STREAM OF CONSCIOUSNESS

If you're as big a fan of the Simpsons as I am, you probably own the DVDs. Each DVD has cast and crew commentary on every single episode, where they talk about all the behind-the-scenes gossip and "how'd they think of that" and "what does that reference refer to?" questions are answered. It's loads of fun and very interesting. Through the 7 seasons of DVD commentaries, I feel I know the writers and producers a little bit more now. Except for one guy: John Swartzwelder. John Swartzwelder is a writer for The Simpsons. He has written more episodes than any other writer. He doesn't sit in with the other writers in a group at meetings, he simply writes his own scripts and submits them. All rewrites are done without him. He has done NO commentaries and makes no public appearances. Some of the directors and producers comment that certain jokes are very "Swartzwelder." This usually means they are jokes that take you out of the Simpson universe for a split second. Like, when Bart asks his father for $750 and he simply opens his wallet and hands him a wad of cash. It's totally unrealistic and defies all logic of that particular episode's universe. Anyway, I got to thinking that Mr. John Swartzwelder was ficticious. I suspected he was a made-up writer, whose name was used whenever writers didn't like their work and refused to have their name associated with the episode. This didn't pan out, because the Swartzwelder episodes are some of the best. Then I decided that his name was used when the entire group of writers pitched in equally to the script. Then, on one of the commentaries, they mentioned that John had written a couple books that were available on Amazon. I looked and found them. I found one of them on Ebay, autographed, for $15 and snatched it up. The cover proclaims, "By the wirter of 49 episodes of the Simpsons." I don't know, it just seemed to sound a little fishy. Then, I searched the net to find any picture of him. In several commentaries, a shaggy-looking, overweight man in the background is identified by the crew as a caricature of John himself. I finally was able to track down a photo and here he is:


He looks very much like the cartoon version of him. I'm ready to believe he does exist and eccentric, but does exist.

The book is called "The Time Machine Did It." I'm about halfway through it now, but it is certainly similar in style to some of the Simpsons episodes he is credited to. It's ridiculous and wacky and zany. It involves a private investigator and a time machine. There is absolutely no realism. It's just a bunch of jokes strung together by a crazy thread of a plot. It reminded me VERY strongly of Chris Elliot's book, "The Shroud of the Thwacker." I reviewed that book a few months ago, but I'm not gonna go back and find the link. Find it yourself if you care. Suffice to say I liked it.

Anyway, the way that one book was so similar to the other reminded me of another similarity. I saw a movie that recently came out on DVD. It's a stop-motion film that is kind of a scary movie, but also a parody of scary movies. It takes place in England. It involves a big event at the end that everyone is looking forward to, but may not happen. The bad guy wants to marry a girl for her money, but is chased away at the end. If you said the movie is "Wallace and Gromit and the Curse of the Wererabbit," you're right! However, if you said "Corpse Bride," you're ALSO right! I enjoyed both movies, but they were both very different, despite their similarities.

Which reminds me of how much I hate when movies and music are re-released in different versions without the public being made aware. I mean, when Star Wars is re-released in a new version, it's made public that changes were made. I'm referring to things like E.T. When E.T. came out on DVD, Spielberg decided to make changes to the film, like when Elliot's mom tells him he looks like a terrorist. Spielberg decided that only now in a post-9/11 world do people know how terrible terrorists are. So he redubbed that line to say "Hippie." How telling is it that Steven Spielberg, maverick filmmaker of the 1970s, has decided that "Hippie" is a suitable replacement for "Terrorist?" Also, he digitially replaced the guns in the hands of E.T.s predators with walkie-talkies. So now, instead of chasing him down with the intent of shooting him, they're simply going to talk about him to their superiors? What the Hell?

So, again, the problem isn't that he changed these things (well, it is, but it's not my main point.) The problem is that he didn't advertise this. Likewise, did you ever get a greatest hits album on CD and find the songs mixed differently from the original albums? I bought Nena's "99 Luftballoons" CD a while back for the sole purpose of getting that song. THe rest of the album is crap. The one song was re-mixed to a dance version. Pissed me off. Another time, I got Art of Noise's "In Visible Silence" CD in which the instrumental "Paranoimia" was replaced with a Max Headroom-led version. I went out and digitized my old record for the "correct" version. My ZZ Top CD box set, collecting all 6 original records, contains MANY remixes and alternate songs without any hints. It's all very insulting. But the best example of this has to be Ozzy Osbourne's "Blizzard of Ozz" CD. Apparently the bass player and drummer for this awesome record felt they were getting screwed out of royalties. When they sued Ozzy, Ozzy simply re-recorded their parts with new musicians. So the vocals, keyboard and guitar work is from 1980-whatever, and the drums and bass are vintage 2000-whatever. Also, the offending musicians are airbrushed out of the back-cover photo.

As I said, I find this insulting. The artists figure we can't tell the difference or don't care. Well, I can and I do. Unfortunately, all I can do about it is bother you people with my whiny complaints...which does very little to achieve any sort closure, truth be told.