From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@ecto.org To: fegmaniax-digest@ecto.org Reply-To: fegmaniax@ecto.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@ecto.org Subject: Feg Digest V5 #183 Fegmaniax Digest Volume 5 Number 183 Thursday July 31 1997 To post, send mail to fegmaniax@ecto.org To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@ecto.org with the words "unsubscribe fegmaniax-digest" in the message body. Send comments, etc. to the listowner at owner-fegmaniax@ecto.org FegMANIAX! Web Page: http://remus.rutgers.edu/~woj/fegmaniax/index.html Archives are available at ftp://www.ecto.org/pub/lists/fegmaniax/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Today's Topics: ------- ------- Re: Oops Re: twizzling Re: John Lennon (.5% RH) Something apart/lennon/misc Re: John Lennon (.5% RH) Re: Favourite books Re: John Lennon (.5% RH) Re: John Lennon (.5% RH) Re: John Lennon Re: John Lennon (.5% RH) Re: John Lennon Indian Interbabe Humor (0.0000001% Robyn content) Funky banana Where is he now? The 13th Cone ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 19:54:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Bayard Subject: Re: Oops > I love the way this list operates. I hate that most people don't take out > the original poster's address when replying to the group (so that the > originator gets two copies, one from the list and one from the poster), > but I love being able to reply to either without bothering to look for an > email address and retyping it. i suppose the "reply-to:" field is not universal enough to be supported by majordomo? pity. one would almost think it could add a reply-to option to each piece of mail it handles (if mail programs recognized this function.) at least woj doesn't have to do everything by hand anymore! =b ------------------------------ From: dsaunder@islandNet.com (Daniel Saunders) Subject: Re: twizzling Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 19:25:25 -0800 > john burgan's fave flicks: 1. Sunless, 2. Mirror, 3. The Conformist, 4. > Brazil, 5. Come and See, 6. Vertigo, 7. Don't Look Now, 8. The Shining, > 9. Alphaville, 10. Sinal Tap ^^^^^^^^^ This I've got to see. -- Daniel Saunders Have a day. :-| ------------------------------ From: Terrence M Marks Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 22:50:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: John Lennon (.5% RH) >just wondering: If John Lennon were still alive, would he be >making important music? I doubt it. I can't think of any band from the 60s that has made important music in since 85 or so. (or any member of such..) I mean, The Kinks, The beach Boys, Paul, Bob Dylan, Donovan, The Stones, The Monkees....all of their latest work is just...not that important. I don't see Lennon as being much difrerent. Terrence Marks Remember-Jesus is your friend. normal@grove.ufl.edu ------------------------------ From: Terrence M Marks Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 23:06:30 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Something apart/lennon/misc Nah... best Lennon song in 25 years (or at least honorable mention) is probably Back in '64, by The Rutles. (Kind of...if Lennon wrote "When I'm '64", instead of McCartney.) I think that Archeology is a better album than any of the Anthology stuff. And...anyone on here MUD? (Just asking because I'm soon to be opening a guild on Nannymud [mud.lysator.liu.se 2000]. The Kittens Guild. The guilds there are Knights, Monks, Vampires, Mages, Adventurers and Kittens. I'm just saying this because I'm kinda proud. And no, Kittens has nothing to do with baby cats. It's just a name.) And...is Apples and Oranges one of XTC's better albums? I got it and apart from "One of the Millions", I'm not too fond of it... Terrence Marks Remember-Jesus is your friend. normal@grove.ufl.edu ------------------------------ From: tanter@econs.umass.edu Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 23:50:50 -0400 Subject: Re: John Lennon (.5% RH) On Wed, 30 Jul 1997, Terrence M Marks wrote: > >just wondering: If John Lennon were still alive, would he be > >making important music? what does this mean? what makes music "important?" isn't it all subjective? > > I mean, The Kinks, The beach Boys, Paul, Bob Dylan, Donovan, The Stones, > The Monkees....all of their latest work is just...not that important in what sense? not important in that it's not introducing new sounds or new instruments or new concepts? i can't think of a song i've heard in the last 5 years that i thought really did that. a lot of the music that is being tauted today sounds to me like rehashed old stuff (with a few exceptions). song topics rarely cover more than drugs/sex/relationships, it's unusual to find a new instrument being used although some electronic stuff is fun, and there's little originality in lyrics. oasis draws a huge crowd but i personally think they're beatles wannabees and are drawing the same crowd 1 1/4 generations later. i've heard people say jewel is important but her voice grates on my nerves and i can't bear to listen to it. robyn is far from "popular" and yet he's one of the most original guys around simply because he's so weird. michael penn also deals with things from a fairly original angle. whe john lennon was murdered, the music he was working on wasn't "important" in the great scheme of all music, but it was important in the sense that he was a changed man and this was his first published work as a changed man. the rolling stones haven't changed a whit since the 60s and they're probably the closest model. neither have aerosmith, dylan or diana ross. a lot of the songs i hear today sound very similar to each other, hence i think we need an infusion of something really different. maybe some afropop or something needs to enter mainstream music. but unless there's some huge change, nothing being produced today will be seen as "important" after we're all dead. whether or not lennon would be making "important music at age 55" is a moot debate since he had already made important music at 25. the fact is that he did make music that effected the entire popular music industry, just as buddy holly had done, and without that today's music would be a lot different, probably. i can't think of a single artist from 10 or even 5 years ago whose music has had an impact even slightly similar to the impact john lennon made 25 years ago. that impact is still effecting contemporary music and may well continue to do so for another 25 years..... marcy ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 16:40:21 +1200 (NZST) From: james.dignan@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (James Dignan) Subject: Re: Favourite books >i don't know what robyn's favorite movies are, but here are his favorite >books... Amazed to see no John Sladek in there. Sladek's style, especally his short stories (like those in the collection "Keep the Giraffe Birning") are very very Robynesque. James James Dignan___________________________________ You talk to me Deptmt of Psychology, Otago University As if from a distance ya zhivu v' 50 Norfolk Street And I reply. . . . . . . . . . Dunedin, New Zealand with impressions chosen from another time steam megaphone (03) 455-7807 (Brian Eno - "By this River") ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 23:07:08 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: John Lennon (.5% RH) Terrence wrote: >>just wondering: If John Lennon were still alive, would he be >>making important music? > >I doubt it. I can't think of any band from the 60s that has made >important music in since 85 or so. (or any member of such..) > >I mean, The Kinks, The beach Boys, Paul, Bob Dylan, Donovan, The Stones, >The Monkees....all of their latest work is just...not that important. No argument with the above examples. However, Neil Young, David Bowie, Eric Clapton, Richard Thompson, King Crimson, Paul Simon, Lou Reed, Iggy Pop and Peter Gabriel are doing pretty good jobs of staying relevant, and they all debuted during the '60s. And Frank Zappa was still releasing strong, forward-looking music at the time of his death.... >I think that >Archeology is a better album than any of the Anthology stuff. Oof. Boy, I couldn't disagree more with that view. Archaeology sounded like something you'd hear on Sesame Street to me...pure kiddie stuff. >And...is Apples and Oranges one of XTC's better albums? Ummm...well no, but it is a pretty cool Syd Barrett song. ;) I do like Oranges & Lemons a lot, though the sound is more slick than I'd like. Eb, still carrying a strong hope that Brian Wilson and Bob Dylan have another "important" record or two in them ------------------------------ From: Terrence M Marks Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 05:20:42 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: John Lennon (.5% RH) > >And...is Apples and Oranges one of XTC's better albums? > > Ummm...well no, but it is a pretty cool Syd Barrett song. ;) I do like > Oranges & Lemons a lot, though the sound is more slick than I'd like. Bah. Fruit is fruit. Oranges and Lemons strikes me as a bit too political (is political the right word?)...is XTC always like that... and...so, what's XTC's best album? > > Eb, still carrying a strong hope that Brian Wilson and Bob Dylan have > another "important" record or two in them The unreleased Sweet Insanity, while not really groundbreaking, was still pretty catchy. Kinda late-80s VH1 pop keyboard sounds, but still good. Terrence Marks Remember-Jesus is your friend. normal@grove.ufl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 10:42:37 +0100 (BST) From: M R Godwin Subject: Re: John Lennon On Wed, 30 Jul 1997, Eb wrote: > And while "Somewhere Apart" is a great thumpin' tune, I don't think it's > anywhere near on the same songwriting level as (for instance) "Woman," > "Beautiful Boy," "Starting Over," "Watching the Wheels" and "I'm Losing > You." Robyn would probably agree. Starting Over? You must be kidding! It's a straight rip-off of 'Don't Worry Baby' by the Beach Boys. 'Watching the Wheels' is the last decent tune he wrote. - hssmrg PS Haven't heard the other two you mention. I thought 'I'm losing you' was by the Temptations, but maybe this is another song with the same title.. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 02:50:20 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: John Lennon (.5% RH) Terrence wrote: >Bah. Fruit is fruit. Oranges and Lemons strikes me as a bit too >political (is political the right word?)...is XTC always like that... >and...so, what's XTC's best album? Some XTC albums are strongly political, some aren't. It's my experience that XTC fans fall into two camps: those who like English Settlement the best, and those who like Skylarking the best. Me, I'm strongly in the Skylarking camp, and I suspect you would be also, given your other musical tastes. For further input, maybe you should ask King XTC, Steve Schiavo, who I believe is a subscriber to this list. >> Eb, still carrying a strong hope that Brian Wilson and Bob Dylan have >> another "important" record or two in them > >The unreleased Sweet Insanity, while not really groundbreaking, was still >pretty catchy. Kinda late-80s VH1 pop keyboard sounds, but still good. You know, I heard so much hype about that album and when I finally heard it, I wasn't too impressed. Like you implied, the keyboard sounds are tacky, and the lyrics are even worse than those on his lyrically-impaired solo debut. I think I enjoyed Orange Crate Art more, even though that wasn't a true BW album. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 04:30:54 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: John Lennon >On Wed, 30 Jul 1997, Eb wrote: >> And while "Somewhere Apart" is a great thumpin' tune, I don't think it's >> anywhere near on the same songwriting level as (for instance) "Woman," >> "Beautiful Boy," "Starting Over," "Watching the Wheels" and "I'm Losing >> You." Robyn would probably agree. > >Starting Over? You must be kidding! It's a straight rip-off of 'Don't >Worry Baby' by the Beach Boys. I can hear a couple of similarities, but calling it a "straight ripoff" is a heavy exaggeration. For instance, the melodic flow of "Starting Over" is strongly based in augmented chords, while "Don't Worry Baby" contains no augmented chords at all. And after all, "Don't Worry Baby" is a much STRAIGHTER ripoff of the Ronettes' "Be My Baby".... Eb ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 08:55:00 -0400 From: Natalie Jacobs Subject: Indian Interbabe Humor (0.0000001% Robyn content) >>I heard this great Indian classical/techno crossover thing. Brilliant! But I >>have no idea who it was. A friend of mine played me something like that when I was in England. They were called Black Star Liner or something like that. . . Black something, anyway. It was indeed brilliant. >Anyone in the mood to write (off-list please) a long drawn-out >dissertation on the merits and joys of listening to the Loud Family >(history, things to listen for, points of reference, etc)? I purchased >"Interbabe Concern" this weekend and, fully realizing I've only had the >chance to listen to it 2 or 3 times so far, I'm having some trouble >getting into it. I dunno - I've heard many dissertations on the myriad joys of "Interbabe Concern" (mainly on this list) and have yet to be convinced that it has any musical merit whatsoever. I couldn't even listen to it all the way through - after a handful of attempts, I traded it in for "Taking