899 0
899 0

AUSTIN DAZE: So you have been involved with the Chronicle since the get-go. We know the first years of publication are hard. What kept you onboard since the beginning? Do you miss anything about those early years?

MARGARET MOSER: Yeah I really do. Mostly in the sense that we had no idea from issue to issue if it was still going to be around. Every paycheck was a race to the max to see who could get their paycheck cashed before the funds were depleted. We had this really funky little office back then that was above Jack Brown Cleaners near Half Price Books on 16th between Lavaca and Guadalupe. There were a lot of other people that were working in arts and stuff in that area-it was kind of lofts before they were lofts. It was just a really easy going time back then. I remember, it would be 110° in the summer there, you’re in your twenties, and it’s just great to have someplace to come to. But the thing that I really miss about it was at night when the paper would just shut down and those of us that would be left in the building would get together and maybe go over to Dan’s Liquor and get a six pack or something and go up on the roof and sit there and just kind of imagine; just talk about the kinds of stuff you talk about when you’re young and free and don’t have any idea if this thing is going to pay off in twenty-five years or something like that. Those are the kinds of things I miss.

AD: What is the biggest lesson you’ve learned since you started in this business?

MM: Well it sounds kind of mundane, but to really get your work done on time. I’m a real procrastinator and a really, really lazy person. It seems like I do a lot and I do a lot because I’ve learned to channel my persistent adult ADD into ways of working in a really profitable form. In other words, I just learned how to exercise a little bit of self control and get that work done. Now I find these days I work really, really hard so I can be really lazy. Like the faster I can work and get something done the easier it is for me to just kind of go, “Ok, I’m taking the day off. I think I’ll skip the interview with the Austin Daze and go play outside.” No, you know, it’s a matter of discipline.

Some of this really goes in line with having left the office and working out of my home now. I work for the Chronicle full time-I’m a full time employee out of my home-and that is a completely different discipline from going to the office and working. If I thought it was hard going into the office and working because I thought there was a lot of distraction going on and stuff like that, it’s worse at home. I’d rather be playing with my dogs than producing income-making work.

AD: What is your favorite and least favorite part of your job at the Chronicle?

MM: I know the worst part of it. The worst part of it is when I don’t turn in “A” work to my editor. Because I am an “A” student and whenever I turn in anything that is less than an “A” student I really feel like a failure; I really feel like I’ve let someone down. When the truth is that I do good work overall-my “B” work is probably other people’s “A” work-but that’s not good enough. I’m on the team and I’m expected to hit those home runs and if I don’t, I always feel really bad about it. And in some ways I feel like I cheated the subject of the story too. It’s like, “Oh my gosh I haven’t given them my whole 100% on it.” So that’s really a drag; I don’t like feeling like that; I don’t like that part of it.

The best part of my job is the people I work with; that’s got to be it, hands down. I am so fortunate to work in a really unusual environment. Even among alternative newspapers, the Chronicle is an anomaly. We’ve learned a lot of lessons along the way and one of them is how to survive. And if that makes us look mainstream in the way the publication is presented then that’s fine but internally there are an awful lot of kids at play. You can see that in the way the Chronicle office looks-it looks like a college dorm. It feels like one too. For all the times I complained about having a bad desk or rotten chair or an old computer monitor or something like that, I look around at some other offices of some other newspapers where they are clean and perfect and said, “No thanks. Not my kind of place to work.” The Chronicle is really my kind of place to work.

When you have a publisher-I’m talking publisher, not editor-who comes in to disrupt your production for a volleyball game you know you are in the right place.

AD: Tell us about the most standout, coolest story you have done.

MM: The most standout story I’ve done would probably have to be the piece I did on Sterling Morrison in 2000. Sterling Morrison was a member of the Velvet Underground and he left the Velvet Underground mid-tour in ’69, I believe. They were leaving a series of dates they had done in Texas and they were in Houston at the airport and Sterling took a suitcase to the airport and got midway in the airport and said, “I’m not going with you.” And he decided to stay in Texas and came to Austin and settled here and began working in remedial studies at UT and ultimately got his Captain’s License to be a tugboat captain. He turned his back on what was arguably one of the great rock and roll bands of all time for this academic course.

