Before we get to "a little bit right/a little bit wrong," I had occasion to speak with my friend Mark on the telephone. We talked about this and that.
"Tension equals sales" said Mark. "It sounds like Gail took marketing 101"
Tension equals sales. (Tension = Sales)
At first it kind of sounded like Reich. In the end it just sounds like the devilry it is.
Does conflict equal tension? Does conflict also equal sales?
Question: In the entire known history of mankind, has a conflict ever been created on purpose, on schedule to (ultimately) generate sales? No?
Is conflict a commodity? Can "conflict" be packaged, bought and sold as a thing to augment bottom line?
pssst. here's the deal--for a buck a post I'll piss off everyone in your discussion group and have them all at my throats by the middle of march. In so doing, they will go to great economic lengths to crystallize their viewpoints on your product.
Does it matter who wins the conflict, or is just having conflict the point?
Am I just catching on to something everyone else has known for a long time? Is there spinach in my teeth? You would tell me if there was, right?
+ + +
If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all!
How the Zappa Plays Zappa thing is a little bit right: Just the other day a neighbor told the story of a friend of a friend with terminal cancer who went to see ZPZ and felt satisfied in his choice of final concert.
How the "unofficial" Zappa cover band thing is also a little bit right: One of the custodians at my high school--the one who deserves the Nobel Peace Prize for his tolerance and humanity--went to see Project Object when Ike was in the band. He said he had a great time, and seeing Ike was "awesome" because Ike was playing with Frank back when he (the custodian) saw Frank live.
Doesn't that sound win-win to you?
Or is that the problem?
+ + +
I've had quite enough of this litigious crap. I want to talk about Sunny Murray next.
copyright © 2008 Stanley Jason Zappa
