Mar 292011
 

Paperback edition of Josh Wilker's Cardboard Gods

One day last year I was paging through an issue of Entertainment Weekly when I arrived at a spread they run every few issues, containing about 4 pages of gift ideas. It’s the sort of seemingly paid marketing/alluring editorial hybrid feature that typically bugs me, but EW does it so well. It’s rare that I don’t read that section without briefly considering purchasing some fancy electronics item that feeds into my deep sense of nostalgia. The people who put together that section have a remarkable knack for knowing what feeds the emptiness of a middle-aged, middle-class man’s consumer life. How I miss the days of being so excited over the release of a new Elvis Costello record that I was once willing to follow my friend’s idea of breaking into his friend’s parents’ extremely permissive house to listen to our new purchase over a bone, I think to myself. Next thing I know I’m seeing if I can justify dropping $299 on an mp3 player/clock radio that’s in the form of a Close ‘N Play phonograph.

One day a book recommendation caught my eye, an actual, affordable hardcover book. Maybe it was part of one of these marketing-driven spreads or maybe it was part of the book reviews section—after you’ve read EW for a while it’s easy to lose all distinctions between marketing and editorial. Whatever. The book was called Cardboard Gods, by someone named Josh Wilker. The review read, in part:

A baseball-loving loner deciphers his complicated childhood through his old box of trading cards. . . . Wilker’s book is as nostalgically intoxicating as the gum that sweetened his card-collecting youth. [Grade:] A —Entertainment Weekly

There was no need for excruciating self-analysis and consideration of this item’s ability to fill The Void. I put a big lower corner dog ear on that page of the magazine (ie, my “important point to revisit” dog ear rather than the smaller placeholder one at the upper corner of where I left off reading) preparation for my next trip to the “library.” I re-read the review a few more times, each time getting more excited at the prospect of revisiting my own life as a baseball card collector, solitary baseball board-game player (and more importantly, manager and league commissioner), and generally desperate kid who was in need of the power provided by the sport’s over-arching history and frequent periods of anticipation (ie, what non-baseball lovers call “all the boring parts”). A couple of days later, without hesitation, I picked up a copy of Cardboard Gods and proceeded to tear through it, cover to cover, in the course of a weekend.

The book was everything I could have imagined, with color reproductions of a mid-’70s–era baseball card kicking off each chapter’s meditation on what that player’s card meant in the lovingly dysfunctional childhood world of its author. It was so much fun to tap into another kid’s relationship and chew on life’s inner meanings while contemplating baseball cards of the likes of Rudy Meoli, Mike Kekich, and Mike Cosgrove (no, not that one). This wasn’t some thumbsucking attempt by Wilker to explain away his life according to an in-vogue branch of pop psychology or the agenda of a “special interests” group, as is too-often the case these days. This book was nice and messy—and truly personal, the way we were more comfortable being in the Do Your Own Thing 1970s. In the words of fully satisfied moviegoers of my youth, I laughed and I cried.

Soon after reading the book I found Wilker’s Cardboard Gods blog and became a regular visitor there. I wrote him a gushing e-mail and over the course of a few e-mail exchanges learned that he was also a music obsessive. Baseball: check. Music: check. Good egg? Highly likely! A few weeks ago I read that Cardboard Gods was being released in paperback. I wrote Wilker and asked if he’d consent to a Rock Town Hall interview that would attempt to further bridge the relationship between baseball and music and their roles in the predominantly male means of sharing personal information. Good egg that he is, Wilker was all for this chat. If you haven’t done so already, I highly recommend checking out Carboard Gods, both in book and blog form. Batter up!

RTH: The Cardboard Gods blog preceded your book, right? (I was late to the party, learning of your book before being directed to the blog.) Was there a turning point in writing the blog that you realized you actually could organize a full-blown memoir through the prism of your card collection?

Josh Wilker: For most of my adult life I have been on the lookout for things that might develop into a book, a habit that has almost always crushed the life out of whatever it is that might have otherwise developed organically if I just gave it some space to grow. And I started the blog as an anti-book in a way, since I’d just finished several years working on a novel that I wasn’t able to sell and I was a little discouraged and just trying to have some fun. That said, I think I had the feeling almost immediately, like a tug on the end of a line, that there was something going on with the baseball cards, but I consciously tried to put thoughts of a book aside for a while and just have fun and go wherever the cards wanted to go.

RTH: Baseball in the mid- to late-’70s, like the world of your childhood, experienced a latent period of counterculture-rooted self-awareness. As a boy were there certain players who best represented your family’s new world? Were there other players you felt represented the “square” world your family was leaving?

Share
Aug 302010
 

“Punk rock’s for pussies!”

Yesterday a friend and I were discussing the responsibilities big siblings have toward their little siblings when it comes to building a strong rock ‘n roll foundation. Actually my friend initially termed what his big brother did for him in terms of rock ‘n roll guidance as “giving shit.” As a big brother myself I explained to my friend that his big brother was actually looking out for his little brother’s best interests. He was upholding his responsibility to guide him in the ways of rock ‘n roll, just as I had long ago upheld my responsibility to my little brother to steer him away from the aesthetic evils of KISS.