In sort of a related subject I’ve known John Cale for many, many years and been a big fan of the Velvet Underground. In 2000 I got it into my head that I wanted to have John Cale at the music awards-that is what I got into my head. I thought about how I could do something like this and I went, Cale, Morrison, it’s time to fill in the blank out here, and I thought, Alejandro Escovedo. Because Alejandro had done a song for Sterling called “Tugboat.” I thought we could do a tribute to Sterling Morrison and invite John Cale to play with Alejandro and put the Tosca band behind it because John likes that. Yeah.

So I went to my editor Louis about this who is like the silent other half of the music awards. People always talk to me and I get interviewed about it but most of the music awards are me and Louis talking about it and us coming to an agreement on stuff. So I bounced it off Louis and Louis was totally for it. I said, “Ok, I got this set for the music awards so what am I going to do? I’m going to do a piece on Sterling. He’s been dead for awhile-he died of cancer, a really horrible death of cancer too that just took him and debilitated him before it finally killed him.” And I thought I would do an oral history of Sterling after the Velvets. Ok, that’s great. That means I have to talk to three remaining Velvets including Lou Reed, who I am no fan of, and Maureen Tucker who I have always admired. And there was a lot of politics that went on with this. The politics largely had to do with the fact that Sterling had a girlfriend that he met here in town who was his girlfriend when he died, and the family didn’t know about it, the wife didn’t know about it, the lawyers didn’t know about it-apparently few people knew about this. But I knew about it because I knew her and everybody that knew Sterling down here knew Gail and everything. So I had sort of stepped in it a little bit by saying I wanted to talk to Sterling’s wife Martha and they were all like, “Why?” They were all afraid that I would say something to hurt her because she didn’t know anything about it. Lawyers were calling me-I was freaking out about it.

In the end I think it turned out to be a really good, really fair piece because as an oral history this wasn’t me projecting about anything anyone said. These were their words. To me one of the most fascinating things about it ended up being these disparate views of the same person. For example, I had Bill Bennett, who is vice president at Warner Brothers and long time friend of Sterling’s-he played in a band with him here in the 70s-say, “Sterling could be a real bundle of contradictions. He would say one thing and do one thing and then would turn around and do another.” And then I asked Maureen Tucker about this, who had known Sterling since high school, and she says, “No. There was nothing contradictory about Sterling. Sterling was very easy to believe-he’s very up front.” So it was fascinating. And when you do something like that as an oral history you don’t have to draw conclusions. You have this person saying this and this person saying that and there you go-and this is the way people are, I believe. You can know somebody really, really well for a very long period of time and yet somebody else can meet them and find out something different about them. I think that was one of the best stories I’ve ever done and it gets cited a lot. People periodically come back and ask me about the Velvets or John or Sterling. I’m certainly not a Velvet Underground authority but it is nice to be thought of when people think about Sterling and John.

Worst story I ever did: many, many years ago I did a story on Jerry Jeff Walker and he wanted to bring along Billy Joe Shaver and truthfully, I wasn’t really interested in interviewing either of them at the time-I didn’t have the appreciation for Billy Joe that I have now. I certainly didn’t mean to be rude in this but Jerry Jeff brought Billy Joe down, and it had happened not very long before we arranged the interview that he had asked to bring him along so I wasn’t really prepared to ask Billy Joe Shaver questions, which is really stupid because Billy Joe Shaver is one of the great honky tonk heroes. So, I really just had my questions for Jerry Jeff Walker and about 10 minutes into the interview I could see Billy Joe shuffling around in his chair and stuff and finally he said, “Well there doesn’t seem to be much for me to talk about so I’m going to mosey on out.” So he left. Later on I realized that I had offended this really great performer who doesn’t seem to have any memory of this incident for which I’m very grateful for. I ate a very pleasant meal with him backstage at Austin City Limits festival the first or second year and he was very charming and very nice and very gracious and I was very glad he didn’t remember who I was.

AD: Do you ever have to wing it and come up with questions out of nowhere?

MM: Yeah, I do end up winging it a lot and mostly that has to do with somebody not being very forthcoming about something. You can have this great question you know, “How does the dynamic change when you are writing songs for yourself as opposed to songs you are going to be performing with the band?” There’s silence. Well, ok. So there’s a lot of winging involved in it. I think more so when I do phone interviews because phone interviews are so hard-they really are. You need to know what they are doing; you need to know if there is some publicity flack sitting next to them in the hotel room going, “What are they saying? What are they saying?” I forget who it was that I was interviewing recently, and they are waving at me to remind me to talk about the record. What record? So for that reason I really prefer the one-on-one stuff.

AD: In your opinion, why is Austin considered the “Live Music Capital of the World”?

MM: I don’t know. You know Austin is one of these extraordinary places in which people who have artistic visions seem to come together and find like people. It’s almost like Austin is this incredible magnet that just pulls in all these different and disparate people with all kinds of interests in the arts. I think that it’s the fact that it’s so open to the arts in general that allows the music to kind of really rise above it. It’s been interesting watching the whole music scene really grow and almost implode over the last 10 years or so because every few years I think there is a kind of a shedding of the skin. And of course there are new bands coming in all the time, new releases all the time, and things like that; this comes from looking at the music poll every year. But about every 4 or 5 years there seems to be something different coming along and you can kind of feel the vibe out there. It’s a source of both frustration and pride for me that there are so many new bands out there because I think that’s what really feeds that life blood into it. And at the same time there’s a division that has to be maintained in order for it to stay valid the way that it is. And by that I mean there is such a tendency to be disposable in our society in general that once you’ve had your moment in the sun you’re kind of shunted off to the side.

AD: Do you think the increase in the population is going to change the scene?

MM: Yeah, it definitely is because the larger a population you get the more you have a demand for mass music. It certainly sort of dumbs it down a little bit. But again, in Austin, we tend to attract these really uber talented people and they just kind of rise out of the mist and sometimes it takes a really long time to do it. If you look back at what Eliza Gilkensen was doing in the late 70s and early 80s, she herself is the first one to hold up pictures of herself and laugh at how she looked, at what kind of music she was playing and everything like that. And yet, she came from this extraordinarily talented family-the father is a song writer for Disney and had top ten hits of his own. And suddenly in her late 30s, probably more like early 40s, she just bloomed into this songwriter of unparalleled excellence and was immediately able to take her place up there with Lucinda Williams and Emmylou Harris without missing a beat. She has turned out album after album after album of outstanding, really remarkable songwriting. That’s the kind of stuff I really like to see.

I was thinking a lot about this stuff because of the music awards and I was talking to Sam the Sham about doing a set this year with the Texas Tornadoes. He was in town a couple of weeks ago and I was trying to get him a little bit of press and I kind of got shoved off by one of the TV stations and one of the local radio stations-although KUT did an interview with him for March-and I thought you know, I know what the deal is, you guys are going for young and hip right now, but you know what young and hip really wants? The young and hip really want that one shot, that one hit out there, that one thing that is going to tell them that they have made their mark out there and here is a guy who did it. Who did it forty-something years ago and people still play “Wooly Bully” and they still love “Wooly Bully” and that’s a song for the ages. So why is it just as interesting for some little twenty-seven year old with a lot of eyeliner and the electronic equipment? That’s the irony of it.

Fortunately in Austin, there is lots of room for that stuff. You have an aging audience of people who still got their peers and you’ve certainly got an ever-growing audience of younger people who will continue to support the younger audiences. And to me, it’s probably the best of both worlds out there. In a way it’s a probably a little bit like New Orleans which has such a pervasive music scene. There is something for everybody out there. I really like that and I think that is one of the things that makes Austin’s music scene really unique.

AD: Do you think rent increases will make Austin a less popular place for musicians?

MM: I don’t think so because most of them come from places that already have fairly high rents. Even though Austin has gone through the roof, pretty much all the big cities are these days anyway. No matter how high we think it is in Austin right now, if you live in LA or in New York or in Chicago or even Dallas or Houston, you’re still thrilled when you come down here.

AD: It impacts the most those people who have been here a long time.

MM: Yeah. We’re the ones who remember the great rent of $100 houses.

AD: What do you think the city should do for musicians in this town?

MM: I don’t think the government has any business in it. It’s kind of like smoking. I don’t think they have any business offering them cuts for it because why are musicians any more important or less important than other purveyors of the arts? It really points out to the much larger problem of affordable housing in general. It’s the same thing with insurance. This HAAM program that’s going on in Austin: at heart it is a really wonderful, noble thing-my boyfriend is in it so I have a real appreciation for the fact that they are reaching out to help musicians. But the real problem is that musicians aren’t getting paid enough; they’re not getting paid a decent wage for it. Ginger Shults, God bless her, she was the vice president of the musician’s union who died last year. She said, “You know if you really want to do something good for musicians in this town, pay them a decent wage.” And if people think that playing music is just fun, and is not work, you try loading out of the Elephant Room at three o’clock in the morning.

