Errors-To: owner-ecto@ns1.rutgers.edu Reply-To: ecto@ns1.rutgers.edu Sender: ecto@ns1.rutgers.edu From: ecto@ns1.rutgers.edu To: ecto-request@ns1.rutgers.edu Bcc: ecto-digest-outbound@ns1.rutgers.edu Subject: ecto #557 ecto, Number 557 Tuesday, 4 May 1993 Today's Topics: *-----------------* Happy Genie Jane Siberry calling all boston ectophiles My unclose encounter with Ingrid and other stories Klaus Warnung! Billboard review Re: Billboard review (none) Karklins Karavan? Re: Happy Philosophers Re: Karklins Karavan? ======================================================================== _Three_ digests coming up. My apologies! Ecto has been busy, and so have I! :) --jessica ======================================================================== Subject: Happy Genie Date: Mon, 03 May 93 19:42:33 EDT From: Angelos Kyrlidis Hi, Bob L. writes: > Hey, do you folks mind being innundated with this? I thought I'd >pass it on to you every two weeks or so. To some of you it might be >redundant (check with the Department of Redundancy Department), or >perhaps overkill. REDUNDANT? No way! Thanks for posting this. There is more enthusiasm in those messages than in the last two weeks of ecto! Hmm, maybe focusing on HR has its positive side too! ;-) Anyway, I really enjoyed Lynn's report on her Ann Arbour Happy Rhodie experience. Especially, the part about the Junior mints :-) I must say that after Meredith revealed the answer to that question of mine, I went out and got me a package, and wasn't too impressed. Now I have to try the Reese's peanut butter cups (I will probably hate them too) :-) Oh, my immersion into the ecto-digest lasted 24 hours... I got stir-crazy and decided that I have the will to reduce my number of posts, so no externally imposed measures are really necessary (and here I am posting again :P). Angelos ___ |--------------(kyrlidis@athena.mit.edu)------------------------ / . \ T | 'Atmospherics after dark, noise and voices from the past \___/ A R | Across the dial from Moscow to Cologne __|_ B A | Interference in the night, thousand miles on either side / _|_\ U S | Stations fading into the unknown...' - Tom Robinson / \ L A |--------------------------------------------------------------- / A | 'My ears have parasites'-hApPy RhOdEs ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 3 May 93 18:49:00 PDT From: dixon@physics.berkeley.edu (David Dixon) Subject: Jane Siberry Hi folks-- Just learned that Jane's new album, "When I Was a Boy" will be released on June 8th. Yaaay! D^2 ======================================================================== From: sae@cmpsci.suffolk.edu (Alan Ezust) Date: Mon, 3 May 1993 22:10:34 EDT Subject: calling all boston ectophiles I'm trying to organize a get-together. Depending on how many people say they can make it for that day, it will probably be around 6pm somewhere in Harvard Square on Thursday the 6th of May!!! If enough people say Thursday is bad but another day is good, we'll try a different day. Soooooo, if you're interested, call me at (617) 354-5252. I only login once a day, and I won't have enuf time to read all ecto-mail this week, so please call instead of e-mail.... -alan -- S. Alan Ezust sae@cmpsci.suffolk.edu McGill University Department of Computer Science Montreal, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 03 May 93 14:30:53 CDT From: Survivor of unforseeable perturbations Subject: My unclose encounter with Ingrid and other stories Yesterday, I was listening to Stuart Rosenberg's program as I waited for the Addison Street bus, the first leg of the journey home from seeing _The Last Days of Chez Nous_. He announced that Ingrid Karklins would be appearing live in the studio. In consideration whereof, I opted to eschew the L/subway for the trip downtown in favor of the slower Broadway bus, where at least I'd be above ground at all times. It was unfortunate, I thought to myself, that I had no blank tape in my recording walkman, and resolved to make mental notes. Sometime after I boarded the connecting bus, she finally came on. She led off with a song in English which I think had the word "responsible" in the lyrics, followed by the wolf song in Latvian. The interview then began. Rosenberg noted that though she was born in Chicago, she grew up Latvian. She replied that she had indeed grown up biculturally, speaking Latvian at home and being steeped in the ethnic cultural institutions. As best I remember what was said next, Rosenberg noted that her songs reflected Latvian culture quite a bit. Ingrid replied that that culture just seemed right, that it had more respect for the natural world. Rosenberg continued that she was generally identified with alternative rock. She replied that the alternative rock scene was the one most willing to accept her music as it is, rather than try to