Let's talk about Vice Magazine

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1177 of them)

View Previous Page...

Seems like I missed quite a thread. Can anyone summarise it succinctly?

― Cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 10 April 2003 19:59 (twenty-three years ago)

people talked about Vice Magazine

― oops (Oops), Thursday, 10 April 2003 20:00 (twenty-three years ago)

ha!

― jel -- (jel), Thursday, 10 April 2003 20:06 (twenty-three years ago)

Maybe this is the wrong time to ask, but did anybody see the recent "retard" issue?

― hstencil, Thursday, 10 April 2003 20:14 (twenty-three years ago)

yes

― dyson (dyson), Thursday, 10 April 2003 20:26 (twenty-three years ago)

No. Should I be shocked or bored?

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 10 April 2003 20:26 (twenty-three years ago)

(Or awed?)

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 10 April 2003 20:27 (twenty-three years ago)

Maybe I did overreact a little bit. Good thread, though.

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 10 April 2003 20:30 (twenty-three years ago)

I dunno, I just skimmed through it myself. I rarely read Vice (mostly because of how an editor butchered a friend's piece then claimed to a friend of this friend that he "wrote it"), but when I do it usually produces in my head the same bewildered repulsion/fascination that I get when I read the Wall Street Journal Op-Ed page.

― hstencil, Thursday, 10 April 2003 20:33 (twenty-three years ago)

It's like someone gave Calum a publishing budget!

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 10 April 2003 20:38 (twenty-three years ago)

I read it way more often now, mostly just to see what music they're talking about. Also it's, you know, free. I've seen more things in it that I find funny, but my reaction to the bulk of it hasn't changed: they borrow this tone that can sometimes amuse me, and then they use it to avoid substantive thought way more often than encourage it.

― nabisco (nabisco), Thursday, 10 April 2003 20:43 (twenty-three years ago)

is vice free in the uk? i found a free copy in rough trade ages ago, but i had an idea that they had some hyped up launch or something and now it costs $$$$$$ to buy here.

― ambrose (ambrose), Friday, 11 April 2003 15:06 (twenty-three years ago)

I'm still pissed off at missing this thread grrrrrrrrrr

― DG (D_To_The_G), Friday, 11 April 2003 15:11 (twenty-three years ago)

I just realized that gygax! posted this upthread:

Vice published Russ Waterhouse's interview with Violent Ramp but that's the only thing I've read of theirs.
Seems like a pretty forward-thinking staff to print it all things considered.

This is what I'm talking about with the "an editor butchered a friend's piece then claimed to a friend of this friend that he "wrote it." According to Russ (one of my best friends), they butchered the piece, then a little while later one of Russ's friends went to a party wearing a Wolf Eyes t-shirt (members of Violent Ramp are in Wolf Eyes). Somebody from Vice (I'm not sure who, I don't know the guys) said to him (paraphrasing) "oh they're pretty cool, did you see my [emphasis added] interview with Violent Ramp?" or something to that effect (I've heard this all third-hand from Russ). Seemed to me to be a pretty shitty thing to do, albeit minor.

― hstencil, Friday, 11 April 2003 15:34 (twenty-three years ago)

I'm still pissed off at missing this thread grrrrrrrrrr

I'm annoyed that I can't link to the Vice Throwdown part 2 sequel thread here for some reason. Nabisco never answered my question there. I'm still interested.

― felicity (felicity), Friday, 11 April 2003 15:46 (twenty-three years ago)

there's a sequel???????????????????????????????????????

― DG (D_To_The_G), Friday, 11 April 2003 15:50 (twenty-three years ago)

Vice is good. U are all gay.

― Momus (Momus), Friday, 11 April 2003 15:51 (twenty-three years ago)

Vice sequel thread here.

― Nicole (Nicole), Friday, 11 April 2003 15:53 (twenty-three years ago)

ooer nice save Nicole. Part 2 was when it got really good. Should we lock this one so people get the full effect?

