Ten Questions About the Oscars

by Alexis Faulkner

1. I spent way too much time and energy seeing movies last year to have Spotlight, a perfectly acceptable NOMINEE, win. This movie was well made and well acted, but it lacked any certain excitement. I was fully prepared to be sorely disappointed if The Martian won (I found it boring and the script in particular annoyed the crap out of me) and I found myself disappointed about not being disappointed. So, I can’t help but wonder, why did Spotlight win? What was remarkable about it and what made it stand apart from the rest of the nominees? Was is the story itself? What separated its sincere and standard directing from the inventive and quirky directing of The Big Short? What about the plot and the acting made it a better film than Mad Max?

2. Is there any way for a layperson to know the difference between sound editing and sound mixing?

3. Too many bear jokes on Twitter. This was most likely due to the fact that the bear from The Revenant was sitting in the audience. I was under the impression that the bear was totally CGI, so this came as a huge shock to me. Also, why didn’t anyone consider the post-traumatic stress that Leonardo DiCaprio might experience upon seeing this bear appear at an event that, by all accounts, was very important to him. He survived the bear attack, and was able to maintain enough sanity to continue with the rest of the film and eventually bring home an Oscar for his performance. So, I ask- why didn’t anyone recognize that it would be insensitive to invite the bear? This created to many unknowns. 

4. Literally none of the speeches were exciting and almost everyone appeared to be on too many pills, especially Ryan Gosling during his pre-show interview. While being interviewed with Russell Crowe, Gosling repeatedly waved his backstage pass at Michael Strahan, as if to say, "It's really okay that I'm back here. I have a pass!" What were they all taking? My friend suggested there may have been a bowl of Quaaludes backstage. Can anyone confirm or deny?

5. Too many children. Why are children allowed at the Oscars?

6. Chris Rock, in the middle of making several jokes about the #OscarsSoWhite controversy, basically explained that there is literally nothing else one could possibly think of to ask a woman besides what she is wearing. The clothes are the absolute priority in this situation. Fashion is, of course, a big part of the red carpet spectacle, and calling out the designers who made the clothes is completely fine, but it takes less than 30 seconds to mention a designer and their design. If Chris Rock needs help thinking of what these other questions might be, he can simply reference THE EXACT SAME QUESTIONS that men are consistently asked on the red carpet. You know, questions, say, about acting or directing or whatever other professional attributes involved in the person's attendance of the event. Rock says, 

“Another big thing tonight is — somebody told me this — you’re not allowed to ask women what they’re wearing anymore.There’s this whole thing, ‘Ask her more. You have to ask her more.’ You know it’s like, You ask the men more.Everything’s not sexism, everything’s not racism.They ask the men more because the men are all wearing the same outfits, O.K.? Every guy in there is wearing the exact same thing.You know, if George Clooney showed up with a lime green tux on, and a swan coming out his ass, somebody would go, ‘What you wearing, George?’”

Why did he make a joke that’s been made a thousand times before? And why did he pick on women to demonstrate that not everything is about discrimination?

7. How has Ennio Morricone never won an Oscar before now???????

8. Why was this year’s awards show so 90s? Why feature Dave Grohl and Toy Story? And seeing Leo and Kate together again was devastatingly nostalgic, but now the internet is flooded anew with Titanic references and it’s time we moved on to new memes.

9. Why was Joe Biden there? And why didn’t Chris Rock make any jokes about politics? WHY DID NO ONE MAKE FUN OF JOE?

10. Why did Sam Smith think that he was the first openly gay Oscar winner? 

Alexis Faulkner is Unicorn Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine

Post 100

by the Editorial Staff of Uncanny Valley Magazine

Hello everyone,

Please enjoy this list of 100 things which we made to celebrate our 100th post on the blog! Thank you and have a nice 100.

Sincerely,

Chris100, Alexis100, and Doug100

1. People with really nice hair
2. Spending too much time in the sun
3. Tiny people
4. Troublingly burnt coffee
5. Discovering you have a fortune cookie leftover
6. No, like, really, really tiny people
7. Not wanting to be a pirate
8. Walking through a puddle you didn't see because you are fucking oblivious
9. Electronic portraits of pig presidents painting pictures of pralines
10. An icicle farm
11. Spinning plates
12. Arms
13. An outrageously long line
14. Filthy pennies
15. Whey
16. Mr. Donnie Wahlberg
17. Qualitative assessments of value
18. Personal space issues
19. Doom
20. Idle plates
21. A haircut
22. Formal corrections to an outdated newsletter
23. Mailing lists
24. Color
25. My blue hoodie
26. Spilling most of your water while trying to walk
27. Plato
28. Liftoff
29. Unfulfilled potential
30. Seven
31. Jammed up
32. Entropy
33. Weigh
34. Cops
35. The uncanny valley (not the magazine)
36. Lurid grafitti
37. Inflammation
38. Standardized tests
39. Sore thoughts
40. Doug
41. Passive aggressive notes
42. A stubborn animal
43. Ghost
44. Quietly counting the days
45. Basic income
46. At the gates of dawn
47. The person who coughed on their hand and then went through a door you were just going to go through, leaving germs on the handle
48. Glue
49. Paranormal activity
50. Animals in captivity
51. A real ham sandwich
52. Lust
53. Spelling errors
54. Obsequiousness
55. Energy cheetahs
56. Mostly forgettable movies
57. Loam
58. Uncanny valley
59. The time your teacher called you out for sleeping during lecture
60. Rich, frothy milkshakes
61. Cheapness as a sense
62. Seven cheese pizza
63. A national anthem
64. Cash
65. Four cheese pizza
66. Freak
67. Charm
68. Knowing your place
69. Steel beams
70. Anarchy
71. Speeding
72. Cheap heat
73. Anchovies
74. Amphetamines
75. A swan's language
76. The Pacific Ocean
77. Losing a finger
78. Peculiarity
79. Camping
80. Captain Eyepatch
81. Way
82. Volatility
83. Forgetting your name, again
84. Flag
85. Baseball
86. Second person narration
87. Mostly forgivable movies
88. Karl the Fog
89. Knowing every night could be the last
90. Eight-track
91. Twins who aren't
92. Many cheesed pizza
93. Heat
94. Design flaws
95. G#
96. Diamond
97. Jet fuel
98. Cribbage
99. An obelisk
100. The valley

Alexis Faulkner is Unicorn Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine
Chris Alarie is Spectacular Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine
Doug Slayton is Professor Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine

Perhapsy Brings Honesty With New Album

by Chris Alarie

For more than five years, Derek Barber has been a busy, integral part of the Oakland music scene. He's lent his prodigious six-string talents to a number of bands, including Bells Atlas, Astronauts, etc., Madeline Kenney, and In Watermelon Sugar (my old band), among others. But in revent years, he's turned more of his attention to his solo project, Perhapsy. Barber is preparing to release the second Perhapsy album, Me Tie Dought-ty Walker, on March 3rd. The album, which he recorded over the period of several years with his friend Jonathan Thompson, is a lush, nostalgic slice of midwestern sincerity and musical sweetness. I interviewed him about the album and his plans for Perhapsy.

Derek Barber of Perhapsy

Uncanny Valley Magazine: First of all, what took so long? I remember you starting to work on this album more than three years ago.

Derek Barber: Well, it's a combination of a long-distance musical relationship with my Olympia, WA-based, long-time friend Jonathan Thompson (who recorded the majority of the album and played drums on it) and being busy with my other two projects Astronauts, etc and Bells Atlas. To be honest, there were a couple moments when I considered scrapping the whole thing and thought it may never be finished.

UVM: Who else plays on the album? What was the recording process like? 

DB: Aside from Jon Thompson on drums, backing vocals, and a few various instruments, I enlisted the bass guitar talents of my friends Christian Carpenter and Scott Brown. However, I do play some bass on the album as well as pretty much all the instruments (guitars, keys, vox, etc) which I enjoy doing. The album was recorded mainly in Oakland—drums on your kit at the old practice space, in various apartments, and also with a good deal of help from Bijan Sharifi at Robot Envy studios. He's the guy who mastered it. The mixing was done in Olympia by Jon and myself though.

UVM: This album has a very particular sound. What were you aiming for in terms of production, etc? Do you feel happy with the results?

DB: I'm a firm believer in trying to make the best sound possible with whatever tools are at your disposal. I put a lot of stake though in Jon's magical ability to tweak meager sounding things into a really interesting and fuller musical vibe. He did the same sort of thing with the first Perhapsy album (which was pretty much all-instrumental) yet this time around I kinda wanted things to be a little more sloppy hi-fi. I'm pretty happy with it.

UVM: This album reminds me of a lot bands and styles (post-rock, 90s indie rock like Built to Spill and Yo La Tengo, midwestern second-wave emo, even some mainstream alternative rock like the Smashing Pumpkins)—most of which date from the mid-to-late nineties. I also know that you are very much interested in the popular culture from when you were a kid/teenager (e.g. your Jurassic Park and Neverending Story tattoos; the fact that the album is named after a story from Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark). Do you consciously look back to the music of your early teenage years in your songwriting and production style? Or is it more something that filters in unconsciously?

