

Fox Network Schizophrenia - Strictly Business?

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Thu, 06 May 2010 23:09:00 +0000

It's probably not a big surprise to anyone that The Wet Spots are huge Glee fans. A program about dorky kids at school who wanna sing show tunes? Yeah. It fits.

Whether you dig the show from an aesthetic point of view, you have to admit that it puts an inclusive message of self-acceptance out there. Small-town bigotry and misguided fundamentalist sexual morality are regularly held up for ridicule. Jocks, flamers, cheerleaders, overacheivers and special-ed students all taste triumph and mockery. They all act heroically and selfishly. They get to be real characters rather than mascots.

Glee is a Fox show. And part of a legacy of vaguely subversive entertainment programming from the network. Fox brought the Simpsons to life nearly 20 years ago, along with In Living Colour and X Files. None of these shows were calls to man the barricades, but all pushed the envelope of what was considered too out-there for TV content, and they often addressed American society from a satirical & unsentimental perspective.

Fox News, of course, is all about a perverted, bullying sentimentality: a somewhat hysterical blend of factual reportage, bigoted opinion, and pure paranoid fantasy presented as the 'real' truth. This branch of the network has been expert in branding itself as an earnest crusader for the 'real' patriotic America. (Read white, Christian conservative America.)

Now while I deplore the hate-mongering on Fox News, I believe that white, Christian, conservative America deserves to have a network as much as any other group. I just happen to think that Fox News' editorial line is strictly about business. It is the stance that generates the most profits for them. They saw a way to distinguish themselves from the newsrooms of the other networks, and they took it. It is not an earnest crusade. It is as calculated as the guy who notices that there isn't a coconut flavoured soda on the market yet and creates one and makes a million bucks.

I have a smart friend who runs a chain of comedy clubs. He regularly hires performers whose material is so stupid that I know in my heart there's no way he could possibly like it. Why does he hire them? Because they put asses on seats. I know that Rupert Murdoch is a conservative, but I don't think he believes a fraction of the insanity that spills from the mouths of his talking heads. He's simply too smart. The difference is Murdoch is selling stupid paranoid hate, not stupid laughs. It's reprehensible. And it's just business.

In one episode of Glee, we are introduced to a character's Mum and Dad. They are intolerant, pious small-town douchebags. This is established by making them big fans of Glen Beck. It's cross-promotional synergy for a schizophrenic network that cynically sells 1001 flavours to every appetite.

But damn, Glee is a good show.

Cool-Headed And Under-Reported Obama Speech Discusses Hot-Headed And Over-Reported Partisan Rhetoric

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Tue, 04 May 2010 18:40:00 +0000

Some excerpts from Obama's Commencement Address at the University of Michigan. Typical Obama rhetoric to be sure, but it's a very canny, cool-headed assessment of how them media prefers to report shrill, divisive soundbites. Of course since it wasn't a shrill, divisive soundbite it didn't get widely reported. Anyway, full marks to Obama for faith in reason.

Obama:

The media tends to play up every hint of conflict, because it makes for a sexier story, which means anyone interested in getting coverage feels compelled to make their arguments as outrageous and as incendiary as possible....

We can't expect to solve our problems if all we do is tear each other down. You can disagree with a certain policy without demonizing the person who espouses it. You can question somebody's views and their judgment without questioning their motives or their patriotism. Throwing around phrases like 'socialists' and 'Soviet-style takeover' and 'fascist' and 'right-wing nut' -- that may grab headlines, but it also has the effect of comparing our government, our political opponents, to authoritarian, even murderous regimes.

Now, we've seen this kind of politics in the past. It's been practiced by both fringes of the ideological spectrum, by the left and the right, since our nation's birth. But it's starting to creep into the center of our discourse. ... The problem is that this kind of vilification and over-the-top rhetoric closes the door to the possibility of compromise. It undermines democratic deliberation. It makes it nearly impossible for people who have legitimate but bridgeable differences to sit down at the same table and hash things out. It robs us of a rational and serious debate, the one we need to have about the very real and very big challenges facing this nation. It coarsens our culture, and at its worst, it can send signals to the most extreme elements of our society that perhaps violence is a justifiable response.

Nasty Comedy, Human Rights, And The Standup Character

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 04:37:00 +0000

Today a human rights tribunal is considering whether stand-up comic Guy Earle discriminated against an audience member by using slurs against her gender and orientation in his routine.

There's some consensus about the events that provoked the complaint: A Vancouver restaurant called Zesty's (where the Wet Spots have performed a few times) was hosting a stand-up night. A woman began heckling and disrupting the performance. The host of the night heckled back at her with a tirade that included the words "dyke" and "cunt". There's been a lot of hand-wringing about freedom of speech versus hate speech in this case, but the comedian insists that the context in which he used these words is the more relevant issue. Is there a context in which flinging slurs like this at people is acceptable? Perhaps. And it's worth examining, because it goes to the heart of what makes stand-up such a vital hybrid theatrical form.

When we go to see magician, we recognize that we are not watching a person with superhuman powers of teleportation, esp, levitation etc. We are watching a gifted performer and technician play the role of a person with superhuman powers. The better the illusion of magic, the better the 'magician'. Similarly, a stand-up comic on stage is not consistently, extemporaneously funny. A stand-up comic is a writer / performer playing the role of someone who is extemporaneously funny. They have written and memorized most of their material in advance. They intersperse it with occasional references to what's going on in the day's news or the immediate environment in order to create the illusion of someone cracking jokes off the top of their head. The best comedians combine great writing chops with a great performance of this illusion.

In a 'nasty' standup show, this writer / performer plays the role of a funny, mean, insulting (and often bigoted) jerk. We see such characters on TV shows and in movies without getting too worked up. Nobody reports Carroll O'Connor to a human rights tribunal because Archie Bunker says vicious things. We all understand that the TV show is a fiction. A fiction that may reflect unpleasant realities, but a fiction nonetheless. In a live 'nasty' show, the stand-up character is also a fiction. The better he (and it usually is he) is at convincing you he's a ranting asshole, the better he is at his job.

