all i ever wanted was an in-between to escape this desperate scene
so yet again, i have found myself with the latest kelly clarkson album via a leak (though this time i got it from ontd_twatlight instead of jim), and i have been listening to it pretty regularly the past two days. it lacks the messy personal touch that the last album had, which is disappointing even if this album is more polished sounding. there are four gems on it - "all i ever wanted," the title track, is amazing, the verses are upbeat and catchy and the chorus is that pure angst that kelly clarkson's voice delivers best, and i like the lyrics; "don't let me stop you" will probably be a single, its got that bland rock/pop sound that's her usual, but its a lot more catchy; "if i can't have you" is the most danceable and catchy track, its loud and addictive, i love it; and "whyyouwannabringmedown" is surprisingly enjoyable, being that i'm usually turned off by pop stars' efforts to sound punk and unhinged, and i was ready to dismiss the song as soon as it started, but the chorus is an awesome kick, so i like listening to it. the rest is pretty disappointing. there's a handful of forgettable contemporary songs that will probably be played on the radio so teenage girls can sing along to them while driving to the mall, the best of which is "long shot." there are a few stirring power ballads like "already gone" and "impossible," though i was turned off by the effect on her voice that is used the former. and then the rest is boring, "i want you" is annoying bubblegum crap that she was probably forced to do, and "if no one will listen" is probably one of the most uninteresting ballad i have ever heard. as rebound from her last album, this one is pretty good, and will probably sell very well, but its a telling sign of the kind of hold her record company has on her.
the funny thing about listening to this album, at this point in time, hearing kelly clarkson sing about break-ups and relationships that she's never had, it made me wonder what it would be like to actually be in that world, that mindset. whenever i hear people talking about the woes of their relationships, i always give myself a little inward high-five because i've never had to go through that. and i like it that way. its not that i'm afraid of the pains of commitment or rejection and all that. i view it as a kind of inverted abstinence - preserving your emotional self for the one. i would love to be able to say one day when i'm married that the guy i'm with is the only one that i have ever given myself emotionally to. i mean, like most abstainers i would probably have cheated a bit - what would the emotional equivalent of a blowjob be, do you think? cuddling? spending time on weekends, but remaining undeclared? or maybe that's the equivalent of anal - being in a relationship but not actually calling it that, agreeing that you can be with other people if you want, but neither of you ever do. its funny that this weird sense of virtue is so appealing to me. they were talking about abstinence and sex education on the view a couple days ago, and elizabeth was making the point that we should not be afraid to encourage the ideal of abstinence until marriage in our kids. but i don't view that as an ideal at all, i think its straight-up tragic honestly. this is my ideal, and its probably just as silly and unrealistic, but i guess that's what the fairy tales are about, right?
the past couple of weeks have been pretty good mentally. angst has only fluttered past every once in a while, and it has been easy to swat away. being less emotional has helped me look back on the way i was made to be the way i am more objectively, and i can't help but grieve for all the possibilities my younger self had. on okcupid, i took the iq adventure test and was surprised to find that my highest score was in spatial. and in the description of my result one part stuck out at me.
An interesting trend we've observed in our data: high spatial scorers who have found an outlet for their natural creativity, even if it's not their full-time pursuit, have a very high overall 'life-satisfaction' rating, while high spatial scorers without that outlet-like those who have become lawyers or accountants-have the lowest rating among our entire user base.
its not a huge surprise, just a confirmation of what i have been suspecting. this whole getting by thing, getting a practical job, leading a sedate life is not going to work for me. ever. my parents have always appreciated my writing interest and my artistic inclinations, but i guess they always saw it as just a hobby. you'd think that after years and years since i was eight years old of saying how much i wanted to be a writer that one of them would have the balls to say, "yes, you will be a writer, and you will be great," but no one ever did, and if i could wish for one thing it would be that someone, any authority figure that was in the position to support me when i was young, had said that or something like that. all i ever heard when i told people that i wanted to be writer was that i would need to find a real job first, and even though i consciously dismissed it and rebelled against it, subconsciously it got in there. and now here i am, a college grad, in a position to do something stupid and drastic but i'm too damn scared because that's not what i'm supposed to do. i don't want to be like its all everyone else's fault, because its up to me to get what i want, i know that. but i mean, if my parents want to help, why don't they try to help me with researching the writing market, or look for jobs in the publishing industry, instead of making inane and useless career suggestions that i have no interest in and have the only merit of its "practical." the one thing that gives me some reassurance is that out of reflex i probably will end up doing something very strange and impulsive eventually. there's only so much of this crap you can take.
the funny thing about listening to this album, at this point in time, hearing kelly clarkson sing about break-ups and relationships that she's never had, it made me wonder what it would be like to actually be in that world, that mindset. whenever i hear people talking about the woes of their relationships, i always give myself a little inward high-five because i've never had to go through that. and i like it that way. its not that i'm afraid of the pains of commitment or rejection and all that. i view it as a kind of inverted abstinence - preserving your emotional self for the one. i would love to be able to say one day when i'm married that the guy i'm with is the only one that i have ever given myself emotionally to. i mean, like most abstainers i would probably have cheated a bit - what would the emotional equivalent of a blowjob be, do you think? cuddling? spending time on weekends, but remaining undeclared? or maybe that's the equivalent of anal - being in a relationship but not actually calling it that, agreeing that you can be with other people if you want, but neither of you ever do. its funny that this weird sense of virtue is so appealing to me. they were talking about abstinence and sex education on the view a couple days ago, and elizabeth was making the point that we should not be afraid to encourage the ideal of abstinence until marriage in our kids. but i don't view that as an ideal at all, i think its straight-up tragic honestly. this is my ideal, and its probably just as silly and unrealistic, but i guess that's what the fairy tales are about, right?
the past couple of weeks have been pretty good mentally. angst has only fluttered past every once in a while, and it has been easy to swat away. being less emotional has helped me look back on the way i was made to be the way i am more objectively, and i can't help but grieve for all the possibilities my younger self had. on okcupid, i took the iq adventure test and was surprised to find that my highest score was in spatial. and in the description of my result one part stuck out at me.
An interesting trend we've observed in our data: high spatial scorers who have found an outlet for their natural creativity, even if it's not their full-time pursuit, have a very high overall 'life-satisfaction' rating, while high spatial scorers without that outlet-like those who have become lawyers or accountants-have the lowest rating among our entire user base.
its not a huge surprise, just a confirmation of what i have been suspecting. this whole getting by thing, getting a practical job, leading a sedate life is not going to work for me. ever. my parents have always appreciated my writing interest and my artistic inclinations, but i guess they always saw it as just a hobby. you'd think that after years and years since i was eight years old of saying how much i wanted to be a writer that one of them would have the balls to say, "yes, you will be a writer, and you will be great," but no one ever did, and if i could wish for one thing it would be that someone, any authority figure that was in the position to support me when i was young, had said that or something like that. all i ever heard when i told people that i wanted to be writer was that i would need to find a real job first, and even though i consciously dismissed it and rebelled against it, subconsciously it got in there. and now here i am, a college grad, in a position to do something stupid and drastic but i'm too damn scared because that's not what i'm supposed to do. i don't want to be like its all everyone else's fault, because its up to me to get what i want, i know that. but i mean, if my parents want to help, why don't they try to help me with researching the writing market, or look for jobs in the publishing industry, instead of making inane and useless career suggestions that i have no interest in and have the only merit of its "practical." the one thing that gives me some reassurance is that out of reflex i probably will end up doing something very strange and impulsive eventually. there's only so much of this crap you can take.