DB: It's definitely subconscious, most of the time. I've become more and more comfortable in not shying away from influences, whatever they might be. I think that what connotes originality, often times, is simply a combination of diverse and plentiful influences. Because I did grow up with a lot of mainstream alternative rock (Weezer, Nirvana, etc.) that pull towards writing songs with a hook is something I've always felt. Just like how late-90s post-rock was very informative and important to me and my friends growing up — its aesthetic and very climactic way of interpreting and writing music. 


Still, it's been nice to see musicians of my generation steadily become unafraid of admitting the influence and identity they found in pre-mainstream emo. I think my fascination with nostalgia, however, is more based upon the role it plays in social interaction. Usually, nostalgia gets a bad wrap when it refers to an artist who's regurgitating what's deemed trendy or whatever. I believe, though, if you have a strong memory associated with a film or piece of music (say, Neverending Story or something like it) and you find you share that same feeling or memory with another person, that's a powerful and fascinating connection.



UVM: You've played guitar in a number of bands in Oakland in a number of different sorts of roles. You've been a lead guitarist in bands where somebody else is the primary songwriter (Astronauts etc, In Watermelon Sugar, Madeline Kenney) and been in bands where much of the songwriting is done collectively (Bells Atlas). But Perhapsy is your own project entirely. How is that experience different from the others—both in terms of songwriting and the basic mechanics of running a band? Has your experience playing music in these other sorts of roles influenced your approach to Perhapsy?

DB: That's a good question. I really value having Perhapsy as my own solo project. I've been in enough bands and musical situations that when the creative control isn't clearly understood, problems inevitably arise. I honestly think that anyone who does music should have a solo project. Not only does it allow you to get some of the ideas out of your head that wouldn't fly in another (more collaborative) band, but it makes you appreciate those more democratic musical activities a whole lot more. I'm also lucky to have a backing band for Perhapsy with musicians I know extremely well, and are very quick to pick things up. When it comes to rehearsing, for instance, some bands take a very long time to get things together. With Perhapsy, though, I have enough trust in the capability of my bandmates that I never wish to do more than one or two rehearsals before a show. I want the music to sound like its a little on-edge. It's not that I want it to come off as unpolished but I certainly try to allow room for happy accidents.

UVM: You are an excellent guitarist and have frequently performed some pretty spectacular guitar heroics in some of these other bands (we used to specifically leave space for you to solo in some In Watermelon Sugar songs). And while Me Tie Dough-ty Walker is definitely a very guitar heavy album, it is less reliant on solos, containing, instead, lots of shimmering, layered guitar textures, more subtle riffs, and interesting chord voicings. In terms of melody, the focus is much more on the vocals than the guitars. Is there a reason why you adopted this style, downplaying your soloing for these other elements?

DB: Thanks. Well, a lot of the songs that appear on the album were written right around the time I first started writing with the intention of singing. It was an altogether terrifying but undeniably rewarding period in my life as I was trying to figure out if I could summon the courage to do so. I got very little encouragement (even discouragement) in my youth when it came to singing, so I always just focused on the guitar being my musical identity. I have nothing against guitar solos — in fact, a lot of the newest post-MTDW songs seem to be headed towards more guitar-featuring zones. But I think this album is a bit of an embrace and statement of intent when it comes to singing these songs. 

UVM: Speaking of your singing, there is a sweetness and earnestness to your vocals. There is something very midwestern about it. Again, relating to the nostalgic quality of the music, you grew up in Ohio but have lived in California for several years now, and, as I understand it, didn't start singing in public until after you moved out west. How have you developed your singing style? What are you trying to communicate with your vocals?

DB: Well, it's funny, I always wanted to sing. I just thought if my friends told me I should stick to guitar, why would they steer me wrong? Ha ha. At any rate, I like the idea of earnestness and sweetness associated with the Midwest because I think, to a certain, extent, that's true. I think, as great creative minds like Kurt Vonnegut Jr. suggest, the Midwest is a great place to be from. (In my case, the emphasis is on from, however).

I do remember a moment, late one night, in my dorm room at the University of Michigan (where I studied Jazz Guitar and a bit of English) when I caught myself singing along to the closing track on Elliott Smith's excellent album XO. The song is called "I Didn't Understand" and it's just a cappella, gorgeous, and fucking tragic. I tape recorded myself singing it and it didn't sound horrible to me. That was the first moment I thought maybe this could be a possibility. The one friend that actually did offer me encouragement, in terms of singing, once described my voice as sounding like "calm water." I thought that was really kind of her.
 