It's worth asking if a 'nasty' show is inherently dangerous or wrong. I think these shows play with dark energies and examine places in our psyches that we often want to deny. And, like BDSM, it can be exhilarating or it can be damaging, depending on how it's played. Comedy often pokes at our tender places. Sexuality, religion, race, frailty, ugliness - these are all areas that we struggle with. There are pieties. There are sacred cows. There is anger and frustration. Comedians gleefully fling this around like zoo chimps with poo. And speaking of chimps, here's another uncomfortable truth: they laugh like hell when one of their number falls over or gets hit. And so do we humans. Violence is funny. Slapstick is the universal language of comedy. Monty Python was comprised of Oxbridge grads and did clever songs about drunken philosophers, but their best gag involved hitting a guy with a big fish and knocking him off a dock into the water. Violent language, vicious tirades and nasty slurs are the verbal equivalent of slapstick. Some of us watch Tom Cruise blow things up in movies. Some of us watch the South Park kids trash talk everything in sight. And some of us go to 'nasty' shows in the clubs. We like aggression in our entertainment.

(As a sidebar, Canadian comedian Jason Rouse's genius has been to deconstruct the 'nasty' comedian persona. A typical Rouse set might begin "So I'm fist-fucking this nun..." and escalate from there into violent, obscene imagery so baroque and demented that it loses any sense of realism or context and enters the world of dadaist cartoon violence where, paradoxically, it almost has a childish innocence. Jason's smiling, friendly delivery of the material adds to this.)

When Michael "Kramer" Richards used the n-bomb against hecklers several years ago, some suggested that his real crime was using the slur while not being funny. Having heard Guy Earle on radio I suspect him of a similar offense. This sounds frivolous but it's central. A tasteless joke, like a sexual come-on, can be either sublime, ridiculous or disgusting depending on how it's delivered and how it's received. Some are born with a genius for delivery. Most of us have to learn. I give immense credit to Earle and to Zesty's for creating a space where novice performers could take risks and fuck up large doing their most dangerous material. It's the sort of place the Wet Spots came out of. But it was often a huge psychic drag to be in these rooms. There's a certain stench to a failed blue joke that doesn't accompany an unsuccessful airplane-food gag.

Part of what makes stand-up fascinating is the unique nature of the character onstage: partly scripted, partly improvised. The relationship between the character and the performer is more intimate than that of, say, Ian Mckellen playing Gandalf. Which is not to say that in standup, performer and character are identical or even close to identical. But it is the case that the performer is usually the primary writer and sole director of his or her standup character. When Zac Galafinakis acts in The Hangover, everyone realizes he's playing a fictional part. Yet there remains a powerful illusion that when he speaks from the standup stage, it is his authentic voice telling true stories.

Live standup is also a unique theatrical form in that it includes anyone who chooses to make a comment. But once you make a comment you are no longer simply an observer or customer. You are also a performer, performing within a context. In a 'nasty' show that context is - well - nasty. Whenever they deal with a heckler, the stand-up performer must go off-script and improvise banter. This is real high-wire stuff and it can be exhilarating to watch. Many comedians relish the risk. But it can easily blow up in the performer's face. So there's a deterrent: In comedy etiquette if you heckle, you give permission to be heckled back viciously. That's the rule at any comedy show. At a 'nasty' show, the stakes are even higher and the sort of language you can expect to come at you if you heckle is even fouler. It's cathartic and charged, and many audience members relish the risk. And it needs to be consensual. To use a hippy, woo-woo phrase, you need to create a well-defined container for this kind of energy.

Guy Earle says there was a sign at the door warning people about the content. There was admission charged. Did the heckler consent to being viciously insulted by entering the space and joining the performance? Did they know the conventions of this sort of show? Is it the performer's job to warn them? The promoter's? All interesting questions. But the most important one is whether we should, in a live interactive theater setting, censure a performer for the words and opinions expressed by the character they're playing.

A new SHINE trailer

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 19:56:00 +0000

A five-minute trailer for SHINE: A Burlesque Musical. Gives a bit of a sense of the plot and some audience reaction. Coming soon to Seattle and New York City!

Trailer and Rehearsal

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 01:12:00 +0000

This last week has been a lot like sailing slowly to an unfamiliar shore through a foggy harbour. Slowly the outlines, contours, and finally the crisp details of the city take shape before you - and you can see the new landscape for what it is.

SHINE is taking shape before us all. The discrete, disjointed rehearsals of earlier in the process are now bearing fruit as seamless, flowing scenes and production numbers. The notes scrutinized individually are now coming together as great performances of songs. We have miles to go, of course, and there is no room for complacency. But this impossible imaginary world is blooming in all of its 3-d neon colour, texture and sound. And, for the record, this experience is WAY better than acid.

In May, we poured our hearts into creating a preliminary edition of this musical for Vancouver Burlesque Festival under the name "By The Seat Of Our Panties". The anarchic energy of that show was captured by a number of amazing videographers and editied into a trailer for the new show this August: Here it is, in all its 60 second glory:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pl7ZM0KuNoM

As we carry on this path, I am grateful daily for the amazing team we have around us, helping us realize this unconventional vision. I owe you all a beer. And a vacation.

Making a Musical Shine! Part 1

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 23:22:00 +0000

Hey folks,

First off, apologies for the spam blog that went out from this account not long ago. We've taken steps to ensure this does not happen again.

These next several blogs are going to concern the process of creating a new original musical from the point of view of the writer / musical director. Over the past 16 months The Wet Spots have been writing a musical. We are mounting it this August 12-23 at the Waterfront Theater in Vancouver under the name SHINE - A Burlesque Musical.