Big brothers and big sisters aren’t always “right” in their advice, but it is helpful nonetheless to get advice from an older sibling. If nothing else it can give younger siblings a firm sense of what music he or she doesn’t like. There’s nothing worse than getting through college and still questioning whether you like Jackson Browne, for instance. Sometimes I wish I had an annoying Jackson Browne-loving older sibling to strengthen my gut feeling that Jackson Browne’s music is not for me.

So how about you? Are you a big sibling? Did you fulfill your responsibility to provide rock ‘n roll guidance to your younger sibling(s)? Did your advice fall on deaf ears, as my heedings against KISS to my little brother did?

Are you a younger sibling? Did your big sibling fulfill his or her duties? Did you give a shit about the “shit” he or she was giving you? Did his or her bad taste strengthen your resolve against the likes of Jackson Browne, Wishbone Ash, or whatever?

If you are a middle child, how did it feel being on each end of this key responsibility?

I look forward to your thoughts.

See also: Letters from the KISS Army.

Share
Mar 092010
 

Word is that Ace Frehley takes umbrage with my characterization of him as the KISS member who most benefited from makeup. His people report that he especially objects to my insinuations that he was once the most cowardly member of the band.

To refute insinuations of Frehley’s timid place within KISS, we have been provided with video record of the band’s appearance on Tom Snyder‘s Tomorrow show, an appearance on which Ace showed the night owls of the world who had the biggest personality in rock’s most supersized band.

Note how Ace distracts from the serious legacy building that Gene Simmons was working to construct. You know Gene’s thinking it’s time to devise a new character/band member.
Continue reading »

Share
Sep 052008
 

Here’s a FRIDAY FLASHBACK! topic from way back that might be worth extending with the input of our newer Townspeople. In the Comments for this post you’ll see that Hrrundivbakshi suggested an offshoot thread that’s also still worth exploring. The KISS Army Reunion referred to, by the way, was a pretty major event in early Rock Town Hall history. It may be worth seeking out that mid-February 2007 series of posts.

This post initially appeared 2/16/07.

Enthusiasm for the KISS Reunion has spilled over to the parking lot here at the Valley Forge Convention Center, so keep those KISS comments coming. Something posted by Townsman hrrundivbakshi, however, caught my eye and warrants a discussion of its own. It has to do with the adolescent rock conspiracy theories that only a teen rock fan’s mind can get its, er, head around for a short time. In case you missed the comment, here it is:

Speaking of bands actually being other bands, I must share one of the funnier/stupider young teen music rumors that me and my friends all believed for a while: that Van Halen were actually KISS without the makeup. It was so obvious, from the backstory (Gene “discovered” Van Halen in a bar in California… yeah, *right*) to the revealing photos on the inner sleeve of VH’s first album. I mean, look at that picture of Michael Anthony scowling with demonic intensity! And you can’t tell me that happy-go-lucky photo of “Alex Van Halen” doesn’t capture the essence of the Cat Man! Now, “Eddie,” he’s, uh, Paul Stanley ’cause of the hair… though it’s funny that Paul didn’t play lead guitar in KISS… hm… I guess — I guess that leaves Ace. Ace is, uh, this David Lee Roth guy, I guess. Funny how he must have a completely secret life/talent set… you know, to be the lead singer and everything. Still, he’s a *rock star*, so, you know, anything is possible. Right?

This fantasy lasted about 3 days before we moved on to the next bizarro adolescent conspiracy theory.

There are rock’s legendary conspiracy theories – Paul being dead, the Elton John/Rod Stewart stomach pumping – but I’m curious to know about the adolescent rock conspiracy theories that you grew up with, even those that only lasted a few days.

Share
Aug 152008
 


It’s hard to believe we’re halfway through the 2008 Summer Olympics and I have not posted my thoughts on Olympic Rock. Some of you may be familiar with this concept: it’s long been my belief that there are certain genres of music that are best judged by the musicians’ ability to hit certain standards, they way gymnasts and divers are scored, for instance. Established forms of Olympic music on which we might agree include rock cover bands as well as their predecessors, Classical music cover bands. In the case of a KISS cover band, for instance, the musicians are judged according to their ability to play the music of KISS as closely to the original studio (and in the case of some KISS tunes, I would presume, live album) versions as possible while also hitting the high, well-defined standards for each KISS member’s Look, gear, stage banter, and chest hair. A first-rate KISS cover band is expected to fit snuggly into the shadows of the masters themselves.


Some genres of rock ‘n roll, I would argue, are “Olympic” in nature. The clearest example of Olympic Rock may be found in Rockabilly. Nothing original is required in Rockabilly; in fact, it might be argued that nothing original is desired. A good Rockabilly band depends on hot licks, hot chicks, hot rods, smokin’ tone, cool threads, long sideburns, and high-stacked pompadours. A great Rockabilly band depends on all those things but done to perfection! And maybe the bassist is really good at riding his standup bass at key points in a performance. Rockabilly judges watch intently, with tattooed arms folded, to ensure that the guitarist is playing the solo in Billy Lee Riley‘s “Trouble Bound” EXACTLY as Roland Janes intended it to be played when he first perfected his licks in some shotgun shack.

Share

Lost Password?

 
twitter facebook youtube