Another week gone ...

It’s an off-week, and I’ve been sick all week.  So, as much as I’d love to toss out a few paragraphs about this or that, I’m just too tired.  I’ll just leave it there and see ya next week.

Perl blog post #57

This week I’ve done a full post over on my Other Blog as regards YAPC 2018.  Which I really should refer to as “The Perl Conference,” now that they’ve changed the name, but I will always think of it as YAPC.

This year was in Salt Lake City again, and we took the whole family (as I mentioned last week) and spent some time with the kids’ grandparents and one of their many uncles.  We didn’t do much as far as Utah sightseeing goes, but it was a chance to enjoy some quality family time, so it was good in that sense.  And we stayed in this wonderfully weird, creepy house which was built in 1889, and various doors kept opening by themselves and scaring the crap out of us, so that was fun.  Other than that, the only exciting thing we really did was go see The Incredibles 2, which was pretty awesome.  I think everyone enjoyed that.

So, now we’re back at home after a week away, including 4 days of 6 – 7 hours’ worth of driving, which is about all we could manage at a time.  We considered trying to make it straight through in one day (even only trying to do so one way), but, in the end, we figured that 5 humans and 2 canines in a car for 7 hours is damned plenty.  We stayed in a newish hotel in Mesquite, Nevada (right near the Arizona border).  I spent some of the driving days doing things (mostly Perl things) on my laptop while riding in the car, which I’m old enough to still think is pretty amazing.  My kids are all like, yeah, so?

Another thing we did while at the Utah rental place, in the company of grandparents, was to officially graduate my eldest child from homeschool high school.  We adopted the rough format of the Sudbury school where said child first attended school, which is that we asked for a thesis on why the student should be allowed to graduate: in order words, to what extent are they prepared to go out and be a self-sufficient adult?  And then there are some questions (occasionally even quite pointed questions, making the person defend the thesis), then there’s a vote (which is mostly pro forma) and then we proclaim them graduated.  So we did all that, and it was pretty nice.  It’s perhaps not the formal, hats-in-the-air ceremony that most get when they get out of high school, but I think it was impactful, and hopefully memorable.

But it’s nice to be back home, back in one’s own bed, with one’s one shower, one’s own recliner, one’s own TV, eating one’s own food instead of mostly bad-for-you fast food and whatnot, and so on.  As we get older, it gets harder and harder to be away from home.  I used to think that was because you just needed more crap as you get to be an old fogey: you need your medicine, and your special pillows, and all that sort of thing.  But now I think it’s more that, at my age, I’ve spent years and years working out what I need to have to be at my most relaxed and happy, and, when I leave home, I’m leaving all that behind.

Or, then again, maybe I’m just looking for excuses to avoid admitting that I’ve become the old fogey myself.  Either way, good to be back home.

The starry sky ... they are swimming happily ...

It’s a good thing this is already an “off” week for me, because I’m currently in the car driving to Salt Lake City for this year’s YAPC.  Okay, well, technically I’m not driving, because that would be totally dangerous while I’m typing this blog entry, and technically YAPC is now “The Perl Conference.”  See, “YAPC” stands for “Yet Another Perl Conference,” which was entirely appropriate when Perl conferences were a dime a dozen.  But, as my preferred computer language enters its twilight yars, it turns out that YAPC is the only Perl conference really left.  So they decided to drop the “YA” and just go with “T” (after politely asking permission of the name’s former owner, who hadn’t used it in years).  But I’ll probably always call it “YAPC” just because I’ve been calling it that for so long that I’ll never break the habit.

This is the second time (that I know of) that YAPC has been held in Salt Lake City (you can read about my experience at the last SLC YAPC over on my Other Blog).  Last time, we packed the whole family (including human and canine—but not feline or other furry/scaly—children) and drove to Utah, a four-state trip (I-15 goes through just a little corner of Arizona), where we rented a house for a week, and The Mother‘s parents and sister drove in from Colorado and stayed with us.  So this year we’re doing the whole glorious, insane thing over, except The Mother is swapping a sister for a brother, and hopefully the house will be a little nicer.  This is what one of my co-workers referred to as a “conferenscation.”  So it should be fun.  Plus, I am giving a talk at the conference (for the second time ever—well, second time at a venue this size), so that’s exciting.

Next week should, ideally, be a full post.  But the weekend after a YAPC is notoriously bad for my blog: I get home and I’m exhausted, and I generally flake out.  But we’ll see how it goes.

