Come with me, into the trees

I more often than not spend too much of my time filling the world with opaque analogies which don't completely make sense. But upon hearing Loney, Dear I feel compelled to throw another of my convoluted "it's like" 's into the blogosphere.

The music Emil Svanängen makes under his Loney, Dear title sounds to me like something fueled from the imagination. A dream that was designed for genius but never meant to go any further than the untapped pleasures of the unconscious. "I am John" seems as if it started out somewhere else and like a freak avalanche it snowballed into a worldly pleasure for us to endulge.

You could mistake Loney, Dear for just another indie do good-er in amongst a plethora of others but tilt your ear a touch closer to the speakers, there is that something else there which gets inside you. It may be that my psychology degree has sent my introspection off the radar but there is more than meets the ear to Loney, Dear.

To be blunt and less vague; from the get-go, Loney, Dear sounds like everything I wish Josh Pyke could be.

OR

To be more interesting; if I was lost in an enchanted forest, I'd want Emil Svanängen there with me to make the experience something else.

Mp3: Loney, Dear - I Am John

In other news.



The Grates have a live DVD titled 'Til death do us party: Live at the forum' coming out this Saturday. I say the timing couldn't have been any sweeter as success from the DVD could keep The Grates rollercoaster firmly moving forward and allowing them to by some more time whilst they write songs for their sophomore release. Patience is her gorgeous glory can never be a bad thing. There is not such thing as too much Patience (anyone get the pun? no? dang!).

The DVD will be launched on a special JTV screening on the ABC @ 10:55pm on 31st March.

Check the clip to The Grates latest single "rock boys" which features Patience's infamous ribbon dance.





Finally on the topic of philosophy I have a little something for you to ponder if you wish to.

David Hume essentially stated that science parades itself as fact but is really no better than religion. Science accepts it can make findings which will predict future events and indeed it often can. But, what is to come of such information in 20 years when subsequent studies often find alternative theories which then counter-act the previously held theories as false or not as true as once thought, no different to the kind of contempt we often treat the subjectivity of religion.

Science is based on universal principles which are accepted as true. But then once replaced this makes them something other than.

My point leads to a really fantastic analogy that David Hume (i think it was Hume) makes in comparing humans and a farm yard chicken.

Every day when the sun comes up, the chicken watches as the farmer leaves his house, heads over to the shed and comes out with grain and feeds the chicken. Every day in the chicken's life without fail the farmer leaves the house, goes to the shed and feeds the chicken. The law of the chicken's universe is that the farmer will every morning feed the chicken and this is a fact.

Then one day the farmer walks out of the house, walks over to the chicken and rings it's neck until it's dead.

Really, regardless whether the chicken adhered its belief of food to religious faith or scientifically grounded fact, neither served to completely and holistically prove something without contestation.

So next time that friend of yours doing micro-biology looks down his nose at you, throw a dead chicken at him.

Interesting i think. You probably don't but hey if your reading this far down the post, your arts degree came in handy!