Art Machine
Just another former infatuation junkie

We’re doing an absolutely great job bringing democracy to Iraq without upsetting the citizens of that country. Yes, sir! No evidence that our war was a war of conquest whatsoever!

Let’s see – the majority of the Iraqi people want to be left alone to chose their own government without the help of Bush. The U.N. wants to lead an international effort to rebuild Iraq, but Bush is saying “Thank you, no. Rebuilding Iraq is our spoils of war.”

But perhaps we should be taking a look at what’s happening in our own back yard while we’re busy bringing “freedom” to the Iraqi people.

r@d@r over at Ex-Lion Tamer points us in the direction of this story. It seems that the Supreme Court has decided to uphold a South Carolina law allowing the state to command abortion clinics to open their patients files. This would mean that the state could collect names, addresses, and other personal medical information about anybody who sought help at a clinic.

r@d@r invited feminists to “lock and load” over the issue. Well, thank you. This is, in fact, a feminist issue as it represents an attack on a woman’s right to choose. Oppression begins with suppression, and there is no greater suppression than regulation of a person’s choices concerning their own body.

But the issue goes much farther than just a woman’s right to choose (although that matter goes a fair distance, itself). The Supreme Court’s decision represents a diminishing of the right to doctor-patient confidentiality. Considered one of the most sacred elements of the doctor’s code of ethics, this confidentiality is the only thing allowing many patients to seek medical help for problems they might otherwise be too embarassed to admit to. A patient whose medical records can be opened at any time is less likely to seek help for sexually transmitted diseases, for diseases seen as signs of weakness, or for any ailment or condition that might trigger a “not me” reaction.

By upholding the South Carolina law, the Supreme Court has set a precedent for the disruption of doctor-patient confidentiality. In the past, such a disruption could only be permitted in the case of a criminal investigation. Now, however, the precedent set is one that allows the state to make laws gathering information on any particular group of patients – in this specific case, women who visit abortion clinics.

While we’re ranting about this, TalkLeft brings us this little gem about a similar attack – this time on attorney-client privelege. Lynne Stewart—a human rights lawyer who acted as a court-appointed defense attorney for Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman—was arrested and had all of her case files siezed by the Department of Justice. In a blazing display of patriotism, Ashcroft referred to her arrest as a significant victory, as he revealed that she was facing a four-count criminal indictment for aiding and abetting terrorism.

Why? Did Stewart give funds or equipment to terrorist organizations? Did she give them secret information about government installations? Was she on the Al-Qaeda payroll?

Actually, she fulfilled her duties as a court-appointed defense attorney. She provided competent legal defense in a court of law for Rahman.

The horror, the horror.

First of all, let’s talk about the new issue in this case. We’re going to prosecute attorneys for defending their clients? That makes no sense. The only way you can prosecute an attorney in a case is if they assisted their client in the commission of the crime – not if they defend their client after the fact. And in that case, the attorney almost never remains the attorney on the case.

We don’t prosecute attorneys for defending their clients. If we were to do so, then the entire judicial system would collapse. No attorney would agree to defend a client on the off chance that they might be prosecuted.

As for privilege issues—is America so blinded by a quest for revenge that we would actually violate the most sacred principle of our judicial system? We have always guaranteed a fair trial to people accused of a crime. No kangaroo courts, no retaliation for defending oneself.

Attorney-client privilege is a vital part of the sixth amendment guarantee of due process. Without privilege, there is no fair trial.

Republicans have been very vocal lately on privacy issues such as these two. Apparently, some genius out there finally realized that there is no specific provision for a “right to privacy” in the Bill of Rights. In other words, they’ve found a way to shred the Constitution while appearing to uphold it. After all, those first ten amendments (or the subsequent seventeen) don’t specifically mention privacy. Do they?

Well, my copy of the Bill of Rights has Amendment IX in it, which states fairly clearly:

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

Or, more directly, there’s Amendment IV.

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Amendment IV is usually used as a defense against illegal search and siezure, but it can also be read as a right to privacy. After all, the people have a right to be secure in their persons or papers until a warrant is issued upon probable cause – meaning that the person requesting such a warrant should be investigating a criminal act at the time and have (defensible) reason to believe that such a search could yield evidence. Few things are more personal to us than our medical histories, dealing as they do with our bodies and little else. Allowing the government to paw through your medical records because you sought a specific treatment akin to giving the police force passkeys and telling them to ignore getting a warrant and rummage through every Asian-American’s home looking for evidence of ties to North Korea. Or giving those same police officers a map to the homes of the wealthy white and telling the to just drop in without a warrant or due process and see if they have any illegal immigrants working for them.

