Song Of The Day – When The Spring Comes Again by Legowelt

From the album ‘Crystal Cult 2080’ (2014)

Posted in Song Of The Day | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Mindhunter – intellectual pulp.

We all find serial killers fascinating, and the odder their motivations and crimes are, the better. A quote from Fight Club, a film principally about psychosis induced by immersing one’s self in a materialistic life, explains this intrigue, ‘only when we lose everything, are we free to do anything’. A psychotic’s freedom: the absolute hedonism it takes, to commit murder – satiating a lethal compulsion or complex – is alluring as it’s so elusive for most of us. We’re simply too rational, have too much to lose, to marry fleeting homicidal desires with acts of murder. Many us are left with insubstantial substitutes; binge eating, having a cry wank or buying shit on Amazon, just to make ourselves feel worthwhile.

Mindhunter provides a guilt-free vicariousness, without getting bogged down in esoteric terminology, chin stroking intellectualism or trite judgementalism. This simplification of a complex subject is aided by pulpy embellishments – you get fuck off retro lettering telling you where events are occurring. Setting the drama in the late seventies, at the inception of the FBI’s profiling of homicidal crimes, helps too. Those in the field were making it up as they went in spartan offices and dive bars punctuated by plumes of ciggie smoke, stale farts, body odour, cold beer and reheated grub.

Witnessing analysis actively permeating an embryonic profiling model, solving crimes, all whilst the three characters at the drama’s centre navigate the FBI’s bureaucratic charter, is rewarding. You’re pulling for them to succeed because you don’t want them to stop learning, because you won’t stop learning about them. Watching their agendas and motivations for their involvement in the project being openly scrutinised by each other is satisfying as is the friction when they debate how their findings, a euphemism for theorising, should be applied. There’s Holden, whose square, FBI suit phenotype masks an abnormal capability to empathise with homicidal impulses and a propensity for experimentalism. He’s also motivated by egotistical earnestness ‘I want to be an expert’ and ‘the biggest mistake I ever made was doubting myself’ that makes him an increasingly unsympathetic figure. His cohort Bill is equally sure of what’s right, and is agnostic of Holden’s interrogation techniques. He sports a flat top, chain smokes, and in contrast to Holden appears wiser and more practical, chiefly because he sees profiling as a way to strengthen judicial process. Finally, there’s the academic psychologist, Wendy, whose expertise and ability to coldly detach from the subjects, analysing their crimes, and to subtlety refine Holden and Bill’s thoughts, makes her their ideal foil.

While the title, Mindhunter, is, well, a bit shit, the show itself is elevated by the sense of dread that persistently lurks. It’s subdued by the narrative moving at a steady and serene pace, appropriately mirroring the logistical day-to-day mundanity of the ‘roadschool’ work the agents are doing. There’s no car chases or re-enactments of the kills. In fact the most visually alarming event ends the first sequence of the opening episode. This gives the interview scenes with the killers central billing, they’re a departure from procedural routine and Holden, Wendy and Bill’s theorising in their safe academic cubicle. Even if minimal insights (the impulse killers tend to be squalid simpletons) are gleaned, you’re engrossed as you sense anything can happen when a psychopath’s ego is being indulged or challenged by Holden’s methods; a cut throat, suicide, denial, defensive ambivalence, excessive self-pity, self-congratulatory reconstructions of a crime’s meticulousness, throwing a juvenile bird into a fan or ejaculating into a shoe, say.

The killers themselves are suitably diverse, but Cameron Britton’s turn as Edmund Kemper takes some topping, and as such he’s (thankfully) likely to recur often in season two. Kemper’s introspection, eloquence and menacing calm, particularly when analysing his own pathology, is a straight lift from Brian Cox’s Hannibal Lecter. This portrayal of Kemper as a Lecter-lite becomes a comical juxtaposition, because Kemper’s so large, both in stature and waist, sports a wispy porn moustache and hilariously thick glasses. It’s as though an extra from The Trailer Park Boys indulged in necrophilia and dismembered ten people. If it seems preposterous, then it probably is, but then so are sane people. Indeed, the oddity of Kemper’s eagerness to comply and be assessed is matched by Holden’s fawning over Kemper’s candidness and jovial manner.

The show has its weaknesses, the attempt to add depth to the central characters by detailing the minutiae of their personal and sex lives is a bit hackneyed. It adds a layer of fat to what would otherwise be lean episodes. What’s wrong with maintaining the mystery of Bill’s family problems, what Holden gets up to, or revealing Wendy’s sexuality? Conversations between Holden and his girlfriend are interesting because they share a common interest in psychology, but the drama and the narrative thread would be enhanced without most of this filler.

Fortunately these detours are fleeting as this show is healthily obsessed with challenging the validity of its chosen subject. A later episode posits the morality of using common serial killer triggers to help determine, justify even, whether peculiar character traits could mutate into something more malicious. Is tickling kiddie’s feet and paying them for the privilege a precursor to deviant behaviour? Is it deviant behaviour? Or has mining the varied geneses of homicidal intent warped Holden and made him unnaturally suspicious of any benign quirkiness? Forty years later there still isn’t an answer. Theory isn’t evidence, or proof, and there should be no such thing as a thought crime, yet we’re living with the legacy of this kind of research – in ‘grey area’ cases we tend to assume guilt and ostracise. Nonetheless, watching killer’s psyches being peeled like an onion, a process which reveals just as much about the profilers, isn’t half compelling.

