The Return of Hole!

NME (my favorite oversized British rock mag) has an exciting new article and video footage of Courtney Love and Micko Larkin, the new Eric Erlandson, talking about her long-awaited second solo album. Turns out it won't be a solo album at all, but will be released as a HOLE album. That's right, Courtney is resurrecting Hole, one of the best bands of the 90s in my humble opinion. Their trio of albums - from Pretty On the Inside to Celebrity Skin - form an excellent conceptual trilogy of this enigmatic woman's ascension from ugly duckling wannabe to one of the most famous (or infamous, but those are only two sides of the same coin) women on the planet.

Watching the clip you can sense Courtney's charisma and humor and the force of her magnetic personality, scorched and battle-scarred as it may be by her epic tragedy of a life. I've been obsessed with CLove for years, since around the time she starred in The People Vs. Larry Flynt. (She really is a good actress, it's too bad she destroyed her film career along with her music one after about 2002.) Call me crazy, but I really see her as the last real rock star, part of a dying breed. Gay guys always have to have their divas, I suppose, and while others may go with more traditional models - Barbra, Liza, Madonna, Cher, Bette, etc. - I like Courtney because she is this weird blend of grande dame/female drag queen plus ROCK N ROLL, like REAL rock n roll, not dance music, not pop music, not American Idol, but something that is raw and real and confessional and RARE these days, to say the least.

I got tired of waiting for her follow-up to 2004's America's Sweetheart (HALF of which is actually very good and inspiring and almost spiritual) a long time ago, but I can't help feeling a little twinge of the old excitement when I see these clips.

Rise again, crazy phoenix. The show isn't over yet.

Check out the article and video clips here.

I think that will work. If it doesn't, just go to www.nme.com and type "Return of Hole" in the search field.

Journalistic integrity/Sam Adams/Out Magazine

I am still fuming over the Sam Adams situation (incidentally, despite the uproar, Sam Adams the beer magnate/founding father still comes up in Google Images above our mayor), and I have to elaborate on it just a bit more. When people say he lied (about his relationship with Beau Breedlove) in order to get himself elected, I don't get it. Do they mean he wouldn't have been elected mayor if it was known he'd had a (brief) sexual relationship with a younger man? If so, ISN'T THAT MAYBE A PROBLEM WE THE PUBLIC HAVE, that we should look at, instead of demonizing Adams? Sam is not Bill Clinton - he doesn't have a wife to be cheating on! That's why I don't believe people when they say this is about whether he lied or not. And the whole thing reeks of hypocrisy. How many of you can honestly say you never tell a lie for any reason? I think it's far more likely that Sam lied to protect his privacy and prevent people from freaking out - just as they're doing right now! - than to get himself elected.

I just saw a news clip about how Adams supporters are banding together on the internet. (I'm planning to attend the City Hall rally next Tuesday, at least the first part of it, since I have to be to class by 1pm.) They had a timid, apologetic looking young fellow on there talking about how Sam made a mistake...but that shouldn't be the end of his run as mayor. That's a way more apologetic stance than we should be taking on this issue. What I intended to do with my letter to WW is TO TURN THE TABLES ON JOURNALISTS - I am one! - and ask THEM To hold themselves to a higher standard of journalistic integrity and look at the way THEY participate in these modern-day witch hunts. The way WW just rubs itself with oleaginous glee over being the first to break this putrid story - they have to remind you every five seconds - just makes me sick! And now for Marty Davis to join the chorus - the publisher of Just Out! - is the ultimate insult. Think about what you're participating in! I don't even care that I freelance for Just Out, I'm going to say it. I only have a month or two to go anyway.

Speaking of things that are gay. I got an issue of OUT Magazine last night, a leftover from the gay.com account I canceled (or at least stopped paying for) a while back. It has a few good articles in it, and I'm not going to deny I love some nice glossy eye candy as much as anyone, and yet, I see it as a good example of the way mainstream gay publications push an identity that you're supposed to adhere to if you're a good gay. Well, I'm not a good gay, and I never will be. I look at other gay bloggers and many of them toe the line, with encomiums to Madonna (I heard a new song of hers accidentally at a bar a while back and it sounded like "Get Into the Groove" just sort of re-mixed! But I think it was a new song, the lyrics were different. How funny/pathetic), obligatory cattiness, every shallow thing you can think of, virtually nothing intellectual. Gays are being dumbed down like everyone else. And their editor came off as such a moron. A reader who wrote in with constructive criticisms that were actually perfectly valid was treated to a snarky, dismissive response that didn't even make sense. It's things like this that make me feel I'm not a part of the gay community any more than I am part of any other community.

I think I'm gonna try to write for OUT. Subvert from within, baby!