Tiger Mountain (by Strategy)." Ahh, that's better. > first off, REM still shows its sense of humor. since _document_ >each album gives us a taste: pop song 89, get up, stand, radio song, >shiney happy people, near wild heaven, man on the moon, drive, the >sidewinder sleeps tonight, crush with eyeliner, star 69, tongue, binky the >doormat, wake up bomb, departure. I guess I can't really argue that a band who names a song "Binky the Doormat" has lost their sense of humor, but of the songs listed above that I've actually heard, none even comes close to a drunken Stipe slurring his way through "King of the Road" while Peter Buck yells the chord changes in the background. If they have kept their sense of humor, it's in a very qualified sense. They're not as pompous as a lot of popular bands, but I still think Michael Stipe, at least, is a pretty humorless guy. > second, U2 have got to be the funnyist superstars on the >planet. they definitely still have very serious themes to the individual >songs, but they don't take themselves very seriously. Again, though, it's muted or qualified. Their humor, such as it is, always seems to have a label reading "KNOWING IRONY" lest we should think they're wacky funsters with nothing Meaningful to Say. OK, they dress up as the Village People, but I nevertheless get the impression they're trying to make a Statement About Commercialism (or something) through such a seemingly amusing act. But maybe that's just me. >many rock stars >take themselves way too seriously. it's the image of rock and roll. But does it have to be? Break the humorless hegemony! Robyn, you are our standard-bearer! Hooray! excelsior, n. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 13:39:29 +0100 (BST) From: Gary Sedgwick Subject: Funky banana I'm very busy still, so this is gonna be a brief review / set list of last night's 12 Bar gig. I can't remember if anyone's said anything about the Dear Janes... I personally didn't think they were up to much. Some songs were all right, but lyrics like 'I think you're an areshole I / love you even after I / think you're an arsehole ...' are just too Alanis Morisette for my liking. (Flame off list please - if you dare admit to being an Alanis fan :)) Robyn's set: Daisy Bomb (with Dear Janes on backing harmonies) Gene Hackman Cheese Alarm Wind Cries Mary (with harmonica - Bob Dylan style!) Clean Steve (now joined by Tim) I Saw Nick Drake Jewels For Sophia (I love this one!) Viva Sea-Tac (and this one! First time I've heard it, but it's a winner) (now joined by Morris) Each Of Her Silver Wands (Morris on guitar) Astronomy Domine (Morris on bongos and HIGH backing vox! Bongos from now on...) Queen Of Eyes Queen Elvis Alright, Yeah encore: Beautiful Queen (with Dear Janes bass player) and finally, a comedy cover of Avalon, including some Pythonesque dancing from Robyn, and Kate Bush backing vocals from the Dear Janes. Robyn apologised before the song that those of us downstairs wouldn't be able to see what he was doing properly, to which someone shouted 'you're just legs to us, Robyn', and Robyn replied with 'that's the nicest thing anyone's said to me... that's a contender for my headstone, thanks!' All in all, a much better atmosphere than last week (and more people I reckon). And it was nice to hear some more of the newer songs. And yes, I have it on tape, except for Avalon (bit of a shame, but then you really had to be there anyway!). Gary ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 11:25:35 -0700 From: mrrunion@tng.net (Runion, Michael R.) Subject: Where is he now? Hey all, I found this review whilst doing a little Loud Family research. The "where is he now?" line makes me wanna go "Urrgh!" St. Louis Riverfront Times, July 3, 1996: Play it Loud The Loud Family Interbabe Concern By Jordan Oakes Scott Miller of the Loud Family is the most underrated pop genius in music history. Artists like Paul Westerberg, Robyn Hitchcock (where is he now?), Marshall Crenshaw, and Guided by Voices' Robert Pollard have won a modicum of cult worship. Miller keeps plowing away... Mike get-back-to-work! Runion ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 14:47:04 -0700 From: mrrunion@tng.net (Runion, Michael R.) Subject: The 13th Cone Yep. Finally, a new cone. It's here. Brought to you by Mary up in Ann Arbor. It's called Wax Fish. Come see: http://www.spacecoast.net/users/mrrunion/cones.htm Mike Runion ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The End of this Fegmaniax Digest. *sob* .