In June 2006 I came across Alice Smith on Big Stereo and sought out a couple of her song. March 2007 I met someone else who dug the song “Dream” as much as I did, and had a deja vu experience. “What song is this” I thought, “How do I know her?” Why of course, from my own musical library.

Every so often I encourage people to jump on board with a particular female vocalist. Its not because I have great musical for sight, I just happen to be in the right place at the right time and know what talent is.

Why you’ll listen to her:
Alice Smith was honest to goodness one of the best female vocalist I’ve seen perform live. Ever. In Life. I didn’t think it was still possible for someone to produce the sound that came out of her mouth, without theatrics. Yeah. Think Ethel Waters or Bassie Smith singing the blues in 2008. Modern music for modern times of course, but just as moving.

Standing almost stock still on stage, she made it look like it was the easiest thing in the world to produce a sound that even Alicia Keys appears to struggle with. It took me a minute to register, could that girl be making as big and as dynamic a sound such as she was? Yeah. The conversation of course went back to Things We Know. If Amy Winehouse was Billie Holiday, tragic and talented, then Alice Smith was Sarah Vaughn or Ella Fitzgerald. She’d live to be 80 and has more raw talent to boot. Plus, she’s absolutely gorgeous with an insane body. Every one was mesmerized.

Why you’ll never hear of her:
Live, you almost wonder whats missing from her album. Well. Her. The recorded songs don’t do as much to capture her range and talent as they should and leave something to be desired. She’s all performer with a record that could be better.

But if you’ve ever wanted to see a nice souther girl make good and you dig good music: Listen and Listen and Listen.

It tells the story of Gabriel and Emilie who meet on the streets of Nantes randomly one afternoon. He offers her a ride , and the ride turns into a pleasant dinner with clearly romantic overtones. At the end of the night he goes in for a kiss only to be turned down by Emile, who believes that even a small kiss could have the most unexpected consequences. They cut to the story of Judith and Nicholas (played by Emmanuel Mouret), two very good friends, who as a means of curing Nicholas’ need for affection decide to engage in a quick tryst that begins with just a kiss (what was probably the most awkward and funny love scene I’ve ever seen on film.) The film centers around there growing affair (Judith is married to adoring, rich and attractive Claudio) and the unexpected repercussions of their actions. Wry, observant and also quite touching, SHALL WE KISS? is a very contemporary meditation on the wages of infidelity. Mouret’s intelligent, successful characters deluge their emotions and instincts with very open speculation as to why they’re doing what they’re doing, trying to appear as if they’re in control while it’s clear to everyone else they haven’t been for a while.

My favorite part of the evening was the discussion after the film, a woman asked in french about the difference between American cinema where infidelity is often treated as tragic and French cinema where it usually takes on a more comedic light. Mouret responded, while of course everything in the film had consequences, in France infidelity was a national sport.

My friends and I all joked, half seriously, about going home, grabbing a camera and making our own “sweded” films. Therein lies the genius. As Gondry stated about the exhibit at Dietch Projects (which allows people to create their own films and have them displayed in the exhibition) “I intend to prove that people can enjoy their time without being part of the commercial system and serving it. Ultimately, I am hoping to create a network of creativity and communication that is guaranteed to be free and independent from any commercial institution.”

It reminded me a lot of watching Muppet Babies as a child. Something in the fact that it stimulated our imaginations and encouraged us to find inventive ways of playing. We’d watch the Star Wars episode and suddenly we’d be using the couch pillows as the starboard of our space ship and with pots on our heads we’d launch our own exploration into the great imaginary unknown.

Big ups to everyone out there grabbing their cameras and playing like they’re five again.

To bring it back to more modern ideas, normalcy still exist in America in nuclear families, while the western civilization is changing to include a large variety of mixed familial types not bound by blood. Normalcy still dictates that women over a certain age should be married. I’m just getting started and am not quite ready to go into full rant mode, but once we begin to examine our lives we realize the ways in which we might all fall outside of normalcy’s radar. I think of my own current affairs, which have not subsided to “normal” coupledom, but which have, at least for the time being, tried to find a way to work beyond the current ideology of the status quo relationship. It may not work but at least we pushed the envelop. And this is only looking at one way of thinking. I feel that once we begin to entrench ourselves in the idea of normalcy we lose the motivation to find and/or try something new.

Let the fundamentalist hold fast to their views of normalcy. And…as the saying goes, “I am human and therefore nothing is foreign to me.”

it might be a better argument were it not four am, but I’m sure you get the idea.

Once home though I turned on the computer and it all fell apart.

During the course of writing my letter I stopped numerous times to check tumblr, flickr, facebook, twitter and god knows what else; despite that nothing had conceivably changed I stopped again to check it a second or even a third time. I stopped to write a shorter email to someone else. Even during the course of writing this post I stopped and clicked on the headers in my tabs section, which seemed to have no apparent purpose except to give myself a mental break.

The last few times I’ve picked up a book I’ve found the task of focusing on each page equally as difficult. On average, in a book that I find quite enjoyable I get through about a page and a half before my mind starts to wonder. Hopefully I start writing micro fiction because I can barely get through what I’m writing lately, averaging about five or six hand written sentences before I stop to do something else. This blog post began yesterday, was written partly this morning and will hopefully be completed now, this afternoon.

I’ve always had a bit of difficulty focusing on things over a long period of time, most of all on movies, least of all on books. But it seems over the past couple of months as my dedication to various sites has increased, my attention span has completely decreased. My productivity on the job has become a problem when every two to five minutes I feel like I need to check my email or see if I’ve missed a twitter. I’m always online and I’m always available but it feels like I’m getting less and less done. Apparently a BBC article reports that I am not the only goldfish in this internet ADD pond:

If you are spending too much time on the internet and are concerned that it is affecting your concentration, you are not alone.

The addictive nature of web browsing can leave you with an attention span of nine seconds – the same as a goldfish.

“Our attention span gets affected by the way we do things,” says Ted Selker, an expert in the online equivalent of body language at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the US.

“If we spend our time flitting from one thing to another on the web, we can get into a habit of not concentrating,” he told the BBC programme Go Digital.

Great, first it was commercials breaks now its the internet.

I feel like I should join a IA support group.