SHINE is set in a crumbling downtown theater called The Aristocrat. The venue has been a vaudeville hall, a burlesque theater, a drag revue, and a punk rock / performance art space through its long, seedy history. It is currently on its last legs, and being run by Miss Shine Mionne - a hard-drinking diva whose legs are a bit wobbly too. In order to save her theater, Shine accepts help from a slick money man who thinks he can turn the place around... with a few minor adjustments.

We got the idea for this musical from five solid years of touring - playing a good cross-section of the world's variety, burlesque and cabaret stages big and small. Along the way, we seem to have joined an international family of migrant freak performers: BDSM aerialists, roller skating hula hooping Josephine Baker impersonaters, magician strippers, Swedish tennis pro contortionists, and a woman who queefs the Blue Danube Waltz whilst a midget dressed as Strauss conducts her.

We thought it would be a great laugh to set a full-book musical in a freaky cabaret theater, with actors in the lead roles and a rotating guest cast of these amazing, outlandish performers as some of the acts that this cabaret theater books. In 2008, we joined forces with the amazing Screaming Chicken Burlesque - a Vancouver troupe that fully embraces both the comedic and erotic elements of the form. We put an embryonic, semi-improvised version of the show up for Vancouver International Burlesque Fest. By the 2009 Fest in May, we had a fully scripted show with 10 original songs.

In June of this year, we made the decision to give the show a full run in a professional theater. The Screaming Chicken gang will be taking care of the choreography and providing most of the chorus dancers. Many of the lead roles are also being filled by performers from this troupe. These next few blogs will be updates on the journey we're all taking together - creating some semblance of an entertaining order from the chaos of fourteen performers and their busy lives.

Make no mistake - The Wet Spots are in this for the long haul. We're looking at mounting this at New York Musical Festival and New York Fringe and New York Burlesque Fest 2010. And there are already film adaptation and overseas stage production possibilities in the works. But for now, our sights are firmly set on that magic opening night of August 12, 2009. And seeing just what we can pull off in this tiny sliver of time we have...

Virtual Variety Part 3

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Fri, 29 May 2009 19:17:00 +0000

Hey Folks. First of all, thanks for indulging my previous post ranting about Bill Maher and opportunities missed in the spiritualist / atheist dialogue. (Good clean petty bourgeois fun but probably not what most of you are reading this blog for. So without further ado...)

The Wet Spots toured in Australia for the month of March 2009. It was our second trip down there and our second performance at the Sydney Opera House for their Mardi Gras programming. To me, it was almost more of an honour to be asked back a second time. It's sort of like sex - once could have been a drunken mistake on their part. Twice implies a certain degree of premeditated intention.

And what a bill they had on for the Mardi Gras this time: Alan Cumming! Amanda Palmer (of the Dresden Dolls)! Meow Meow! Justin Bond! Best of all, they had several late night cabarets in which this stellar cast would perform impromptu duets and goof off. It reminds me of the stories of the original Ocean's Eleven starring Sinatra, Dean Martin, Sammy Davis Junior etc. After a long day of filming, the rat pack would hold court in some Vegas casino lounge and fuck around - telling stories and doing songs and comedy. It is a great regret that our tour schedule did not allow us to arrive in town in time for these shows.

As it happened, we got to perform two nights following Justin Bond's "Close to You" show. For those of you unfamiliar with Justin, he came to fame over the last decade as Kiki of the cabaret duo Kiki and Herb. (Others will know him as the MC in Shortbus.) This act completely re-wrote the rules of what a drag performance could be, stormed Carnegie Hall and toured to critical acclaim worldwide. And then they decided to pack it in. Kiki was a savagely quick-witted, nihilistic drag character and Justin was wearying of embodying those emotions so often. So he began to perform as himself, trading in the boozy, agonizingly funny fictions of Kiki's eternal descent for equally poignant true stories from his glamorous life amongst the gliteratti and his pagan romps amongst the Radical Faeries. His genius as a musical parodist is undeniable, so his choice to focus on earnest interpretations of pop classics and original material is particularly bold. It is a roll of the dice, and it has come up double sixes, as far as I'm concerned. His transformation is an inspiration to any creative who is feeling the need to stretch and grow beyond their comfort zone. Here he is at Joe's Pub in New York City performing Marat / Sade.

In Australia, Justin performed his "Close to You" show, which features him singing every song from the classic Carpenter's album, accompanied by a ten-piece live band. When I walked into their rehearsal, I saw that the pianist was executing a flawless performance with his left hand, while simeltaneously jotting notes for the musicians with his right. And so I was introduced to Lance Horne - Emmy Award-winning musical genius and tireless cabaret booster. Lance acts as musical director for Justin Bond, Meow Meow, Alan Cumming and a host of others - grounding their oft-eccentric visions with sound technique and theory. I tried to find a Youtube video of him performing on his own, but almost every clip showed him making some other performer look astounding. Here he is singing at Joe's Pub - his second home in NYC. (And don't even get me started on his first home...)

Our shows were a delight to perform, and on our closing night we recorded a brief interview with Australian radio. It is interspersed here with clips of audience reactions...

From Sydney, we flew on to Adelaide for the 2009 Fringe Festival. The Adelaide Fringe is second only to Edinburgh in terms of size and prestige, and we were fortunate enough to perform in a truly glorious venue - the fabulous Parel van Vuren Spiegeltent. Speigeltents are antique, portable performance venues that used to tour with circuses around the turn of the last century. They have cloth roofs, ornate carved wooden frames, and countless stained glass and mirror panes throughout their structure.

Our dressing room - behind it - was a rather more prosaic porta-cabin trailer. But we got to share the trailer with a mad, hilarious gang of performers from a beautiful cabaret show called A Company of Strangers. Here's a little clip hyping their event:

The MC of their night was a gruff, eccentric, songwriter and dancer named Martin Martini. Here he is performing at the Soho Theater in London:

The sensational Meow Meow joined their cast for several nights. Here she is doing her charming deconstruction of diva-hood...

In contrast, the mournful, mysterious Lady Carol sang Radiohead's Creep and Queen's The Show Must Go On. I love a woman in a hooded maroon velvet cape who plays ukulele. I mean, who doesn't. Right? Here she is doing Kate Bush. (Not like that. But that would be hot.)

One of my particular favourites was Gateau Chocolat - an enormous operatic talent from London UK. His warmth and energy illuminated the whole show, and his outrageous costumes were a visual delight. He's the fellow in the green unitard from the overview clip above. He is currently performing with those superfriends of Variety - La Clique . Here he is in a (frankly quite bizarre) little art film clip:

Another treat was the irrepressible Paul Capsis - an Australian legend. Fresh out of playing Riff Raff in a Rocky Horror revival, Paul delivered a stunning array of larger-than-life vocal interpretations, even out-Janis-ing Janis Joplin. And he split his trousers like PJ Proby. So Cass mended them. Here's a short clip that doesn't really do justice to his vocal chops, but gives a good idea of his stage presence.

Finally, we had the lovely Sveta and her dancing Russian Bears. Here she is doing her own demented diva take. She rounded out their show beautifully.

Sveta Dobranoch

This was the show we got to listen to night after night as we prepared for our own slot immediately following them. It never once got boring, and we snuck in many times to watch these unique talents from the wings. Theirs was a consistently sold-out show, and most deservedly so. But we still won the award for Best Cabaret, betches. Just saying... ;-)

An Open Letter to Bill Maher

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Thu, 28 May 2009 18:03:00 +0000

Howdy, Bill

Just Saw Religulous. You're sharp as ever. Which is maybe a bit too sharp. I think it would have served your cause better if you'd let more people finish their sentences, rather than cutting them off with some withering comment.

I know, I know. You don't suffer fools. And we love you for it. But I think you're stacking the deck in the same way my old intro philosophy prof did back in the day. As you put it so well, the story of Jonah living in the belly of the whale and the story of Jack climbing a beanstalk both seem equally fantastic. And otherwise intelligent people who believe either story as literal truth are fun to mock. They are soft targets.

But there are harder targets out there you might have addressed. A lot of folks go to church and see these stories as fables. I have a Minister friend who openly talks about "the creation myth" or "the flood myth" from the Bible. Now admittedly he is United Church and prone to whiskey binges, but you take my point. So why do these folks take part in religion? Because they get something out of it. Something you don't get. And it's OK you don't get it. But it doesn't mean they're all stupid or crazy.

I was happy to see you talking to the Jesuit astronomer who notes that 1500 years passed between the writing of the Bible and the birth of scientific method, so we should not expect to find any valid scientific info in either Testament, and instead search for it today with all tools at our disposal. But I thought it was a bit disingenious to portray him as some radical maverick. Those Jesuits are generally smart mofos, and they often have quite a sense of humour about the various saints and miracles that their religion portrays.

I was also happy to see you talking to Dr. Andrew Newberg - the neuroscientist who studies how human brain patterns change while in religious trance states (such as 'spirit posession', speaking in tongues or deep meditation). I was unhappy that he never got to explain his ideas because you were too busy saying that he had proved your theory that religion is a neurological disorder. Below are some vids of him addressing scientific panels and documentarians. In fact, he is quite sympathetic to the human need for spirituality, and sees it as completely divorced from the question of whether any sort of god exists. For anyone interested in spirituality and rationality, this is fun (if nerdy) stuff.

Your point that we would quickly resign from any social club that had committed the atrocities of most religions is a good one. And your concern that fanaticism will lead to the end of the world either through war or neglect is valid. I get your urgency. But you ignore a crucial question: Why are many rational, non-fundamentalist people religious?

Many people use meditation or religious ceremonies (gathering in contemplation, telling ancestral stories, taking part in ancient rituals) in order to transcend the ego. The ego is the center of our rational intellect. Which is good. It is also the part in each of us that sees ourselves as an entity separate from everyone and everything else. To many people this just seems like a given. It is not. We could also choose to see ourselves as part of a greater entity: Gaia, or a cultural tradition, or a collective consciousness. But the ego fights this. And it likes to think that it is the entirety of our minds. It is not. It has been repeatedly, scientifically proven that there is lots of brain activity going on that is unrelated to our immediate egoic consciousness. The ego is also constantly engaged in a futile struggle for more. More status, more money, more sensation. And it loves to be right. To dominate. Either physically, or intellectually, or morally, or emotionally. It feels good. For about a minute.

Spirituality can be the discipline of recognizing this hungry chatterbox and trying to turn it down for a while in order to allow other parts of our consciousness some breathing space. It's not that different from cognitive therapy - how we can train ourselves to recognize an anxiety attack or an angry rage or a depressive episode as just that - an episode and not the absolute reality of our condition.

I would have loved to have seen you talk more about how this worthwhile project to tame the ego has been repeatedly hijacked for various egocentric projects. As you put it "Does the Vatican look like anything Jesus had in mind?". You could also have presented some agnostic alternatives to religion (with its historical baggage and its curent crop of douchebags). There are plenty. Buddhist meditation is a practice that asks no belief in anything supernatural and welcomes all denominations. Some "new age" and neo-pagan practices are incredibly pro-queer and anti-patriarchal. But you didn't do this. You went for the easy argument against the extremists in order to be right. In order to win.

And you did. And you looked like it felt good. For about a minute. And then you looked pissed & pugilistic again. In contrast to some of the serene believers you mocked. Do you think this approach changed any minds? Or did it just flatter those who already agree with you? Religious leadership is clearly an ego trip for some of your interviewees. It's alarming how similar your own motivation looks.

A bad advertisment for a good cause...