Slithy Toves II

"Magicians Never Tell"

[This is one post in a series about my music mixes.  The series list has links to all posts in the series and also definitions of many of the terms I use.  You may wish to read the introduction for more background.  You may also want to check out the first volume in this multi-volume mix for more info on its theme.

Like all my series, it is not necessarily contiguous—that is, I don’t guarantee that the next post in the series will be next week.  Just that I will eventually finish it, someday.  Unless I get hit by a bus.]

Last time, we talked about how each volume of a mix has its own distinct character, despite the fact that they all share a common theme.  Perhaps nowhere is this more apparent than this second volume of slinky, sinuous fare.  Usually my volume IIs are just “volume I continued,” as my initial songlist is almost always plenty for two volumes, or close enough with a few additions.  But Slithy Toves is a much more specific mood than usual, and I’ve always struggled to find tracks for it.  Volume I took me forever to fill out, so I often wondered if I was ever going to be able to complete a volume II.  Unless perhaps I found a “hook” for it ... and then I did.  See, last volume, “slinky” was most often provided by brass: Cherry Poppin’ Daddies, Cat Empire, Joe Jackson’s Jumpin’ Jive, and the Swing soundtrack.  But there were a few deviations even so ... Jon Astley and the Primitives gave us a bit of synth, and Santana did the serptentine via guitar.  As did Mazzy Star, but the combination of Dave Roback and Hope Sandoval also provides something extra: the buzz.  Now, most often buzzing guitars are associated with punk, and metal, and grunge, and that sort of thing.¹  But the buzz can be slinky and sinuous too, and this volume has quite a bit of it.  There were three songs that really cemented this concept for me, and they’re all here in this volume.

And perhaps the buzziest of all the tracks here is the Arctic Monkeys’ “Do I Wanna Know?”  While the choruses are almost thrashy (albeit in slow motion), the verses are something quite different.  The (Sheffield) England band is doing something unique with the lyrics in the verses here; the end of the lyrical line is typically in the middle of the sentence, making each line run into each other, looking at it one way, or having the rhymes fall in the middles of the lines, looking at it the other way.  Either way, this structure causes the song to roll along, twisting around like a sidewinder.  It’s a really great song, and it’s the opener here.

Secondly we have Phantogram.  Now, I’m pretty sure I discovered this band because some source tried to convince me they were witchhouse, and I was then engaged in trying to understand just what that style was.  Now that I have a (slighly) better grasp on it, I’m not sure I fully agree—witchhouse seems more firmly rooted in electronica than Phantogram exhibits.²  But it is true that Phantogram shows some of that darkness that witchhouse is famous for, while still retaining the high-energy pop.  Now, like a lot of semi-obscure alternative bands, Phantogram has a lot of good songs, a few great songs, and one ultimate shining moment that epitomizes all that they are and all that they can be in one sparkling pop gem that worms its way into your head and will not let go.  In the case of Phantogram, that moment is “You Don’t Get Me High Any More.”  It’s an absolutely perfect song that is practically impossible not to sing along with, and its just chock full of slink and buzz.

In the case of MS MR, that shining moment is “Salty Sweet,” in which the New York-based duo assure us that they fear rejection, prize attention, crave affection, and dream, dream, dream of perfection.  It’s another perfect pop gem³ that also sways back and forth and sneaks in a little buzz in the underbeat.  I fell in love with it the minute I heard it.⁴

And of course you can’t do buzzy slink without talking about Muse.  When I first heard Muse, I decided that they sounded a bit like U2—late U2, where Bono’s bombast has reached nearly operatic proportions.  The second time I heard them, I decided they sounded more like Queen, who of course is also famous for their operatic tendencies.  Muse has a quiet musical brilliance that’s difficult to overlook, even when their songs aren’t quite as reach-out-and-grab-you as some of their peers’.  “Undisclosed Desires” is almost a quiet tune for them, but it definitely works well here.

As I was putting the final touches on the selection for this volume, I got a wild hair up my ass to throw in “Halo” by Depeche Mode, off yet another of their truly great albums: in this case, Violator.  It has a touch of buzz, and a touch of slinky, but not too much of either, and I’m not entirely sure I can tell you why it’s here, except that once I had it in there I couldn’t conceive of taking it out.  You’ll have to judge whether or not you think I made the right choice.

Now, just because we’re all about the buzz this time out doesn’t mean we’re neglecting our old favorites.  We do have some returning bands, including Shriekback, who I noted last time might be the only band that has an actual propensity for this mix.  “Underwaterboys” is a quieter track, almost dreamy as it flows snakily along.  And Iron & Wine are back as well; “Peace Beneath the City” is a weird, surreal little tune (as most of his are), where Sam Beam demands we give him a juggernaut heart and a Japanese car.  But it has no problem delivering on the sinuous, and it even throws in a little buzz too.

You know what else can deliver on some slinky goodness?  Remember our discussion of dreampop last time?  And remember how I said it can be quite versatile?  Yeah, that.  For this volume, I couldn’t resist throwing in some Twin Peaks, because “Dance of the Dream Man” is about as slinky as it gets.  And Goldfrapp is ostensibly dreampop too, although they range pretty far and wide.  They can even do buzz sometimes, and their buzziest album of all is Black Cherry, which is also my least favorite Goldfrapp outing, to be honest, but it does has its moments.  “Tiptoe” is definitely one of them.

Less dreampop and more downtempo, with perhaps a bit of electro-world thrown in, we have volume closer Banco de Gaia, with “B2,” and its semi-goth-industrial lead-in from Jade Leary, “Infantry.”  Leary definitely brings the buzz, as usual for him,⁵ but there’s also the requisite sinuousness we need for this mix.  As for Banco de Gaia, this project by South Londoner Toby Marks is sometimes labeled “ambient dub,” and that works pretty well for our closing track here.  There’s some indistinct, vaguely Middle Eastern female vocals, quite a lot of ambient-ish synth work, and it’s all held together by a serpentine synth throughline that makes it the perfect closer this time around.

And perhaps not really dreampop at all, we have Morphine—although I don’t really know what to call it.  It’s all bass, and deep-voiced vocals: singer Mark Sandman is exactly as hypnotic as his name implies, with that talk-singing, sing-songy style reminiscent of Lou Reed.  I discovered Morphine when I decided to rewatch Wild Things after many years, and was fascinated by closing song “Murder for the Money.”  I then tracked down the album and discovered that several tracks would fit here.  “Swing It Low” is a quiet track, but it works well in the dreamier portion of the volume, leading in to the Twin Peaks selection and thence to Shriekback.

Slithy Toves II
[ Magicians Never Tell ]

“Do I Wanna Know?” by Arctic Monkeys, off AM
“You Don't Get Me High Anymore” by Phantogram, off Three
“Undisclosed Desires” by Muse, off The Resistance
“Peace Beneath the City” by Iron & Wine, off The Shepherd's Dog
“Salty Sweet” by MS MR, off Secondhand Rapture
“Tiptoe” by Goldfrapp, off Black Cherry
“Shanty Pig” by Mary's Danish, off There Goes the Wondertruck ...
“The Twister” by the Lucy Show, off ... undone
“Let's Go to Bed” by the Cure [Single]
“Swing It Low” by Morphine, off Like Swimming
“Dance of the Dream Man” by Angelo Badalamenti, off Twin Peaks [Soundtrack]
“Underwaterboys” by Shriekback, off Big Night Music
“Rev It Up” by Jerry Harrison: Casual Gods, off Casual Gods
“Beg, Steal or Borrow” by Berlin, off Love Life
“Halo” by Depeche Mode, off Violator
“Fancy Things” by the Weepies, off Sirens
“Thieves in the Temple” by Renée Geyer [Single]
“Infantry” by Jade Leary, off The Lost Art of Human Kindness
“B2” by Banco de Gaia, off Igizeh

Total:  19 tracks,  75:13

I also went back to the 80s for a bit, because I really love it there.  No-brainers were “Shanty Pig,” by the vastly underrated Mary’s Danish,⁶ and “Twister” by the equally undeservedly unheard of Lucy Show.  The obscure American band provides the serpentine via the bassline, while the obscure English band uses synth.  Also hailing from the 80s are Berlin, synthpop gods, and Jerry Harrison, late of Talking Heads, surely one of the game-changers of the decade.  From the latter, his big hit “Rev It Up,” which has the proper serpentine bassline for this mix; from the former, non-hit (but still great song) “Beg, Steal or Borrow,” which gives us more of that sweet, snaky synth.  And of course we can’t leave the 80s without hearing from the Cure, who grace us with “Let’s Go to Bed.”  I think the slink in this one is both bass and synth.  Also, it’s just a really great tune.

And, getting completely away from the buzz, perhaps the two absolutely most sinuous tunes on this volume are “Fancy Things” by the Weepies, and Renée Geyer’s remake of Prince’s “Thieves in the Temple.”  For the Weepies, this is entirely out-of-character; “Fancy Things” is an absolute revelation from the normally country-tinged duo.  It’s got a slinky backbeat, some great, slinky lyrics, and it also gives us our volume title.  As for Renée Geyer, who may very well be the Australian version of Adele (except for the part where she’d already been singing professionally for over a decade by the time Adele got around to being born), this excellent version steps up Prince’s (honestly, less than stellar) original by adding a truly slinky bassline and, of course, Geyer’s sultry, smoky vocals.  I’m not a huge fan of Geyer overall, but this track is just amazing.

Next time, we’ll take our deepest dive yet into the world of dreams.

⇐ Slithy Toves I

Slithy Toves III ⇒

__________

1 And we’ve already heard that mix.

2 Or maybe I still don’t understand what witchhouse really means.

3 Or, I suppose, it’s more of a pop confession, by their own admission.

4 Weirdly, I think I also found MS MR while researching witchhouse.  I think they’re even less so than Phantogram, really.

5 We first met Leary last time, but we’ll probably have to wait for another mix to really see him shine.  In the fullness of time, of course.

6 The Danish deserves a much more full discussion, but I fear that will have to wait for another mix, which we shall come to in the fullness of time.

Some lame excuses

I really wanted to get you a longer post to you this week—honestly, I really did.  But the combination of attending a graduation party and becoming terribly ill has just made that infeasible.  I was already pretty much a day behind on my weekend chores because of attending the party (which really was a lovely affair, and I wouldn’t have missed it for the world), but I’m having some sort of intermittent stomach cramps which make it very difficult to concentrate long enough to finish anything that requires actual brainpower.  So I think I’d best just give up and try again next week.

Sorry.

Crossing the streams

Some things should never be mixed.  Different sets of refrigerator poetry magnets, for instance.  We have two on our fridge—or, more accurately, the remanants of two, since the majority of both sets have been scattered to the winds.  One is Dr. Seuss themed.  The other is from ThinkGeek.  You probably see where I’m going with this already.

You know, the interesting thing about having little leftover sets of poetry magnets is that having extremely limited word choice makes you come up with constructions and combinations that are ... shall we say, unusual.  Here’s one.

Rain and eggs,
   I would conjure within.
      Like you, am
yellow, and random automagically.

And here’s another:

Would you thank Sam with ham?
Do I conjure, like rain and eggs?
Say! random yellow mouse: blow in with microsoft sand ...

I had to cheat a bit on that last one by combining a stray “s” (which is really there to help make plurals) with a leftover “and” to make the “sand.”  But I’m okay with that.  We’ll call it poetic license.

None of these actually mean anything, of course.  And yet, I feel like a properly motivated English major could easily wring a thesis or two out of ’em.  Note the curious repetition of the phrase “rain and eggs” in both works.  And why is the mouse yellow, do you suppose?  Perhaps the artist was trying to make a statement about cowardice.

Or perhaps the artist was just running low on adjectives.  Hard to say.

Next week, a longer post.

Something to Say (But No Time to Say It)

This is technically a “Nothing to Say” post, except that I don’t have nothing to say, so it’s also not really.  But, then, the “Nothing to Say” posts have always been among the most paradoxical posts in a huge sea of paradox, so no huge surprise there.  You could start with the last post in the series and work backwards from the internal links, or you could just go check out the series listing for ”the informals” and get links to them all.

The main point of the posts in this series is to do a bit of a retrospective on the Blog So Far—how many posts, how many words, that sort of thing.  Typically I do them whenever I can’t think of any other good topics, not when I just ran out of time.  However, this time I really did just run out of time: I’m attending another YAPC this year (yes, yes, technically they’ve changed the name to “The Perl Conference,” but it’ll always be “YAPC” to me), and, for the second time ever, I’m presenting a talk.  So I’m mildly stressed about it, because I radically overprepare for these sorts of things (which is amusing, as I’m terribly disorganized in nearly every other aspect of my life).  Preparation is the way I overcome stagefright: when people ask me if I’m nervous when presenting a talk, the answer always depends on how much I’ve prepared for it.  With little to no prep, I’m nervous as hell.  But my typical procedure is to write an outline, and then create slides or somesuch, and then write speaker’s notes, and then practice it over and over again (often in the shower), until I know it all cold.  And then I’m not nervous at all.  So I’m right in the midst of doing all that, and feeling like I’m running a bit behind (the talk is only about a month away, and I haven’t finished all my notes yet), and, while I do have a couple of topics worked out that I’d love to present, I just don’t have the time this weekend.  So I’m cheating a bit in calling this a “Nothing to Say” post. But it’s definitely a “Blog So Far” post, because I can do that fairly quickly and it’ll still be somewhat informative, without taking up a ton of my time.

