From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V7 #483 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Wednesday, December 23 1998 Volume 07 : Number 483 Today's Subjects: ----------------- barfing [Mark_Gloster@3com.com] Re: Crablings unhatched [Briannupp@aol.com] Pinkwater on Teletubbies [steve ] Really Bad Things [Joel Mullins ] Sally and CD Text ["Tony Blackman"] Merry meet, merry part, etc. [Natalie Jacobs ] Fegunta numero uno: what is a pog? [Bayard Catron ] Re: Fegunta numero uno: what is a pog? [overbury@cn.ca] Re: Fegunta numero uno: what is a pog? [overbury@cn.ca] Re: Sally and CD Text [Eric Loehr ] [none] [Eric Loehr ] Re: Really Bad Things [Joel Mullins ] Recommended reading for political folks [Eleanore Adams ] Re: Really Bad Things ["Bret" ] (polytix) still long, still boring [Christopher Gross Subject: Pinkwater on Teletubbies Today on his regular All Things Considered* spot, Daniel Pinkwater took on the weighty matter of the Teletubbies. He rather likes them. In fact, he thinks that the Teletubbies set is an homage to The Prisoner, what with the talking sprinklers and the all-seeing babysun. Brilliant insight or completely off his nut? I don't know, but the music is nice. - - Steve *this might be on file at ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 01:43:25 -0800 From: Joel Mullins Subject: Really Bad Things Has anyone seen Very Bad Things? I saw it tonight and I'd strongly recommend that everyone sees this film. It's definitely one of the best films of the year. - --Joel ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 09:43:27 +0000 From: "Tony Blackman" Subject: Sally and CD Text Has anyone got a version of "Sally Was a Legend" out there on tape? I'm still kicking myself for having missed the two opportunities I've had for recording it..... I can't get it out of my mind. I reckon it's the best song Robyn's written for a long while. On another note, can anyone from the US tell me how many CDs these days are CD Text encoded? I just thought that it was just that the UK was a third world audio/video nation that meant we didn't have any over here, but it appears that after a frenzied CD shopping expedition in L.A. only one CD out of thirty I bought had CD Text. That means that I've now got TWO CDs in total with CD Text, and BOTH of those are by Dan Bern! Is it just one record company putting them out? As someone who spends a lot of time listening to music in the car, I had hoped CD Text would mean the end of my referring to songs by their track numbers, but it looks like I'm wrong again (and disappointed). Anyone got any opinions on VAST? The constant playing of "Touched" on KROQ meant it grew on me. Tony. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 09:17:29 -0400 From: Natalie Jacobs Subject: Merry meet, merry part, etc. >kind that I think would function well.> > >i'm genuinely interested in a kind that you think would function well. >offlist, if you prefer. (hell, not at all, if you prefer...) Argh... I'm a very ignorant anarchist, really - I don't have the vocabulary to explain what I have in mind. Ask me again when I've read a few more books, or when I'm less tired, whichever comes first. >supposedly favor freedom?> > >"supposedly" is the key word, here. i touched on this yesterday, but, >what they mean by "freedom" is, more less, "don't tax me, don't tell me >i can't smoke dope, and don't touch my guns." but is wage slavery >freedom? is getting cancer (an industrial disease if ever there was >one) freedom? Hey, I'm not arguing! I'm no libertarian. Why do you think I used the word "supposedly"? >own biases onto the concept of the left-right spectrum, to say the >least.> > >i think you've got it completely backwards. what are the differences, >say, between the soviet union and nazi germany? not semantic >differences: actual, tangible conditions. there aren't very many, >right? yet, one is called a right-wing dictatorship, and one is called >a left-wing dictatorship. why? is it completely arbitrary? I agree that the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany had very little difference between them. But that's not my point. What I see you doing is saying that anything you like is left-wing, and anything you dislike is right-wing. I agree with you on some points, so I'm left-wing? No, I'm not. I don't believe in a lot of the things you believe in. What am I then, right-wing? No, I'm not right-wing, either. I'm neither. Politics are too complicated to be boiled down into a left-wing/right-wing, either/or scenario. It's like saying you have to be either straight or gay, or Christian or Jewish. It's not that simple. > Well, I wouldn't want to go