Obama, Hunter Redux Plus Thoughts on Chomsky and Sports

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 20:27:00 +0000

A few months ago, when it became clear in the last week of the campaign that Obama was going to go over the top and win the bastard, I blogged about Hunter Thompson's suicide. It was pretty clear that the re-election of George W. Bush had depressed him to the point where he decided it was time to check out. Last night I watched a biopic on HST and this morning I watched the inaugural address and it got me thinking about faith and hope and symbolism and... sports.

Noam Chomsky is a sharp mofo and I like much of his analysis of power relationships and the way the media manufactures consent. But the man has no sense of fun when it comes to pro sports. He is quoted as saying (roughly) that pro sports just give the proles something to be distracted by while the real work of screwing them over occurs out of sight. And that may well be true, as far as it goes. But pro sports (rather than, say, pro algae farming) succeeds as entertainment because it connects with us emotionally. When we see our team go the distance and win the championship, it makes us feel like good things are possible.

I am an occasional hockey fan. A few years ago my local team was in the last place playoff spot (which was not unusual). Yet they beat their number-one-ranked opponents three games in a row in a playoff series, and looked set to win the best-of-seven contest. Around the same time, my band was in the middle of recording an album with a pro producer. We had endured about ten years of toiling in obscurity and poverty, and we were hard-pressed to believe that we could ever pull ourselves out of that place. Listening to the hockey games on the radio filled me with hope that good things could happen if people worked hard. And I worked HARD on that album. With a sense of hope in my heart that I can still hear in my vocals and my guitar performances.

In the end, my hockey team lost the next four games of that series and got bumped out of the playoffs. The album was finally birthed after a lot of disheartening delays and after I had left that band. But the point is not the ultimate result of a hockey series or a recording session. The point is the emotional feeling of possibility. When you lose the sense that good things can happen, you reach for your pistol like Hunter S. Thompson did after the 2004 election. I myself remember wondering how a just deity could allow a decent man like Kerry to lose to such a catastrophe as Bush. "Things happen for a reason." Cassie told me, "Have faith. Something better than you can even imagine now is around the corner." I thought she was a gullible hippie and considered kicking over her shrine. Now, with Obama sworn in, I realize that it would not have been possible if Kerry had won in 2004. And the truth is, I could never have foreseen this amazing moment. Cass was right. I suppose hope is optimism when things are going your way, and faith is optimism when your house gets stepped on by Godzilla. After he eats your child. And your testicles.

But right now, Obama is like that long-odds sports team that wins the championship. Except that he is also upending many generations of racial impossibility and making the youth vote feel like they can actually affect their political landscape. I wonder what Chomsky makes of this victory. Probably not a lot. He probably sees that Obama owes favours to the same special interests as his predecessors, and that the machinery of government makes real change very difficult. He may even suggest that the president is largely a symbolic sop for the masses while the real dealings occur behind closed, exclusive doors.

But that's precisely it. The US presidency is a weird office. It is a a symbolic post like a king. And it is a real seat of executive power. It is a brand - especially during the campaign. Obama will probably disappoint many with the tough executive decisions and compromises he will have to make once he takes office. But the very fact that the Obama brand inspired people so deeply, the fact that people put their hopes into this brand, and the fact that the USA in a free election chose this brand is wildly significant. He won the toughest championship in the history of the world. So think about what we can achieve in our lives. Some of us have been getting by on faith for a long time. And some of us have not made it through. As of this inaugaration, we can now have hope.

More Virtual Variety

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 00:12:00 +0000

John Here:

We've just wrapped up our December tour of London. (Yes. You can tour the city of London. Trust me on this one...) and we had to add a few more links to some of the great performers we were fortunate enough to work with. Our final night in the city, we performed at a show called La Clique. It's a variety show on a long run in the West End. It is probably the best variety show in the world right now. Below are some of the other acts on the bill:

Mario, Queen of the Circus: When you look at his act it seems inevitable. But when you pause to think about it, though, it takes a very particular mindset and a very particular skill set set to conceive of and then fully realize a Freddy-Mercury-impersonating, Mediterranian leatherman musical sex-comedian juggler acrobat.

Miss Behave: What's not to love about a latex-wearing comedic sword swallower?

The English Gents: Sure they've got the bowler hats, umbrellas, suits & ties, sock garters, Union Jack underpants and the most virtuosic acrobatic talent I've ever seen. But it's the cutup / straight man comedic characters they've developed to play off each other that really put this act in a league of gentlemen of their own.

David O'Mer: Absolutely and unapologetically the most eroitc male acrobatic act on earth right now.

Camille O'Sullivan: How can I even start to do this performer justice? She is the best cabaret-repertoire singer I have ever seen perfom. Watch this video. Then watch all her other Youtube videos. Then buy her album. And still you will have no idea just how magnetic she is live. So go see her live.

Yulia Pikhtina: Um... If I say "Hula Hoop Artist", a lot of you will probably not bother to click this link. So let me instead say "Virtuosic Acrobatic Dancer". Okay... maybe that will make others of you decide to pass this one up. Here's what I'm gonna say: "WATCH THIS WATCH THIS WATCH THIS!!!!"

Okay. That's it for now. On to New York City in a weeek or so. Hope to see you there!

Virtual Variety

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 18:20:00 +0000

John Here:

I love the variety show medium. I'm so grateful that much of my work week is spent watching these outrageous, imaginative and bizarrely gifted performers showcase just what the human mind and body are capable of. It's sort of like a daily affirmation. Of just how weird, wonderful, diverse and dedicated people are.

Unfortunately, this affirmation costs £80 a plate unless you happen to be on the bill. So I've hit upon this idea: From now on, when The Wet Spots are on a variety bill, I will try to find Youtube footage of all of the performers in the show and post them on our blog, so that our audience can love these people as much as we do.

