A visual representation of my current musical interests.

These are just a few clips I've been meaning to share over the past few months, so why not do them all together?

First off, let me say that if you haven't purchased or otherwise acquired a copy of last year's album "Wincing the Night Away" by The Shins, you're missing out on something truly incredible. I don't care what kind of music you're into. If you have ears, you will love this album.

They even made videos for my two favorite songs, although I wonder where you even watch good videos these days OTHER than on YouTube.

Here's my favorite track from the album, and the video's pretty cute.

"Australia" by The Shins:



Mega huge thanks to Emily for hooking me up with an album that is essentially perfect.

On a slightly more obscure note, Karen and I found one of the greatest live acts around when we went to see Modest Mouse a while back. While Modest Mouse itself was weak, it was worth it to see the experimental lunacy of Man Man. Click here to see a loud, jarring clip of their high-energy stage presence, or you can watch this to actually hear what they sound like.

A while later, we got a chance to see Man Man again at a smaller venue in Birmingham. This time, their set wasn't so hot, but the opening act again made my day. The Extraordinaires were hilarious and very talented. A great find.

Here's The Extraordinaires performing "Neighborhood Watch," my favorite song off an excellent self-published album called Short Stories.



And one last one here. I simply love the husband-wife duo Mates of State, especially their newest album, "Bring it Back." Maybe it's their ability to sing completely different parts over each other, or the fact that no two songs ever sound alike (for better or worse).

Here's "Like U Crazy" by Mates of State:



So now that I've flooded your browser or RSS reader with massive, obnoxious videos....anyone got any other recommendations?

No zombies. No 'suggestive posture.' No gays. A look back at the Comics Code Authority.

The other day, I was talking to a friend about the MPAA, those loathsome morality police who took a good idea (parental notification of adult movie content) and corrupted it to become a puritanical cabal that dictates what we get to see in the theater.

But let's leave that rant for another day.

Talking about the MPAA, I was reminded of the Comics Code Authority, a nongovernmental group that was chartered in 1954 to excise any trace of adult content from comic books.

I remembered three things about the Comics Code Authority:

1. They were created in reaction to "Tales from the Crypt" types of comics that reveled in the grotesque and salacious.

2. Their stamp was on every comic I bought as a kid, at least until the 1990s, when their power waned with the introduction of independent comic shops.

3. Their morality was strict, eliminating all references to sex and gore.

But after our MPAA chat, I decided to read up on what was actually in the Comics Code. And as you will see below, what I found was a nightmare document of such reactionary zeal, it made Joseph McCarthy seem kinda lukewarm about communists.

Let's read a few highlights from the original code!

On the portrayal of crime:

• Crimes shall never be presented in such a way as to create sympathy for the criminal, to promote distrust of the forces of law and justice, or to inspire others with a desire to imitate criminals.

• Policemen, judges, government officials, and respected institutions shall never be presented in such a way as to create disrespect for established authority.

• In every instance good shall triumph over evil and the criminal punished for his misdeeds.
(No wonder comics always seemed so predictable!)

• The crime of kidnapping shall never be portrayed in any detail, nor shall any profit accrue to the abductor or kidnapper. The criminal or the kidnapper must be punished in every case.
(Wouldn't this negate half the comic plotlines out there? Dr. Octopus alone seems to have kidnapped Spider-Man's entire family at some point. I guess by "detail," they meant specifics on realistic ransoms and such.)

On semantics and design:

• The letter of the word "crime" on a comics magazine shall never be appreciably greater than the other words contained in the title. The word "crime" shall never appear alone on a cover.

• No comics magazine shall use the word horror or terror in its title.

My personal favorite:

• Scenes dealing with, or instruments associated with walking dead, torture, vampires and vampirism, ghouls, cannibalism and werewolfism are prohibited.
(That's right, no zombies or vampires. The restrictions were eventually lifted on vampires and other "literary" monsters, but zombies were still banned.)

Just plain weird:

• Special precautions to avoid references to physical afflictions of deformities shall be taken.

On boobies and proper coverage thereof:

• All characters shall be depicted in dress reasonably acceptable to society.
(Like spandex and adamantine armor.)

• Suggestive and salacious illustration or suggestive posture is unacceptable.
(For some reason, this always makes me picture a 1950s film-noir femme fatale leaning against a wall, smoking a cigarette while wearing one of those Carmen Sandiego hats.)

• Females shall be drawn realistically without exaggeration of any physical qualities.
(It's true. This is what all women look like.)

On sweet sweet lovin:

• Illicit sex relations are neither to be hinted at or portrayed. Violent love scenes as well as sexual abnormalities are unacceptable.

• The treatment of love-romance stories shall emphasize the value of the home and the sanctity of marriage.

• Passion or romantic interest shall never be treated in such a way as to stimulate the lower and baser emotions.

• Sex perversion or any inference to same is strictly forbidden.
(I'm thinking this was the one cited in the code's ban on homosexuality.)

In 1971, the code was revised after Stan Lee's government-backed storyline about drug abuse was nixed by the Comics Code Authority. This highlighted the fact that even a negative mention of drugs was forbidden.

But the code still pretty much read the same.

In 1989, the code was overhauled dramatically, to the point that it was almost
indecipherably permissive. Here's a telling sample:

• Scenes and dialogue involving adult relationships will be presented with good taste, sensitivity, and in a manner which will be considered acceptable by a mass audience. Primary human sexual characteristics will never be shown. Graphic sexual activity will never be depicted.

But by this point, the code was nearing the end of its days. In 2001, Marvel created its own ethical policy. New comic companies like Image (home of Spawn) didn't care a bit about comic code approval.

Wikipedia gives this update:

As of 2007, DC Comics and Archie Comics are the only major publishers still submitting their books for CCA approval, and in the case of DC, only books from its Johnny DC and DC Universe superhero lines, with DC Universe titles sometimes published without Code approval.

OK, so now that I've trashed the longstanding comics code (which, I have to admit, never really inhibited my enjoyment of comics as a kid), I feel I should address the big-picture issue: Should there be morality guidelines for popular media?

I think Marvel did the right thing by creating a code for its own publications. That way, a parent can generally be confident that a kid reading Marvel titles won't be exposed to anything too jarring. (Unless they grab a copy of Marvel Zombies, in which case that kid is going to be messed up for life.)

But it obviously comes down to an issue of individual parenting. In my ideal world, groups like the MPAA and the Comics Code Authority would exist to help make people aware of what's featured in a certain work instead of creating artificial limits on what could be included in, say, an R-rated film.

Will all this change soon when I have a daughter? Probably so. But I doubt I'll ever get to a point where I think it's a good idea for anyone to tell me what art I should or shouldn't be able to see as an adult.

Snow 'n' Joe.

Yep, it actually snowed this weekend all the way down here in Birmingham, Ala. I think this is the first snow I've seen stick since we moved here in 2005.

So how did I enjoy the winter wonderland of 1/20th an inch of snow? I ran out in my pajamas with Jonas, a camera and a dog biscuit. A few snaps later, Jonas had his treat, and I was back inside, sipping coffee next to the roaring fireplace.

All in all, a damn fine weekend.

Huzzah for home-improvement marathon.

I know it's been sleepy on the blog since the holidays. We had a great time up north with Karen's family, but I've been swamped with work ever since. I'm gradually finishing off some huge projects, but only in time to start new ones.

Speaking of big projects, this weekend looks to be a behemoth of home-improvement work. During one of this week's two massive storms, we noticed leaks popping up in our living room. I just found out a few minutes ago it's going to be about $836 to fix the entire area above the living room. (We have a flat roof, which I've honestly been worried about since Day 1.)

In addition, I'm heading into my fourth stab at installing a new sink in the guest bathroom. (The photo is of me celebrating the removal of the ancient rust-bucket sink from the 1950s.) It's going relatively well, but each night of labor ends with a new list of parts or tools we need to get from Lowe's. Sadly, I wasn't able to finish before Karen's mom rolls into town tonight, but I'm hoping to get it done tomorrow.

We're also getting estimates to install a full-sized dishwasher, replacing the one we have now, which was apparently purchased in Smurf Village. A bigger model will be quite a boon when we're washing bottles by the dozen.

Somewhere in there, I'd like to finish up the detail work on the house painting, and then there's the fence that's only stained a third of the way around. Oh, and converting the study into a nursery, complete with closet overhaul. All this, and just two months to go before L'il Griner storms the scene and devours 90% of my attention.