Dig Out Your Soul: an Oasis Obsession Uncovered

As arguably the most devoted (and perhaps only) remaining Oasis fan living in America, 24 June 2008 marked quite a day for this bloke. The reason, of course (as if you didn’t know!), is because that’s when the band officially announced upcoming release details for their 24th UK single, "The Shock Of The Lightning" (out tomorrow), to be followed by the 6 Oct release of their 7th studio album: Dig Out Your Soul.

Given that coming to terms with Oasis' post-1997 fall from greatness—documented to great effect both in this book and this film—has been perhaps the defining struggle of my late adolescence/early adulthood, I was at first hesitant to blog about this new album, lest it dredge up any painful memories.

But after more thought, I decided I couldn’t resist. Informing said decision was MC Gallagher’s Law of Correlation, which states: “The more MC Gallagher likes an Oasis album’s cover art, the more he likes its songs”. That said, it seems auspicious that I quite like the new record's artwork (pictured above). But before I elaborate on that, allow me to start from the beginning of the band's discography.

For starters, one should interpret my thoughts on this matter with the foreknowledge that I regard Oasis' first two records, Definitely Maybe (1994) and (What's the Story) Morning Glory (1995), as the defining albums of my youth. Moreover, I consider the covers for said albums to be utterly iconic.

But then came Oasis' 3rd, 4th, and 5th records—Be Here Now (1997), SOTSOG (2000)^*, and Heathen Chemistry (2002)—which I once referred to (in a darker moment, mind you) as: "a cocaine-driven monumental f*ck up, 48 minutes of drivel, and the single lowest exemplar of artistic output in human history, respectively".

Given the Law of Correlation, I should have seen it coming: the self-indulgent cover of Be Here Now (above, left)—complete with a Rolls Royce in an effing swimming pool—was just as over-the-top as its songs’ bloated production; the New York City skyline depicted on SOTSOG (above, middle) evoked a certain Irish Americophile (Bono), which only heightened the disappointment of Oasis’ own electronica-influenced experimentation vis-à-vis other bands like, say, U2; whilst the blurred and rather unmemorable image atop Heathen Chemistry (above, right) foretold how little its tunes would impede the band’s continued fading from seemingly everyone’s mind but my own.

Thank God, then, that the simple yet appealing train shot gracing Oasis' sixth record, Don't Believe The Truth (2005), was correct in suggesting a band who'd finally gotten their act back on track.

All of this finally brings me back to the Dig Out Your Soul cover, which again, I fancy. First off, it's probably the giant cutout hands (and wishful thinking), but was Terry Gilliam involved at all? No, apparently it's the handiwork of London-based designer Julian House, who's previously done covers for Primal Scream and Stereolab among others. The vibrant colors and butterfly evoke this cover by The Kinks (a good thing) whereas that apple is surely an homage to The Beatles' self-founded record label or else a clue that Liam Gallagher's diet no longer consists solely of cigarettes and blow. And as far the piece's middle left portion is concerned, the row of crucifixes is a bit disconcerting, but I've chosen to focus instead on the turntable (classy) and lightbulb (not a CFL, but still).

In conclusion, to the one person still reading this (hi Mom!), I've decided to interpret what looks to be a butterfly emerging from a mushroom cloud as a good omen—especially when said image graces the newest album of a band you're desperately hoping can transcend a trifecta of mid-career bombs.

Then again, if the reader comments to this article are any indication, some might say my decidedly positive reaction to the Dig Out Your Soul artwork is a bit misguided. Here's one of my favorites (written 15 Jul 2008, 9:51am, under the pseudonym "mullet"):

Alternative album title:
"Dig out your sh*t and smear it on the cover"
No doubt when you play it, there'll be sh*t in your ears too.

But such talk does not phase me in the slightest. In fact, I am so confident that this new record will be tops that I've convinced brumpelstiltskin—despite Greenspanke's staunch objections—to invest in this $99 deluxe limited edition box set.

So what do you think? Did I make the right call? Or will this purchase go down in history as the most anyone's ever spent to effectively put sh*t into their own ears?

---

^* SOTSOG = Standing On The Shoulder Of Giants (their typo, not mine).

Soda Point Induced Neurosis

Given our previously documented interest in Big Soda's largest reward programs (My Coke Rewards and Pepsi Stuff), brumpelstiltskin were quite intrigued to learn of a new "diagnosis" apparently being considered by psychiatrists in charge of revising the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).

Namely, in yet another Mic's Tape exclusive, we've learned that the DSM-V (expected release date: May 2012) may include so-called "Soda Point Induced Neurosis" (aka SPIN). According to an anonymous email (signed, "A disgruntled former assistant to then-APA President Dr. Steven Sharfstein"), SPIN is characterized first and foremost by the "compulsive hoarding of soft drink bottle caps".

The email, which we received yesterday, went on to read: "To be diagnosed with SPIN, the patient must meet at least four of the following criteria during the same 2-week period, which must include (1) and (2)":

(1) Moderate to severe interest in at least one of the following:

• Free music, movies, and electronics
• Free sweepstakes entries
• Becoming a walking billboard for Coca-Cola and/or its corporate partners

(2) The patience to redeem 10 to 12-digit nonsense codes via manual online entry

(3) Continued hoarding despite embarrassing social/interpersonal consequences (e.g., being spotted by a co-worker while removing a Diet Pepsi Max bottle from a trash can)

(4) Recurrent hoarding despite future dental ramifications for self or loved ones (e.g., unintentionally enabling girlfriend's formerly under-control pop addiction)

(5) Brazen disregard for potential legal repurcussions (e.g., unlawful removal of empty cardboard 12-pack containers from local recycling facility)

(6) Diminished ability to make rational decisions (e.g., buying Pepsi instead of Cherry Coke—even though the latter's on sale and you like its taste better—because you're "one point away from that hot new David Archuleta download").

So, is SPIN really destined for the DSM-V? Or is our source for this story suffering from some kind of caffeine-induced psychosis? Only time will tell.

The Skinny on Why TMZ is Thick

While walking through my office waiting area the other day, a certain magazine cover (pictured right) caused me to do a double take.

At first glance, it looked like it could have been an Onion article: a picture of a beautiful, healthy-looking celebrity—oddly paired with a “Stop Calling Me Fat!” byline—accompanied, no doubt, by a satirical article cleverly ridiculing our culture’s increasingly twisted ideals of “normal” weight and physical attractiveness.

But in actuality it was the 17 Dec 2007 issue of People magazine, in which the cover story detailed the reaction of actress/singer Jennifer Love Hewitt's (aka J. LoH) after gossip website TMZ.com published the above photo alongside the headline: "We know what you ate this summer, Love -- everything!"

Hewitt responded directly via her own website; here is an excerpt:

I've sat by in silence for a long time now about the way women's bodies are constantly scrutinized. To set the record straight, I'm not upset for me, but for all of the girls out there that are struggling with their body image.

A size 2 is not fat! Nor will it ever be. And being a size 0 doesn't make you beautiful.

Hewitt's concern for those "struggling with their body image" is very well-founded, especially since numerous scientific studies such as this one suggest a "direct effect of media exposure [to a thin ideal body image for women] on eating disorder symptoms".

Interestingly, Hewitt has been back in the headlines recently, only this time it's for having lost weight. The decision to seemingly flaunt her successful diet on the cover of Us Weekly has led some to question the consistency of her stance.

While there's little doubt that Hewitt's words and actions convey a mixed message, the stand she took against the media should be commended all the same. Our culture's distorted, unrealistic and unhealthy "thin ideal" needs to be challenged, and media outlets that shamelessly reinforce it—like TMZ—should be reviled.