It really points to a much greater problem of how the cost of living is skyrocketing for everyone. Right before this interview we were talking about the business down here on South Congress and how everything is going up here. You look across the street at all those little Mexican businesses and you can kiss them goodbye-they are going to be gone. And where do those people go? We lose part of our culture, we lose part of our history, we lose part of what to me was so unique about Austin-especially South Austin. For awhile this little strip down here on South Congress-once you got past the SoCo stuff was like parts of Lamar that just hadn’t changed in twenty or thirty years.

AD: We lost our office.

MM: It’s too bad because it keeps people who have those dreams from being able to find inexpensive hole-in-the-wall little places and start their businesses-their clothing shops, their art stores, their newspapers, or practice for their band or whatever. So I think it is part of a bigger problem.

AD: So the music show turns twenty-five this year. How did the event start?

MM: We started with a poll. The first year that we had the poll, which was in 1982, we had no show. The second year a show was put together for it and I didn’t run that first show but I took a look at it and I said, “I can run this.” So in the next year, I went to Nick and Louis, because they were talking about doing another awards show, and I said, “Why don’t you let me run it and I will bring the Fabulous Thunderbirds in.” They were pretty hot back in 1983. And they said “Ok” and so I did. I got them to come do the show and they also performed with the Big Boys who were also pretty much at the top of their form back then. So you had hot blues rock and you had hot hard-core punk. I forget who else we had on the bill that year but Stevie flew in from Hawaii where they were having the CBS Convention and he appeared with Double Trouble at the show and they previewed their entire Couldn’t Stand the Weather album unannounced. That was just like, “Oh God that was fabulous. I can do this; I can put together this show.” So I got real cocky about it and the next year we aimed to put together a bill that was still fairly interesting but it wasn’t as high octane as the bill the year before and we flopped terribly. There is a vicious story about Nick and Louis-that Nick kept following Louis around the show that year and saying things like, “If we sell one hundred more tickets we won’t lose the newspaper. If we sell ninety-nine more tickets we won’t lose the newspaper.” Well we didn’t lose the newspaper but we certainly learned the value of having a good headliner at an event. I have ended up over the years directing all but four of the shows.

AD: Do you count all the ballots and do you know if someone has stuffed one? For that matter, what is a stuffed ballot?

MM: A stuffed ballot is any ballot where a second person has made a concerted effort on the part of a person or band-who seek to get more votes in-to make that band win at any cost. The trick is to count them on a case by case basis. If a band or one person has had their hands on the balloting, you can tell. It’s hard to explain but it’s just as easy to tell with written ballots as it is with computer stuff. People would think that the computer would be harder, but the paper trace is still there. It’s not about divining it, although there is a certain amount of intuition involved. For example, if a band that spells their name with an umlaut gets an unusually high number of ballots with that umlaut there, then there may be something going on; most people wouldn’t know what an umlaut is, much less put it on their ballot.

AD: So are you allowed to ask people to vote for you?

MM: Sure. I really encourage campaigning. I think healthy campaigning is great. For example, last year when I was tallying all the ballots I was going, “There is something going on out here that I’m not getting. There’s some sort of influence or something that I’m missing.” And I’m not talking about stuffed ballots; I’m talking about something that was happening. And towards the end of the balloting it was Spoon that kind of clued me in on what was happening: it was MySpace. Because there was just this different way that the ballots were coming in and because I’m so used to looking at them over the years I can tell when there is a deviation in form, and I recognized that this was coming from MySpace. And once I realized this was MySpace I started looking at these new bands that were coming up and they were all connected by MySpace. And I thought, “Oh this is very interesting.” So I set up a MySpace account for myself and one for the music awards, and over the last year I’ve watched very carefully-especially on the music awards site. So every few days I was looking in at the balloting to see who was getting voted on and how they were getting voted on. In other words, here’s a name coming in, do I see their name accruing over a number of weeks, or after we’ve announced the balloting is coming to a close did this band come out of nowhere with no votes previously and come in with 1,000 votes over a 36 hour period? These are things that make me stop and look at it and look at it against the other ones. The ballots have a way of being like water in seeking their own level. No matter how hard you campaign most of the bands will have roughly the same amount of votes out there. So if I’ve got one band that is off the scale and it’s not Bob Schneider or Los Lonely Boys or some band with a national hit or a name you’ve never heard of or can’t place anywhere I might be suspicious. But for the rest of the time I really try to be fairly easy going about it. A lot of people have their say with it and if occasionally stuffed ballots sway a position or something like that, that’s the way it goes. Mostly, I don’t understand why anyone would take pride in winning off of a stuffed ballot-I guess that’s part of it for me. I mean it’s not that big of a deal. It’s not like you are being voted president or prom queen so what is the reward in it?