This past week we've been performing at Bush Hall in London with a show called Medium Rare. Here are some of the other acts on the bill:

The Wau Wau Sisters - A wonderful, occasionally sappho-erotic musical comedy trapeze duo from NYC (here seen on Australian TV):

Earl Okin - Musical Genius and Sex Symbol. One of the best musical comedians (or perhaps comedic musicians) currently working.

Alice and Alice - Demented and creepy! Lewis Carroll meets The Shining! Here seen at the Edinburgh Fringe.

So & So Circus - Hot, talented dance and acrobatics from the UK.

Captain Frodo - Absolutely uncategorizble. Just watch this. You will never be the same.

Ursula Martinez - A truly creative and inspired comic burlesquer. Here seen at Just For Laughs Festival in Montreal:

More great performers to follow over the next months as we tour around to other shows.

YouTube - Frank Zappa on Crossfire

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:02:00 +0000

YouTube - Frank Zappa on Crossfire

"America is going down in a blaze of, satanism, kinky sex, profanity and androgynous pop icons!"

"No! America is quickly deteriorating into a fascist theocracy!"

(Just in case you think anything is new in the culture wars. Zappa on Crossfire in 1986. 20 minutes long & patchy sound, but well worth a look.)

Integrity

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 22:42:00 +0000

John here:

Yesterday a friend of mine asked me why it was that people who are otherwise honest and open have so much trouble around integrity in romantic relationships. Why do good people cheat?

The word "integrity" means "the state of being integrated". And "integrated" means that all the parts sit comfortably together. So integrity means being and behaving in a such a way that all parts hang together. A man who despises the conditions of the factory farm yet eats beef daily has parts within him that do not fit together. In this area of his life he does not have integrity. A man who believes that factory farms are just fine for cows and eats a lot of beef DOES have integrity in this area of his life. (Though he may need to educate himself.)

Now we all have contradictions like this where we behave in ways that contradict our values or what we know is best for us. But it is hard to accept. So we have to rationalize, deny or outright lie to ourselves to keep from seeing the contradiction. Psychologists call it "cognitive dissonance". And we all do it to some degree. But when the issue is serious, then cognitive dissonance is very painful. The man who drinks and does coke a lot knows in one part of his mind that it is unhealthy and dangerous and that it could kill him. And he sort of knows that he is hooked. And he doesn't want to die. But another part of him knows that the only solution is to give up the booze and coke completely. Forever. And there's no way he wants to do that. Because he needs the stuff to feel okay and the thought of life without it is too scary.

So he swears off in the morning during the hangover. And then - in the afternoon when he's jonesing, and a glass of wine would feel just right - he makes the decision to have that glass. But he has to come up with some reason why it's ok to do it and why he isn't really hooked and why it's not really that bad. Sure, a part of him knows he's bullshitting himself. But another part is saying just as loud "No, no. It's fine. Go ahead. What the hell?" That's some serious cognitive dissonance. That's a lack of integrity. And it's painful.

As far as sexual relations go, I think that people have a big problem with integrity because they are not honest with themselves or with others about what they want. The sexual urge can be just as strong as the urge for that bump of coke. Especially if it seems like that urge will not be satisfied.

Let's say you really like being slapped with a codfish at the moment of climax. Or at least you think you probably would. You've never tried it but you fantasize about it all the time. Chances are, you'll probably think to yourself "Wow, that really gets me off but I probably shouldn't mention it to the person I'm dating. Because they'll think its weird and maybe leave."

You've made a few assumptions. The first is that your desire to be fish-slapped is weird and not valid and does not deserve to be satisfied. The second is that your lover will not stick around if they know about the fish thing. The third is that you should try to continue a relationship with a person who would leave if they knew about your hidden desires.

So you keep quiet and marry your lover. You love them. You want to be faithful. But this unrequited fish-slap thing is nagging at you like a bad coke habit. You start surfing the fish-slap sites. Eventually you hire some strapping young fellow down at the docks to work you over with a salmon every second Friday. You tell your spouse that you're working late.

The parts are not integrated. You love your spouse. You value them. You want to be faithful. And yet here you are sneaking around. When you get caught you are truly sorry. You hurt. And you can't really explain why it happened.

It happened because you were not honest about your desires. Not honest with yourself or with your partner. What's more, you didn't honour the fish-slap side of yourself. You didn't listen to it and celebrate it, saying: "Ok, this is beautiful. Let's explore it." You said "Um, this is weird and I don't deserve to have this sort of pleasure." And then later, when the fish-slap side of yourself demanded to be heard, you didn't have the courage to negotiate with your partner - to say "Could you maybe fish-slap me once in a while? Say - once a month? No? OK. What if the guy at the docks does it? I still love you but I need this."

These are tough talks to have. I make my living thinking about this stuff, and I still have trouble with some of these talks. So I have compassion for the cheaters. And for the cuckolds. Because there is still so much shame out there. We are told in a million different ways that if our desires do not conform then we have to keep them very quiet. This is a recipe for dishonesty, cheating and behaving without integrity.

(And then there are folks like Dan Savage who are working tirelessly to make unusual desires seem less unusual, and advocating that we explore them, not hide them. Thanks Dan, and great job on Colbert, by the way.)

I know that I am attracted to many people, and that I would not be happy in a monogamous relationship. The hard part was owning it and celebrating it instead of being ashamed of it. And holding out for a partner who could roll with it and wanted to live in the same way. I believe that we are faithful to each other. Faithful in that we are very honest about what we want and where we're at - even if it's hard to say and hard to hear. Even if it turns out to be a deal-breaker. It's scary, but not as scary as hurting people by sneaking around.

Patti Smith Dream of Life

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 08:26:00 +0000

John here:

Saw this Patti Smith bio / tour / art film called Dream of Life. Very inspiring, watching a consummate performer surf this massive wave of electric sound - intoning an apocalyptic call-to-arms of personal expression and political action. Out of anyone else's mouth some of this shit would sound like a Fine Art freshman's manifesto, but she summons all the conviction of some oracle from the Trojan War, and gets right past your irony towers.

Even if you're not a Patti Smith fan, watch this movie - if only to watch a wise survivor channel untold voltages and fuck life like she's about to ship overseas.

Drunken freaks and weirdos, Bucky Sinister

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 17:09:00 +0000

John here:

Cass used to tell me about this hard-drinking, shit-kicking poet on the circuit named Bucky Sinister. They used to sit up late at night downing whiskey and talking shit together at the national poetry slam events. Last week she showed me his latest book: Get Up: 12-Step Guide to Recovery for Misfits, Freaks and Weirdos. I would have included and Artists in that title. But maybe he figures Misfits, Freaks and Weirdos covers most of us, too.

It's some cool shit. 12-Step stuff was hard for me to hang with at first. I never had any real cred as a punk, but I came from that outsider / freak scene and in many ways I still identify with it. I go to Burning Man and hang out with people who like to stay up late. The conformist aspects of 12-Step scared the shit out of me. Bucky's book would have helped me relax into a program a lot more easily. Just knowing that out there somewhere is a Punk Rock AA group that opens with a moment of violence followed by the serenity prayer makes me happy.

But I really wish someone had handed me this book about ten years ago when I was still drinking. It's full of handy tips for anyone who is wondering if maybe they have a problem with booze or drugs. For example:

If you're the oldest person living in a punk rock house, you have a substance problem.

If you've ever bought one of those 'clean up my urine sample' kits for drug testing at your job, you have a substance problem. Normal people would far rather just not do drugs and keep their job safe.

If you've ever developed a system to keep you from drinking or using too much (eg: leave the credit card at home, only drink beer, only drink at home, alternate between a drink and a glass of water) then you have a substance problem. Normal drinkers don't need a system.

If you hang with a group that does coke - even occasionally - you have a substance problem. Most people NEVER see coke in their entire lives.

Oh by the way - if you're saying "Yeah I do some of the above but that doesn't make me an addict. Loads of my friends do that stuff too." then you have a substance problem. And so do loads of your friends. You've chosen to hang around with people for whom excessive use is normalized. Say it with me again: "Normal people don't do this shit."

And finally, Bucky NAILS the substance abusing artist's attitude of self-pity, resentment and self-delusion: "It's not fair, I am an extremely talented, misunderstood artist and I can't get ahead because of (insert excuse here). If only people would appreciate me for the genius that I am... Or could be... I haven't really produced a lot lately but that's because of (insert excuse here). My drinking is part of my cool Bukowski / Hunter Thompson / Dylan Thomas / Darby Crash image and if I stop, then I will lose my inspiration and my sense of self. Plus the drunken badass image is cool.

Get over it. The music / art / lit scene is a TOUGH racket. Some of the best of the best get to fuck up publicly with booze & drugs and have it fuel their image. And then there's the rest of us who aren't at the top. All we have is talent and good behaviour. Being a badass loses us more work than it wins us.

So buy this book. For yourself. Or your talented drunk-ass friend.

http://www.chapters.indigo.ca/books/Get-Up-Step-Guide-Recovery-Bucky-Sinister/9781573243667-item.html

An Open Letter to Dr. Hunter S. Thompson on the Eve of an Obama Landslide

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 09:35:00 +0000

You gutless, dead, doom-drunk old addict! It's really too bad you took yourself out just after that second Bush win. I think you would have liked Obama. A Kentucky boy like you would have felt the significance of an African American president deep in your hillbilly heart. And you surely would have relished the savage stomping the GOP Greedheads are about to get. McCain is gonna be trounced as surely and as painfully as McGovern in '72. And the young black candidate who all the students are out marching for is gonna win by a mile. But that's what happens when you get so despairing that you can't even IMAGINE the world getting better. You don't get to stick around and see the fucking miracle that's just around the corner.

Sure, in early 2005 it looked like Rove's strategy for permanent Republican domination was working. How else could you explain such a lightweight human catastrophe with two failed wars and a demonstrable lack of comepetence getting RE-ELECTED? We were all pretty down. But not as far as you. When you drink that much it makes the downs WAY down. It fucks you up. Takes you out of the game. Makes you a clownish shadow of your glory days.

When Nixon died you wrote a scathing and tender obit. "Nixon gave no mercy and expected none. He was pure that way." So in that spirit let me give it to you straight, Hunter: Nixon lived out his natural alottment of days. He lived with the shame of what he'd done. He lived knowing the revulsion his name caused. Yet he found a way to carry on. But you - acid hero of a generation? You blew your fucking brains out and let your son find you. I hate to say it but in your one-man war against Richard Millhouse Nixon, Nixon wins.

Most if us who have hit the bottle too hard have come up with some baroque justifications: We need it to settle us. We need it for our image. For our sense of self. We need it for our work. We need it because we are sensitive and idealist and the world is a harsh and imperfect place. And when a talented drunk like you goes down it's easy for us to get all poetic and say that your heart was broken by the country going so far astray, or that you had imprisoned yourself in your bacchic reputation, but the truth is a bit simpler. You were a terminal alcoholic and a drug addict. It made you irreparably, clinically depressed. And you didn't get help for either condition. And you shot yourself. So you don't get to see this sweet, gorgeous, beautiful, glorious, perfect moment when all those sixties promises finally come true and the youth vote carries a decent, honourable man into the highest office in the USA. The kids - they're better organized now, Hunter. You thought McGovern had some hot shit students working for him? Man, you have no idea. You have no ideas at all now.

Hunter, Vegas showed us how to be secret agents in squaresville, and Campaign Trail '72 showed us how to approach politics and power without getting raped. I learned a lot from you about how to live outside - how to think outside, how a word can be used as a shiv. You were the sharpest of them all. But the biggest lesson I learned from you is that there's about as much fear and loathing in this world as you care to focus on. And that it can distract you from beauty and truth.

