JackViolet

Standing behind LoveLoveMika, she says hi. It's nice to be warm! But the show needs to start already!

--Jack

ha ha ha That's what ponchos and rain boots were MADE for - MFCers!

I don't want to wear a poncho. I want to wear tiny sparkly dress!

Well, we'll see what I will do. When is everyone getting in line?

--Jack

Projected weather now is cold and rainy all day. It was like that today and it SUCKED. Are people seriously going to sit in the cold rain from noon on?

--Jack

Спасибо , Катя! Мика не был сильно расстроен всей той путаницей с песнями?

Mika has not been strongly upset by all that mess with the songs?

Ne osobenno! Ya dumayu, on k takim vescham privyk. Vse taki takoe ne tak uzh redko vstrechaetsya na live shows.

(Not particularly! I think he's somewhat used to that sort of thing. After all this happens somewhat frequently with live shows.)

I mean, he wasn't pleased, but he really wasn't devastated.

--Jack

Ok, report!

Got there at around 5:30 to see Natalie, Lucy and Mommylovesmika already there, at the very start of the line. Behind them was a group with the dancing, sparkly girl (we all called her Sparkles, including the management) and her friends, and behind them other people. We waited there for a while: Sparkles was adorable and made friends with the security. They went down the line asking who had confirmation numbers and seemed very confused that nobody of all of us in front did, but I asked them if they could mention to John that we were there. Some people with VIP passes came, and they stood in a different line to the side.

Eventually Rilo and her friend arrived, and went to the back of the line. I told her that if they were going to let MFCers in I'd make sure to tell them she was with us, but it turned out not to be necessary. Another security person came out and insisted that everyone without a confirmation number had to go to the back of the line! So we all ended up right next to Rilo, behind all of these people. We discussed the situation between us and asked Mommylovesmika to talk to the security guard and mention again that we were from the MFC and John might want to know we were there, and that seemed to do the trick. They took those of us who were with the MFC (and we said that Sparkles and her crew was definitely with us) and made yet another line.

Mika was inside by this point and we could see him rehearsing. There was also a promotion for some candy store going on and a giant giraffe mascot came by, and people mentioned that Mika would get a kick out of him. So I jumped up and down behind Sparkles and waved and got his attention, and he smiled and waved back, and then I waved him to the side, like "No, not me! Look there! The giraffe!" And he did, and laughed. Oh, and MommylovesMika brought some small posterboard and made a sign saying "MFC says Mika is golden!" and the Rilo suggested we also write "We love your closet!" on the reverse side, and we did. I decorated it with pictures of various clothing items, and also rainbows and teddy bears. That sign amused a lot of people.

Allison came and explained that she would try to get us in, but that she was waiting for a group of official fans with a list of names, and I explained that far as MFC went, that was us, and there wasn't going to be a list. And I could assure her no other MFCers would be coming. So then we got reshuffled again to the back of the VIP section this time, and were soon inside. Apparently some of the people who had confirmation numbers but no VIP passes were giving us kind of dirty looks at this point.

Took a while for things to get set up: everything was pretty confused. They told the band they'd go up and play one thing, then another, then no wait, something else. You know the whole deal with Obama by now, but I just wanted to explain that even the people giving directions on the floor had no idea what they were going to run. They'd give one set of directions: "ok, we'll go to the cooking now, and then come back with the music!" only to have some higher-up contradict them the next second, and so then "no, wait, we're being told music now and then cooking! No wait, commercial!"

Love Today was played as a warm-up, and then Mika left the stage and no one seemed to know what was going on. When Obama came on, it was cute, Mika went up to one of the tvs to see the speech better, and for a moment everyone was serious and paying attention to the same thing, because I think we all thought he might announce a war.

But he didn't, and I gotta say: 1) that speech could have been a LOT shorter for what it was--Obama kept repeating himself, 2) nothing he said was anywhere important enough to have to interrupt all broadcasting for it. If he WAS announcing a war, ok. But as it was? I don't get why it couldn't have been aired at any other time during the day.

After another period of "are we doing this? No, we're going to do that. No, that! Okay, prepare to do that people! Wait, nevermind again!" they finally decided to film a very SHORT take on the cooking and a goodbye. It was really confusing, because it seemed like any time the people on the floor made a decision, they'd get a correction or a reversal of it on their earpieces.

I'd like to clarify here, btw, that it really didn't seem that they cut Mika because they considered him less important, but because of time issues. The first take they did of the cooking section was literally like, 30 seconds. Then they did a slightly longer re-take, but it still wasn't as long as Mika would require just to sing the song in full. So I think they cut him because they knew they didn't have enough time, and they didn't want to have him sing just till the first bridge of the song.

So they filmed the closing of the show, and then came back to film Mika's segment. The announcer came up to Mika and started doing chitchat, and Mika did not seem that keen to talk to him. He asked "are we going to be talking now, or do I just sing?" and the guy say that they'd do some light banter, and Mika looked kinda perplexed, and then they seemed to discuss what they would be bantering about. I made a comment about poor Mika being forced to rehearse "casual chatting" with the annoying host, and I think Martin heard me and snickered. (Not sure though)

Then the segment went on as you saw. The teleprompter, btw, read "over 5 million records sold," so the guy messed that up. He ad-libbed the iTunes part though--that wasn't on the prompter, I think he was told to mention that via his earpiece.

Then everyone lined up for quick-quick-quick photos with Mika. Mine was blurry, but Rilo got a really cute pic. And then they rushed us out of there. It was nice that everyone got the opportunity for a photo though.

We stood outside talking a bit, and then I decided to see what was going on at the side of the building--sure enough, some of the non-MFC fans were lined up waiting for M. We lined up too and waited for something over an hour. I talked to Martin in the meanwhile and said I was sad they couldn't have played more songs, and they should have rebelled and done so. He said "well, you know Mika, he probably would have!" but there really was no way. Finally Mika came out, and signed stuff, but also rather quickly. Rilo and I didn't get our things signed, but that was fine with me--I just liked seeing him out of his stage clothes and being nice to the other kids. He signed all sorts of things--a shoe, a notebook, a crumpled dollar bill. Not poor Rilo's metrocard though! Then he made a beeline for his car and left. Ha.

Most everyone left then, but Rilo and her friend and some of the other fans stayed, and we decided that we'd bonded, and went off on an adventure together. So we couldn't post earlier, as we were off having coffee and breakfast-lunch around Times Sq in a big group. So: a good morning, all in all!

--Jack

P.S. I was trying NOT to be caught on film through the entire thing, and basically succeeded. The MFC contingent side right to the side of/behind Sunshine. I'm the girl in the pink plaid skirt who always had that white sign/card over her face.

I'm on the train right now to meet up with Rilo outside the GMA studios. Got all of a half hour of sleep tonight, so I hope they let us in! Unfortunately I am not Christine or Sariflor, so Mikastaff doesn't recognize me as MFC by face. ;-)

--Jack

Oh geeze, finally.

He may not be saying "I am bisexual" exactly, but at least he's definitely saying "I am not straight." And everyone can relax a little hopefully.

--Jack

Funny--the reviews are a lot more calm and positive this time around. Makes me think that the initial marmite reaction has worked out of people's systems, and now they can listen to this album already knowing what Mika is and isn't, and appreciate it for what it is rather than what they think it maybe should be. The backlash that always comes with being an out-of-nowhere pop sensation has worn off, and people can just say "yes I like it" and not worry about it. It's interesting, because this lets us have the first glimpse of where Mika will actually stand in the pop echelon years on, and how he will be regarded.

--Jack

I haven't had time to edit the photos yet, so I'll give you three unedited ones as preview!

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv201/JackViolet/Mika%20NY%202009/DSCN2964.jpg

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv201/JackViolet/Mika%20NY%202009/DSCN2958.jpg

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv201/JackViolet/Mika%20NY%202009/DSCN2974.jpg

--Jack

Oh, Patsy.

I saw him recently, he was lovely. And even came out afterward and was sweet and in good humour, and possibly went out to karaoke with some fans but I don't know as I did not stay. Am so excited for him return to the States--just wish that it was a solo stint rather than part of the NYLON tour! (And hope the tickets won't sell out before I've saved up to buy them!)

--Jack

That would be some interesting kind of stylistic device.

I was thinking, actually, that if he had done that, it would at least be a little interesting. This isn't even that.

--Jack

Babs, I love you. Only you would start this thread.

I don't like... when people don't like "exotic" food. :-P I love for food to be exciting, interesting, and an adventure, and besides that, what most people consider "exotic" I consider "totally normal." So I'm always at a loss when friends are like "I only eat plain pasta or baked potatoes or pizza." It's like someone telling me, "I only listen to the Beatles and Britney Spears and Bee Gees, and that's it."

--Jack

Hi there everybody!

I did notice "your" instead of "you're" spelling, but Mika's songs are more like poems than grammar books, so I don't mind; it probably sounds better that way and it gives the listener a lot of freedom of interpretation...when Bob Marley writes/says" I'm gonna love y'a" instead of "I'm going to love you", nobody minds; so what's the big deal?

The big deal is that "ya" is an accepted dialect variant on "you." It is not a "mistake," it is dialect--kind of like Mika's use of the word "ain't." Using "your" for "you're" is not dialect, and is obviously wrong (it sounds absolutely the same, and certainly doesn't provide any additional interpretation as "your a stressed out single mother" makes zero sense if we insist on taking "your" literally and not just accepting that he meant "you are"). Such mistakes are simply not professional and have no place in a professional publication. It's as bad as if he printed the lyrics on dirty napkins. We could still read them, sure, but it would still be sloppy and embarrassing.

--Jack

Last time I checked, people were just sharing opposing viewpoints, not calling anyone an "idiot" or any other colourful adjectives.

Well I did say "I'm not an idiot," which was admittedly somewhat aggressive, but I was feeling piqued at having something explained to me in great detail when I specifically said that my problem was not that I was at a loss for an explanation.

That said, my remark certainly didn't mean anyone else was an idiot, either.

--Jack

I didn't say that, but considering my initial post did say that I "understood what Mika was getting at," I didn't really need to have everything explained to me as though I were a child.

And yes, it's possible to find sense in most things if you stretch and bend enough. I'm just saying that having to do that in the first place is the mark of a badly-written work. Well-constructed poetry/stories/etc provide additional layers of meaning upon further and more in-depth examination, but they should not be messy nonsense at first glance.

--Jack

P.S. I'm not even saying there was no sense in the lyrics--I'm sure it all made sense in Mika's head, and yes, with some work one can figure out what he was going for. But I am saying he did a shoddy job of conveying it.

Thanks, Jack. Have I mentioned that I missed you?

Aww, I've missed you too!

You missed this thread, I think:

 

http://www.mikafanclub.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18505

 

Oooooh, I did. You all make me proud. :-P

--Jack

Because Lady Jane had no choice but to walk on water; as in, she had enchanted feet that simply wouldn't allow her to go below the surface. So when her "fella" fell down into the water, the only way for her to follow him was to hack off these "enchanted" feet that kept her on the surface.

That would actually make sense. Too bad it would have needed to be explained then.

She didn't abort the story, as implied by "legends were never made that short."

Uh, I'm not an idiot. I know. I just mean that grammatically, one would need a direct object to follow that. Moreover, that is not at all the normal usage for the verb "abort." We do not say "abort a story"--that itself makes the sentence stilted and awkward. (We do say "abort a mission" and such, but still "did not abort" is horrible, horrible usage.)

"She never had a man to show" means she was single, as indicated by "Then one day she found a fella."

Again, I'm not incapable of reading comprehension, and I did say I understood what he was getting at.

No more painful or stilted than any other poetry/fable. It just isn't as linear and complete as our modern ears are used to.

I don't know what poetry or fables you've been reading; most of the ones I read and teach are quite lovely and flowing, modern ears or not.

It's a reference to a legend about a mermaid who had earned herself a pair of legs and could only return to the sea if she cut off her feet so that her legs would grow back together as a tail. I'm not sure if that was an unedited version of the Hans Christen Anderson fable or a different story with a similar theme. I remember it because I thought it was deeply interesting and moving.

That's great that it's a reference, it would be even better if it made sense in the context of the story he provided. Are you sure about this legend, however? In Hans Christian Anderson's story, the mermaid had her tail cut in half to become legs, and then her feet felt like they were being stabbed with knives each time she took a step, but there was no cutting off of feet. And I've never heard of any variant of that story except for Paracelsus' Ondines.

Try "she didn't have a man to show for it." She was special and could something amazing, but she had no love to show for how awesome she was. It's common practice to truncate familiar phrases like that if the context makes the meaning clear because the listener can infer the full phrase.

Funny, this hardly makes the meaning clear: the way it is, it's confusing whether she didn't have "a man to show [for it]" or "a man to show [her talent to]." I would not say this is a successful shortening at all.

Poetry tends to take more liberties with grammar in order to produce more subtle shades of meaning than are possible in prose (which is why so many people hate poetry.)

Good poetry doesn't sound as awkward as this does, and "subtle shades of meaning" does not mean "confusing tripe." One can't just wave away all of this songs' faults with "it's poetry!" That's actually one of my major peeves when I have to edit student poetry, that they think anything goes just because it's not prose.

The most general theme of the song is that relationships are hard, messy, often unrequited, and complicated by the actions and opinions of other people, especially if the people involved are exceptional/unconventional in some way. Part of that is conveyed in the way that language is used.

Really? I would think a number of people would say it's about something else entirely.

--Jack

Oh dammit I missed Bab's birthday! So sorry guys. :-( I've really been out of it.

happy belated birthday, Babs!

--Jack

Btw, just looking at the booklet now... I've had this problem with LiCM's lyrics too, but seriously!! WHY can't Mika get someone to proofread his damn lyrics and tell him the difference between "you're and "your"? He's got the money! He can spell things however he wants on his blog, but you'd think he'd have someone look things over for publication. It's embarassing to look at.

--Jack

See, I prefer the fable quality of Lady Jane to the words of Blue Eyes which make no sense to me, but I do like the rhythm and music of Blue Eyes. Lady Jane and Lonely Alcoholic are quite Nilsson-ish as I have said before.

Well I certainly don't think Lady Jane's lyrics are awful because they have a fable quality. I love fables! I think they are awful because they often don't make any sense, don't follow from one point to another, don't really tell a coherent story (and fables tend to be very coherent, albeit with their own logic), and have some really eye-rolling word combinations.

Mind you, I'm a fan of Marc Bolan's lyrics, and those are often called "nonsense," but they're a very different type of nonsense.

"Lady Jane did not abort"???? Ok, I get he was trying to rhyme, but gawd, that's awful. Abort what? "A man to show"... what? "Eager just to let him know"... what? I know what he's trying to get at, but he's twisting the laws of grammar all over, and it's painful and stilted.

I don't get why she had to cut off her feet to become a fish. Makes no sense, and the image of a woman with her legs cut off at the ankles is both unpleasant and not at all reminiscent of a fish.

Also, technically, I don't follow why she had to show a man she could walk on water and why her life was so awful without a fella, but ok, that's more of a feminist problem than anything else.

But all of that is nothing before the illogic of the following stanza. No man would dare to catch her, but when "some member of a faraway state" (and that's clumsy, ugly phrasing again) commands it, suddenly it's no problem at all? Besides that, "member of a faraway state" makes me think of an anthropomorphic penis or something, since we just said "no man" dared to do this (and I'm interpreting "man" as "human" rather than "strictly a male"), and I doubt that was the intention.

But again, if the emperor is "the only man" who could be so uncouth as to want Lady Jane, who the hell killed her? "Though you think you've got your prize/There's another fish that has escaped your eyes" is horrible-sounding as well, and moreover makes no sense in context AGAIN. The emperor wanted to eat Lady Jane because she was such a famous fish. He got that; there's no other "prize" that escaped his eyes, because he a) certainly didn't care for Lady Jane's non fishy qualities, b) didn't care for her lover either. I don't care if this is all supposed to have a deeper meaning, if you're going to tell a metaphorical story, it needs to either be entirely figurative (and this is not), or it needs to make some basic sense on the literal level (and this does not).

Finally, wtf, now Lady Jane's lover (who drowned so shouldn't be alive anyway, according to the lyrics it was only Lady Jane who "thought" he became a creature of the sea) is looking for her? Why??? He didn't seem to want her before she was eaten, as "she never stopped looking" thus apparently she didn't find him.

The whole thing is a huge mess.

So anyway, on a lighter note...! Question for everyone: If you could have picked one or two of his "other" songs to be on this EP - songs that we've heard on YouTube but that he has not officialy recorded - which would they be?

 

For me:

- Sally

- I've Got Life

- Same Jeans

- HMDYLM

 

All of these would obviously not fit the theme of this EP, but these are what I would choose for a pre- second album EP if I had my way.

Oooooh! Sally, easily! And I think it would fit with the theme, easy.

--Jack

Ha, I know what a raspberry is. :-) I think we have one in the smilies?

--Jack

That is an example of a lame lyric. "Lonely is so lonely alone" is about as awkward as they come and no matter how many hundreds of times I hear this line I still cringe.

When I first heard the song, I thought the lyric was "lonely is so lonely, you know?" and I loved that. A simple, plaintive statement, evoking childish loss in its primitiveness, and effective precisely because of that. Ie, at that level of loneliness, words fail the singer, and all he can come up with to describe the feeling is "lonely is just so... lonely, you know?"

I have never gotten over the disappointment of finding out what the lyric actually was.

--Jack

Love "Blue Eyes." Not a fan of "Lady Jane" at all, with "Lonely Alcoholic" just a little more preferable. Also, the lyrics on these songs are amazingly terrible. Nay, impressively terrible.

That said, I am nevertheless not at all disappointed. "Blue Eyes" and "Toy Boy" alone are enough to make me happy, and though I say I'm not a fan of the other two songs, they are still interesting to hear, and I can enjoy both in certain moods (I just don't want to listen to them over and over). Anyway, all in all, I'm glad this was released. It's fun to hear what else Mika's been playing around with!

--Jack

I agree with you. I have analysed the song for hours and I can't see anything 'gay'.

I think people don't read the lyrics from the very FIRST line to the LAST line, which is extremely important.

I also think the lyrics of this song are way too dark and serious just to label them as 'gay', or 'involving gay'. How lame.

Who's labelling anything as gay? It's a story that, among other things, involves a relationship between two boys. That's not the only thing in there. Are we supposed to ignore it because as soon as we say that there's a gay relationship in a part of a song, that has to make the song "about" gayness?

--Jack

So I've read throughthe lyrics multiple times and I don't understand where everyone seem this 'gay' thing coming into play.

i'm not getting onto the topic of is he gay or straight or whatever cause I have my own opinion and this isn't the place to discuss it.

I just want to know where and why everyone gets the 'gay' image because I'm not getting that from just the lyrics.

Because you've got two boys here. The Toy Boy of the title (the singer compares himself to a toy, not his beloved), and the boy that the Toy Boy singer loves. Also: "I'm a boy just like you,"--the two lovers in the first part are both male, so, that's your gay thing.

--Jack