Do you believe that these issues apply only to narrow cases? That it’s all right to sacrifice other people’s rights, as long as yours go untouched?

That’s specifically why it cannot be said enough...

The Kraft Foods Corporation has graciously protected us from name-brand confusion by smacking down an artist’s right to work under the name “King VelVeeda”.

Stu Helm (the artist formerly known by a misspelled corporate trademark) was an underground cartoonist who occasionally drew covers for Screw magazine. His company – cheesy graphics – apparently drew the fire of Kraft Foods for “tarnisment.” They claimed that his work was pornographic and degrading, and that his use of a name similar to a Kraft food product would suggest that Kraft approved of his work and would associate their product with it.

Helm is back now, but without his original nickname. And he’s just posted a comic of what happened to him on his website (which was closed down by the court while he was involved in the case). You can find his work at cheesygraphics.com (some content not safe for work).

Everybody should check out this link for prime examples of that musical oddity, Bastard Pop.

And don’t say I never did nothin’ for you.

Note: The following entry is graphic-intensive. Exercise caution.

In a move that shocked exactly no-one after the massive build in rumors, Apple announced today that it was opening its own online music store. And with it comes a snazzy new edition of iTunes.

Naturally, being both a Mac geek of the umpteenth power and a music geek of the umpteen-minus-oneth power (look! I made a new word!), I had to try it out. And I figured you might like to go along for the ride.

Let’s define the space, first. This is my computer. CD’s, papers, and pumpkin seeds make up the clutter scattered all around.

This is me in all my unkempt glory, about to embark on a voyage into the wild, wooly world of Apple’s online music store. Still relatively sane, if a bit unshaven.

About three years ago, Charles – a good friend and former roommate of mine – started his frequent comments on how fast I drink diet cola. An unhealthy addiction, to be sure. Since he first made these comment, I’ve started to think of things in terms of Pepsi’s. This movie is three Pepsi’s long. Etc. My mind just turns to Pepsi and I think of it a lot. You know the drill.

But I digress. The question is: can I pay for and download a track before I drink an entire bottle of Pepsi?

At this point, the Pepsi is still closed.

I’ve already downloaded the new iTunes and the new Quicktime from Apple’s website, so that’s taken care of. That was less than ten minutes out of my life, and I’m eager to get going.

Every time Apple updates iTunes, they use a new color note. This is so when you go down to your dock to open the program, you know for sure that you’ve got the new button. The last note they used for iTunes 3 was purple. Purple’s okay. But the new note is green. Green’s my favorite color.

Ooo, green…

Click on the pretty green note, and iTunes opens up.

At this point, I open the Pepsi.

So far, things look pretty normal. Still the same brushed-aluminum look. The search option up in the corner is still there, along with the multi-colored eye that says “Browse.” My library is currently empty because I’m trying to archive my eMusic downloads on CD-ROM (a dangerous and time-consuming task, I assure you). Yup, everything’s normal. Except for…

This new button. This is over in the menu with all of my playlists. Wow, did Apple know what they were doing, or what? Their store is right there under your own library, just crying out to be clicked. Don’t have something in your library yet? That come-hither look tells you that you can have it right away – for a price. Plus, it’s green. Ooo, green. I like green. Clicky-clicky.

Click for actual size

There’s the storefront in all its glory. A storefront that screams We have major artists! in big, bold letters. Maybe even in that San Francisco font that Apple used to include with its system way back in the old days (1984). Just looking at this screen, I see Sheryl Crow, Beck, Bob Dylan, Eminem, The Who… they’ve got a good selection, I must admit.

And the storefront is not too shabby, itself. Beyond the flashy names all over the place, there’s an elegance to the design. A pop-up menu lets you jump to genre listings. You can power search, browse, and send requests. It tells you the top album and song downloads. Very cool. And, of course, there’s a link where you can buy an iPod. This is on my wishlist, if any wealthy potential benefactors are out there reading.

The third thing I notice is that my library search option has turned into “Search Music Store.” All right, I’m game. I’m a sucker for Kurt Weill (German composer of “September Song” and The Threepenny Opera, among others), so let’s search for “Weill.” Just type it in and hit “return”.