But yeah, I still have a lot of hang-ups with singing. Before recording any vocals on any song, I have a ritual: I say "Fuck it" and hit record. As far as communicating goes, I can only hope to give a listener the same feeling I get when I hear Daniel Johnston, Elliott Smith, or Bob Dylan: honesty.



UVM: What are your plans for the album, in terms of release? Is there going to be a record release show? Will there be a tour? I know you've traded off between performing Perhapsy solo and with a full band; are your planning on continuing this flexible sort of arrangement?
DB: Well, the album comes out on March 3rd and there's going to be a release show on March 6th at the Starline Ballroom in Oakland—you've been there, yeah? Anyhow, it's kind of a fancy joint now and is a good hangout space for the artsy music kids. I hope to have physical copies soon and if an ideal tour presents itself, I'd be interested. However, I'm getting older now and time away from my girlfriend Maddie is kind of a big deal. But I never thought I'd be in the kind of relationship that meant this much to me, so it's cool. Also, I do like the flexibility of playing solo when the opportunity seems to fit. But playing with the full band is freeing in its own way and usually a hell of a lot more fun.

UVM: As discussed above, this album took a while to make and you've written and recorded (as demos, ostensibly) a good batch of new songs since then. Has it been strange, leading up to the release of the album, to focus on these older songs, some of which may have since left your usual repertoire? Do you have plans to record another album in the next couple of years with the newer songs?

DB: Yes, it's a bit odd releasing songs that are nearly four years old or so. Strangely enough, while I was working on the album, I had serious doubts about the quality of the songs. It's only in the last year, however, that I've realized that I actually like the songs a lot. Not that I can't do better, hopefully, but that the songs where I'm making myself kinda vulnerable actually are pretty satisfying. I think I'm always a bit scared about how my music comes off to my friends or random folks. But finally putting this thing out will be very healthy for whatever comes along next. And yes, I currently have about thirty or so new ones to choose from for the next album. I assure you, sir, it won't take as long to put together.

Me Tie Dough-ty Walker is available for pre-order on Perhapsy's Bandcamp page and will be released on March 3rd. Derek will perform the album at the Starline Social Club in Oakland on March 6th.

Chris Alarie is Spectacular Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine.

Doug Explains Why Marco Rubio is NOT a Robot

by Douglas Slayton

 

As we discussed last time, the run-up-to-the-election-deciding-pie-eating contest is getting very fierce. Names are being called, feelings are being hurt, and only one can leave with the rose. While the Democrats only have two real options (sorry Steven Spielberg), the Republicans have at least thirty six candidates—and very possibly exponentially more because new candidates keep bursting out of the chest of noted Hollywood actor Ronald Reagan like the popular 1979 sci-fi-horror film Alien, but with a healthy dose of xenophobia. In the upper echelon of these smiling, vacant eyed homunculi is Marco Rubio, just behind the rubber puppet that is Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, who is probably that neighbor you have who is really nice but is actually the Zodiac Killer.

Chief within the name calling amongst the contestants is the accusation that Marco Rubio is a robot; this could be not be further from the truth. This criticism likely comes from his steely complexion and and dry, angular handshake. While these are characteristics of robotism, they are nothing without the true underlying causes.

Robotism is a condition that is contracted at birth when people, instead of being birthed from cellular entanglement of two warm blooded humans who don’t really care for each other but due to their fear of their slowly approaching demise feel that having a fraction of their dna survive another thirty to one hundred and twenty years is preferable to happiness, are constructed from metal bits under sweatshop conditions in the South Pacific. So not much different from human birth, but different enough. Those who have robotism live very different lives than meat people: the aging process is quicker as every year they are simply re-equipped with whatever technological advancements may have been developed in the past twelve months. But those with robotism also live virtually forever. Meat people only live thirty to one hundred twenty years—no less no more.

There are many reasons we can speculate that Rubio has these row-boatian characteristics. He could have been infected with some kind techno virus, but this is unlikely as he never wears raver clothes and has yet to ever mention Jamiroquai in public. He could be one of the silver men: a cult who worship those with robotism as both spiritually and sexually superior to the meats. The silver men theory is popular because there have been instances noted where a silver spray-painted gentleman who resembles Rubio has jumped out of a fake bush scaring people at Fisherman’s Wharf in San Francisco. This, we know, is a popular tradition for the silver men to cull meats from the robotians. Though the most likely explanation, according to my expertise, is that he may have been hit very hard in the head with a steel pipe, contracting wererobotism. Wererobotism is a very rare and serious disease wherein a meaty begins to think they are a robot, so they start eating only industrial metal shavings ¹ and only move in jagged forty-five degree movements.² Wererobotism—I am trying to say—is not a real thing; it is a thing robotists use as an excuse for when they start taking on those qualities.

