From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V7 #76 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Friday, February 27 1998 Volume 07 : Number 076 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Disparagements. . . more arguing w/ Eb [MARKEEFE ] Richard Thompson's Hamlet (NO RH!) [jlaw@mem.unibe.ch (Jeff Lawrence)] Versatility [Gary Sedgwick ] Re: don't start [dlang ] Fwd: Osborne, Tull, Country, Severed Heads ["Gene Hopstetter, Jr." ] Oi, mush... [Gary Sedgwick ] Re:Moss Elixir ["BENJAMIN.BRETTENNY" ] Re: Catching up with a thousand posts [Ross Overbury ] alt.soy.bomb [firstcat@lsli.com] unpleasant stain [Russ Reynolds ] Re: Soy Bomb [Jason Thornton ] Re: bands v. solo careers [Aaron Mandel ] floral markers RH [Marshall Joseph Armintor ] Re: bands v. solo careers [Dede Davis ] Mystery CD (Warning: 90% Robyn!) [Nick Winkworth ] re: John Brion [griffith ] Re: bands v. solo careers [Aaron Mandel ] Re: bands v. solo careers [nicastr@idt.net (Ben)] Re: Disparagements. . . more arguing w/ Eb [MARKEEFE ] Re: don't start [Russ Reynolds ] Re: Soy Bomb [Terrence M Marks ] Re: In sorrow not in anger [Terrence M Marks ] Re: the eb issue [Terrence M Marks ] [0%RH] more Grammy talk (was: Soy Bomb) [hal brandt ] Re: Soy Bomb [hal brandt ] Re: Neutral Black Milk Cat Saturday Hotel [John Barrington Jones ] Re: Mystery CD/Critix [Bayard ] Re: In sorrow not in anger [MARKEEFE ] Re: instrumentatino [kenster@MIT.EDU (Ken Ostrander)] Re: In sorrow not in anger [Tom Clark ] Re: the eb issue [Ner ] Re: Versatility ["Maxey L. Mullins" ] Don't start, ya feckin' guppie! [The Great Quail ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 03:23:38 EST From: MARKEEFE Subject: Re: Disparagements. . . more arguing w/ Eb In a message dated 2/26/98 2:20:08 PM, you wrote: <> Well, it's all well and fine that you like RH better than 670 other artists that you "like" (so, does this mean that you wouldn't change the station if this artist/band came on the radio, or does it mean that you're content -- or would be content -- to own a "best of" of theirs, or does it mean that you own several albums of theirs and would gleefully own a T-shirt and would definitely see them if they came through town -- assuming they're still together and/or living?). But, no matter how many other artists you like *less* than Robyn, you still like 29 or so *more* than RH. Now, I'm sure you could me *more* disparaging of other bands/artists, but I maintain that you're doing something akin to preaching against the choir (whatever the hell that means!) when you're disparaging of RH (even though you could be more critical, you were, nonetheless, disparaging) on the RH list: This makes you something of a detractor (I just looked it up, and it's not as strong a word as it sounds; just means something like "one who speaks ill of"). Now, Eb, why not just say that RH is your 30th favorite artist and leave it at that? We'll just assume that there are reasons why this is true, if you'll just assume that, as far as a lot of the people on this list are concerned (and they have been heard from!), you're -wrong- when it comes to RH. Now, of course, in the real world, you're not wrong; you're merely making informed (yet largely subjective) observations based on your expriences and tastes. In this world, however, you're a detractor and have cast disparagements and are wrong indeed. So, don't try to fool me (or others. . . or yourself!) into thinking that #30 out of 700 is a sufficiently good ranking; it's okay at best; it's leftovers; it's Dominoe's pizza and the WB; it's an old faded-out ribbon won at some cheesey dirt lot county fair 17 years ago, and you can't even remember why. In the Olympics, it means you showed up, fell down, and are going home with zilch. But. . . hey, who the heck are #'s 1-29, anyway? This may be your chance to get off the hook, if you can really wow us with some good stuff here. . . - -----Michael K., who's been looking for a new hobby and has (sadly) become addicted to arguing favorite artist rankings with Eb. Where *did* those watercolors go, anyway? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 11:05:07 +0100 From: jlaw@mem.unibe.ch (Jeff Lawrence) Subject: Richard Thompson's Hamlet (NO RH!) **>Somebody mentioned a while ago about hearing Richard Thompson perform his **>3-minute summary of Hamlet. Does anybody know if he in fact wrote it? Is **>it on CD? The time I heard it was on the radio performed by a female **>folk-singer (and I don't think it was Linda). He did not write this song - it was a song from the 1940's or so - think its by Burton Lane or someone like that - but don't quote me on that :-) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 11:11:19 -0000 From: Gary Sedgwick Subject: Versatility >>Oh, and someone said something about the acoustic guitar not being >>versatile. What are you talking about? You obviously know nothing >>about the guitar. I've been playing for about 8 years. > >I didn't say that, of course (or did I?) - I've been playing 20 years and I >agree, but you can't say that an acoustic guitar by itself is more versatile >than an 8-piece band with separate horn and string sections. (And, >presumably, a good arranger.) The most versatile instrument is the voice. Oh, and the harmonica comes in a close second! Gary, about to play some Bob Dylan. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 21:47:42 +2910 From: dlang Subject: Re: don't start leave it out. If you start wittering on like this you'll sound like a >>total >>wazzock. The whole list will go pearshaped and everyone will be sick as >>a >>parrot. And if that happens you'll get a right bollocking. >> >>A right bollocking, cor strike a light , you know how to make a bloke >>feel small, enough to make a bloke feel like he's fallen arse over tit!!. >> dave > >do me a favour. You'd feel a proper charlie, like some git thinking he was >lord muck had given you a quick one-two smack bang on your conk. (I said >CONK. Gawd'elpus. Conk. Y'know - schnoz? hooter?) Ah knows what a conk is you daft appath, doest thay think I were born yesterday ,you great lummox. You're like a big girls blouse ,or sodding worse, a smarmy lounge lizard, bloody ell,all teeth and trousers.Mind you don't take it personal like, I know you can't help it being at the arse end of the world an all. Bloody colonials , don't know any better , not like us folk, remember, we fought a war to help buggers like you keep your bums clean and you reward us by shagging sheep ! Ungrateful bastards ! Dave "Ramsbottom " Lang ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 09:27:08 -0500 From: "Gene Hopstetter, Jr." Subject: Fwd: Osborne, Tull, Country, Severed Heads James said: >um, yeah... me too! Trouble with Tull songs, though, is I can only really >imagine Ian Anderson singing them. Although Robyn would do a good version >of "Dun Ringhill" IMHO. I think Robyn could do a good job with the "Heavy Horses" type of Jethro Tull. I'd love to see Robyn go head-to-head with Peter Hammill, tho. >BTW - Severed Heads are an Australian dacey-industrial band. Their CD >"Cuisine (with Piscatorial)" ain't too bad, either. Yum, Severed Heads. Nice bloke, that Tom Ellard. "Quest for Ooom-Pa-Pa" is a riot. Come to think of it, Robyn would do a fabulous job with Severed Head's "Dressed In Air", dontcha think? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 09:41:25 -0500 From: Natalie Jacobs Subject: Catching up with a thousand posts All of Robyn's stuff sounds the same, eh? Well, he sure as hell ain't Noel Gallagher... except that they only have one pair of eyebrows between them. Sure, a lot of Robyn's stuff sounds "samey," but it doesn't bug me all that much. He manages to maintain enough diversity to hold my interest, and if he doesn't experiment very much with vocals or song structure, nevertheless he does what he does very well and that's enough for me. On the other hand, like Eb, I'm not all that curious to hear his new material because I pretty much know that it's not going to be much different than his earlier stuff, so I haven't been scrambling to get some of those tapes that are circulating. I'll certainly buy his new album when it comes out, and I'll probably like it, but I'm not expecting any new thrills. Robyn's "sameiness" does prevent him from ascending to the very tippy-top of my favorites list - he may be part of my musical Divine Trinity but he still ranks far below Costello and Partridge. (Though if the latter favors us with another album full of twee Beach Boy-isms and cutesy cleverness, he may fall a few notches as well...) But it is still always a pleasure for me to enter into the fabulous and sinister Robynverse, replete with its scaly and slimey flora and fauna, and if the incidental music tends towards jangly folky pop, and the voice of its bard is a bit of a monotone, nevertheless the glittering treasures of that country are abundant and wonderful to behold. (In other words, I like Robyn. :) By the way, I find nothing wrong with Eb being a "detractor." One of the things I like about this list is that people aren't afraid to criticize Robyn if they have a mind to - in other words, there's a refreshing lack of grovelling hero-worship, and Eb is a prime example of that tendency. Of course, he does have his little deviations - Juliana Hatfield's solo stuff is NOT superior to the Blake Babies, dammit! - but nobody's perfect, right? :) n., still vaguely ennervated from listening to "Autumn is Your Last Chance" on the way to work p.s. Ani DiFranco = Alanis Morrissette with credibility. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 15:05:44 -0000 From: Gary Sedgwick Subject: Oi, mush... >>do me a favour. You'd feel a proper charlie, like some git thinking he was >>lord muck had given you a quick one-two smack bang on your conk. (I said >>CONK. Gawd'elpus. Conk. Y'know - schnoz? hooter?) > >I think this is my favorite active thread right now. ;) > >Eb Knock it off, guv, me sides are splitting. Don't take no grief off no-one, Eb me old mucker, me 'n' the boys'll sort 'em out. Tell 'em they're messing with the Saaarf London bruvvers, mate. Flipping 'eck, they don't arf give it some lip - rabbit, rabbit, rabbit! More bloody front than Brighton!!! You should tell 'em to leave it out, you know, say to 'em, "chill out man". Well, I'm off down the chippy for some grub, and then down the pub to get completely rat-arsed. Hair of the dog, you know... I woke up this morning completely tit-faced!! I'd had a skin-full - it was a right bender!! Had a bit of a scrape with the Old Bill as well, didn't I? Bloody pigs!! But that's nothing compared to the missus - the old ball and chain didn't like it one bit. And she thinks I've blown loads of dosh when it was only a bob or two! I'm in the dog-house tonight!! Laters, Gaz, who was tempted to use his favourite but not-for-family-viewing expressions for 'drunk'. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 15:14:21 +0000 (GMT) From: "BENJAMIN.BRETTENNY" Subject: Re:Moss Elixir I also happen to think that Moss Elixir is a great LP, definetly the best for a long while and one of my favourites, all the songs have a very concise, finished feel about them. On an entirely different note, as you all know many of Hitchcocks works use his own paintings on the cover and inside or on the back (the picture on the back of the 'Underwater Moonlight' cd being a prime example), is anyone aware whether he has ever received any recognition in art circles for his paintings and drawings. BEN ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 98 10:14:58 EST From: Ross Overbury Subject: Re: Catching up with a thousand posts > Robyn's "sameiness" does prevent him from ascending to the very tippy-top > of my favorites list - he may be part of my musical Divine Trinity but he > still ranks far below Costello and Partridge. (Though if the latter favors > us with another album full of twee Beach Boy-isms and cutesy cleverness, he > may fall a few notches as well...) I've heard some demos. They're a mix of guitary stuff and Prokofievy-sounding orchestral songs. I thought Nonesuch was a bit flaccid (although it's got moments), but I'm eagerly awaiting the release of this CD. There's talk that it may be 2 CDs! Hey Steve, do you know any more about this? - -- Ross Overbury Montreal, Quebec, Canada email: rosso@cn.ca ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 98 09:18:53 From: firstcat@lsli.com Subject: alt.soy.bomb an alternative soy bomb explination closer to a feg mentality...though judging by its anti-cheese proclamation it must be an evil anti-feg.... >Subject: Soy Bomb!!! >From: jsmooth@escape.com >Date: 1998/02/26 >Message-ID: <6d4p0s$3r2$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> >Newsgroups: rec.music.dylan > >Attention mindless lemmings of Amerikkka! I am a representative of the Soy >Bomb Nation, pledged to destroy this cheese-encrusted culture. We have now >released the official SOY BOMB MANIFESTO, which is located at this address: > http://www.hiphopmusic.com/soybomb.html > Stand up today and join us in our call to BURN THE CHEESE!!! > > Burn the Cheese!!! - ------------------------------------- Jay Lyall Channel Sales Director Livermore Software Laboratories, Intl. 2825 Wilcrest, Suite 160 Houston, Texas 77042-3358 1-713-974-3274 jay@lsli.com Date: 2/27/98 - ------------------------------------- Two-Hour Luxury Goods Commercial Also A Spy Film ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 98 08:15:00 -0800 From: Russ Reynolds Subject: unpleasant stain >I doubt if Mr. Hitchcock (#83) cares if anyone one this list is surprised >by any of his future releases. I would personally be totally shocked if Eb >could come up with anything half as clever as "The Unpleasent Stain". Is that a clever song? Don't believe I've ever heard it. Anyone care to post the lyrics for the uninitiated? - -russ PS--I'd be shocked if ANYONE on this list could match wits musically with Mr. Hitchcock (opinions vary, but apparently there are anywhere from 0 to 29 people in the world who are capable of that). On the other hand most of us have talents Robyn Hitchcock may be unable to master...like sending e-mail for instance. Yet the price of beans remains relatively low. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 08:33:22 -0800 From: Jason Thornton Subject: Re: Soy Bomb At 04:40 PM 2/26/98 -0700, the rock critic of the gods wrote: >12. I don't mind Paula Cole's music, but she is utterly unwatchable as a >performer. Unwatchable? She's one of the most talented, intense performers out there today. And talk about range, diversity and unpredictability...and quite the opposite of emotionally flat as well... Actually though, considering how highly I do think of Paula Cole, I'm surprised at how well her recent album has done, and by her numerous nominations. Yes, I'm a pessimist when it comes to the Record Buying Public, and the Grammys. >Take it down a peg, sweetie. Robyn, take it up a peg. Paula, "take it down." Man, you ain't never satisfied. ;) >And if you're not gonna shave, you >could at least stop wearing sleeveless tops and lifting your arms up all >the time. Now, *that*'s a pretty weak argument, Eb. Somewhat inane and insulting, I'd say. How about a bikini contest for the "Best Female Artist" grammy? - --Jason (who also agrees that the "why don't you do better" argument holds no water - although I've seen Adrian Belew use it online) BTW, I've seen umpteen babillion "Best New Artist" nominations for artists with more than one album out. What, exactly, *IS* the "rule" for this category? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 11:48:00 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: bands v. solo careers On Thu, 26 Feb 1998, Ben wrote: > Why is that weak, weak, weak? Maybe you should admit it's true. I think > it's personally pretty lame that you spend so much time criticizing other > peoples work, and do it with some kind of an air of authority. do you like every piece of music you hear? would you prefer to like more of it? if you ignore critics (by which i mean, anyone who's heard something you haven't and expresses an opinion about it) you're letting record companies, radio stations and a little random chance determine what you're exposed to. if everyone wrote music, there would be a glut so enormous that even an army of critics working overtime (or rather, working during the breaks in their rehearsal schedules) couldn't give much of anyone any idea of what to look for, or even what's out there. if nobody who didn't write music criticized it, we'd be a nation of sheep, periodically thinking that the gruel didn't taste as good as usual but unable to find an alternative. maybe you just think that listening to music is just a less honorable pasttime than playing it. i'm not sure i can agree with you. a ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 10:55:34 -0600 (CST) From: Marshall Joseph Armintor Subject: floral markers RH << anyway, it would be cool to meet. we'll work out some sort of signal. we can all wear a pink carnation. (just kidding.)>> Or perhaps a hydrangea... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 09:28:33 -0800 (PST) From: Dede Davis Subject: Re: bands v. solo careers - ---Aaron Mandel wrote: > if you ignore critics (by which i mean, anyone who's heard something you > haven't and expresses an opinion about it) you're letting record > companies, radio stations and a little random chance determine what you're > exposed to. I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with this. I generally ignore critics (of music, movies, television, etc.) because I find that my tastes run directly counter to most critics'. If I should find a critic whose tastes are similar to mine, I would listen to that one. I usually find that word-of-mouth from friends whose perceptions I trust steers the course for my music-buying dollar. Occasionally I will purchase something unknown to me that I've heard/seen advertised in the media, but not often. I think the dangers of letting professional critics dictate your tastes are just as great as those of letting anyone dictate to you how you should spend your money. Observe, please, the current glut on the nation's highways of those huge, gas-guzzling, monster 4-wheel drive vehicles. It is easy for anything to become "trendy". People must learn to evaluate things for themselves and make their own decisions, whether this applies to music, automobiles, politicians, hamburgers, or whatever else have you. == Dede "Out of boredom/ I decided/ I'd get with it"--MCC _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 09:45:12 -0800 From: Nick Winkworth Subject: Mystery CD (Warning: 90% Robyn!) Just curious. Can you help me identify a Robyn CD I just came across the other day which I was not previously aware of? ...what am I saying, I *know* you can! It is seemingly just called "Robyn Hitchcock" on a UK label (sorry I forgot which one) dated 1995. It has an interesting selection of tracks from various albums including EOL, Invisible and others. The only previously unreleased track is Statue With A Walkman. Recognize it anyone? I always object to buying a compilation for just *one* new track, but I was not aware of this release before. Rarity value perhaps? ~N Who'll be glad when this crazy week is over and he can read some of the huge pile of accumulating digests... obDylan: I made the mistake of channel surfing on Grammy night and was faced with the sight of the man accepting some award or other. Is it just me, or is he starting to look like Liberate? I just managed to change the channel before I threw up. Eh! (sorry Dylan fans ;) ) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 09:53:14 -0800 (PST) From: griffith Subject: re: John Brion This is sort of a response to JBJ's take on John Brion. It is true that Brion is primarily a keyboard player. When I was fortunate enough to go to one of the fabled shows at Largo, John Brion played just about everthing on stage. He is a very accomplished piano player (Beer in one hand while tickling the ivories with the other). He is the one playing drums on "We Are The Underneath" on the XMAS compilation that is circulating. I'm pretty sure he is the one playing xylophone (or is that vibes?) on "I Feel Beautiful" from same compilation. While at the show I was at, he played mellotron during IODOT - pretty amazing. I think that John's production should be quite interesting, perhaps giving Robyn that psychadelic Beatles sound (sort of like on 'Beautiful Queen'). Thankfully, John Brion is NO Jeff Lynn. I could be (probably am) totally wrong.....(what else is new) griffith = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Griffith Davies hbrtv219@csun.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 13:02:45 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: bands v. solo careers On Fri, 27 Feb 1998, Dede Davis wrote: > If I should find a critic whose tastes are similar to mine, I would > listen to that one. I usually find that word-of-mouth from friends whose > perceptions I trust steers the course for my music-buying dollar. i hate to be too rude, but hello? i specifically said that i was lumping critics in with everyone who hears something and expresses an opinion, for instance your friends. my point is that "making decisions for yourself" isn't completely possible. you have to hear about new music from somewhere. if you get to know a writer's opinions, you might be able to tell from a negative review that a record is something you'd like. my main beef is with the "i bet you couldn't do better so shut your mouth" comments. a ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 13:14:46 -0500 From: nicastr@idt.net (Ben) Subject: Re: bands v. solo careers >On Thu, 26 Feb 1998, Ben wrote: >> Why is that weak, weak, weak? Maybe you should admit it's true. I think >> it's personally pretty lame that you spend so much time criticizing other >> peoples work, and do it with some kind of an air of authority. > >do you like every piece of music you hear? would you prefer to like more >of it? > >if you ignore critics (by which i mean, anyone who's heard something you >haven't and expresses an opinion about it) you're letting record >companies, radio stations and a little random chance determine what you're >exposed to. > >if everyone wrote music, there would be a glut so enormous that even an >army of critics working overtime (or rather, working during the breaks in >their rehearsal schedules) couldn't give much of anyone any idea of what >to look for, or even what's out there. if nobody who didn't write music >criticized it, we'd be a nation of sheep, periodically thinking that the >gruel didn't taste as good as usual but unable to find an alternative. > >maybe you just think that listening to music is just a less honorable >pasttime than playing it. i'm not sure i can agree with you. > >a No, it just puts me off when somebody thinks their opinion is somehow "better" or more "well informed" because of whatever reason. Weather you're an internationally famous rock critic or a member of an isolated South American tribe, it's still just your opinion, not the word of God. - - Dr. Nick ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 13:00:24 EST From: MARKEEFE Subject: Re: Disparagements. . . more arguing w/ Eb In a message dated 98-02-27 03:40:32 EST, I wrote: << Now, Eb, why not just say that RH is your 30th favorite artist and leave it at that? We'll just assume that there are reasons why this is true, if you'll just assume that, as far as a lot of the people on this list are concerned (and they have been heard from!), you're -wrong- when it comes to RH. Now, of course, in the real world, you're not wrong; you're merely making informed (yet largely subjective) observations based on your expriences and tastes. In this world, however, you're a detractor and have cast disparagements and are wrong indeed. >> It's the next morning, and a lot of what I wrote in this paragraph now seems embarrassing to me. . . mostly the fact that I essentially told Eb that I wasn't interested in his opinions and even implied that the rest of the list might not be, either. Personally, this is actually far from the truth, and I imagine that most of the others on this list are also very interested in Eb's opinion. Sorry, Eb for being (unnecessarily) disparaging of you, and sorry to the rest of the list for trying to assume what your opinons and feelings might be. I, too, like the fact that, in general, there isn't a "Robyn is God" mentality (I'm paraphrasing someone else whose post I just read, but I can't remember who that wise person was). Anyway, don't mind me too much; I just tend to get a little riled up sometimes and go off on rants. I wish you all a good day. . . :-) - ------Michael K., humbly ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 98 10:24:00 -0800 From: Russ Reynolds Subject: Re: don't start ======== Original Message ======== >leave it out. If you start wittering on like this you'll sound like a >total >wazzock. The whole list will go pearshaped and everyone will be sick as >a >parrot. And if that happens you'll get a right bollocking. > >A right bollocking, cor strike a light , you know how to make a bloke >feel small, enough to make a bloke feel like he's fallen arse over tit!!. > dave do me a favour. You'd feel a proper charlie, like some git thinking he was lord muck had given you a quick one-two smack bang on your conk. (I said CONK. Gawd'elpus. Conk. Y'know - schnoz? hooter?) James ======== Fwd by: Russ Reynolds ======== So far I haven't understood a word of this thread but it's cracking me up. The word "wazzock" alone had me laughing for three hours steady. I hope it's as rude as it sounds. - -russ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 13:32:46 -0500 (EST) From: Terrence M Marks Subject: Re: Soy Bomb > "Soy Bomb"? What was that? A plug for that guys struggling band or > something? Dylan's coolheadedness was amazing, but it's a good thing > that Soy Bomb didn't have a copy of "Catcher In The Rye" and a firearm > with him. Where the hell was security? Ol' Dirty Bastard of the Wu Tang > Clan interrupting Shawn Colvin's moment was another lowlight. Wu Tang's As someone who more-or-less missed the Grammys, can one of you elaborate? I have a feeling that most of the list failed to watch. (When I heard they weren't going to give Tintern Abbey a Lifetime Achievement award, I turned it off...) Terrence Marks normal@grove.ufl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 13:41:24 -0500 (EST) From: Terrence M Marks Subject: Re: In sorrow not in anger > that's exactly what i've been thinking. and i don't seem to understand > why eb is even on the list if RH is only his 30th favorite. Robyn would > definitly be in my top 3. and i'm glad eb's on the list. i've been > enjoying the discussions. I'm not eb, but on a bad day, Robyn fails entirely to make my top 10... (I mean, if you can't think of 10 artists/bands better than him, you need more albums. I dig his music a lot, but I mean, there's The Kinks, The Beach Boys, Stevie Wonder, Squeeze, Harry Nilsson, The Monkees, The High Llamas, Pink Floyd, and Nirvana [the English one]) Why am I on the Robyn Hitchcock list and not the other lists? 1) Robyn is doing a LOT more than any of them are... 2) This list doesn't degenerate into petty bickering NEARLY as often as the others do. Robyn doesn't usually make my top X artists lists because artists tend to be very good. (OTOH, he usually shows up on my top X albums lists because albums tend to be rather bad. I mean, look at post-PS Beach Boys or post-Arthur Kinks. Dozens of great songs on dodgy albums.) Terrence Marks normal@grove.ufl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 13:46:56 -0500 (EST) From: Terrence M Marks Subject: Re: the eb issue > does anyone else find it extremely grosse that eb says he is a fan of > over 700 artists. and that in 1996 he liked 140 different albums. i > mean who has that kind of time? eb, you're either extremely rich, work > at a record store, or someone's paying you to listen to music. i mean > there's no way i even hear 140 new albums in a year much less like that > many. that's a lot of freaking albums. i'm afraid i don't have the > time or money. or maybe i'm just too caught up in my "Hitchcock > vaccuum." I don't. If you a) consume music rapidly b) have a phonograph/tape deck c) buy indie/local music at $5/disc instead of mass-media drivel at $15/disc and d) find cheap records/have people send albums to you [which is *technically* copyright violation, and a good way to hear about new bands] Then it's fairly easy to get that much music. I mean, in one weekend I managed to pick up 30 albums featuring 50 bands that I'd never bought material of before and saw 7 live bands. Cost me about $35, total. If you look hard, you can find lots of music for real cheap. (And I appreciate cheap albums more. If I had paid full price for my copy of UK Squeeze or The Beach Boys Love You, I would have thrown them both out the window. At $1 per, they're a lot more palatable) Terrence Marks normal@grove.ufl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 11:50:56 -0700 From: hal brandt Subject: [0%RH] more Grammy talk (was: Soy Bomb) Eb wrote: > > >Bette Midler's dig at Barbra was beautiful. > > I missed that. What did she say? She just made a quick jab at the dour diva, telling her sarcastically that she hoped she was enjoying her NyQuil. > Aretha > Franklin's stuff just laid there- She really seems to have lost a lot of > her range and intensity, sad to say. She even forgot the "R-E-S-P-E-C-T" bit on the first break! Maybe the lame Blues Bros. 2000 were distracting her? > > The graybeard, old-fogey blunder of the night was James Taylor winning > Best Pop Album. Sheesh. The new James Taylor CD has got some really nice songs on it. Maybe when YOUR beard turns grey (and it will!), it'll speak to you more. Then you can rediscover Garcia as well! (insert your winking, P-tongued emoticon here) > > the coolest moment of the night was > Van Morrison/John Lee Hooker beating out Monster Noggin & Monster Ego for > Best Pop Duet. I cheered loudly. I was right there with you on that'n! > > When did Lindsay Buckingham lose his voice? At least he didn't stay home drinking NyQuil! > I don't mind Paula Cole's music, but she is utterly unwatchable as a > performer. Agreed. Her Joe Cocker-esque spasms are totally superfluous. But, then you rant: > Take it down a peg, sweetie. And if you're not gonna shave, you > could at least stop wearing sleeveless tops and lifting your arms up all > the time. Nice display of sexism, there. Is that why you judge Ani DiFranco so harshly as well? > Strange bedfellows: Patti Smith sitting directly behind Tara Lipinski. No mention of Patti Smith's armpit hair. How come? > > I'm happy that Vanessa Williams escaped the stage set with her life. A botched opening that set the tone for the whole night. I'm surprised there isn't a lawsuit ala Fran Drescher and TV Guide. Chris Rock asked her if she was alright and she responded 'yes' off-mic, then he asked her again on-mic so the world could see he was a caring, concerned guy. THAT was sincere. > > Whaddya bet that Fiona Apple would've won Best New Artist instead of > Cole (releasing her *second* album), if not for The Speech? Although after Ol' Dirty Bastard's diatribe, they are probably wondering why they cared! /hal ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 98 10:58:50 -0800 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: Oi, mush... On 2/27/98 7:05 AM, Gary Sedgwick wrote: >I woke up this morning completely tit-faced!! Happens to me every morning. Then I roll over. - -tc sorry, i couldn't resist. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 12:18:59 -0700 From: hal brandt Subject: Re: Soy Bomb Terrence M Marks wrote: > > > "Soy Bomb"? What was that? A plug for that guys struggling band or > > something? Dylan's coolheadedness was amazing, but it's a good thing > > that Soy Bomb didn't have a copy of "Catcher In The Rye" and a firearm > > with him. Where the hell was security? Ol' Dirty Bastard of the Wu Tang > > Clan interrupting Shawn Colvin's moment was another lowlight. Wu Tang's > > As someone who more-or-less missed the Grammys, can one of you > elaborate? During Bob Dylan's performance, a guy ran out and started dancing & gyrating with the words "Soy Bomb" enigmatically scrawled on his bare chest. He was dragged off after a couple of minutes. Bob did his best to ignore the display. The "Catcher In The Rye" comment above was a reference to the insect that shot John Lennon. See Eb's post for more about "Soy Bomb"'s true identity. ODB from the Wu-Tang Clan grabbed a mic from Eryka Badu right before Shawn Colvin accepted her Grammy and ranted about Wu-Tang deserving an award before he was escorted off stage. The only other televised rant I can think of that was more pathetic was Mike Love's speech when the Beach Boys were inducted into the Rock 'n' Roll Hall Of Fame. /hal ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 11:25:50 -0800 From: John Barrington Jones Subject: Re: Neutral Black Milk Cat Saturday Hotel >Terrence M Marks wrote: >> >> The Gerbils were the best out of that set, I think, because they >> had the ebst singer. > >have we created a new expression? I also now use the expression E-B-Jee-Bees to describe the feeling I get when I listen to a CD I don't particularly care for. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 14:47:51 -0500 (EST) From: Bayard Subject: Re: In sorrow not in anger On Fri, 27 Feb 1998, Terrence M Marks wrote: > I'm not eb, but on a bad day, Robyn fails entirely to make my top 10... > (I mean, if you can't think of 10 artists/bands better than him, > you need more albums...) So just b/c you like Stevie Wonder better than RH, that means I should too? Why? and what's your definition of "better"? I've heard all the bands you listed (except the "english nirvana") . I like RH better. Are you saying I have poor taste? It's all subjectivity. #30, #5, #3... am I the only one on this crazy list who puts RH in the middle podium, gold medal winner, #1 post modern artist, king of all media except radio and mtv, top fav? come on-- who's with me????? =b ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 14:41:04 -0500 (EST) From: Bayard Subject: Re: Mystery CD/Critix On Fri, 27 Feb 1998, Nick Winkworth wrote: > Just curious. Can you help me identify a Robyn CD I just came across the > other day which I was not previously aware of? > > ...what am I saying, I *know* you can! > > It is seemingly just called "Robyn Hitchcock" on a UK label (sorry I > forgot which one) dated 1995. It has an interesting selection of tracks > from various albums including EOL, Invisible and others. The only > previously unreleased track is Statue With A Walkman. > > Recognize it anyone? > > I always object to buying a compilation for just *one* new track, but I > was not aware of this release before. Rarity value perhaps? This is commonly known as "The Sequel Sampler", i believe. Sequel is apparently the UK analog to Rhino Records, at least insofar as the robyn 80's reissues are concerned. Not sure exacrtly how rare it is but I have a copy thanks to Jeff Pearce (thanks!!) and the version of SwaW is interesting.. has kind of a far-off tinkly piano on it and the old geezer sounds like a muppet. It's not as bad as this decription makes it sound! :) re. critics : i agree with Mike "Runnyon and on" 100% on his post from yesterday. If critics weren't often such whiny, embittered, self-righteous primadonnas people wouldn't be moved to challenge them to actually try to create the art they slam on sometimes. I feel I should state at this point that i am not necessarily referring to our very own eb, who is certainly not the most unfair critic in the world, though he does at times anger me when it seems he is trying to start fights. I don't disagree with him so much as see things differently. But then, i haven't yet found a critic I really click with. I guess what i'm saying is, critics have a tough job-- they have to know everything about their chosen art, experience all of it, and maintain objectivity in reporting it. In other words, a Sisyphean task. So I suppose I have no right to criticize.. hey, wait a minute. Mike's post was so beautiful to me I must repeat it here. - -- This is music we're talking about, not essay-writing, or speech-giving, or academic-criticism. At the risk of sounding "Copian", the best music is a form of artistic expression that goes well beyond formal cause and effect and mental rationalization. There are no absolutes, no rights and wrongs. Objectivity is impossible. That's what makes award shows so meaningless, record reviews so pointless, and best-of lists so baseless. I've said it before, but in my humblest opinion, in the end its the emotional and spiritual connection you make with the music on your own terms (and in a twisted 20-century fan-obsessed way, with the artist) that really means something. All else is friendly chatter and wile-away-the-time banter. __ Sing it, brother. testify. :) =b ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 15:07:14 EST From: MARKEEFE Subject: Re: In sorrow not in anger In a message dated 98-02-27 13:54:08 EST, you write: << (I mean, if you can't think of 10 artists/bands better than him, you need more albums. >> This brings up an interesting case of semantics. What Terrence is talking about here seems to be artists/bands that would be considered better, in general, by a lot of people, by and large. But that seems different to me than having a list of *favorite* artists -- bands and artists that you like regardless of what everyone else thinks about them or what sort of a contributon to the world of music and humanity in general this band/artist has made. I mean, yeah, the Kinks (in the 60's, anyway) could probably be considered better than RH, but I simply enjoy Robyn (on the whole) a little bit more than the Kinks (although it's a fairly close call). Now, if I were picking out a stack of CD's to send back with an alien being as a representation of music from this planet, I'd most likely put the Kinks in that collection, but probably not Robyn (depends on how much spare cargo space they have, but let's say there's only room enough for 10-20 CD's). Still, in terms of pure enjoyment, the RH catalog (and the essence of Robyn) would *personally* rank higher for me than would the Kinks. . . at least by a handful of ranking slots. Maybe that's not what Terrence was getting at, but this difference in interpretation of the word "favorite" has come up before (in my own experiences), so I thought I'd explore it a little further and see what other people thunk. - -----Michael K. (whose wife wouldn't be happy with the suggestion that I might "need more albums". . . even though I do, of course!) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 15:16:04 -0500 From: kenster@MIT.EDU (Ken Ostrander) Subject: Re: instrumentatino >I'm not going to go through this list one by one, but many of these choices >don't seem "deviant" to me at all. once again, we disagree. >It's not just a question of guitar. It's a question of lyrical tone, >melodic style, attitude, character, influences mined, etc. I *definitely* >think Dylan's catalog is more varied than Robyn's. And the Pogues' sound >*was* limited, which is why they couldn't sustain a career. And when did I >ever say I liked the Ramones, Johnny Cash or (blecch) Ani DiFranco more >than Robyn? guess what? i don't cross-reference everything with deference to your tastes. i was making a point about musical variation. and i'd like to say that whether dylan or hitchcock is more "varied" is just another matter of opinion to be argued ad nauseum. _blood on the tracks_ is to _oh mercy_ as _i often dream of trains_ is to _perspex island_? whatever, i love 'em both. >> Eb, maybe you should devote a little more time to >>the artists you like more. it seems like the amount of time you spend >>posting to this list leaves you little time for your top 29. ;^) > >Who wants to spend all his time rehashing the Beatles' greatness? Who wants >to talk to a bunch of 40something Dylan fans about collecting 1997 tour >tapes? Who wants to talk to a bunch of teenage REM fans who discovered the >band circa Out of Time? And (grrrrrr) who wants to talk to a bunch of >stodgy, anal-retentive Elvis Costello fans who can't appreciate any music >that stretches beyond an old-school lyrics 'n' sheet-music songwriting >aesthetic? Zzzzz. Etc. > >I like this list. That's why I'm here. can't say as i blame you. i was on the dylan list for a while and the sheer volume of posts just wore me out. KEN hey, by the way, i bought neutral milk hotel last night. pretty snazzy. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 98 11:58:23 -0800 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: In sorrow not in anger On 2/27/98 11:47 AM, Bayard wrote: >#30, #5, #3... am I the only one on this crazy list who puts RH in the >middle podium, gold medal winner, #1 post modern artist, king of all >media except radio and mtv, top fav? come on-- who's with me????? I'm with you, dude! I know most of my posts have nothing to do with him, but Robyn is my favorite artist too! Call me shallow; call me stupid; Hell, call me tit-faced! - -tc ******************************************* Tom Clark Apple Computer, Inc. tclark@apple.com http://u2.netgate.net/~tclark ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Feb 1998 15:30:36 -0500 From: Ner Subject: Re: the eb issue Maxey L. Mullins wrote: > anyway, eb my man. since you're the esteemed rock critic on our little > list, i'd like to see a list of your top 29. (the ones you like more > than robyn.) i would just like to know who i'm dealing with. i like > some critics, i hate others. i want to know if i should trust your > opinion. and i think everyone else on this list would be interested to > know what else you like. we know you like robyn. what's the other 29? Come to think of it, I'd like to see that top 29 list as well? I'm curious to know what you like the most since you are exposed to so much. Maybe there'll be someone on that list I'd be interested in checking out. - -Ner ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 14:29:09 -0600 From: "Maxey L. Mullins" Subject: Re: Versatility Gary Sedgwick wrote: > > >>Oh, and someone said something about the acoustic guitar not being > >>versatile. What are you talking about? You obviously know nothing > >>about the guitar. I've been playing for about 8 years. > > > >I didn't say that, of course (or did I?) - I've been playing 20 years > and I > >agree, but you can't say that an acoustic guitar by itself is more > versatile > >than an 8-piece band with separate horn and string sections. (And, > >presumably, a good arranger.) > > The most versatile instrument is the voice. Oh, and the harmonica comes > in a close second! > > Gary, about to play some Bob Dylan. yes gary i do agree that the voice is the most versatile instrument. but i'm not sure about the harmonica ranking so high on that list. all guitars would be more versatile in my opinion. and what about the piano? and let's not forget the drums. a good drummer can give the drums quite a lot of versatility. =joel ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 98 15:36:13 -0500 From: The Great Quail Subject: Don't start, ya feckin' guppie! >>>leave it out. If you start wittering on like this you'll sound like a >>>total wazzock. The whole list will go pearshaped and everyone will be sick as >>>a parrot. And if that happens you'll get a right bollocking. >>>A right bollocking, cor strike a light , you know how to make a bloke >>>feel small, enough to make a bloke feel like he's fallen arse over tit!!. >>do me a favour. You'd feel a proper charlie, like some git thinking he was >>lord muck had given you a quick one-two smack bang on your conk. (I said >>CONK. Gawd'elpus. Conk. Y'know - schnoz? hooter?) >I think this is my favorite active thread right now. ;) What the feck is this fluttawump? Jaysis Buddha wept in crimfuss streams oh flutterin brilliance, I have no ideagram contra what the feck to respond to such glibber-meeping flumpwugget. Although I can say, If I was to fargle up a bit of me own schwantz-guptie, I would -- deservedly, na? - -- be ripe for a plooky plum peach pit pear wumping right down the left tentacle ventricle, eh? And Eb, that right blerky blinky bloofer, he groks apparent that this is his favvie? Hindu Sockmuffin! Nexta thing down the peristalsis will be that bolshy bleckin' Partridge nooker, the Great Quail -- Jaysis, what a stuffed snork-fucker he is, too, eh? -- will post some feckin bucket-o-tripe, wouldn't ye just ken it? That fiffle pus-fucking willy wonkar! Then I mesel' will haveta fill his snoosty with fifteen fecks of gwizz, and maybe sock the old guppie in the flossing snock-hole! Nelbus toast, maties, droogies, and punters, - -- El Codorniz Grande - ---------------------------------+-------------------------------- The Great Quail, K.S.C. | Literature Site - The Libyrinth: TheQuail@cthulhu.microserve.com | www.rpg.net/quail/libyrinth www.rpg.net/quail | Vampire Site - New York by Night: riverrun Discordian Society | www.rpg.net/quail/NYBN 73 De Chirico Street | Arkham, Orbis Tertius 2112-42 | ** What is FEGMANIA? ** "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents." -- H.P. Lovecraft ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 98 15:36:09 -0500 From: The Great Quail Subject: Pax Quailius cum Ebus Oh ye Fegs, Touching the Eb Issue: Lately things have stacked up pretty grimly around Eb. Now, Eb certainly has his defendants and his detractors, but the caliber of some recent posts has taken a most unpleasant tone. Yes, Eb is a rock critic. But this is immaterial -- other than the fact he gets the occasional free CD, that is. Lucky Eb. But I would like to remind people that Eb never once wished this to be known to the List. Eb never uses the "I'm a critic" thing to add weight to his words. To be honest, more people use that as an accuasation directed at him more than anything else. Now . . . . I do not, in general, like critics -- but only because there are far too many *bad* critics. Too many idiots that think their opinion is divinely inspired, no matter how uninformed or vulgar it might be. These morons plug into the Great American Fiction that "everyone's opinion is equally valid." Yup. Sure. I am thinking of many critics such as haunt those evil channels such as E-TV or those delightfully shallow magazines with dubious titles such as "Entertainment Weekly" or "TV Guide." But good critics -- real critics -- are worth their weight in gold, even when you violently disagree with them. In my opinion, some of these well-known ones include Travers and Fricke of "Rolling Stone," Roger Ebert from the "Chicago Sun," and Robert Hughes from "Time." Sister Wendy is up there too, heh heh. There are, of course, many others, and I am sure Eb could compile a list of hundreds. I will try to explain my position: Let me put to rest this fallacy that Eb's opinion in meaningless because he is not a musician, or this "why doesn't he form a band and show us how to do it right" dreck. No offense to those who hold this idea, but it is not a very well developed position. Like it or not, a critic *is* an artist. It is a myth to think that everyone can be a critic -- a myth propogated by the profusion of these E-TV idiots mentioned above, and fueled by the American desire to blow hot air in a public place. But a true critic *is* an artist, although one of a different stripe. By writing about a piece, by critically exploring it, drawing fresh conclusions, forging connections that may not have been there *until* the critic creates them, by developing new metaphors to better understand the work -- all these are acts of creation. Like it or not, true criticism is an act of creation, and effort of will. The true critic takes a work to a new level through her criticism -- it is something impossible to do by the artist himself, or indeed, through a similar art. (Although many artists can also be critics, like TS Eliot or Umberto Eco. But those are two different hats.) We are talking about two modes of communication here, the primary art and the discourse built around it. Of course criticism can merely point out what is "bad" and what is "good," but a well-developed piece should make us see things in a new light, should create a new space in which we can understand the primary source as being a connected and involved entity. And that is not very fucking easy whatsoever. Just look to the literary field for a host of examples (and to be fair, a host of complete and utter bullshit.) I am particularly thinking of the ground-breaking work of Jorge Luis Borges, Roland Barthes, Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Harold Bloom, Umberto Eco, and many others. (Again, not that I agree with everything they say!) Now as I have said before, my opinions are informed by my own bias towards post-structuarlism. But I feel it is safe to say that most people today accept that criticicm is *not* merely a stream of "opinions" placed in a "transparent" medium of language. . . . I suppose what I am saying is this: feel free to bash Eb. Lord knows, I do, especially because the poor man refuses to acknowledge why the Grateful Dead were divinely inspired. He also has bad taste in shirts, accuses me of flirting too much (Imagine that, Natalie and Susan?) and he won't give me that autographed copy of Geddy Lee's Rickenbacker 4001 bass that he uses for a cricket bat. But to bash Eb in a mean spirit, or to treat him like a child being trained to "play nice with others," or to accuse him of being a foul and dirty critic and not a clean and useful artist. . . those flames shed more heat than light, and while intended to cast Eb's weaknesses into sharp relief, only serve to reflect the weaknesses of the poster. . . . Well, that's my opinion, at least. And I hope that I did not ignite a flame war on the nature of criticism. . . . - --Quail - ---------------------------------+-------------------------------- The Great Quail, K.S.C. | Literature Site - The Libyrinth: TheQuail@cthulhu.microserve.com | www.rpg.net/quail/libyrinth www.rpg.net/quail | Vampire Site - New York by Night: riverrun Discordian Society | www.rpg.net/quail/NYBN 73 De Chirico Street | Arkham, Orbis Tertius 2112-42 | ** What is FEGMANIA? ** "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents." -- H.P. Lovecraft ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V7 #76 ******************************