From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest)
To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org
Subject: fegmaniax-digest V7 #274
Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org
Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org
Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org
Precedence: bulk


fegmaniax-digest        Thursday, July 16 1998        Volume 07 : Number 274



                               Today's Subjects:
                               -----------------
  Re: scott baio's pecker                     [Gary Assassin <gsa@panix.com>]
  Quick Quiz                                   [Tom Clark <tclark@apple.com>]
  you worked hard to earn it         [Ken Sabatini <ksabatin@arches.uga.edu>]
  Re: flaming school marmism (100% Eb-bashing content)  [Eb <gondola@deltane]
  critical support?                  [Ken Sabatini <ksabatin@arches.uga.edu>]
  Re: Quick Quiz                            [Sean Hennessey <suggs@tiac.net>]
  Re: scott baio's pecker                       [zolarox@juno.com (Debora K)]
  Re: scott baio's pecker                             [Mark_Gloster@3com.com]
  Re: Rat Jap Bastards! (100% Eb-bashing content)     [nicastr@idt.net (Ben)]
  Re: fegmeet in chicago...?          [Zloduska <kjseelna@students.wisc.edu>]
  Reasons for not posting                              [JH3 <jh3@netins.net>]
  Re: Rap Bastards!                               [Eb <gondola@deltanet.com>]
  Re: critical support?                           [Eb <gondola@deltanet.com>]
  Re: Reasons for not posting    ["Daniel Barkhouse" <barkalone@hotmail.com>]
  Eb Wars - echoing Mark G  [james.dignan@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (James Dignan]
  There Can Be Only One!                               [JH3 <jh3@netins.net>]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 15:01:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: Gary Assassin <gsa@panix.com>
Subject: Re: scott baio's pecker

> <A little poll: How many people on here have seen Repo Man more
> than five times?  I have.>

I have.

> i'd guess that i've seen it on the order of 15 times, but i've got to 
> confess that i think Sid And Nancy is a better movie.  that scene at the 

Only saw it once so can't comment. didn't really like it.

To make a Robyn reference, I think that a souped up version of "Do
Policemen Sing" could be a ska song.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 98 16:17:47 -0700
From: Tom Clark <tclark@apple.com>
Subject: Quick Quiz

I was in Tower Records last night and while visiting one of the listen 
stations I had to chuckle when I saw a selection from the band 
"Superfuzz" right next to one from the band "Bigmuff".

Q:  What the hell is so funny about this?


- -tc

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 19:20:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ken Sabatini <ksabatin@arches.uga.edu>
Subject: you worked hard to earn it 

Eb cries out (a few excerpts):

<Mm-hmm. Well, let's see, my much-debated previous post (you know, that
<rare post where I *dared* to offer a personal anecdote, unlike all the other 
<Fegs who *never* post about their personal lives or social activities...)
[. . .]
<Now, just because I don't give a darn about Dan Bern doesn't mean that I
<resent Mark posting about him. But I sure don't see any anti-Bern folks
<gleefully taking shots at his posts like they do with my (for instance)
<Rufus Wainwright raves.

All I saw were a few people who offered a contrary opinion about Rufus,
none of which were particularly mean-spirited.  To which you responded
with something like, "I don't understand how anyone could find his
voice annoying." I wouldn't call that gleefully taking shots by any
stretch.

<Face it, there's simply a double standard that applies to my posts. If
<that's how it's gotta be, fine, I can deal with it. Just don't pretend
<otherwise, through these rationalizations. First, I get accused of being
<self-indulgent. If that gets refuted, then I'm too off-topic. If that gets
<refuted, then I'm too negative. Etc. It's always something. And all these
<criteria are rarely applied to anyone else. It's just that certain folks
<on this list are continually gunning for me.

Why do bad things happen to good people?

Perhaps it has to do with your history of being argumentative, insulting,
and hurtful on a list that is generally friendly and helpful. Yeah, you offer
many cd recommendations and related news, which are helpful to people
who don't have other outlets to hear it, but it only takes a few
instances of extreme ugliness for people to dislike you and even look
for instances to be especially critical of you in the future. It surprises
me that you are surprised by this.

Surely you know what is in your heart when you bait others and drop
insults in the presumed hope that people will respond, only for you to
unleash a torrent of abuse upon them (at least equal parts topic-related
and personal).
Let's take the recent Dead stuff: Over multiple posts to the list, you
included anti-Dead comments of one form or another (none of which built on 
any currently discussed topic). Sure, after 3 or 4 of these, someone fights
back and lo and behold we have an argument for all to read. I have a feeling 
you've had very close to these exact arguments time and time again over the
years. Do you feel you've gained anything out of repeating them once more 
here? I don't think much was gained by the rest of us innocent bystanders.

Related to this, most of your points could just as easily be made without
attacks on the characteristics of the person who questions your views.
For example, when you learned that Ben was currently a music major in
college your subsequent posts to him re the Dead always included some
negative comment about his youthful age a la "go back to your music
books, son."  The accuracy of your criticisms is not the issue--its how you 
say things and how you directly insult people in the process of discussing
them. But surely you know this.

Heck, even your recurring lists of discs that Eb is "currently dismissing," 
is informative about where you're coming from.

Over time, the numbers of people offended by you add up, I suppose, and
you get a mini backlash of sorts. My guess is that the silent polite
majority hold their tongues at most of your antics, so the criticism you 
do hear is just a sampling.  At some point, you gotta reckon its time to 
saddle up and head off to another town (listserv).

Riding into the sunset,

Ken

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 17:44:41 -0700
From: Eb <gondola@deltanet.com>
Subject: Re: flaming school marmism (100% Eb-bashing content)

Ken sniffed, snooted and sobbed:
>All I saw were a few people who offered a contrary opinion about Rufus,
>none of which were particularly mean-spirited.

Uhh, did you actually READ what people said about his voice? I think the
most recent snipe was that he sounds like *Kermit the Frog*. And yet,
notice how mildly I've replied to criticisms of Wainwright. I haven't even
responded to half of them (including the above quip). You know why? Because
I don't take criticisms of bands I like, personally. I may argue back if
the criticisms are really shallow or based in genre bigotry, but otherwise,
fine. If anyone says Neutral Milk Hotel is too based in gleeful noise for
them or too bleating, fine. If anyone says Wainwright's music is too
flowery and overassembled for them, fine. It just doesn't phase me.  I'll
reserve my right to keep praising those artists, however.

>Perhaps it has to do with your history of being argumentative, insulting,
>and hurtful on a list that is generally friendly and helpful.

<cue violin>

>but it only takes a few
>instances of extreme ugliness for people to dislike you and even look
>for instances to be especially critical of you in the future.

Well, in *your* case, certainly....  Watch out for projecting your grudges
upon everyone else, however.

>Surely you know what is in your heart when you bait others and drop
>insults in the presumed hope that people will respond, only for you to
>unleash a torrent of abuse upon them.

Well now, there's a creative interpretation.

>Let's take the recent Dead stuff: Over multiple posts to the list, you
>included anti-Dead comments of one form or another (none of which built on
>any currently discussed topic). Sure, after 3 or 4 of these, someone fights
>back and lo and behold we have an argument for all to read. I have a feeling
>you've had very close to these exact arguments time and time again over the
>years. Do you feel you've gained anything out of repeating them once more
>here?

Christ. Listen, I didn't start the Dead flame wars -- others did. I made
one parenthetical anti-Dead comment in the context of a larger post about
my "annoyance" theory, and a couple of I.D.'s launched lengthy
thread-starting tirades against me in response. If you're going to complain
about seeing repetitive arguments, focus your whining elsewhere. And you've
attacked ME before...so why start THIS repetitive argument?

>Related to this, most of your points could just as easily be made without
>attacks on the characteristics of the person who questions your views.
>The accuracy of your criticisms is not the issue--its how you
>say things and how you directly insult people in the process of discussing
>them. But surely you know this.

Could you BE more full of it? My opponents are far more guilty of personal
attacks than me. Standard chain of events: I criticize a band that someone
else likes. They criticize *me*. Try actually examining the evidence, Mr.
Spin Doctor.

>My guess is that the silent polite
>majority hold their tongues at most of your antics, so the criticism you
>do hear is just a sampling.

Yeah yeah, and we both know just how much your guess is worth. There you
go, projecting your fussy grudges upon everyone else again.

>At some point, you gotta reckon its time to saddle up and head off to
>another town (listserv).

Wishful thinking, no doubt. I have plenty enough friends and pleasant
exchanges on this list to rule out unsubscribing...sorry, honey. And just
what do YOU contribute to the list besides your netcop talents?

How about this attack on me, Danielle? Just like being back with the old
poops on COSTELLO-L again, eh? Woo.

"Well, man it's like -- uh -- The Happenings."

Eb

np (still): Genesis Archive 1967-75

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 21:06:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ken Sabatini <ksabatin@arches.uga.edu>
Subject: critical support?

said me:
>>This conversation also gets at a reason why many great artists get left
>>behind (critically and otherwise): They don't have a defining hipness to
>>them.  They may produce beautiful work, but it doesn't GRAB you from
>>your seat and MAKE you take notice of it . . .  it doesn't build on (or
>>move in the opposite direction of) a current fad.

said Eb:
>Aww, come on. We were talking about critical support here, not teenagers.
>There's plenty of critically acclaimed music which doesn't have an
>immediate hook. I mean, what was the best reviewed album of last year?
>Dylan's Time Out of Mind? Not much grab-you hipness there. Or take Steve
>Earle, who released another of last year's top-reviewed albums. Etc. That
>whole "sophisticated singer-songwriter" genre has very little immediate
>gimmickry, yet critics eat it up. Heck, Rufus Wainwright doesn't have any
>grab-you hipness either, for that matter. Yet his reviews are damn
good....

Note that I said critically "and otherwise" above.  They are distinct but
still very related.  I guess it depends on who you consider in the universe
of critics. There are so  many music magazines, internet sites, etc. in
which "critics" abound.  I'm not sure what critical consensus really
means. Spin magazine branded Cornershop's disc album of the year,
didn't they?  Bands like Beck, Radiohead, even Prodigy, get way too
much critical attention, wouldn't you say?

I love the idea that there is this breed of music lovers listening to new
discs in their dingy apartments, truly loving music and struggling for the
perfect words to describe the art form they love most, paying no mind to 
who the magazine is trying to get on the cover next month, ignoring what
other critics are writing about the artist in question, what is popular at 
the moment, etc.
Now I'm not saying that magazine music writers are slaves to the music
labels or to editors or to whatever is selling biggest at the moment, but
I imagine the reality is probably typically closer to this: music critics 
get a bunch of discs in the mail a couple of times a week, having deadlines
to write reviews that prevent them from getting more than one or two quick 
listens to the music, make a quick judgment and then pen a few sentences 
of easily digestible or supposedly witty material and voila, 3 1/2 stars 
out of 5.

This is a serious question: how do you determine whom to look to when
determining critical consensus?  Specific magazines, newspapers, writers?
I'm hoping you sample beyond your LA, California city limits. ;)     


old eb:
>>>And Woj, if you wanna "burst my bubble," then post about music other
than
>>>Robyn and Lilithfairism. ;)
old ken:
>>Wow. Let this be a lesson to anyone who questions Eb: he's got a
>>bullet with your name on it--don't make him use it. Ebnoxious, indeed.
newer eb:
>I'm not sure how you came up with the above conclusion, but it clearly
>reflects *zero* understanding of the previous exchanges.

I'd love to hear the intended meaning of the above comment. It sounds a lot
like you were pulling out your trump card and saying, "until you talk
about more music that you currently do, you're not ready to get into 
the ring with me--for I am the grand MASTER of DISASTER, the spinner of
the TUNES and the maker of your WOUNDS, I'll turn you around like a REEL
to REEL, you'll be as out of DATE as an 8-track TAPE, . . . mo' fo'."


If I'm wrong then I'm wrong,

impassive bystander ken

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 21:20:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sean Hennessey <suggs@tiac.net>
Subject: Re: Quick Quiz

> I was in Tower Records last night and while visiting one of the listen 
> stations I had to chuckle when I saw a selection from the band 
> "Superfuzz" right next to one from the band "Bigmuff".
> 
> Q:  What the hell is so funny about this?

A: The Superfuzz and the Bigmuff were two different type of late sixties
(or possibly more early 70's) distortion pedals.  They also happened to
respectively be the favourite pedals of the two guitar players in
Mudhoney, who released a mini-album called 'Superfuzz Bigmuff', with the
seminal song 'Touch Me I'm Sick'.

And it's hilarious.  wonder if either band is as good as the band they
combine to namecheck? :)

tara - Sean 'I was in Uni when grunge was hep' Hennessey

'1998 was a bad year for English football.  It was the year David Beckham
was villified.'
*******************************************************************************
Sean Hennessey, President of Boston Reds,
http://members.tripod.com/~boston_reds/
Member and co-admin of the Red Devils list:  red-devils@pipeline.com 
e-mail: suggs@tiac.net or giggs@tiac.net ICQ: 9288628

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 19:38:10 -0700
From: zolarox@juno.com (Debora K)
Subject: Re: scott baio's pecker

'Shakes the Clown' has moments that rival anything perverse in 'Sid and
Nancy'.  The Robyn Williams mime scene when reenacting puberty is at
least as good as Sid's "let's do lunch" scene in Paris with that chick
with the headgear.  
 
I've seen each at least a baker's dozen and Repo Man on occasion.

Vince (I will delurk after commenting that Eb seems to be *born again*,
whatever that means)

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 19:50:48 -0700
From: Mark_Gloster@3com.com
Subject: Re: scott baio's pecker

>'Shakes the Clown' has moments that rival anything perverse in 'Sid and
>Nancy'.  The Robyn Williams mime scene when reenacting puberty is at
>least as good as Sid's "let's do lunch" scene in Paris with that chick
>with the headgear.

Shakes the Clown was pretty darned good for twisted humor. It was
reviewed (dead-on correctly) as "the Citizen Kane of alcoholic
clown movies."

When asked if he would have done anything differently if he had
the movie to do over, Bobcat Goldthwait said roughly, "I think
I would have thrown up maybe one less time in the flick."

It's a fun movie, but there aren't a lot of people who can sit
through it with me. Come to think of it, I'm not terribly
anxious to see it again.

happies,
- -markg

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 23:19:44 -0500
From: nicastr@idt.net (Ben)
Subject: Re: Rat Jap Bastards! (100% Eb-bashing content)

>Christ. Listen, I didn't start the Dead flame wars -- others did.

Well, the USA declared war on Japan before Japan declared war on the USA.
But, as I remember, there was a little incident that *provoked* the USA...

>>Related to this, most of your points could just as easily be made without
>>attacks on the characteristics of the person who questions your views.
>>The accuracy of your criticisms is not the issue--its how you
>>say things and how you directly insult people in the process of discussing
>>them. But surely you know this.
>
>Could you BE more full of it? My opponents are far more guilty of personal
>attacks than me. Standard chain of events: I criticize a band that someone
>else likes. They criticize *me*. Try actually examining the evidence, Mr.
>Spin Doctor.

I think what Ken was mainly referring to was your use of name-calling.
"Petulant child", "indignant deadhead", "proggie", etc.... they are more
clever than the standard brand of name-calling, but still the same thing.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 22:10:30 -0500
From: Zloduska <kjseelna@students.wisc.edu>
Subject: Re: fegmeet in chicago...?

Bayard proclaimed:
>Hi Fegs,
>
>I am going to be in Chicago for a week sometime in october, so i naturally
>thought.. hey, why not have a fest with the chicago fegs?  I was told once
>to let y'all know when i'm in town, so, now you know! which is not to say
>that my being someplace is a reason to have a party (though I would
>definitely throw a party for many of you, in a second!  or even longer!)
>So what do you think?  I can bring some refreshments, and maybe even the
>feg party game!  (though the quail still has the nicely cut out game
>cards!)
>
>
	Well, noone knows me well, but I will be around the Chicago area in
October.  Just around my b-day too...I'd be willing to do something; I go
to Chicago a lot.

ciao,
the ever loopy
~kjs

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 22:28:17 -0500
From: JH3 <jh3@netins.net>
Subject: Reasons for not posting

Eb writes:

>Well, look at it this way: Why would a Feg choose NOT to express an opinion
>about some artist, when said artist's name comes up? Is it more likely
>because he/she is timid to offer an independent view, or because he/she
>simply isn't familiar enough with the artist to have a confident opinion?

I can think of lots of reasons:

1. No time (I can't overemphasize this one)

2. You don't care enough about it to bother

3. Someone else has already expressed the same opinion
   and you don't want to be redundant (and you also
   don't want to be redundant)

4. You might change your mind later and regret what
   you wrote

5. You know that someone who owes you a tape has a
   contrary opinion and you don't want to wait any
   longer than necessary

6. Did I mention "no time"? That really has to be
   heavily emphasized

7. You've expressed too many other opinions lately
   and you don't want others to think you're conceited
   or have no life

8. You're just feeling too damn depressed

9. You're too busy thinking of one more thing for that
   lame-ass top-ten list you're doing to worry about
   anything else

10. It's time for South Park!


...And later:

>Well, I'll be dagburned -- someone actually read that post. I wasn't sure,
>judging from the silent response. That really felt like a wasted effort,
>considering it was probably the most time-consuming Fegpost I've ever
>written.

Perhaps I might even mention that I, too, am generally considered something
of a prodigy when it comes to picking out tunes by ear. Those parallels
between you and me just keep piling up, Eb. Scary, isn't it? And I haven't
even mentioned the Claudine Longet poster I've got rolled up in my desk.

John H. Hedges

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 20:40:02 -0700
From: Eb <gondola@deltanet.com>
Subject: Re: Rap Bastards!

Ben:
>>Christ. Listen, I didn't start the Dead flame wars -- others did.
>
>Well, the USA declared war on Japan before Japan declared war on the USA.
>But, as I remember, there was a little incident that *provoked* the USA...

Oh, so writing a negative sentence about the Grateful Dead is just as
reprehensible as bombing Pearl Harbor. Well, maybe in your world....

>I think what Ken was mainly referring to was your use of name-calling.
>"Petulant child", "indignant deadhead", "proggie", etc.... they are more
>clever than the standard brand of name-calling, but still the same thing.

Well, boiling down an insult down to two glib words is a lot less violent
than posting rambling 6-7K tirades the ways others do.

"The Happenings?" they asked, rolling the sound around carefully, balancing
it on the tip of their tongues.

Eb

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 20:40:02 -0700
From: Eb <gondola@deltanet.com>
Subject: Re: critical support?

Ken, writing less spitefully this time:
>I guess it depends on who you consider in the universe
>of critics. There are so many music magazines, internet sites, etc. in
>which "critics" abound.  I'm not sure what critical consensus really
>means. Spin magazine branded Cornershop's disc album of the year,
>didn't they?  Bands like Beck, Radiohead, even Prodigy, get way too
>much critical attention, wouldn't you say?

In Beck's case, nope, not at all. I think Beck may be remembered as THE
artist of the '90s, and I believe he will be around and flourishing for a
very long time. (I did think that Mellow Gold was individually overrated,
however.) And yes, I've said before that I think Radiohead is way
overrated, though I certainly don't hate the band. As for the Prodigy, they
really aren't that much of a critic's choice -- they received lots of
press, but it was mostly not-so-informed mainstream critics completing
assignments to write about the big Electronica phenomenon (which never
quite took off). Not really a heartfelt thing. And the album only received
OK reviews, actually -- the idea of the Prodigy, Charismatic Nucleus of the
Latest Rebellious Musical Craze, was larger than the reality of their
music. Me, I didn't even bother hearing the album -- I heard the previous
one (which most of the band's veteran fans like better), and it didn't win
me over. Meanwhile, all the Prodigy's recent radio hits seemed pretty
shallow to me. Not too durable. Lots of initial "grab-you hipness," not
much else. I wasn't motivated to hear more.

Yes, Spin picked Cornershop as best album. And yes, Cornershop are a
critic's favorite. That album showed up on lots and lots of critics' top 10
lists. Again, I didn't even hear the new album, but I heard the previous
two (plus an EP) and wasn't encouraged to pursue the band further. I'd like
to hear the new album sometime, but I'm pretty sure that I won't make a
personal connection with it. But even though I'm not a fan, the group is
quite respected overall (and popular too). So I'm aware of that, and
acknowledge it.

>Now I'm not saying that magazine music writers are slaves to the music
>labels or to editors or to whatever is selling biggest at the moment, but
>I imagine the reality is probably typically closer to this: music critics
>get a bunch of discs in the mail a couple of times a week, having deadlines
>to write reviews that prevent them from getting more than one or two quick
>listens to the music, make a quick judgment and then pen a few sentences
>of easily digestible or supposedly witty material and voila, 3 1/2 stars
>out of 5.

All depends on where you look, kemosabe. If you're reading shorthand
reviews in People or Entertainment Weekly, yeah, this isn't far from the
truth. But if you read detail-oriented music magazines that aren't so
focused on best sellers and major-label promotional campaigns, it's a
different story. If you read a lot of music reviews, you can tell pretty
quickly if a writer knows what he's talking about, or whether he's just a
hired gun whose background is more in journalism than in music.

>This is a serious question: how do you determine whom to look to when
>determining critical consensus?  Specific magazines, newspapers, writers?
>I'm hoping you sample beyond your LA, California city limits. ;)

<sigh> Well, I've already cited the Village Voice poll repeatedly, which
polls like 450 of the nation's most widely read critics. That's a pretty
decent barometer (though a bit mainstream-skewed). Also, when you scan lots
of music magazines, when you spend a lot of time on the phone hearing what
other music-saturated folks are focused on, you get a pretty darn good idea
of where the heat is. Say I'll be talking to some publicist from X label.
She'll ask me what it's in my CD player lately. I'll tell her that I'm gaga
over the new Rufus Wainwright disc. She replies, "Oh yeah...I know a lot of
writers who are crazy about that one." Now, on the other hand, I might have
said that I was really into the new Halo Benders album. In THAT case, I
might get back something like, "Oh yeah? I haven't heard that. What label
are they on?" Not much buzz surrounding that band. Or alternately, I'll ask
her what SHE is enjoying at the moment. You can get a pretty strong sense
of what folks are listening to, when a bunch of conversations like this
pile up with people from a variety of different musical immersion levels.

>>>>And Woj, if you wanna "burst my bubble," then post about music other
>>>>than Robyn and Lilithfairism. ;)
>I'd love to hear the intended meaning of the above comment. It sounds a lot
>like you were pulling out your trump card and saying, "until you talk
>about more music that you currently do, you're not ready to get into
>the ring with me--for I am the grand MASTER of DISASTER, the spinner of
>the TUNES and the maker of your WOUNDS, I'll turn you around like a REEL
>to REEL, you'll be as out of DATE as an 8-track TAPE, . . . mo' fo'."

Gawd. OK, Grandmaster Ken, I'll give you the skinny. I needle Woj about
liking nuttin' but his "ecto" music. He needles me back. It's harmless. In
the above case, Woj made a dismissive comment about some Lilith-esque
artist (I don't remember who), and added "Sorry to burst your bubble, Eb."
As in "Sorry to tear down your impression of my narrow musical interests,
Eb." My response was the above -- in other words, "You want to defy my
pigeonhole, and yet you're still demonstrating your pursuit of sensitive
singer-songwriter women types -- it's just that in this case, you happened
to find one that you didn't like." Or to put it another way, Woj saying
that he doesn't care for X female artist is a lot weaker counterargument
than if he had said that he loves Rancid (for instance). See? Really had
nothing to do with what you're throwin' down, G.

Jeez, if not for Ken, you guys might've been spared my posts today. ;)

"Only better."

Eb, still trying to figure out how Scott Baio became involved

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 20:49:43 PDT
From: "Daniel Barkhouse" <barkalone@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Reasons for not posting

>10. It's time for South Park!

I'd appreciate hearing some feedback from other Fegs about this show. I 
am a part-time teacher and I find it more than a little disturbing that 
the majority of my middle school students absolutely adore it. I read 
TIME, Newsweek, Rolling Stone articles on the programme, but have to 
confess that I have not seen much other than a Web clip of one of the 
show's eight-year-old characters drop-kicking a baby. Between that and 
DVDA, I can't say that I'm motivated towards it. What is going on in our 
culture that this sort of thing is as wildly popular as it is? And nail 
me for being anal if you like, but it's my feeling that something has 
happened within the popular culture within the past ten years or so that 
makes events like the Jonesboro episode almost understandable... Circa 
Tarantino, peut-etre? 

But, as for South Park, is the show as great as its adherents--George 
Clooney, say--claim?

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 16:13:51 +1200
From: james.dignan@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (James Dignan)
Subject: Eb Wars - echoing Mark G

>Is he correct in saying that he will be treated differently
>for things like starfucking than the rest of us? I'm almost
>positive that he is.

agreed. I've mentioned knowing Martin Phillipps (Chills), Bob Scott (Bats),
Shayne Carter and Andrew Brough (Straitjacket Fits), David Kilgour (Clean)
and various members of the Verlaines on several occasions on this list over
the past few years. Although none is quite in the stellar league of some
other names mentioned, I have never received any abuse from anyone about
it.

Eb raises the hackles of more than a few members of this list for his
opinions, but at least he has the courage to say them, knowing that he will
cause the occasional flame. Better that than never to have a worthwhile
opinion on anything.

And think of how boring this list would have been without him for the last
couple of years! There are a handful of fegs I always look out for the
posts of, because they are usually worthwhile. Eb is right at the top of
that list, along with The Great Quail and Susan D. (there are others, never
you fear, sticking their latex fins above the surface of some coastal
region, and from the wilds of Australia and Canada to the swamplands of
Florida and Bath, and all points in between...)

Basically, what I'm saying is: don't lay off Eb completely - a lot of his
opinions are just that and as such need to be half of a debate. BUT try to
keep it a debate, rather than degenerating into flame wars. Don't single
him out as "Fegmania's most wanted". And fer feg's sake steer well clear of
attacking the person - go for the ball, not the player, otherwise you will
be yellow carded, or worse!

James

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 23:23:46 -0500
From: JH3 <jh3@netins.net>
Subject: There Can Be Only One!

Eb wrote:
>I don't necessarily expect personal attacks right and left...

...and kept writing:
>My opponents are far more guilty of personal attacks than me.

...and just recently:
>Well, boiling down an insult down to two glib words is a lot less 
>violent than posting rambling 6-7K tirades the ways others do.


Now wait just one minute here! I thought you said *I* was the
Official Pathetic Whiner on this list, and now you're grabbing
that role for YOURSELF? How fair is THAT?

JH3

------------------------------

End of fegmaniax-digest V7 #274
*******************************