pigeonhole it. She then reminisced about performing in Latvia, where her backup band was that country's principal pop music band, and she found the experience weird in many ways. She segued into a Latvian song about bees, which she explained was really about advice passed on from generation to generation of women. I though t of the common phenomenon in eastern-bloc countries, of disguising social and political messages in writings that seemed, at face value, to have nothing to do with social or political messages, the better to slip them past the thought administrators of the state. Rosenberg then commented that her commitment to Latvian culture contrasted to much of the music world, which seemed to "aspire to rootlessness"--to deal at length with the notion of "being from one place and living in another." Ingrid then opined that music was indeed a means of being in one place and living in another, and did another Latvin song to close the interview. Somehow, we've got to spread the gospel of Happyvangelism to this man. WRT the flick from whence I was going, and Vickie's query on an associated point of language: "chez nous" is French for "Our place." It translates idiomatically, I suppose, into a metaphor for the entropic forces gripping the household, with Bruno Ganz being nominally in a relationship with Lisa Harrow, but inexorably being attracted to Kerry Fox, and so on. I'd meant to say this Friday, but forgot. Suzanne Vega said between numbers: >In the last show I saw, "Some kids asked me about the Queen and the >Soldier. After a couple questions, they said 'Were they the Queen and >the Soldier dating?' Ummmmyeah, sort >of...." Like it or lump it, I can easily visualize right-wing commentators like Paul Harvey and Rush Limbaugh retelling this vignette with gusto once gays achieve full parity in the American war machine :-) :-('. Alan says: >Mitch posts about the ectonomy, stupid... I say: > > Was that *really* a mitch post? It didn't even fill up my screen once! > :-) Like it or lump it, occasionally there are occasions when I have less than usual to say. As fate would have it, I was under the weather last week. This one will probably be closer to average length :-). Or will it? My lack of sleep at this moment is causing entirely new ideas to flow less freely, and I've run out of other people's posts to respond to. To the memory of Pierre Bergavoy and Julio Gallo. Happy Anniversary to the Columbian Exposition. Mitch --------------------------------------------- "I have always hated to go to bed for fear I'll miss something." --Bill Veeck (Not sure whether this is more relevant to Drewcifer's recent additions to our bi thread, or my own deranged sleeping habits :-). ) ======================================================================== Date: 03 May 1993 23:18:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Suspended In Duct Tape Subject: Klaus Warnung! Hi! Methinks this is going to end up ein Klaus. I've basically been off the net for over a week and a half (to all of you whom I owe e-mail, be patient, it's on its way!), and those ecto digests have just been piling up!!! First, to those who have seen Ingrid Karklins in the past week or so, I'm hope you enjoyed it. She is massively cool. I saw 10,000 Maniacs again Saturday night- the sound wasn't as good as in D.C. and the audience was a bunch of clueless college- frosh morons (down, Drewcifer, I don't include you in that blanket assessment ;), but Natalie was a lot more talkative. I was able to really pay attention to Zap Mama this time, and now I'm desperately seeking their CD. What's it called? What's the label? Help! (To give you an indication of what the crowd was like, witness Natalie's first spoken words after taking the stage: "I'd like to thank you all for being so polite and considerate while Zap Mama was performing, and staying nice and quiet while they were singing. It was very nice of you.") The set list was in a different order than last time, and the encore was a full half-hour, which surprised me, since I really wasn't expecting the band to want to play for that bunch any longer than they absolutely had to. They played "Maddox Table"! I was going nuts. Then woj and I looked around, and noticed that NOBODY had a CLUE what song they were playing- I bet about 10 people in the entire auditorium were even aware that the band existed before "Like The Weather". It was amusing, in a sad sort of way. I made sure to be very vocal after the song was over, so they'd know at least one person appreciated that blast from the past. ;) The Maniacs really do some great covers. They could put out a whole album of covers and I'd buy it, and even if they were doing songs I couldn't stand the originals of I'm sure I'd love their way of doing it. They're batting 1.000 with me so far...Kiri, do go see