BM pics & the Green Card Cupid - OPENLY

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 16:58:00 +0000

BM pics & the Green Card Cupid - OPENLY

I write the theme song? I sing the theme song?

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:11:00 +0000

John here:

It's been a VERY productive few days. Cass and I have been working on a bunch of music for other people's projects:

Kirby Ferguson - the genius web director behind the "Do You Take It...?" video - has been making a gang war spoof. We've written him one 'West Side Story' type musical theater number and one syrupy Celine Dion-ish love theme. I don't want to reveal much more about this video because it is set to be released soon and I expect it will be the biggest success of his career.

Birgitte Philippides - the director of Polyamorous NYC - is in the middle of creating a pilot for a reality TV show featuring the lives of a circle of polyamorous friends in New York City. She has an amazing production company working with her on this: smart, witty, queer... and they've got real integrity. Cass and I are obviously excited by the possibility of a TV series showing polyamory to a wide audience in an intelligent, non-exploitative manner. So we pitched them on writing the theme song for the show. It's sort of a parody of those perky "Friends" sitcom theme songs from the 80s & 90s.

I really enjoy working on these sorts of things because they're light. I'm not as invested in the material as I am with Wet Spots songs. This sounds like maybe I don't care as much about them, and that's true... sort of... but in a good way. With the Wet Spots, we've consciously and unconsciously developed personae and a bit of a mission statement to go with the act. For example, we don't want to write a song that would make the audience feel ashamed about sex in any way. Even if it gets a laugh out of them. Now I think this is a good 'rule' to have. In and of itself. But once you get enough of these well-intentioned rules in place around an act, it becomes a bit harder to just blurt out your ideas into songs. You sort of measure them against the yardstick of your aesthetic principles before they even have a chance to develop. You don't intend to do this, it just happens. And it bogs down the writing process.

An unsuccessful writing session is a gut-wrenching experience. Have I used up all my good ideas for this lifetime? Has the well permanently dried up? These questions always arise & dance around - about as easy to ignore as a piece of sawdust deep behind your eyelid. But a simple way to avoid this experience is to not write. To focus instead on the managerial side of the self-employed artist gig. Book more shows, sort out some work visas, send out some promo kits, do the blog etc. This process is insidious because it keeps you away from your real work but seems totally reasonable

Writing for other people is great because we get to throw out all the Wet Spots rules. If we want to write a vicious song, we can. If we want to write a bubblegum pop song then we can. We blurt out the ideas, and if they don't work then it's not a crushing blow to our faith in the viability of our main meal ticket. The other reason why writing for other people is great is because we're writing. Period. We're showing up for work, and getting the gears turning. Which makes it that much easier to show up for writing new material for ourselves.

Or so goes the theory. One of the goals I have for this New York summer stint is to get a lot of work done on a musical. The Wet Spots wrote some songs for a semi-improv'd burlesque / musical theater project earlier this year at the Vancouver International Burlesque Festival. The amazing Screaming Chicken Theatrical Society provided the actors and a lot of the plot ideas. Now Cass and I want to take those songs, and a bunch of new ones, and create a full-fledged, full-length, fully scripted musical with a very different plot. I believe that this musical could be a big-titted hit on a scale way above and beyond what The Wet Spots have achieved. So I'm really invested in it. So I'm really bogged down on it. It doesn't have that playful lightness that good writing requires. So I've been writing for other people instead. And I'm really happy with the results I've achieved in those pieces. But it remains to be seen if I'll now be able to dive in to this musical and give it that same dedication. In this, our last week in New York City.

THE WET SPOTS' BLACK ROCK CITY FIRST UNITARDED CONGREGATIONAL CHOIR

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 20:57:00 +0000

OK, folks! Big news!

The Wet Spots' Choir is a GO for Burning Man 2008.

Here's the deal: we're going to gather as many of our friends and fans as we can find and we're going to perform as a totally random, f*cked up choir at Burning Man.

Where: Center Camp, 8:00 PM Thursday night

What about rehearsals?
We're going to post some arrangements for songs here on our blog.
You download the mp3s and drive your friends insane by playing it in the car all the way from Reno.
Then you and your friends, thus indoctrinated into our nerdy sex cult, will join us for a rehearsal (Bwah ha ha!) on the playa.

Rehearsal: 4:00 PM Wednesday at our camp (freedomcommunity, 3:30 and Dart)
If you can't make rehearsal just show up and fake it.

Sound good? It's gonna be a riot!
Please drop us a line at cass at wetspotsmusic.com or leave a comment on this blog to let us know you're interested. We have absolutely no idea how this will turn out but it's gonna be fun.

-- Cass and John

The first Choir arrangement: DYTI! Surprise!

noreply@blogger.com (wetspots) — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 20:08:00 +0000

1) Lyrics for Do You Take It are HERE

2) The MP3 of the whole arrangement is HERE . Everyone should download this!
(a right-click will give you the option to download)

3) Pick one more mp3 for the part you want to sing.
(What you'll hear is your part louder than all of the other parts so you can practice!)

The Guys' Lead vocal mp3 is HERE.
The Girls' Lead vocal mp3 is HERE
The Guys' BG (Background vox) mp3 is HERE
The Girls' BG mp3 is HERE. <-- fun for chicks with high voices who like to go "ooo"

Pick whichever part you can sing. Please correspond with your gender.
IF you have to sing the part (esp. guys) an octave lower, that's fine!
If you're trans you can sing and stand with your preferred gender ;)

A reminder: INVITE YOUR FRIENDS TO SING WITH US!
REHEARSAL (BWAH HA HA!) 4:00 pm Wednesday at our camp
WHERE? freedomcommunity (3:30 and Dart)