AD: But it is pretty big business because winning the Austin Music Awards turns into really good publicity.

MM: Yes it does.

AD: Like the Greencards.

MM: Perfect example. I have a little Google alert set up in my thing so that anytime anyone mentions the Austin Music Awards it sends a little alert and The Greencards are an excellent example of a band that really took seriously their win for best new band. And best new band has always been a really interesting category anyway. It’s always been a really hard-fought category. That’s the one people really want to win. They don’t seem to get things like, if you place in the top ten one year you’re not going to be there the next year because you’re not a new band anymore. Most of these categories I tend to be fairly easy going about. If people perceive a band as being instrumental, and as being a contemporary Latin band, and a rock band, and a soul band, and a blue grass band-fine. I’m really not going to fool with that kind of thing. But let me back up a little bit: in the instrumental category I do look really hard at it because if you are a band who has someone being nominated in your lineup for best vocalist, you’re not going to be best instrumental band. I’m not a real hard ass about a lot of those things but that’s one that I am. But I think that over the years Hall of Fame has become one of those categories that people really want to win, because unlike the category wins or the performing band wins, it has to do with what you’ve done in the past year. It wasn’t always that way but it is now. Did you have an album out this year? What did you do this year? Hall of Fame really looks at somebody’s career. For musicians, many of whom have gone into this profession to the embarrassment of their parents, they have something that all of a sudden they can hold up and go, “I did it. I know you used to hate it when I sat around practicing after school, but here it is. Here is my proof that someone thinks enough of me to vote me into the Hall of Fame.” So that has become a really hotly contested category over the last few years.

AD: Tell us about the new home of the Austin Music Awards show.

MM: We are going to be at the Convention Center this year. It will be really interesting to be working with the Convention Center. SXSW has had a really good relationship with them since they have been around. From what I understand, the Convention Center was designed with the knowledge that SXSW was going to be one of its primary clients, and over the years I think SXSW helped shape the Convention Center. It is nice be able to move in on that part of it. I hope that we will be able to feed off of some of that energy.

AD: What do you think about SXSW?

MM: What Chris Gray did in the Chronicle last weekend in his column was really revealing. It helped explain SXSW to a lot of people who don’t understand it, and maybe pissed them off when he basically reiterated that SXSW is an industry event. They do a lot of things for the public-outdoor shows and things like that-but basically this is for the industry. SXSW is the elephant: all the blind men are feeling around, “oh, I know, it’s like the foot.” “Oh no, it’s like the trunk.” It’s really for me. But SXSW is a really fascinating, incredibly well run organization. They really do think a whole lot about everything that goes into it, and make sure that it’s done right. So in getting to work with them as part of the music awards we get the benefit of their expertise. Plus we are five years older than SXSW so it’s a nice combination of know-how and can-do.

AD: I know you are biased but what do you think about what SXSW has become?

MM: A couple of years ago in an interview Roland Swenson said, “You know a lot of people look at SXSW and say ‘ I never imagined that it could become like this.’ I always imagined that it would be like that.” I think that’s a really crucial understanding of SXSW; that was what Roland had in mind all along; that this was the way it was going to go; that this was the way it should be. The fact that it has become like that says a great deal for his efforts in it and how it has become and what it is to the city. I mean, it is an incredible economic boon. It’s hard to imagine Austin having a music scene now that didn’t have SXSW as part of it. Even if it has something like Austin City Limits festival, that would be just like having the annual festival each year. But SXSW is so much more pervasive in what it does. If you’re out on the town during that period of time and you get in a cab and you ask for a receipt the receipt may be printed up by a record company who is trying to promote something for SXSW. To me that’s remarkable. And I think that what they have become in terms of the conference and everything is just amazing. And you have to remember the conference is part of their title; it is part of what they do; it’s not just the showcases, which is what most people think of when they think of SXSW. It’s also those panels that they do and those side things that they do. You know the panels are really an amazing way for getting to talk to your heroes, or listen to your heroes talk, or listen to the dialogue of the industry as it is happening. Like a couple of years ago when Andrew Lou Golden came-he was the manager for the Rolling Stones very early on-I just couldn’t get enough of him. Robyn Hitchcock was sitting a couple of seats down from me wearing this Easter egg furry outfit and everything and I’m like, “Oh, this is Andrew Lou Golden and I’m two seats away from Robyn Hitchcock. How much better can life be?” And that’s the kind of wonderful things that SXSW gives you. There like these little mitzvahs or something. Little gifts right there.