The long and short of it is that Marco Rubio is not cool and should come out and apologize to the robot community rather than taking on robotist stereotypes in order to try and pander for their votes. Robots can’t vote anyway, but that is mostly because of claustrophobia.

Douglas Slayton is Professor Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine.

---

1 A robotist notion suggests that robots only eat industrial metal shavings, but this is perpetuated by the fact that robots are systematically forced to live in industrial areas because of economic hardships due to years of oppression. Industrial metal shavings are heavily marketed in these areas at bodegas in with bullet proof glass around the counters.^↩
2 This is another robotist notion because of a three year period from ‘79 to ‘82 where the popular joints for robots were clicking joints that would stop every forty five degrees creating the illusion of quick jerky motions^↩

Doug Explains the Iowa Caucus

by Douglas Slayton

Editor's Note: this is the first in a new series of articles whereby Uncanny Valley Magazine Professor Editor-in-Chief Douglas Slayton explains important, newsworthy topics. If you would like to read Doug's explanation of a particular topic, please send us an e-mail at uncannyvalleymagazine@gmail.com.

In the run up to the crowning of the new President some of you have walked up to me on the street
and yelled indignantly, "What is Iowa?!" and one even was like, "What is a Caucus?" to which I probably responded by crying or running in the opposite direction, because I thought you said something else. I am sorry for the misunderstanding. In order to make this up to you I will now explain what the Iowa Caucus is.

Firstly, Iowa, contrary to popular belief, is not in fact a state. Iowa is a governing body responsible for transportation and farming regulations. Iowa is actually an acronym, but no one remembers what it stands for because James Garfield possessed the only documents outlying its meaning at the time of his death and everyone forgot he had them until after he had been shot into to space. Coincidentally, that is why we have a space program: to recover these documents from his frozen corpse. As the need to govern both transit and farming grew, the department of Iowa grew to the size of a state after purchasing land from the states surrounding it so the officials and their family would not have to commute in from the coasts any longer. As more people began to occupy the compound, it became necessary to create more civilized infrastructure to support this new population, which led to the current misconception of its statehood.

A popular dictionary defines Caucus as "not what you think it is you perverted little fuck, put the book back on the shelf and go to class." This does not clarify the situation. Throughout the course of the "election cycle" half of what are considered "states" hold Causcuses. They are an ancient and brutal ritual where the supporters of each party must battle each other to prove that the candidate they support leads the strongest warriors and will better protect us from roving clans of geese that Canada uses to oppress the United States.

While all of this is common knowledge, it is important background for the current dispute that is the topic du jour for the media. This past week, this election season's Causcuses began with an especially brutal bout among the Democrats, leaving thousands dead and ten times as many homeless in the rampage across the non-state of Iowa, with the front runners' (Hillary Clinton and Bernard Sanders) supporters being some of the most vicious and entitled Caucusers¹ of all time. Clinton's were mostly armed with money from rich people and Sanders's was composed mostly of those who were young and had nothing to lose. I don't actually know the results; as a noted apolitical and perpetual presidential write-in candidate myself, I am not legally allowed to follow any coverage until there is an official, final announcement.

I would like to take a moment and ask why I haven't been invited to any debates. Is it my unpopular stance on outlawing chicken wire headwear? Anyway...

On the Republican side, some stuff happened too, I am sure. Like, look at them: they obviously did some shit. Although, traditionally, Republicans are less brutal because they are all related and think that fighting within the family is inappropriate.

Now someone just yelled at me from across the bus asking what the difference between a Causcus and a Primary is. This is a good question.

Primaries are what the younger states use to decide the candidates. As such, they are less brutal and more civilized. The constituency all casts double blind ballots for their choice. As the ballots are double blind, the voter does not actually know what they are voting for, so it is basically luck based. Traditionally, the candidate listed on the right side of the ballot has done better because of the right handed dominance in our culture. In the last decade, though, officials finally noticed the trend and have started randomizing the ballots. But usually it ends up with useless results for "other" and comes down to whichever candidate has not been battered into submission from the press and public.

It is important to stay informed on these issues and political events, so when a estranged relative or potential sexual partner (haha, yeah right) asks about who it is you voted for or who you think might pull it out in the end, you can flippantly say something like, "Oh the brutality of it all is too much for my poor heart to take. Please, please let me die already." To which they will respond with a tearful assertion that life and politics have meaning and you will simply shake your head endlessly until they leave, confused.

---

1 Or, as they are commonly known, Caucasians.

 Douglas Slayton is Professor Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine.