<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Open Thread for September 25, 2009</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/09/25/open-thread-34/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/09/25/open-thread-34/</link>
	<description>Overthinking It subjects the popular culture to a level of scrutiny it probably doesn&#039;t deserve.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 00:05:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Trevor</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/09/25/open-thread-34/#comment-12508</link>
		<dc:creator>Trevor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 00:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=10239#comment-12508</guid>
		<description>@Gab - The whole notion of indie being &quot;cool&quot; or &quot;better&quot; than major label music is open to interpretation, but from my own experience it usually doesn&#039;t matter what label a band or artist is on, so long as the music connects. I have just as much love for a major-label artist like Radiohead (well, when they were on a major label) as I do for Joy Division (on Factory) or Arcade Fire. And your example about the Beatles demonstrates that major labels have often times gotten it right. What makes them less appealing is the copycat effect, for me at least. Just because I like the Beatles doesn&#039;t mean I&#039;ll &quot;love&quot; the Byrds (though I like them just fine) or just because I like Radiohead I&#039;ll like Coldplay (a tired comparison, no doubt, but I remember that&#039;s how a lot of people tried to sell me on them at the time they were first breaking. I like a few of the songs I&#039;ve heard, but I haven&#039;t been inclined to go out and buy their records). I think by and large, a lot of what gets recorded on indie labels wouldn&#039;t find a home on a major label, and that&#039;s not necessarily a bad thing. For every Neutral Milk Hotel that gets nurtured and allowed to expand their horizons, there&#039;s a Wesley Willis who is exploited for gain (though my whole argument could fall apart if it&#039;s pointed out that Willis was indeed on a major).

As I&#039;ve gotten older, the appeal of being deliberately obscurist has worn off, or at least the &quot;being obscure for obscurity&#039;s sake&quot;. All the really good little record stores in the area are dead and gone, so I have to go to Best Buy for my CD-purchasing (I could do Amazon online, but it depends). When my cousin worked for the local college radio station and I&#039;d sit in on his show, it was hard to find much nice to say about a lot of the subpar indie stuff that was mandatory for playing. So to say that music is more &quot;authentic&quot; because it&#039;s on a smaller label...sometimes that&#039;s true, sometimes that&#039;s a load of crap.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Gab &#8211; The whole notion of indie being &#8220;cool&#8221; or &#8220;better&#8221; than major label music is open to interpretation, but from my own experience it usually doesn&#8217;t matter what label a band or artist is on, so long as the music connects. I have just as much love for a major-label artist like Radiohead (well, when they were on a major label) as I do for Joy Division (on Factory) or Arcade Fire. And your example about the Beatles demonstrates that major labels have often times gotten it right. What makes them less appealing is the copycat effect, for me at least. Just because I like the Beatles doesn&#8217;t mean I&#8217;ll &#8220;love&#8221; the Byrds (though I like them just fine) or just because I like Radiohead I&#8217;ll like Coldplay (a tired comparison, no doubt, but I remember that&#8217;s how a lot of people tried to sell me on them at the time they were first breaking. I like a few of the songs I&#8217;ve heard, but I haven&#8217;t been inclined to go out and buy their records). I think by and large, a lot of what gets recorded on indie labels wouldn&#8217;t find a home on a major label, and that&#8217;s not necessarily a bad thing. For every Neutral Milk Hotel that gets nurtured and allowed to expand their horizons, there&#8217;s a Wesley Willis who is exploited for gain (though my whole argument could fall apart if it&#8217;s pointed out that Willis was indeed on a major).</p>
<p>As I&#8217;ve gotten older, the appeal of being deliberately obscurist has worn off, or at least the &#8220;being obscure for obscurity&#8217;s sake&#8221;. All the really good little record stores in the area are dead and gone, so I have to go to Best Buy for my CD-purchasing (I could do Amazon online, but it depends). When my cousin worked for the local college radio station and I&#8217;d sit in on his show, it was hard to find much nice to say about a lot of the subpar indie stuff that was mandatory for playing. So to say that music is more &#8220;authentic&#8221; because it&#8217;s on a smaller label&#8230;sometimes that&#8217;s true, sometimes that&#8217;s a load of crap.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gab</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/09/25/open-thread-34/#comment-12475</link>
		<dc:creator>Gab</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 05:43:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=10239#comment-12475</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m starting with you, Genevieve!  Is a person a fake fan of art if they really like someone from a big label, though?  I don&#039;t want to make fallacious arguments, but say the Beatles are on a big record label- would that mean their music isn&#039;t as good or genuine any longer?  This whole indie v. big thing kind of confounds me because the &quot;big&quot; names, the &quot;indisputable&quot; icons of music are usually signed to a big company at some point.  Think of the &quot;more cowbell&quot; skit from SNL.  Classic, right?  Funny as Hell.  But underlying the humor of Will Farrell&#039;s gut flapping around as he bangs the pants off of that cowbell is an important vein to this whole debate, and that&#039;s the corporate/studio influence.  That song, &quot;Don&#039;t Fear the Reaper,&quot; is &quot;classic,&quot; but how much of it was from Blue Oyster Cult and what, if anything at all, was changed because of the studio execs?  So I guess what I&#039;m trying to wrap my tiny brain around is, well, in the end, does it really matter?  If so much has gone down in history as &quot;influential&quot; or &quot;iconic&quot; or &quot;genre-defining&quot; with big studio backing (and, potentially, influence), why do some circles that wouldn&#039;t dare say the Beatles were insignificant or Led Zeppelin had no impact on music at all still bash people outside their circle for buying something from an artist signed with a company like Virgin or Atlantic?  I just have never understood this whole thing or wanted to take a side because I think there&#039;s hypocrisy no matter where you look.  ::whimper::  Sorry, everyone.  I sound whiny and confrontational, but I can&#039;t really word it any better.

So it&#039;s bad to complain without giving a solution, I realize that.   Ergo, my answer: eliminate money, and there will be no need for big record labels.  If we lived in a Star Trekkian, purely Marxist/Engelsist (I so made that word up) utopia where there was no need for capital, art like music could be distributed freely and without limitations.  So there ya have it: let&#039;s go commie and share music.   

Realistically, though, corporations are never going to go away because the way our society works is too grounded in them; and unfortunately, this means the best way of getting your art out there is being with one of them.  So art, namely music, is always going to gravitate there in order to be fiscally successful.

BUT

There is an argument to be made for defining &quot;success&quot; in different terms.  If your only goal in the music you make is to touch souls, and you do that by playing for nothing at a coffee shop, you win.  You did it.  You are a success.  If the soul purpose of writing the song was to get some bad breakup joo-joo off your chest, and you feel it leave you as you play the chords or whatever, you did it.  You&#039;re a success.  I hope what I&#039;m trying to say *here* makes sense...

Alright, I&#039;m just going to stop now before I hurt myself (or someone else).   

Lee: Maybe my working for a school district made me think it was actually more unbelievable that he would have been *fired in the first place* than his getting rehired later.  I find (and have been witness to) a striking and depressing parallel between how teachers and aids get shuffled around from school to school instead of fired when something scandalous happens to when priests get caught in molestation fiascoes and get transferred to different churches.  

So on a related vein, oh BOY could I say so much about Polanski and related celebrity criminals and such...  But I&#039;ll save it for the podcast discussion, since it&#039;s all, no doubt, going to be discussed by y&#039;all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m starting with you, Genevieve!  Is a person a fake fan of art if they really like someone from a big label, though?  I don&#8217;t want to make fallacious arguments, but say the Beatles are on a big record label- would that mean their music isn&#8217;t as good or genuine any longer?  This whole indie v. big thing kind of confounds me because the &#8220;big&#8221; names, the &#8220;indisputable&#8221; icons of music are usually signed to a big company at some point.  Think of the &#8220;more cowbell&#8221; skit from SNL.  Classic, right?  Funny as Hell.  But underlying the humor of Will Farrell&#8217;s gut flapping around as he bangs the pants off of that cowbell is an important vein to this whole debate, and that&#8217;s the corporate/studio influence.  That song, &#8220;Don&#8217;t Fear the Reaper,&#8221; is &#8220;classic,&#8221; but how much of it was from Blue Oyster Cult and what, if anything at all, was changed because of the studio execs?  So I guess what I&#8217;m trying to wrap my tiny brain around is, well, in the end, does it really matter?  If so much has gone down in history as &#8220;influential&#8221; or &#8220;iconic&#8221; or &#8220;genre-defining&#8221; with big studio backing (and, potentially, influence), why do some circles that wouldn&#8217;t dare say the Beatles were insignificant or Led Zeppelin had no impact on music at all still bash people outside their circle for buying something from an artist signed with a company like Virgin or Atlantic?  I just have never understood this whole thing or wanted to take a side because I think there&#8217;s hypocrisy no matter where you look.  ::whimper::  Sorry, everyone.  I sound whiny and confrontational, but I can&#8217;t really word it any better.</p>
<p>So it&#8217;s bad to complain without giving a solution, I realize that.   Ergo, my answer: eliminate money, and there will be no need for big record labels.  If we lived in a Star Trekkian, purely Marxist/Engelsist (I so made that word up) utopia where there was no need for capital, art like music could be distributed freely and without limitations.  So there ya have it: let&#8217;s go commie and share music.   </p>
<p>Realistically, though, corporations are never going to go away because the way our society works is too grounded in them; and unfortunately, this means the best way of getting your art out there is being with one of them.  So art, namely music, is always going to gravitate there in order to be fiscally successful.</p>
<p>BUT</p>
<p>There is an argument to be made for defining &#8220;success&#8221; in different terms.  If your only goal in the music you make is to touch souls, and you do that by playing for nothing at a coffee shop, you win.  You did it.  You are a success.  If the soul purpose of writing the song was to get some bad breakup joo-joo off your chest, and you feel it leave you as you play the chords or whatever, you did it.  You&#8217;re a success.  I hope what I&#8217;m trying to say *here* makes sense&#8230;</p>
<p>Alright, I&#8217;m just going to stop now before I hurt myself (or someone else).   </p>
<p>Lee: Maybe my working for a school district made me think it was actually more unbelievable that he would have been *fired in the first place* than his getting rehired later.  I find (and have been witness to) a striking and depressing parallel between how teachers and aids get shuffled around from school to school instead of fired when something scandalous happens to when priests get caught in molestation fiascoes and get transferred to different churches.  </p>
<p>So on a related vein, oh BOY could I say so much about Polanski and related celebrity criminals and such&#8230;  But I&#8217;ll save it for the podcast discussion, since it&#8217;s all, no doubt, going to be discussed by y&#8217;all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Genevieve</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/09/25/open-thread-34/#comment-12470</link>
		<dc:creator>Genevieve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 01:03:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=10239#comment-12470</guid>
		<description>Gab, as expressed so eloquently by Jack Black in &quot;School of Rock,&quot; rock &amp; roll (and most music, frankly) is the ultimate way of &quot;stickin&#039; it to The Man;&quot; music issued by major labels antithetical to that, at best.

In a less ideological sense, though, there&#039;s the perception that major labels are more interested in presentation than substance.  Since the origins of the modern music industry, there have been those &quot;cookie cutter&quot; bands who succeed solely because they are marketed correctly.  Major labels are often nothing more than image brokers, caring little for actual talent.

Also, there&#039;s the financial aspect.  When you buy from a major label, a much smaller percentage of the price is going to the actual artist, compared to the smallest labels (such as Righteous Babe, Rising Son, Philadelphonic) which are typically just the biggest name performer and half a dozen or so of their pet projects/closest friends.  Also, larger labels tend to lock an artist down into a long-term contract, which can end up being hazardous to their creative health.

Then, swinging back towards the ideological side of things, there&#039;s the contingent of people who *always* choose small, independent ventures over giant corporations, whether it&#039;s for groceries, music, or whatever.

Mainly, I think the issue is that smaller labels offer greater creative freedom, because the larger the corporation, the more intricate the bureaucracy... and the more people&#039;s opinions you have to take into account, the less authentic the music.  Generally.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gab, as expressed so eloquently by Jack Black in &#8220;School of Rock,&#8221; rock &amp; roll (and most music, frankly) is the ultimate way of &#8220;stickin&#8217; it to The Man;&#8221; music issued by major labels antithetical to that, at best.</p>
<p>In a less ideological sense, though, there&#8217;s the perception that major labels are more interested in presentation than substance.  Since the origins of the modern music industry, there have been those &#8220;cookie cutter&#8221; bands who succeed solely because they are marketed correctly.  Major labels are often nothing more than image brokers, caring little for actual talent.</p>
<p>Also, there&#8217;s the financial aspect.  When you buy from a major label, a much smaller percentage of the price is going to the actual artist, compared to the smallest labels (such as Righteous Babe, Rising Son, Philadelphonic) which are typically just the biggest name performer and half a dozen or so of their pet projects/closest friends.  Also, larger labels tend to lock an artist down into a long-term contract, which can end up being hazardous to their creative health.</p>
<p>Then, swinging back towards the ideological side of things, there&#8217;s the contingent of people who *always* choose small, independent ventures over giant corporations, whether it&#8217;s for groceries, music, or whatever.</p>
<p>Mainly, I think the issue is that smaller labels offer greater creative freedom, because the larger the corporation, the more intricate the bureaucracy&#8230; and the more people&#8217;s opinions you have to take into account, the less authentic the music.  Generally.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Wrather</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/09/25/open-thread-34/#comment-12469</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Wrather</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 21:19:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=10239#comment-12469</guid>
		<description>If you&#039;re interested, we&#039;re going to court a shitstorm and talk about it on the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.overthinkingit.com/category/podcast/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;podcast&lt;/a&gt; tomorow.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you&#8217;re interested, we&#8217;re going to court a shitstorm and talk about it on the <a href="http://www.overthinkingit.com/category/podcast/" rel="nofollow">podcast</a> tomorow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mlawski</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/09/25/open-thread-34/#comment-12467</link>
		<dc:creator>mlawski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 18:09:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=10239#comment-12467</guid>
		<description>In other news, Roman Polanski was finally arrested:

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/WireStory?id=8684404&amp;page=3</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In other news, Roman Polanski was finally arrested:</p>
<p><a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/WireStory?id=8684404&#038;page=3" rel="nofollow">http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/WireStory?id=8684404&#038;page=3</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lee</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/09/25/open-thread-34/#comment-12465</link>
		<dc:creator>lee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 16:20:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=10239#comment-12465</guid>
		<description>@Gab: speaking of suspension of disbelief, I just finished the last episode (4) of &quot;Glee&quot; and find this show to be stretching my limit in that regard. I think it was the combination of the dancing football team and the re-hiring of the disgraced former glee club director that put me over the edge. I&#039;m going to give this show a few episodes, but it&#039;s trying my patience.

@Trevor: are people still pissed at Kanye? Perhaps, but he&#039;s definitely fading back to his normal level of notoriety. Check out Google Trends:

http://www.google.com/trends?q=kanye+west&amp;ctab=0&amp;geo=all&amp;date=mtd&amp;sort=0</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Gab: speaking of suspension of disbelief, I just finished the last episode (4) of &#8220;Glee&#8221; and find this show to be stretching my limit in that regard. I think it was the combination of the dancing football team and the re-hiring of the disgraced former glee club director that put me over the edge. I&#8217;m going to give this show a few episodes, but it&#8217;s trying my patience.</p>
<p>@Trevor: are people still pissed at Kanye? Perhaps, but he&#8217;s definitely fading back to his normal level of notoriety. Check out Google Trends:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.google.com/trends?q=kanye+west&#038;ctab=0&#038;geo=all&#038;date=mtd&#038;sort=0" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/trends?q=kanye+west&#038;ctab=0&#038;geo=all&#038;date=mtd&#038;sort=0</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gab</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/09/25/open-thread-34/#comment-12460</link>
		<dc:creator>Gab</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 23:58:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=10239#comment-12460</guid>
		<description>Trevor, you make me wonder something for the bajillionth time, so I&#039;m going to now ask it of anyone willing to take me up on it:  Where did this notion that music from indie labels is automatically better and/or more genuine than records from bigger labels come from and why did it come about at all?  But then why is it always &quot;snobby&quot; to prefer indie- and is it really so?  Does caring too much about the label OR not caring at all mean a person is disingenuine in their interest in what they listen to?

Oh yeah, just watched Dollhouse.  Two BSG actors in one episode, duking it out!  :O  But I can&#039;t remember, did Alpha *die* at the end of the finale?  I was sort of looking forward to more of him this season.