Posted in TV | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Song Of The Day – Port Gentil by Porter Ricks

From the album ‘Biokinetics’ (1996)

Posted in Song Of The Day | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Song Of The Day – One For The Road by Devin The Dude

From the album ‘One For The Road’ (2015)

Posted in Song Of The Day | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Brexit – the final solution to my consumerist paralysis.

 

Gosh, what a pompous title that is. Brian Sewell would’ve been proud.

But yeah, I need a new laptop and have done for well over a year. The current one, purchased in 2010, is slower than a granny at a supermarket checkout thanks to its optical hard drive. So what’s all this hand-wringing over getting a new one? Well, I’m embroiled in the process of converting the loft in my house. By saving consciously and conscientiously I have sufficient funds to turn my current dwelling from a two bedroom house into a four bedroom house. If house values continue to rise exponentially (thanks gentrification!) perhaps I’ll sell it to some cunty nuclear family within a few years.

Spending ten grand on the loft conversion is okay. It’s completely practical and it manipulates capitalism’s ruthlessness to my benefit in a self-congratulatory, pragmatic Sarah ‘get a home report!’ Beeny way. Providing you do it properly, it’s like printing money. Buying a more expensive laptop than I originally intended to, or really need, is the consumerist zeitgeist controlling and extorting me. This juxtaposition is infuriating. I’ve probably lost many of you at this point. We all need a bit of hedonism cries the gallery. Wanting to replace a seven year old laptop that wheezes louder than an asthma sufferer when you turn it on is completely normal bruh.

Sadly, Alan Curtis is completely right. The speed and perpetuity of digital and technological advancement has drastically altered sociological mores by seamlessly assuming consumerist materialism as its keystone virtue. Fashions and trends are nothing new, but this consensus is firmly established – by not having a contemporary device that works and works quickly, or having instant or 24 hour access, you’re cutting off multiple avenues that allow you to be ubiquitously sociable. Consciously opting out of or resisting said advancement makes you a) old (likely), b) a joyless anti-social curmudgeon or c) someone who’s to be looked upon with suspicion.

Which is unfair, but mostly I loathe having bourgeois impulses that vanquish rationality. Needing a new laptop is rooted in practicality, but upon researching what one to get for my specific and basic needs (to surf the internets, laddie) I was seduced by the features more expensive models had. Some are capable of allowing me to game in bed at 2k resolution. Having been introduced to the possibility I now not only want this, but feel I need and deserve it too. Pivoting from the intent to buy or spend on something for practical use to desiring it for its material worth, aesthetics, branding and potential improvement in lifestyle is a form of specious capitulation I associate with insufferable Apple acolytes and Tories. You know the sort, folk with enough disposable income that care little they’re being grossly over-charged, and who blithely acquiesce to its cynical marketing of needing to own the latest model. Owning the latest incarnation signifies you belong to the clique, that you have the status and wealth to ‘fit in’ with the zeitgeist, just like Patrick Bateman. How it makes you feel (about yourself) is more important than what the device was designed to do. There’s no room for negative or critical thinking here, such as was this a productive use of my cash? Will I use all these features? Do I really need this upgrade? Can I upgrade this device? Sometimes I wish I could be (a bit more) impulsive, but eschewing such questions when buying anything feels vulgar, as though you’re trying (and failing) to suppress a proclivity for snuff porn.

But yeah, I really, really want to watch snuff porn on an Aorus laptop, and now nothing else will do. Not even the fact that I plan on buying a refurbished model for a third less than its retail price is enough to alleviate the sickening realisation that I’ve saved up my money, only to feel just like one of those folk who willingly extort themselves. Though hopefully the adage is true – quality makes you forget the price. When the new laptop arrives I suspect I’ll enjoy using it so much, particularly the improvement in performance over its predecessor, that I’ll soon forget what I spent on it.

Still, while this war is lost, there are personal battles still to be won. I refuse to move from one incremental, often comparatively frivolous, technological step to the next. What’s the point in going from a Samsung S7 to an S8? Or an iPhone [whatever the previous one was called] to an iPhoneX? Plus, and while we’re on the subject, you have to be the biggest fucking cunttwat alive to buy the iPhoneX (cost – £1000 – WTfuckingF) just to get those hideous animal emojis which mimic you talking, or, god forbid, singing, and only work if you converse with someone who’s using an Apple phone. That there hasn’t been a revival of the Internationale in response Sex & the City 2, or Apple’s ‘Animoji (go-fuck) yourself’, pricing, war on audiophiles and the music industry, confirms communism is dead and buried.

Thankfully I’ve finally found a justification I can live with: I’m psychologically bracing myself for Brexit. In spending £1200 on a laptop when, to serve my practical and basic needs, one for half the price would suffice, I can console myself that it’ll be a one off. Post-Brexit I (and many others) probably won’t be able to afford such a luxury, or, if we can, we’ll pay a premium price for a basic model. God knows how we’ll cope.

Posted in Odds & Ends | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment