<?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/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for How&#039;s That Working Out?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com</link>
	<description>Courtney muses on music, burritos and life&#039;s little mysteries</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:53:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Road Trip &#8211; Day Three &#8211; Marfa, TX to Tucson, AZ by John Taylor</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2009/01/08/road-trip-day-three-marfa-tx-to-tucson-az/#comment-59</link>
		<dc:creator>John Taylor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:53:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=94#comment-59</guid>
		<description>You suck the big one, loser.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You suck the big one, loser.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Twilight Conference Recap by peter</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2009/08/04/twilight-conference-recap/#comment-57</link>
		<dc:creator>peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:37:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=145#comment-57</guid>
		<description>yeah, check the treatment of &quot;mommybloggers&quot; and their apparent insatiable desire for swag clouds their editorial judgement , vs male gadgetbloggers for whom freebies never have the same effect.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yeah, check the treatment of &#8220;mommybloggers&#8221; and their apparent insatiable desire for swag clouds their editorial judgement , vs male gadgetbloggers for whom freebies never have the same effect.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Song Obsession: Dri &#8220;You Know I Tried&#8221; by Daniboy</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2009/02/19/song-obsession-dri-you-know-i-tried/#comment-56</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniboy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:29:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=133#comment-56</guid>
		<description>I discovered this song just some weeks ago
and i&#039;m obsessed too
it&#039;s so so so so nice!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I discovered this song just some weeks ago<br />
and i&#8217;m obsessed too<br />
it&#8217;s so so so so nice!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Song Obsession: Dri &#8220;You Know I Tried&#8221; by George Jonez</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2009/02/19/song-obsession-dri-you-know-i-tried/#comment-55</link>
		<dc:creator>George Jonez</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2009 00:52:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=133#comment-55</guid>
		<description>fun album. ive loved it for a few years now. will be tough for labels to release this record b/c is contains lots of samples. that what DRI told me. so, i guess its gotta be true.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>fun album. ive loved it for a few years now. will be tough for labels to release this record b/c is contains lots of samples. that what DRI told me. so, i guess its gotta be true.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Jonas Brothers Are Not the New Beatles by The Curateur</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/the-jonas-brothers-are-not-the-new-beatles/#comment-54</link>
		<dc:creator>The Curateur</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:45:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=137#comment-54</guid>
		<description>Completely superficially they are very reminiscent of The Beatles. I actually wrote a draft of a post comparing them mostly due to the wardrobe style, mayhem and screaming girls a few months ago, but abandoned. Nicely done lady!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Completely superficially they are very reminiscent of The Beatles. I actually wrote a draft of a post comparing them mostly due to the wardrobe style, mayhem and screaming girls a few months ago, but abandoned. Nicely done lady!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Jonas Brothers Are Not the New Beatles by defendme</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/the-jonas-brothers-are-not-the-new-beatles/#comment-53</link>
		<dc:creator>defendme</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 15:41:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=137#comment-53</guid>
		<description>lol, but nothing you or Billy Corgan are saying make them the new Beatles and that, at the end of the day, is the point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>lol, but nothing you or Billy Corgan are saying make them the new Beatles and that, at the end of the day, is the point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Jonas Brothers Are Not the New Beatles by mememoi</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/the-jonas-brothers-are-not-the-new-beatles/#comment-52</link>
		<dc:creator>mememoi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 15:11:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=137#comment-52</guid>
		<description>But being a Christian and having it be OK to overtly follow certain related principles are pretty different things.  Just think of two major musical artists who have said they identify personally as Christians getting mainstream, taste-making &quot;cool kids&quot; acceptance these days would be Katy Perry &amp; Kings of Leon...by being identified with losing faith or indulging in debauchery in order to be credible (well, at least in the case of KOL, don&#039;t get me started on KP).  

I&#039;d say trying to give a platform to socially unpopular feelings (being religious or just secularly prude-ish, especially as a young person is marginalized behavior among peers) that many people have but feel embarrassed or ashamed to admit to can still be considered subversive and is still a fair parallel to what the Beatles did. 

It&#039;s not about what people actually ARE, but what is endorsed in the mainstream - the media, the mass culture, the opinions that tastemakers promote. (Since I bet a poll of Americans would have a similar percentage of people saying they felt sexual feelings, LOL.)

I just think the idea that them expressing a desire to be sober, nice and NOT oversexed fits into any kind of real popular male ideal for youth is a false delusion.  They are more the misfits, at least in the entertainment industry at the moment.

Also, Billy Corgan just called them the &quot;real deal&quot; in an interview. Woot. LOL.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But being a Christian and having it be OK to overtly follow certain related principles are pretty different things.  Just think of two major musical artists who have said they identify personally as Christians getting mainstream, taste-making &#8220;cool kids&#8221; acceptance these days would be Katy Perry &amp; Kings of Leon&#8230;by being identified with losing faith or indulging in debauchery in order to be credible (well, at least in the case of KOL, don&#8217;t get me started on KP).  </p>
<p>I&#8217;d say trying to give a platform to socially unpopular feelings (being religious or just secularly prude-ish, especially as a young person is marginalized behavior among peers) that many people have but feel embarrassed or ashamed to admit to can still be considered subversive and is still a fair parallel to what the Beatles did. </p>
<p>It&#8217;s not about what people actually ARE, but what is endorsed in the mainstream &#8211; the media, the mass culture, the opinions that tastemakers promote. (Since I bet a poll of Americans would have a similar percentage of people saying they felt sexual feelings, LOL.)</p>
<p>I just think the idea that them expressing a desire to be sober, nice and NOT oversexed fits into any kind of real popular male ideal for youth is a false delusion.  They are more the misfits, at least in the entertainment industry at the moment.</p>
<p>Also, Billy Corgan just called them the &#8220;real deal&#8221; in an interview. Woot. LOL.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Jonas Brothers Are Not the New Beatles by defendme</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/the-jonas-brothers-are-not-the-new-beatles/#comment-51</link>
		<dc:creator>defendme</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 23:39:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=137#comment-51</guid>
		<description>Well, since the 2007 Gallup poll has 82% of Americans identifying themselves as Christian that would make the morality the Jonas Brothers tout the very definition of the establishment, in at least two different ways. :)

http://www.gallup.com/poll/103459/Questions-Answers-About-Americans-Religion.aspx

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/establishment?qsrc=2888</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, since the 2007 Gallup poll has 82% of Americans identifying themselves as Christian that would make the morality the Jonas Brothers tout the very definition of the establishment, in at least two different ways. :)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/103459/Questions-Answers-About-Americans-Religion.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.gallup.com/poll/103459/Questions-Answers-About-Americans-Religion.aspx</a></p>
<p><a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/establishment?qsrc=2888" rel="nofollow">http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/establishment?qsrc=2888</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Jonas Brothers Are Not the New Beatles by mememoi</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/the-jonas-brothers-are-not-the-new-beatles/#comment-50</link>
		<dc:creator>mememoi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 23:22:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=137#comment-50</guid>
		<description>(PS When I say subversion is a neutral act, I mean as a concept...once it&#039;s being performed, it does have a direction one way or another, duh. :} )</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(PS When I say subversion is a neutral act, I mean as a concept&#8230;once it&#8217;s being performed, it does have a direction one way or another, duh. :} )</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Jonas Brothers Are Not the New Beatles by mememoi</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/the-jonas-brothers-are-not-the-new-beatles/#comment-49</link>
		<dc:creator>mememoi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 23:14:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=137#comment-49</guid>
		<description>I see your point but the definition of subversive is to infiltrate a system and attempt to change it from within...it doesn&#039;t have anything to do with whether that is coming from a conservative or progressive angle, as long as your overt purpose is veiling your underlying message.  Subversion is a politically neutral act.

Not that I think they are being sinister about it, they are just not flaunting the meanings of the music so it can be universal.  Simple is not the same thing as unintelligent...it&#039;s harder to boil things down than to make them complicated (see: bad poetry).  :P 

And if you mean they should take some sort of a political stand, they have written about social issues and criticism in music from their distant, pre-Mouse past. Their newest song has the vaguest hint of the pacifism they insinuated way back when in early songs.  Though as long as they are with Disney, I wouldn&#039;t expect much of it.  Maybe someday...I agree, it would be nice. But remember, we have the benefit of looking back on the Beatles&#039; whole career and judging them.  I don&#039;t think it&#039;s totally fair predict any current young band&#039;s failure or success like there&#039;s any certainty.

Anyway, interesting post, thank you!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I see your point but the definition of subversive is to infiltrate a system and attempt to change it from within&#8230;it doesn&#8217;t have anything to do with whether that is coming from a conservative or progressive angle, as long as your overt purpose is veiling your underlying message.  Subversion is a politically neutral act.</p>
<p>Not that I think they are being sinister about it, they are just not flaunting the meanings of the music so it can be universal.  Simple is not the same thing as unintelligent&#8230;it&#8217;s harder to boil things down than to make them complicated (see: bad poetry).  :P </p>
<p>And if you mean they should take some sort of a political stand, they have written about social issues and criticism in music from their distant, pre-Mouse past. Their newest song has the vaguest hint of the pacifism they insinuated way back when in early songs.  Though as long as they are with Disney, I wouldn&#8217;t expect much of it.  Maybe someday&#8230;I agree, it would be nice. But remember, we have the benefit of looking back on the Beatles&#8217; whole career and judging them.  I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s totally fair predict any current young band&#8217;s failure or success like there&#8217;s any certainty.</p>
<p>Anyway, interesting post, thank you!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Jonas Brothers Are Not the New Beatles by defendme</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/the-jonas-brothers-are-not-the-new-beatles/#comment-48</link>
		<dc:creator>defendme</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 21:07:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=137#comment-48</guid>
		<description>I have to respectfully disagree with you there, the message in saving yourself isn&#039;t subversive. It&#039;s conservative. Those two things are pretty mutually exclusive. I see what you&#039;re saying, but they wouldn&#039;t have to talk about sex per say to be more subversive - in fact I do agree that talking about sex would be quite mainstream for them in this day and age, although it was nutty as pie for the Beatles. Any intelligent topic that&#039;s outside of the mainstream would do. That&#039;s territory Jonas don&#039;t cover.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to respectfully disagree with you there, the message in saving yourself isn&#8217;t subversive. It&#8217;s conservative. Those two things are pretty mutually exclusive. I see what you&#8217;re saying, but they wouldn&#8217;t have to talk about sex per say to be more subversive &#8211; in fact I do agree that talking about sex would be quite mainstream for them in this day and age, although it was nutty as pie for the Beatles. Any intelligent topic that&#8217;s outside of the mainstream would do. That&#8217;s territory Jonas don&#8217;t cover.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Jonas Brothers Are Not the New Beatles by mememoi</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/the-jonas-brothers-are-not-the-new-beatles/#comment-47</link>
		<dc:creator>mememoi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 21:04:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=137#comment-47</guid>
		<description>The fundamental problem with your argument is that I think they DO want to change the world.  And they are being somewhat subversive about it.  Just not in a way that the world currently deems &quot;cool&quot; - sex and drugs and an independent label.  Subversive doesn&#039;t mean pro sex&amp;drugs, to me it means anti-mainstream.  They are commercially successful, but they aren&#039;t really mainstream.

Right now, the world is pretty into overt sex, drug use, irony and anti-tradition/faith to the point that those are the mainstream ideals currently de rigueur to conform to; they are refusing to stick to that status quo because it&#039;s not who they are and they are suffering backlash from all the so-called tastemakers as a result.  Isn&#039;t that what subversive is - going against the grain?

And I think the Jonas Brothers DO send subversive messages...that it&#039;s OK to NOT have sex and fake highs be the sole focus of your good times, that it&#039;s OK to look to a spiritual solution (a lot of their puppylove songs can easily be interpreted as &quot;inspirational&quot;).  It&#039;s marketed to kids...but older teens and adults are listening and curious (or hateful). Their message and very being are resonating with a lot of young people, and it IS a message of nonconformity for any kid who goes out in public with their eyes open these days.  (It would have been 15 years ago when I was a teenager too.)

Beatles told us it was OK to celebrate sex, high times and irreverence(awesome!); Jonas Brothers are saying it&#039;s okay to still want love and sincerity and that the pursuit of desires can be titillating even before they are fulfilled...

That might not catch on like the Beatles, but it&#039;s certainly all right,they needn&#039;t ape them or any of their other idols to be a respectable or credible band, in my eyes.

The Jonases&#039;ll keep growing up, and be less innocent, but it doesn&#039;t have to be all about debauchery, does it?  As someone who&#039;s been there and done that,  I find little to be more trite and dull anymore. I&#039;m not trying to get converted to Christianity either, believe me, but I can&#039;t help but feel there is plenty to latch onto with the JB worldview, for people who want it.

Whatever way, I think it&#039;s more subversive NOT to act subversive in the way that other great acts acted subversive.  Because if they did that, they&#039;d be exactly like the 1000s upon 1000s of other bands littering the pop-rock/alternative/indie landscape...that I stopped paying close attention to 10 years or so ago.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The fundamental problem with your argument is that I think they DO want to change the world.  And they are being somewhat subversive about it.  Just not in a way that the world currently deems &#8220;cool&#8221; &#8211; sex and drugs and an independent label.  Subversive doesn&#8217;t mean pro sex&amp;drugs, to me it means anti-mainstream.  They are commercially successful, but they aren&#8217;t really mainstream.</p>
<p>Right now, the world is pretty into overt sex, drug use, irony and anti-tradition/faith to the point that those are the mainstream ideals currently de rigueur to conform to; they are refusing to stick to that status quo because it&#8217;s not who they are and they are suffering backlash from all the so-called tastemakers as a result.  Isn&#8217;t that what subversive is &#8211; going against the grain?</p>
<p>And I think the Jonas Brothers DO send subversive messages&#8230;that it&#8217;s OK to NOT have sex and fake highs be the sole focus of your good times, that it&#8217;s OK to look to a spiritual solution (a lot of their puppylove songs can easily be interpreted as &#8220;inspirational&#8221;).  It&#8217;s marketed to kids&#8230;but older teens and adults are listening and curious (or hateful). Their message and very being are resonating with a lot of young people, and it IS a message of nonconformity for any kid who goes out in public with their eyes open these days.  (It would have been 15 years ago when I was a teenager too.)</p>
<p>Beatles told us it was OK to celebrate sex, high times and irreverence(awesome!); Jonas Brothers are saying it&#8217;s okay to still want love and sincerity and that the pursuit of desires can be titillating even before they are fulfilled&#8230;</p>
<p>That might not catch on like the Beatles, but it&#8217;s certainly all right,they needn&#8217;t ape them or any of their other idols to be a respectable or credible band, in my eyes.</p>
<p>The Jonases&#8217;ll keep growing up, and be less innocent, but it doesn&#8217;t have to be all about debauchery, does it?  As someone who&#8217;s been there and done that,  I find little to be more trite and dull anymore. I&#8217;m not trying to get converted to Christianity either, believe me, but I can&#8217;t help but feel there is plenty to latch onto with the JB worldview, for people who want it.</p>
<p>Whatever way, I think it&#8217;s more subversive NOT to act subversive in the way that other great acts acted subversive.  Because if they did that, they&#8217;d be exactly like the 1000s upon 1000s of other bands littering the pop-rock/alternative/indie landscape&#8230;that I stopped paying close attention to 10 years or so ago.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why I Hate Coldplay by e*rock</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2008/10/26/why-i-hate-coldplay/#comment-46</link>
		<dc:creator>e*rock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 10:55:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=50#comment-46</guid>
		<description>i like that you have to explain why. any of the reasons you explain could make them cooler, BUT they&#039;re just douche bags making boring music. so that&#039;s hard to explain.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i like that you have to explain why. any of the reasons you explain could make them cooler, BUT they&#8217;re just douche bags making boring music. so that&#8217;s hard to explain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Day Four &#8211; Tucson, AZ to Palm Springs, CA by defendme</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2009/01/09/day-four-tucson-az-to-palm-springs-ca/#comment-45</link>
		<dc:creator>defendme</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 18:57:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=109#comment-45</guid>
		<description>I got it from The Curateur. You should check out her blog and maybe send her an email. http://thecurateur.blogspot.com/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I got it from The Curateur. You should check out her blog and maybe send her an email. <a href="http://thecurateur.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">http://thecurateur.blogspot.com/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Day Four &#8211; Tucson, AZ to Palm Springs, CA by Jen Ferris</title>
		<link>http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/2009/01/09/day-four-tucson-az-to-palm-springs-ca/#comment-44</link>
		<dc:creator>Jen Ferris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 07:52:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://howsthatworkingout.wordpress.com/?p=109#comment-44</guid>
		<description>how did you get Rachel Platten&#039;s song Honeybees as an MP3?
is her album out yet? Is there somewhere to download it now if I promise to pay too when it comes out? lmao!!

 My friends from Toronto found out about her and we have been trying to find out about her album and stuff and there seems to be a lack of information out there re: this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>how did you get Rachel Platten&#8217;s song Honeybees as an MP3?<br />
is her album out yet? Is there somewhere to download it now if I promise to pay too when it comes out? lmao!!</p>
<p> My friends from Toronto found out about her and we have been trying to find out about her album and stuff and there seems to be a lack of information out there re: this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