AD: It is a good representation of the industry and how difficult and hard hitting it is. It’s a microcosm of how it works.

MM: Absolutely. And if your band didn’t get accepted in there, welcome to the real world. For the people that work on SXSW they are thinking about this year-round. I might shoot off a note to Andy Flynn on the panels saying, “Here’s an idea for something.” And he’ll say, “Well, we’re not going in that direction this year-maybe next year.” And it’s true. Each year they try to focus on something a little different. And I may get in a huff because I think I have a great idea for a panel, but they have something else they’re doing and it’s part of what makes SXSW unique. Their vision stays very pure. For that, my hat’s off to them. It’s also off for the people who by the same token have gotten their feathers ruffled by SXSW and have said, “I’m going to go off and start my own little thing.” Well good for you-it makes things all the more fun out there. Everybody knows the Yard Dog party is where it’s at. If you can sneak into the Spin party or if you can get one of those record execs to cover your tab at the Four Seasons you’ve got it made. For a lot of people, just getting into the showcase is everything. And getting into the showcase is really tough.

What I get a lot is, “We won x award at the music awards last year and got turned down by SXSW. What’s the deal?” Well I can’t tell you what the deal is. SXSW is doing something very different from what we’re doing. We are acknowledging what the people around town thought at the time. If they thought you were the best punk band or the best none of the above band, they are your constituents, they’re your voters, they spoke. That’s a very different process from SXSW, which is thinking like an industry; not a population. They are thinking in terms of what is going to work for what they want to do in their showcases. Sometimes those are very different things, and “fair” is not really one of the words that enters into it.

AD: I’m getting used to SXSW but one thing I still don’t like about it is missing twenty shows for every one you go to.

MM: We’ve got a solution for that: one band, one song, one club. In the early days, when I used to really hit SXSW showcases all the time we used to have vans to transport us around and we would pick up musicians along the way. We would take them around and we would have the van park at one end of Sixth Street and meet us at the other and we would see one band, one club, one song and move on to the next. We tried to add one drink in there with it but by the sixth club we weren’t doing so well. You won’t get to see the whole set but that is one way of approaching it.

AD: What makes Austin special to you?

MM: The night that John Lennon was shot I was looking in a bookstore on the drag and it was around the corner from Inner Sanctum Records that was on Twenty Fourth Street back then when it was kind of this rundown place. Inner Sanctum Records was like the community center for the music scene whether you were an Armadillo goer or into the blues or jazz or punk rock-everybody went there. They had all these good “in stores” back when “in stores” were really new things and stuff like that. They carried really great import records there. And the guy that owned it and started it, his name was Joe Bryson. He’d be there all the time running his shop and everything and the day after Lennon was shot I was just like really flipped out about things and I left my job over at this miserable bookstore that’s not there anymore and I shuffled around the corner to Inner Sanctum Records and there was nobody else in the store. It’s this little itty bitty store and Joe was in there and he was behind the counter and I walked in and I just stood there for a minute and Joe looked up from behind the counter and he saw me, and he kind of half smiled and walked over to the turn table and put on John Lennon’s rock and roll album. And he played “Stand by Me.” He walked over to me and held out his arms and closed the door and we slow danced to “Stand by Me” in the afternoon sun as it was dropping down on this very cold day. And if I ever think about things that make Austin really special I think about that moment. Not only because it was a tremendous shock to my young life but just how much it meant to be able to go to a store, a business, that was that into things that were important to me and have someone who was the owner of the store be so connected. To me it seemed to be so Austin to be able to talk about that.

We danced until the song was over and he took the needle off the record.

In this article

Join the Conversation