them if you can- you won't regret it. Now, to the backlog! (Fortunately for all of us, I only really feel the need to reply to the earliest digests in my queue, not all of them...) Jeffy inquires re Tori's version of "Ring My Bell": }?!? What's that rendition and where did it come from? (of }course, how can I be any sort of completist when I don't even }have all the official 'n relatively easy to find B-sides yet...) Dunno. ;) Tori's cover of "Ring My Bell" appeared on the Ruby Trax compilation of (I think) 2 CDs, all containing 70's tunes done by 90's artists. From what I hear, the compilation was not by any stretch worth the $35 or so people had to pay for it in the States, but Tori's song is definitely amusing. Nothing like anything else she's done in a while... but it's definitely her. }I believe disappear fear and Tribe only played on the Morning }stage. Hm... they were scheduled for the afternoon. Oh, well. (Hey, are we sure it was even Tribe of _Abort_ fame, and not Tribe 8, a lesbian group from the West Coast? I saw a mention of them in the Advocate recently, and thought there might have been a misleading typo in the program, but I really have no idea.) }(BTW, how can I get in touch with Val? She offered me that }Tribe CD but I never gave her my address!). Her address is in Martin's database, and can also be obtained by fingering her at vnozick@eagle.wesleyan.edu (her account is toast, but the finger info is still there- dunno why). If that fails, I'll drop you e-mail. (Or I could just publicly post it here and you could all come out of the woodwork and send her weird shit via snail-mail, like woj and I did today... ;) }Betty was a SCREAM. They played at Wesleyan last weekend, but as usual, I didn't find out until the day after. :P }If only Ferron had been there to prove that lesbians don't have }to write and sing cliches. Well, maybe Melissa Etheridge is stretching it a bit, but... I agree with you completely on the womyn's music, though. Gag. }Yes, I would have liked more Indigo Girls and ME, but I thought }it was perfect the way each "band" got to do one piece and did }so with a minimum of instrumentation--basically whatever they }could carry out with them. That was way cool- done out of 100% necessity, I'm sure, but nice nonetheless. Mike (mjm) asks: }I mean, the bottom line is, if someone (I'll use the specific }e.g. of someone I know) has a couple of lesbian relationships, }after having a few heterosexual ones, then reverts back to }strict heterosexualism, and plainly states she is *no* longer }attracted to women "in that way," are you saying she's lying }through her genes? Well, yeah, sort of. For her to have had those relationships in the past means that she has the capacity to have them somewhere- just because she has decided to spend the rest of her days happily hetero doesn't erase the existence of her days in lesbian relationships. People don't wake up in the morning and say "Gee, I think I'll be hetero/homo/bisexual now." It's something about themselves they discover as they mature, both physically and emotionally. That's the "nature" part: the "nurture" is how/whether or not they choose to act upon whatever signals their inner beings are sending them. Okay, I can't point you to an article in a scientific journal that backs me up on this, but my personal belief (from personal experience) is that nature kicks nurture's ass when it comes to the issue of an individual's sexual preference, whether that person chooses to act upon it or not. My upbringing basically taught me that I, and a great many of my friends are evil. Why the hell would I consciously waltz down the (metaphorical) path to Hell? I don't do evil, it's not something I'd ever be into. Well, enough of that can of worms... So Lynn, welcome to ecto (more GEnie crosover- run away! ;). How was your day with Happy, hm? Inquiring minds desperately want to know!!! Meredith meth@delphi.com "the music industry sucks wet farts out of dead pigeons." -brni (one of the funniest phrases I've encountered in a long time :) ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 3 May 1993 23:24:40 -0400 (EDT) From: consid Subject: Billboard review I receive the Ectodigest, so in case somebody else has already typed this in, forgive this duplication. Anyway, here's the "Equipoise" review from the 5/1/93 issue of Billboard: HAPPY RHODES Equipoise Enigmatic singer/songwriter aims to broaden her ardent cult following with an album that dabbles in pop/AC gloss without sacrificing too much of the cryptic poetry that has made previous releases unique. Rhodes' wide vocal range soars to Kate Bush- like soprano heights, and then drops to a near-masculine alto, giving atmospheric songs like "Save Our Souls," "Runners" and the single-worthy "He Will Come" an interesting multi- character quality. Whether or not radio station programmers all across America will run out and add Happy to their playlists is another matter, of course ... We can hope, of course! Now, onto another subject: If anyone out there has a sick, twisted sense of humor, pick up Peter Bagge's "Hate" -- the funniest comic book ever, in my opinion. It's the story of Buddy Bradley, a loser in his mid-20s living in Seattle. I just finished rereading all 12 issues, and almost laughed myself silly. -Sue Trowbridge ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 3 May 93 23:54:30 EDT From: WretchAwry Subject: Re: Billboard review > I receive the Ectodigest, so in case somebody else has already > typed this in, forgive this duplication. Anyway, here's the > "Equipoise" review from the 5/1/93 issue of Billboard: > > HAPPY RHODES > Equipoise Thank you for sending this along Sue. I went to the bookstore and all they had was the May 8th issue so I was very pleased to see that someone had gotten it. Great! Vickie ps, thanks Mitch, for the "Chez Nous" meaning. I would have been watching the film with an entirely different point of view if I'd known that in advance. pps, thanks Bob, for the Prodigy posts. I, for one, like seeing them. ppps, welcome to Lynn. LuckyLuckyLucky!!! ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 4 May 93 00:00:22 EDT From: mojzes@monet.rutgers.edu (brni) >Meredith >meth@delphi.com > >"the music industry sucks wet farts out of dead pigeons." -brni >(one of the funniest phrases I've encountered in a long time :) > unfortunately, i can't claim to have originated it. the original was "the president sucks....," from the comic book _Cerebus_. brni ======================================================================== Subject: Karklins Karavan? From: metatron!joe@dogface.austin.tx.us (Joe Zitt) Date: Mon, 03 May 93 22:18:59 CDT WretchAwry writes: > We just got back from Ingrid Karklins. It was *GREAT*!! She played ... > here and her family still lives here. I asked her where she would > be playing next and she said they were heading back to Austin. So nu, follow her down here! "You could be an ocarina salesman going | Metatron Press | Austin, Texas! from door to door..." -- Laurie Anderson | Human Systems Performance Group ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 4 May 93 03:19:07 MET From: brage@sphere.home.id.dth.dk (Jens P. Brage) Subject: Re: Happy Philosophers >>>>"It is not enough to discover how things seem to seem--we must discover >>>> how things really seem." -Niels Bohr Hi! Albert writes: > I think this view gives too much importance to *us* as the observers, as > something that exists separate from reality. We are all part of reality, > and this reality is all that exists. Well, see below, but I beg to differ: I think your view gives too much importance to "us" [:-)]: We are all part of the only existing reality (the "Truth"), but our senses are limited. There is not reason to believe that the "True" universe is limited to whatever we can/bothers to observe. > There's still no reason to make a difference between the "real seeming" and > the "seeming". One day, someone could come up with a new and improved > measuring instrument which would make the lines seem bent again. How do > you know something *really* seems to be? Yes, and in the case we would revise our "scientific" view and say that the lines "really seems" to be bent (and, quite incidentally, is what they "seems to seem" to be). I'd say that, that which "seems to seem" to be is our naive, immediate explanation of the natural phenomena we observe: The falling mist is the cloak of a godess[1], the planets move in perfect circles around the Sun[2] or light propagates through a mechanical ether[3] in which the Earth moves. That which "really seems" to be is then the model of the universe that most adequately and consistently explains our observations at any given time. This model should also be "minimalist" in the sense that it should not introduce needless complexity (such as gods or ethers). This model is of course subject to change, whenever our understanding improves[4]. Positivism in short, I guess. And finally, that which "is" is the real, physical universe, beyond the veils of our senses and instruments. We can never know this universe: There will always some interpretation (instruments) between the real universe and our consciousness (at least if you embrace the premises of (hard) science. A lot of other belief structures would certainly allow direct "communication with nature"). > I'm not really comfortable with this black box view, because it keeps open > a possibility for things to exist in reality which have no consequences in > reality. One could even say that such things don't really *exist* after > all, at least not in *this* reality. They are completely irrelevant to > this reality. Yes, but note that you're now talking about "this reality": This is actually the same as acknowledging that different observers might come to different interpretations (and therefore different realities) of the one "True", physical reality. > I believe that something which is said to exist should have some > consequences in reality. So in principle, everything is observable. Let's take an example: Does the innards of a black hole exist (assuming that black holes exists ;-))? If we ignore certain properties of the stuff within the black hole (such as gravitational effects), it cannot be observed from our viewpoint and does not influence our reality. Does it, in "Truth", cease to exist? The black box model actually saves us from having to explain things which doesn't impact our reality, without committing the sin of anthropocentrism. Or "consciousnesscentrism" [;-)] in general. > Uhm... This sounds interesting, but what is the connection between the > black box model and the possibility of machine intelligence? I think that > *we* are a sufficient proof of the possibility of machine intelligence, if > you use a liberal definition of machine, and you are willing to call us > intelligent. :-) Ah, I was just referring to the fact that not even within all the (hard) sciences (e.g., research in machine intelligence) has the black box model been accepted: A lot of people aren't ready to acknowledge that machines could be intelligent, and tries to find all kinds of excuses for not accepting, e.g., the Turing test (which is basically the black box model applied to artificial intelligence). I admit that I haven't followed the discussions that closely myself, but one of my colleagues has, and it seems that some of the prominent (and quite recent) arguments are something like: "Ok, so we can't tell the difference between a Man [presumed intelligent] and a machine, but that doesn't mean that the machine is intelligent". This is basically a refusal of the basic tenets of the black box model. Personally, I agree with you: If Man can be intelligent, why shouldn't other machines based on the same natural laws have the same potential? To believe otherwise is, IMHO, to embrace mysticism. [Incidentally, it's probably not surprising that we agree on this: I suspect we both have "hard" scientific backgrounds... :-)] Notes: [1] C.J. Cherryh, "Brothers of Earth", p. 108 ;-). This a fictional religion, but this kind of explanation of natural phenomena can be found in the most primitive religions. [2] Kopernikus, around 1500. At least they had figured out that the Earth isn't the center of the universe. [3] Lots of physicist, around the end of last century. This idea was destroyed by the special theory of relativity. [4] E.g., I wouldn't be surprised if we discover that the special theory of relativity needs revision. As my teacher in relativity said of the mass/velocity dependency: "I don't believe in singularities". PS: [Yes, we'd better keep some Ecto relevance! ;-)] Last night I heard a piece by Miranda Sex Garden on the radio, "Break Down the Sky". Is this from "Suspiria"? It sounded pretty good, I was about to turn on the shower when I heard a snippet of the music, and I just went into my living room, sat down on the floor and listened! ;-) PPS: This thread should adequately explain the "strange discussions" bit in my entry in the Ecto File! :-) PPPS: Phew! ;-) Jens P. Brage | No time gives us reasons for why it just goes by brage@sphere.home.id.dth.dk | And no man can stop the seasons /\ | But so many men will try \SphereSoft | - Jefferson Airplane, "Common Market Madrigal" ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 4 May 93 0:33:04 EDT From: WretchAwry Subject: Re: Karklins Karavan? > WretchAwry writes: > > > We just got back from Ingrid Karklins. It was *GREAT*!! She played > ... > > here and her family still lives here. I asked her where she would > > be playing next and she said they were heading back to Austin. > > So nu, follow her down here! Nu too? One of these days maybe. Dare I tell about the only time I've ever been to Austin? Let's see....1974...um...1993...uh...wonder what the statute of limitations....ah....maybe I better not :-) Let's just say...pmeh...and say it backwards. Anyway, I really enjoyed Austin. I still have a wonderful necklace that I bought at a fair in the park (no, don't remember what park, but it was pretty centrally located, if that helps. It was a beautiful day!) Vickie ('jes an old hippie at heart) "Roll me another one, just like the other one" ? ======================================================================== The ecto archives are on hardees.rutgers.edu in ~ftp/pub/hr. There is an INDEX file explaining what is where. Feel free to send me things you'd like to have added. -- jessica (jessica@ns1.rutgers.edu)