Oh, and Lee, this isn&#039;t the first time cheerleaders walk around in their uniforms in a filmed depiction of high school.  Given some of the other aspects of &quot;everyday life&quot; at their high school in the show that need to be disbelievingly suspended, I&#039;d say that&#039;s kind of small potatoes.  BUT, I do see a GENDER argument against it, naturally.  After all, the cheerleaders are always dressed as if they&#039;re about to go to a game, but the football players don&#039;t walk around in their pads and helmets every day.  IIRC, a jersey may be worn every now and then by the guys, but it&#039;s with some jeans and without pads or anything like that.  I noticed *this* differentiation pretty early on.  Ahem.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Trevor, you make me wonder something for the bajillionth time, so I&#8217;m going to now ask it of anyone willing to take me up on it:  Where did this notion that music from indie labels is automatically better and/or more genuine than records from bigger labels come from and why did it come about at all?  But then why is it always &#8220;snobby&#8221; to prefer indie- and is it really so?  Does caring too much about the label OR not caring at all mean a person is disingenuine in their interest in what they listen to?</p>
<p>Oh yeah, just watched Dollhouse.  Two BSG actors in one episode, duking it out!  :O  But I can&#8217;t remember, did Alpha *die* at the end of the finale?  I was sort of looking forward to more of him this season.</p>
<p>Oh, and Lee, this isn&#8217;t the first time cheerleaders walk around in their uniforms in a filmed depiction of high school.  Given some of the other aspects of &#8220;everyday life&#8221; at their high school in the show that need to be disbelievingly suspended, I&#8217;d say that&#8217;s kind of small potatoes.  BUT, I do see a GENDER argument against it, naturally.  After all, the cheerleaders are always dressed as if they&#8217;re about to go to a game, but the football players don&#8217;t walk around in their pads and helmets every day.  IIRC, a jersey may be worn every now and then by the guys, but it&#8217;s with some jeans and without pads or anything like that.  I noticed *this* differentiation pretty early on.  Ahem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Trevor</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/09/25/open-thread-34/#comment-12459</link>
		<dc:creator>Trevor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 21:55:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=10239#comment-12459</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve been out of the loop culturally for a week. Are people still pissed at Kanye?

One thing I can recommend to my bibliophilic friends is &quot;Our Noise: The Story of Merge Records&quot;, which I saw reviewed on the Onion AV Club and decided to buy so that I can review it myself for the local newspaper I work for. One caveat; before this book, I wasn&#039;t aware of there being such a thing as &quot;Merge Records,&quot; except maybe noticing now that their label is on the back of my Neutral Milk Hotel and Arcade Fire (and She &amp; Him) CDs. I&#039;d always felt at a disadvantage in my formative years of music snobbery (circa 1997-2000) because it seemed like all the cool independent labels either died before I was aware of them (Factory Records) or co-opted by &quot;the Man&quot; (A&amp;M, IRS). Alas, one state border over there existed a hip, cool record label that didn&#039;t implode and is in fact still going strong. Based solely on my NMH/AF/S&amp;H portion of my record collection, I can say with some certainty that I will get something out of this (like a book review when I finish it, but also a greater sense of what an indie music label can do given sound management and an ability to ensure the loyalty of acts without screwing them rotten behind closed doors). 

That&#039;s all I got, really.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been out of the loop culturally for a week. Are people still pissed at Kanye?</p>
<p>One thing I can recommend to my bibliophilic friends is &#8220;Our Noise: The Story of Merge Records&#8221;, which I saw reviewed on the Onion AV Club and decided to buy so that I can review it myself for the local newspaper I work for. One caveat; before this book, I wasn&#8217;t aware of there being such a thing as &#8220;Merge Records,&#8221; except maybe noticing now that their label is on the back of my Neutral Milk Hotel and Arcade Fire (and She &amp; Him) CDs. I&#8217;d always felt at a disadvantage in my formative years of music snobbery (circa 1997-2000) because it seemed like all the cool independent labels either died before I was aware of them (Factory Records) or co-opted by &#8220;the Man&#8221; (A&amp;M, IRS). Alas, one state border over there existed a hip, cool record label that didn&#8217;t implode and is in fact still going strong. Based solely on my NMH/AF/S&amp;H portion of my record collection, I can say with some certainty that I will get something out of this (like a book review when I finish it, but also a greater sense of what an indie music label can do given sound management and an ability to ensure the loyalty of acts without screwing them rotten behind closed doors). </p>
<p>That&#8217;s all I got, really.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gab</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/09/25/open-thread-34/#comment-12457</link>
		<dc:creator>Gab</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 18:11:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=10239#comment-12457</guid>
		<description>@Mlawski- Yes.  ;p</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Mlawski- Yes.  ;p</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mlawski</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/09/25/open-thread-34/#comment-12456</link>
		<dc:creator>mlawski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 17:18:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=10239#comment-12456</guid>
		<description>@Gab: Well, agree to disagree.  But imagine, if you will, the Flashforward pilot as written and directed by the Lost guys and starring Henry Ian Cusick rather than Joseph Fiennes.  Now isn&#039;t that a lot better?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Gab: Well, agree to disagree.  But imagine, if you will, the Flashforward pilot as written and directed by the Lost guys and starring Henry Ian Cusick rather than Joseph Fiennes.  Now isn&#8217;t that a lot better?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using memcached
Database Caching 1/5 queries in 0.009 seconds using memcached
Object Caching 555/559 objects using memcached

Served from: www.overthinkingit.com @ 2012-02-13 22:28:43 -->