Click for actual size

Great googly-moogly! They have a lot of Kurt Weill’s stuff here by a lot of different artists. And the search was pretty quick. Of course, I’m on a high-speed connection. But it returned versions of Weill songs recorded by John Coltrane, Rosemary Clooney, Elvis Presley, Liberace, Louis Armstrong…

At this point, the Pepsi is this far gone:

All right. So they’ve got variety and a fairly easy system to use. So, let’s pick a track and give it a real test. Whom shall we download?

At this point, I start playing with those little windows of “Just Added”, “Up & Coming”, and the like that are on the main genre pages. And I discover that clicking the word “More” brings all of the entries up on a page by themselves. That arrow on the left side of the display window, however, causes the four albums currently displayed to roll off the screen and the next four to scroll on. Snazzy design is always an Apple strongpoint.

So, let’s see. I already have The Donnas’ Spend the Night and David Bowie’s The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars. Both very good albums, yes, but I’m not willing to spend the money on music I already have.

Finally, I decide to go with Tom Petty. I don’t have his latest album, and his single “The Last DJ” has been banned by some radio stations – not for questionable content, but because it’s pretty critical of commercial radio. Or so I’ve heard. I double-click the title track and listen to the free thirty-second sample. Yup. Sounds good. Time to take the plunge and click the “Buy Song” button.

A single song off the iTunes Music Store is going to run you $0.99. Almost all of the albums are $9.99 if you buy them all at once, unless they’re under ten tracks long. Then the price gets adjusted down. And if you get to over twenty tracks, the price is going to go up. But in general, you get a discount when you decide to buy the whole album. But $9.99 is a pretty steep price to pay just to try out the service. Heck, I didn’t even pay eMusic that when I started – I got free downloads. So, for the sake of science – one track at $0.99.

Click for actual size

There’s the sign-up screen. Create an account, and you can enable one-click shopping. Just click what you want to buy, and there it goes.

Those of you who haven’t heard about the limits on these files, here’s a quick run-down.

• You can only play these songs on up to three Macs
• You can burn as many CD’s as you want to
• You can put them on as many iPods as you want to

As far as “Burn as many CD’s”, the agreement points out to you that you can only burn an unaltered playlist a maximum of 10 times. But you can burn your library as many times as you want, and you don’t have to worry about paying for the song each time.

By now, the Pepsi is this far gone:

A few quick seconds later, and I’m ready to buy. Of course, Apple now has me on file – but they had that already.

Click for actual size

A very cool thing is that it asks you if you actually want to buy the track/album you just requested. This is more helpful than you might imagine. It ensures that you won’t get charged out the yin-yang because of an accidental click.

Now, I’ve got a completely new playlist over there in my listings. iTunes tells me that the playlist is just like any other playlist that I might make, but tracks downloaded from the store will be instantly added to the list. Also, the new playlist is green. Pretty green. Wants it. Wants it, my preciousss….

Sorry. Bad Smeagle.

Aside from the fact that I am now a dollar poorer than I was a few minutes ago, the whole process was completely painless. Friendly, even. But the friendliest process in the world doesn’t mean Jack if it’s a substandard product. So now it’s time for the acid test. Time to plug in the headphones and give the song a listen.

Even with iTunes’ built-in EQ turned off, the sound is incredibly rich. Clear stereo. And the track is pretty good, itself – but that’s to be expected.

So far, we’re doing pretty good. Apple has my money, I’ve got my song, and all is right with the world. And the pepsi is down to about a third of the bottle left.

Now, let’s put it on a CD.

Lanford Wilson wrote a play called Burn This, but I don’t think he had CD’s in mind when he did. Anyway, that’s what I called the playlist I was going to burn from. From here, it’s just a matter of clicking the “Burn Disc” button in the corner.

There’s the disc. All set to be put anywhere I want the music. Isn’t technology grand? And I still have Pepsi left.

So, that’s how easy the service is to use. How does it stack up?

I’ll admit, eMusic’s monthly subscription service has spoiled me a bit. There’s just something about paying one flat fee and getting all the music you can carry that calls out to the voracious non-conformist in me. It takes a lot to make me want to pay by the track or by the album for music that I’m going to download.