― felicity (felicity), Friday, 11 April 2003 15:59 (twenty-three years ago)

nah, not until I say:

I like Slayer.

― jel -- (jel), Friday, 11 April 2003 16:01 (twenty-three years ago)

They'll never be able to top the aforementioned "Special" issue.

― Aaron W (Aaron W), Friday, 11 April 2003 18:39 (twenty-three years ago)

Hm. Just watched a few moments of Ghost World, and realized that the "Coon Chicken" scenes therein perfectly encapsulate Nabisco's (spot-on) criticism of Momus upthread, namely that per some of his posts here, Momus "sees inherent value in people's doing things society disapproves of." Thora Birch would represent Vice Magazine and Momus would represent the approving art teacher.

― Amateurist (amateurist), Tuesday, 22 April 2003 04:14 (twenty-three years ago)

actually isn't Vice Magazine sort of like the zine put out by the guy who brought the pedophile to meet Enid?

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 22 April 2003 04:22 (twenty-three years ago)

dude it's a metaphor.

― Amateurist (amateurist), Tuesday, 22 April 2003 04:32 (twenty-three years ago)

mine's a simile

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 22 April 2003 04:41 (twenty-three years ago)

actually mine's closer to analogy.

― Amateurist (amateurist), Tuesday, 22 April 2003 04:46 (twenty-three years ago)

two years pass...

But Vice is actually racist wheras T Birch's character is a mere cultural commentator!

― Fushigina Blobby: Blobania no Kiki (ex machina), Monday, 12 September 2005 20:46 (twenty years ago)

vice either has the clumsiest grasp of irony since me as a 14yr old, or is actually rascist.or it's neither of these, and i just dont get it. vice tries to assume an unassailable position, and perhaps succeeds. ultimately i dont really like it cos there's no earnestness.

lack of earnestness might not be much of a problem in itself, but as i see it has no other redeeming features...it's badly written. what happens when they run out of adolescent taboo subjects to cover.they should do a 'msuic' special, or a 'film' special.joke's worn thin

― daavis sztaayenszz, Monday, 12 September 2005 21:47 (twenty years ago)

It took OVER TWO YEARS for someone to say this!

― donut Get Behind Me Carbon Dioxide (donut), Monday, 12 September 2005 21:53 (twenty years ago)

I notice both the Nathan Barley and the Vice threads have been revived, and one observation I'd like to make is that it doesn't make much sense to be pro-Nathan Barley and anti-Vice, because one is parasitical on the other, and they're both satire. One's a set of post-PC injokes, and the other's an in-joke about a set of post-PC injokes. One's meta, and the other's meta-to-the-meta.

― Momus (Momus), Tuesday, 13 September 2005 08:29 (twenty years ago)

(And this thread, of course, is meta-to-the-meta-to-the-meta.)

― Momus (Momus), Tuesday, 13 September 2005 08:30 (twenty years ago)

vice isn't satire, though.

― N_RQ, Tuesday, 13 September 2005 08:31 (twenty years ago)

no but it likes to hide behind the trope when it can

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Tuesday, 13 September 2005 09:08 (twenty years ago)

puny tropes.

― N_RQ, Tuesday, 13 September 2005 09:09 (twenty years ago)

I skimmed a Vice for the first time a few weeks ago, and didn't really like it. Their in-your-face attitude is too obvious. It seems like it's geared towards nihilistic south park republicans or something.

There was a funny thing on one of their DVDs where they showed a video for a Queens of the Stone Age that was some naked Japanese guy jumping around with a picture of the editor's (or someone's) face over his naughty bits. It was brilliant.

I don't think it's up to white people to decide when the word "nigger" is okay to use, btw.

― recovering optimist (Royal Bed Bouncer), Tuesday, 13 September 2005 23:35 (twenty years ago)

peta to the meta

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 00:03 (twenty years ago)

nihilistic south park republicans or something

see

This sounds like the worst thing

for more

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 04:33 (twenty years ago)

Vice is for children, nigga.