How I usually start one of these posts is by checking the control panel of my blog.  Today it tells me that I have 423 total posts, from the first post (March 28th, 2010) through last week (May 13th, 2018), which is 425 weeks (if you count both endpoints, which you have to, because there’s a blog post at either end).  Assuming my date math is right, of course ... which, considering my upcoming talk is all about date math, it damned well better be.

(For those who are familiar with my Perl work and know of my Date::Easy module, this is the code to get that answer:

perl -MDate::Easy -le 'print( (date("5/13/2018")->epoch - date("3/28/2010")->epoch) / 86_400 / 7 + 1 )'

Which is really not as easy as it should be.  I’d like to add subtracting two dates—properly!—to the module before YAPC next month, but we’ll see how my time holds out.)

So, how many of those posts should count as actual posts is always up for debate.  The first thing we should subtract this time around are the “series listing” posts, which are categorized as “crosslinks.”  They super don’t count as weekly posts, because I did them all at once, not one per week.  So that leaves 415 posts in 425 weeks, which means I’ve missed 10 weeks in a little over 8 years.  Not awesome perhaps, but not particularly tragic either.

Then we have 55 posts on my Other Blog, but they totally count.  There are 38 interstitial posts, and they really shouldn’t count.  And there are 77 partial posts, which I last time tried to count as ⅓ of a post each (on the grounds that my normal posts average about 1,500 words and my partial posts are closer to 500).  Which is mildly odd math, but, if we roll with it, that puts us at just under 334 posts across 425 weeks, which is roughly a whole post every 9 days, so that’s still respectable, I’d say.

When it comes to words, I don’t do rough word counts any more.  I wrote a script a long time ago that I keep revising: it sucks in the whole blog post file, splits the text on three things—whitespace, pipe symbols (which I use to format links), and double-hyphens, which my posting script turns into proper em-dashes—filters out anything that doesn’t have any letters in it, throws out any formatting symbols I use that do have letters in them (e.g. “h1.” or ”{img}” or ”~~CENTER~~”), then counts the results.  And then I start removing things and recounting, so that I effectively subtract out certain kinds of words that I feel shouldn’t count towards my final word count.  The things I throw out are:

• “type” lines: These are lines at the very top of my post that tell my formatting script which blog they’re destined for, possibly the name of the post, etc.
• block quotes: If I’m quoting a long passage of text from someone else, that should hardly count towards my word count, right?
• links: Meaning the actual URLs themselves, not the words you click on (those still count).
• footnotes: This one is a bit more debatable, but I figure you can choose to skip over the footnotes if you like, and, assuming you do, then I shouldn’t count them in my total words.
• code blocks: Sure, I wrote them (usually), but code is not words in the traditional sense, and it often artifically inflates word count (e.g. ”$d” shouldn’t really count as a “word”).
• fine print: By which I mean those disclaimer-y things at the tops of my posts, like “this is part of a series” and “don’t count on the next part of the series being next week” and so on.  A lot of that is reused boilerplate, and, while I did have to write it once, I don’t feel like it’s fair to count it for every post.

So, according to this script, if I suck in every post in the “published” directory and every post in the “novel” directory, I come up with this:

total words          551189
- in links           3645
- in blockquotes     64602
- in footnotes       19457
- in code blocks     6128
- in fine print      5568
net words            451789

That’s around half a million words, even discounting as much as I do.  (I suspect there’s a few more posts somewhere that I’m not including, but I seriously doubt it could be more than 50 thousand words’ worth.)  About 20 thousand words just in footnotes (I thought it’d be higher, actually), and over 60 thousand that I’m quoting of other people’s words (of course, some of that is quoting myself, and some of it may be just for formatting purposes, like poetry or whatnot).  Still, a perfectly reasonable total, I think.  I have no complaints.

This post itself is a bit light, but not so much that I’ll mark it as “partial,” I don’t think.  I’m already over 1,100 words (final count, after editing, and adding this not-quite-a-footnote: 1,330).  And that’s good, because, despite the lack of time this weekend, I really don’t want to fail to deliver on my new blog schedule.  I already feel a bit lame for dropping back to half as many posts as I was making.  If I can’t even maintain that level, I really will feel a failure.  So this week I’m cheating a bit by doing a topic I can pound out very quickly, but I think it still qualifies as a full post ... even if mildly short on really interesting topics.  But celebrating half a million words spewed forth into the void of the Internet is not nothing, even though it may not particualrly impress you, dear reader.  But, as always, I can but point out that you really shouldn’t be reading this blog anyway.

See you next week.