Of course, Apple manages to provide a lot. They’ve got selection, ease of use, and a pretty fair price plan. $9.99 for a downloaded album isn’t a bad price to pay, and the music is still mine. While I may not download as much as I would like to (I can’t afford to download as much as I would like to), I’ll definitely be keeping up with the new music store.

What’s most important about the store, however, is not the pricing or the selection. It’s what Apple has gotten the music industry to do.

The music industry has said time and again that they didn’t want people to be able to download music. The statement from the RIAA was that downloadable music would never be a reality until it had effective copy protection, couldn’t be burnt to CD, and couldn’t be put on portable players. In other words, the music industry was only willing to sell you the music when they didn’t actually have to sell you anything.

Apple’s system has gotten the record industry to agree to a distribution model in which the consumer retains ownership of the product they’ve bought. You can burn it and put it on portable players. Of course, it still has copy protection. But as far as protection goes, it’s very non-intrusive.

So, I have to give Apple’s new service four stars. While it’s currently too rich for my unemployed blood, it ranks just slightly ahead of eMusic in my estimation by virtue of the titles offered. eMusic has the advantage on price, but Apple takes ease-of-use, convenience, and popular selection hands-down.

Now, here’s the downside for PC users. Just like the iPod at its roll-out, the new Apple Music Store is currently Macintosh only. It’s built into iTunes, which is a Mac-only piece of software. As much as I would love to take this time to tell you that it’s time to invest in a Mac, however, Apple is currently working on a version for the PC. It’s not clear yet whether it will be just a version of the store or if PC users will finally get a version of iTunes to call their own. Whatever it is, however, Apple once again proves that it is the greatest innovator currently working in the computer field.

The Civil Flag – and there’s a poster, too

r@d@r over at Ex-Lion Tamer posted this link long ago, but I just got around to mentioning it, myself.

Barefoot’s World has this page, featuring the history of the United States Civil Flag for peacetime – as well as a document detailing the flag’s dimensions for people interested in making their own.

Technically, it’s Saturday. But I’ve never done The Friday Five before, so I guess I’m in the clear.

1. What was the last TV show you watched?

Actually watched? A re-run of Dharma and Greg. Some more cheesy stuff came on after that, but I was paying attention to my computer at that time.

2. What was the last thing you complained about?

In real life? The fact that I’m burnt out on music and movie shopping. The sad truth is that shopping online lacks the tactile sensations and atmosphere of shopping in a brick-and-mortar store. But when you get to the actual brick-and-mortar store, they’re trying so hard to match an online store’s selection that their selection outstrips their space or any organizational system that makes sense. The result? You can either click around online and slowly feel your life drain away from you, or you can go to a store and walk out completely numbed and empty-handed because you couldn’t force yourself to browse the overflowing racks.

Virtually? Well, I was going to mention a rant I did on the fact that Girls Gone Wild has actually been licensed for a major motion picture, and that somebody actually thought it was a good idea, but then I wrote that rant about movie shopping. So I guess my “virtually” answer is the same as my “in real life” answer.

3. Who was the last person you complimented and what did you say?

Speaking about somebody I didn’t know all that well, I said, “I haven’t had much chance to talk to her, but she seems incredibly cool.”

4. What was the last thing you threw away?

An empty Diet Pepsi bottle.

5. What was the last website (besides this one) that you visited?

William Gibson’s blog.

---

Well, that was painless. Wonder what comes up next week.

As my previous entries show, I’m a sucker for protests that combine political awareness with nudity. That’s why I’m completely enthralled and want a poster of this upcoming Entertainment Weekly cover (Suggested nudity, not safe for uptight work places).

For those of you who want to get an idea of what the cover looks like and are checking it out in a space that feels nudity has no place near the human body, here’s a significantly censored version of the image.

John Ashcroft doesn’t want you to click the Short, Sassy One’s face – even if you’ll only see the censored picture

As far as their new album goes, it’s about as good as modern country gets – taking a turn from the mass-produced pop/pap of commercial country radio and going back to a more roots, folksy sound.

Of course, the cover (which I really do want a poster of, by the way) isn’t about their new album. No, it’s all about the political fooferall surrounding Maines’ (the Short, Sassy One) comment that they were embarassed that Bush was from Texas.

As you may recall, many copies of Home went up in flames following those remarks.