― Cool Raoul (Cool Raoul), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 13:56 (twenty years ago)

..it doesn't make much sense to be pro-Nathan Barley and anti-Vice, because one is parasitical on the other, and they're both satire.

Wait, so if I mock someone making racist jokes, I should be pro-racist jokes because the humor I like is based on their idiocy? Momus, you're reaching.

― mike h. (mike h.), Wednesday, 14 September 2005 14:03 (twenty years ago)

The greatest crime in media and marketing is that of trying too hard.

― TOMBOT, Wednesday, 14 September 2005 14:22 (twenty years ago)

eight months pass...

so, do people still hate VICE? (lol thread) Me, i think it can be amusing and offensive in about equal measures, paradox that. not something i seek out.

― timmy tannin (pompous), Saturday, 3 June 2006 07:01 (twenty years ago)

Wait, so if I mock someone making racist jokes, I should be pro-racist jokes because the humor I like is based on their idiocy? Momus, you're reaching.

Racist jokes are not satire, Mike. It seems clear to me that Vice and Nathan Barley inhabit the same world, a world of irony and meta-commentary. Very few people think that Vice is actually racist; they simply feel greater or lesser degrees of discomfort with its racially-themed language. Vice plays on all the same ambiguities as Nathan Barley did, in terms of whether it celebrates or condemns the culture it portrays. Sure, Nathan Barley is one step more meta than Vice -- it contains a portrait of Vice (in the Sugarape Vice issue episode-- but Vice is already meta. (And this thread is more meta than both. Any racists here, or just people using the word "nigga" protected by layers and layers of meta-quotation?)

― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 3 June 2006 12:05 (twenty years ago)

i was at a friend's birthday bbq last weekend and there was a big mess left where the people from vice had been hanging out. everywhere else was surprisingly tidy considering it was a party and all.

― jhoshea (scoopsnoodle), Saturday, 3 June 2006 12:12 (twenty years ago)

Well now, at last we have a valid criticism of those people!

― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 3 June 2006 12:13 (twenty years ago)

I was at someone's house and they had a copy of a special photography issue of Vice (the only copy I have ever seen, I think), and, man, I really thought it was seedy and pretty gross. I must be getting old. In the 80's, It would have been sitting right next to my stack of Answer Me and Film Threat mags and whatever mag was featuring Joel-Peter Witkin that day. Cuz I was all about "transgression", don't you know. (oh, and fakir whatsisface's extreme corset mag. LOL! who was i kidding back then? at least i never actually got a subscription to Yellow Silk or On Our Backs. I'm sure I wanted to.)

― scott seward (scott seward), Saturday, 3 June 2006 12:16 (twenty years ago)

you think those three-fingered nerds from Survival Research Labs watch Robot Wars on t.v. and weep?

― scott seward (scott seward), Saturday, 3 June 2006 12:20 (twenty years ago)

I AM BRINGING REAL LIFE EXAMPLES TO THE PAGES OF ILX!

― jhoshea (scoopsnoodle), Saturday, 3 June 2006 12:20 (twenty years ago)

For the record, I don't write for Vice any more. But I consider editor Jesse Pearson a friend. I enjoy hanging out with him. He's just a smart, cat-loving, art-damaged media-head nerd... like me.

― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 3 June 2006 12:23 (twenty years ago)

It's very interesting to go back and reread this thread!

― Dan (If I Could Turn Back Time) Perry (Dan Perry), Saturday, 3 June 2006 12:26 (twenty years ago)

"One thing we noticed is that people don’t want to read about music, really. Nor should they."

this is kinda true, actually. reading about music is like reading about architecture. boring for the most part unless there are nice pictures to look at.

― scott seward (scott seward), Saturday, 3 June 2006 12:32 (twenty years ago)

Skipping 1077 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.