In our new in-depth profile of Ariel Pink, the much-mythologized singer-songwriter spoke candidly of his eight-year relationship with fellow L.A. musician Geneva Jacuzzi and the difficult months following its end. But when he sat down to develop the plot for his Travis Peterson-directed clip for Mature Themes highlight "Only In My Dreams," he did so with her in mind as his co-star (she appears first in the opening shot), as the chief love interest in a constellation of women that comprises what he jokingly refers to as a "polygamist fantasy." Watch how the dream comes to life alongside some "Director's Cut"-like commentary from Pink himself:
"I've been kicking the idea around for a while. It's a strange, perverted fantasy I suppose I've been concocting in my mind in some of my more vulnerable moments. But I wanted Geneva to be in it, so I had to run it by her. I thought it would be a real coup if I could get her to appear in the video and play such a huge part in it. It was an opportunity to poke fun at myself and it was an opportunity for her to poke fun at herself and me. I almost proposed to her in reciting the lines at the very end, in front of all of these girls who were sort of interests of mine.
It's a deep-seated fantasy of men to have various women throughout their lives. People don't consider polygamy a reality unless you're Mormon. There's always been this monogamous pact between a man and a women, but there's really not. That's just how what the U.S. defines marriage.
I have a theory: I believe that with the advent of the United States and the lawful definition of marriage, it was defined as between one man and one woman. It was anti-polygamy, in effect saying no man can hoard his women. That was a way to maximize the libido of men, to create productive units by saying, 'if an American man plays their cards right, they can have their very own pussy waiting for them at home.' They wouldn't have to compete with the more powerful. The most beautiful women in society were essentially with the person they were with, by brute force, the person with power. And that person was likely to be a polygamist. In many other societies that was likely to be the case. Rulers, sultans, their societies were not maximizing their productivity potential, in part because they were hoarding women at the top.
I'm just saying the United States reversed that thinking and maximized potential human productivity potential by giving lesser males their opportunity to have a wife. And most women were empowered with finding their own husbands, too, by liberating their sexuality, increasing the yield of society. That's all in threat now. There's divorce. There are pleas for everyone to be married. They don't realize it's really just an apparatus kept in place by the government to exploit the sanctity of a marriage, which is supposed to be about love, first and foremost, between two people. That sanctity is exploited for the purpose of yielding tomorrow's consumers and workers. They encourage you with a tax break because they reward monogamous marriages, because they could potentially yield children. It's why 'life is much easier' with a partnership: business is better, it's a good investment on the government's part. It's not always just about the love between a man and his wife. That's one thing I don't think people consider nowadays. They want to believe in the importance of marriage, boil it down to just a signature on a legal document. But that's exactly what it is. If not, why not just get married without one? Who's going to stop you? Who's to say what it is and what it isn't? Why listen to anyone else? It's just a signature.
I'm just a guy out on a limb. I'm being true to my nature for the first, I feel, getting in touch with my desires. It's a lot easier for me to be an artist and not be interested in sex, as was the case when I was younger, which I compensated for that by saying, 'Oh well, I don't even want women, I'm a sexual being, I'm not a pervert.' I'm just trying to be honest with the person I love. That's what it comes down to.
It's key that Geneva understands my point of view. I was just trying to flirt with her, trying to woo her again. I don't like her having this idea of her thinking of me as a despondent psychopath who is not going to let her go, so heartbroken because he can't move on. I want to be able to piss her off a little bit, and make her think I'm ridiculous. She can know that it's okay. It's not that big a deal. But all that said, it's more symbolic of friendship. Our friendship. And it's a creative collaboration, what we've done this entire time. It doesn't have to be all mine, all or nothing, all the time."