I don’t know what to think of this, honestly. I’m starting to think that the long, sordid story of the Dixie Chicks’ venture into Susan Sarandon territory is an example of how inaccurate reporting can be in its very nature – you aren’t there, so you have to depend on the report, which has to fit into a certain space. Especially if it’s just “Entertainment News”.

Let’s review, shall we?

On March 10, the Dixie Chicks performed a concert in London as part of their European tour. During the concert, Natalie Maines made the comment that the Chicks were ashamed that President Bush was from Texas.

(What wasn’t reported was the bit that followed immediately of – “But you know we support the troops 100 percent”.)

Then there was the backlash. CD burnings, bannings from radio stations, hate mail, Death Threats[!], protest slogans, and one thing I’m still not certain I’m understanding correctly – Dixie Chick stompings (where, apparently, people paid for a baby chick in a Dixie cup that they would promptly… stomp. You’re kidding, right?). This, of course, got a lot of news coverage.

Then there was the backpedaling. The Chicks apologized. Which, frankly, disappointed me. It was reported that they apologized to the President and to their fans.

Now, I’m wondering – because of This report from Yahoo! News, which suggests that the Chicks apologize for using “disrespectful” language, but not for taking a stand against the war or Bush’s policies.

So, what does all this mean? Are the chicks backpedaling publicity hunters? Are they misunderstood peace activists who made a few hasty statements and now want to tone down the inflammatory rhetoric in the hopes of being understood? Or are they people who want peace and are at the mercy of a corporate machine that drives modern pop music and works off of focus groups to do their damage control?

Frankly, who cares? I’m glad to see them saying things now like, “Am I sorry that I asked questions and that I don’t just follow? No.” (Maines). I was disappointed to hear that they apologized for their original statements. But, in the end, they’re minor players in the peace movement.

What’s more important is the reaction that they faced within their public. Good Goddess, these are people with opinions, just like the rest of us. And they’ve been given the public stage to make their statements. For years, paparazzi, gossip columnists, fan clubs, and celeb-stalkers alike have defended unscrupulous practices with the statement that celebrities “give up their right to a private life” in exchange for celebrity status. But now that they actually voice an opinion, they’re supposed to keep it to themselves?

And this is America, fer cryin’ out loud in da mud, now. We express our opinions, and we have a right to do so. You cannot logically say “So-and-so is fighting for your freedom, so shut up.” If people are really fighting for our freedom, then we have no right to be silent. Too many people have fought and bled and died for that freedom. Too many patriots have fallen in battle to defend our right to speak our minds for us to shut up now. If you agreed with the war, say so. If you disagreed with the war, don’t let yourself be silenced. This is freedom.

I stole this quiz from Rin, but I don’t think she’ll miss it.

Comic Sans – You are easy going and have a good
sense of humor. You are a nice change from the
norm. Beware of becoming too cliche.


What Font Are You? (Standard Fonts)
brought to you by Quizilla

They grow up so fast.

Hello. My name is Ryan. And I’ve directed a play.

Ryan Kirk has made his directorial debut, directing both Sexaholics and The Cowboy, The Indian, and the Fervent Feminist for Virginia Tech’s University Theatre.

snif And it seems like it was just yesterday he was playing in Variations on the Death of Trotsky.

I’m not dead yet.

They grow up so very, very fast….

Sign up to receive our newsletter, and get the latest news on our website delivered directly to your inbox!

Back in the old days of the internet (before Microsoft and Yahoo! bought up everything in sight), I used to run a mailing list to keep people up to date on my personal website (which was then hosted on a pre-Yahoo! Geocities).

Shortly after the service I ran my mailing list through was bought out by Yahoo! and turned into part of Yahoo! Groups, I stopped doing it. By the time the ArtMachine had gone blog, my old mailing list was a long-forgotten relic of a bygone era.

These days, I keep the site updated constantly with new content. And I have a bit of an interest in promoting my various endeavors in widely-ranging fields. So I’ve decided to re-introduce my newsletter. This time, the letter is going to be distributed regularly. And, instead of being notification of updates to the site (I’m not quite that masochistic), it’ll be further updates on projects, news about recent events, and the occasional plug for a product that I produce myself and can (hopefully) get a little bit of money for.

So consider signing up now. The first issue will be hitting e-mail boxes soon. You can do it with that handy little box at the top of the entry. Just enter your e-mail address, and my newsletter will come straight to your spamfilter.

Share and enjoy.