“America’s No. 1 bestselling novel takes a ironic shot at the purveyor of 99-cent downloads,” Philip Elmer-DeWitt reports for Fortune. “‘OK. What do you think of the MP3 revolution?’ About half way through Jonathan Franzen’s Freedom an adoring high school student puts that question to Richard Katz, a Khadafi-handsome rock musician and, we suspect, the author’s alter ego.”
“What follows is a rant that touches on everything from the role of the Marseilles in mobilizing the French peasantry to Apple’s commitment to making the world a better place,” Elmer-DeWitt reports.
“Before he is done, Katz has called Bob Dylan a chewing gum maker and the iPods sold by Steve Jobs — a long-time supporter of Democratic candidates who once dated Joan Baez and put Al Gore on his board of directors — ‘the true face of Republican politics,'” Elmer-DeWitt reports.
How does Franzen get there? Read on in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Apple’s iTunes Store song downloads used to be 99-cents, before the greedy music cartels forced Apple into tiered pricing, where the most popular tracks cost $1.29, in exchange for allowing Apple to finally drop DRM. If that fact dings up Franzen’s little polemic, so be it.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Readers too numerous to mention individually for the heads up.]
Not gonna play today.
I spent three months away from MDN because of it (for those not sure what I mean, I’m talking about political slugfest that would likely ensue after mentioning anything even remotely political, in an article headline, or MDN take/note).
To paraphrase Freud:
“Sometimes an iPod is just an iPod.”
it’s a music player, kids. that’s all.
I was extremely apprehensive to click the link. Fortunately there were few responses at the time.
But ChrissyOne, the water is soooo warm today! Come on out and play!
it’s a music player, kids. that’s all.
Self-Correction: it’s a entertainment and information content delivery device. but the essence of my intended message remains the same.
The party of Eisenhower who sought peace and balanced budgets, T Roosevelt who busted monopolies and trusts, Gerald Ford who reigned in the CIA, Lincoln who pushed the transcontinental railroad and land grant Colleges, Coolidge who built our first Federally Funded (Lincoln Way) highways or the Luddite inmates running the asylum today?
The Republican Party used to be a bunch of reasonable people dedicated to balanced budgets, support for SMALL business, protection of the environment, woman’s rights and keeping the government at all levels out of our private conduct. That is NOT the gang running the show today.
The true new face of Republican Politics:
http://www.amazon.com/Young-Guns-Generation-Conservative-Leaders/dp/1451607342/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1284477545&sr=8-1
So just to make it clear to others who didn’t bother clicking on the link to the original PED article, he is talking about a book of fiction by Jonathan Frazen. The plot of that book is completely irrelevant to the segment he pulled out of it. The segment talks about a fictional rock musician, who is giving an interview, and in that fictional interview, he is talking about Apple, iPod and republicans. While amusing, this is quite far away from anything real; it is not even the book author’s political (or any other kind of) statement. I’m really not sure how it merited a write-up in MDN…
Et ainsi, il a commencé.
And just as PED yanks out a segment from a book of fiction, and completely without context, quotes it in his own article, so does MDN yank out PED’s comment on that quote and paraphrases it into a catchy, flammable headline…
“the Marseilles in mobilizing the French peasantry”
I had to read several time this sentence to understand it because:
– Marseille (without the “s” at the end) is a town from south of France
– Marseillaise is the french national anthem, “mobilizing French peasantry bla-bla-bla”
Not sure if the mistake comes from the rock-star or the journalist, but it is pretty hilarious 😀
Wow…really pathetic…ranks up there with “God’s flyover” at Glenn Beck’s rally. Ever notice how MDN always defensively thanks “too numerous to mention” readers when one of these politic-baiting articles gets posted?
MDN,
Could you focus your efforts on addressing the glacial loading pace of this site and its login page instead of pulling political cr@p out of fictional books? I’m not having such slow loading times elsewhere, only here.
You are a big government loving, commie!
@ Fin Fang Foom
Hijacking Freud’s analysis of his own dream smoking cigars brings a brutal image of trying to smoke your own iPod.
But hey there’s an app for that!
I like MDN’s politics threads. At least folks here are smart and funny as they trash-talk politics –as opposed to, say, the moronic flame wars on WaPo.
@Which Republican Party?
Even Reagan would be called a RINO in today’s Republican party.
I worked for Reagan in the 1980 election cycle and our city, county & state went for him- the 1st Republican to do so since Reconstruction. On balance, he wasn’t a bad President- not great, but better than a second Carter term.
I didn’t leave the party- it left me.
I plan to read “Freedom” shortly. Got about two books ahead of it. Anyone among the MDN faithful who read it that might care to share their opinion?
I too am done with this site today- you lose my hits when you bring politics into the discussion.
Speaking of hits- in terms of credibility- like Consumer Reports- MDN’s has taken a big one thanks to arrogant stupidity.
Have fun with your propoganda.
Quick, it isn’t too late to turn this thread into a political slugfest!!!
I second that, ChrissyOne. Perhaps I should follow Predrag’s example – but what would I read during lunch at my desk?
@”You are a big government loving, commie!”
Unfortunately republicans today represent more totalitarian tendencies than “big government” democrats. Problem with commies wasn’t that they offered universal healthcare accessible to all. Problem with commies was that they were totalitarian. Shoving down the throats their “only” viable ideology. Republicans today do not represent conservatives. They represent extremists.
and what was the point of getting rid of DRM so i can take my purchases and playthem on some other brands device? thats it thats y i have to pay 29 cents more ? i dont get it? id prefer to keep my 29cents and contiue to play my music on my ipod instead of having the option of playing it on some creative or samsung device ahhhhh music labels suck