so far as to say that there's something >*wrong* with Ani Difranco -- all these aspects you mentioned are very cool -- >but I can tell you what I strongly dislike about her: her voice. It just bugs >the shit outta me. Oh, *man*. Don't get me started. Apart from DiFranco's mainstream counterpart, Alanis Morrisette, I have never heard a female voice so filled with irritating, affected mannerisms. I just want to scream at her to shut up every time I hear her. And I have a very high tolerance for annoying voices, too (e.g. early Kristin Hersh, Robyn, Jeff Mangum, etc.). And of course there's her whole "gosh, I'm so rebellious, I've got a nose-ring and call myself 'punk-rock'" shtick... and she's so freaking pretentious, too. Yuck. >the coolest news in a long, long time has been pinochet's, uh, >misadventures. and yes, it would be wonderful to see saddam stand >trial. but first and foremost should be henry kissmyassinger. Eddie, you probably disapprove of Michigan's own Michael Moore (he still calls himself a Democrat, for cryin' out loud), but in his book "Downsize This!" he had this bit about a "show trial" for Kissinger, in which Kissinger is beaten to death by Vietnamese amputees. You'd dig it. From James's quiz... >12A D.W.Gregory John H., Steve, Ross... I'm gonna let you take this one, it being the holidays and all. n. p.s. This will probably be my last post before I depart for Shreveport tomorrow - a mere 5 hours from Danielle in Baton Rouge, and only 80 miles from the birthplace of Jeff Mangum in Ruston! - so I would like to wish you all a very happy solsticial holiday. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 10:04:03 -0500 (EST) From: Bayard Catron Subject: Fegunta numero uno: what is a pog? On Tue, 22 Dec 1998, Eb wrote: > Bayard: > >> of his record labels dropping the ball. That's simply the enduring > >> rationalization/wishful thinking of the Zealous Fan in Denial > > > >Didn't say it was PURELY a case of that. I said it had something to do > >with it. > > Very well. Thanks. > >Now you're naming a bunch more factors > >that RH probably couldn't do much about if he wanted to. > > Right...so? I didn't say he was STRIVING to have these shortcomings. My point was more that there ARE many other factors. I really think you're overstating the whole "passe" argument. At the risk of receiving an angry reply from your bodyguard, I infer it may have something to do with your job (a better one than mine - i work for the NSA). > >And I think he is approachable more often than not. > > Spoken like a true Feg.... Not really. I bet he'd even be nice to you, and not tickle you half as hard as Natalie M. > Just about ALL of you are *fatally* oversimplifying in your responses. > Being "culturally relevant"/"topical"/whatever does NOT mean you have to > write songs about the current presidental administration, prime minister, > etc. Yes, absolutely! This is why I'm winning this debate. > political songs. Etc. What it DOES require is being more willing to write > songs that look beyond your own Weird Little Universe, a universe which > often has only tenuous connection to reality. Ah, but as I've said, a goodly number of Robynsongs DO look beyond his own sphere. And oftentimes his sphere is an analog to our own. > >> Now, I do think that "Airscape" might have been a more successful single, > >> if a major label had been behind it. But there, we're talking about RH's > >> best radio single ever... > > > >Don't forget "Queen of Eyes," too. > > Ehhh...great song, but not quite radioworthy. A bit rushed for airplay, I > think. And not quite polished enough. IIRC the single the record company chose was "Where are the Prawns?" Or possibly "..Destroy You". QoE and KoL got passed over. Or did you mean "rushed" as in "too short"? As Eddie sez, Queen of eyes gets shorter every time you listen to it. > >ps. To "reverse enginneer" your argument, would you say those top-grossing > >"grossout" bands you reposted recently are having great success in part > >b/c of their topical, relevant songwriting? > > No, those acts have become successful via other strategies, which are > completely irrelevant to Robyn's realm. Yeah... seems like their main strategy is "Be a big dumb bland music act with mass appeal". Basically the opposite of Robyn! (: > >(he's a sort of combination of Sayer, Eb, and someone who hates XTC.) > > "Sayer"? Leo? Huh? No, Jeme's big punk Japanese friend. He'll tell you all about him, or check the archives for the time after last year's bumbershoot travelogue (the first of its kind, i believe.) Pregunta: what are "pogs" for, anyway? =b ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:01:14 +0000 From: overbury@cn.ca Subject: Re: Fegunta numero uno: what is a pog? Date sent: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 10:04:03 -0500 (EST) From: Bayard Catron Copies to: fegmaniax@smoe.org Subject: Fegunta numero uno: what is a pog? Send reply to: Bayard Catron > Pregunta: what are "pogs" for, anyway? La reponse: Glass milk bottle stoppers. I've seen fancy ones with the thumb tab and the staple still present (for their areodynamic qualities, of course). Before I ever saw them on the mainland they were being sold on Oahu as "the Hawaiian milk cap game". I thought it'd never catch on; you might as well sell rocks as pets! - -- old guy. - -- Ross Overbury Montreal, Quebec, Canada email rosso@cn.ca ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:12:13 +0000 From: overbury@cn.ca Subject: Re: Fegunta numero uno: what is a pog? Oh, *James'* question! D'oh! - -- Ross Overbury Montreal, Quebec, Canada email rosso@cn.ca ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:19:12 -0500 (EST) From: Eric Loehr Subject: Re: Sally and CD Text On Wed, 23 Dec 1998, Tony Blackman wrote: > > Has anyone got a version of "Sally Was a Legend" out there on tape? I'm > still kicking myself for having missed the two opportunities I've had for > recording it..... I can't get it out of my mind. I reckon it's the best > song Robyn's written for a long while. I managed to miss this completely -- I'd also love to get an audio copy if anyone managed to capture it here or elsewhere; (I have lots to trade.) > > On another note, can anyone from the US tell me how many CDs these days are > CD Text encoded? I just thought that it was just that the UK was a third > world audio/video nation that meant we didn't have any over here, but it > appears that after a frenzied CD shopping expedition in L.A. only one CD > out of thirty I bought had CD Text. That means that I've now got TWO CDs in > total with CD Text, and BOTH of those are by Dan Bern! Is it just one > record company putting them out? As someone who spends a lot of time > listening to music in the car, I had hoped CD Text would mean the end of my > referring to songs by their track numbers, but it looks like I'm wrong > again (and disappointed). What the heck is CD Text encoded? (Obviously) I've never heard of it... Eric ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:20:57 -0500 (EST) From: Eric Loehr Subject: [none] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 10:20:05 -0800 From: Joel Mullins Subject: Re: Really Bad Things Eb wrote: > > >Has anyone seen Very Bad Things? I saw it tonight and I'd strongly > >recommend that everyone sees this film. It's definitely one of the best > >films of the year. > > > >--Joel > > The reviews have been *terrible*.... > > Eb So, what's your point? Don't take this personally, Eb, but I don't trust critics. Some people seem to think that critics have better taste than anyone else in the world. But I don't buy into that. I loved Very Bad Things. It's a great film! Hell, the English Patient got good reviews and that movie sucked. - --Joel ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 08:31:06 +0000 From: Eleanore Adams Subject: Recommended reading for political folks I am reading "No Island of sanity" By Vincent Bugliosi right now - will finish it today. If you don't know who he is, he is one of the best prosecutores CA has seen. he is the one who put away Manson, if you need a high profile case. He won 105 out of 106 feloney cases. The premise of his short work is that this jones v Clinton trial should have been postponed until after the President was done with his official public office, and sites much, much, much presidence for this. Almost always our court system is in favor of the public interest, not the private interest. But in the case of Jones v Clinton, the Supreme court weighed in the favor of the private, Jones, not the public, us the people of the USA. This does not mean Jones would not have had her day in court - it would just have been postponed until after the president was done with his duties. If the Supreame Courd had not made their flawed ruling in 1996, we would not be where we are today. It is very interesting.... Eleanore ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 08:32:05 -0800 From: Mark_Gloster@3com.com Subject: Re: Eric Loehr said: > > > > It looks like he got the same answers on James' quiz as I did. What do we win? - -Markg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 08:33:36 +0000 From: Eleanore Adams Subject: Re: Music again > she.rex wrote: > > p.s. on the RH Greatest Hits cd, who did backing vocals on She > Doesn't Exist and Dark Green Energy? It sounds like Michael Stipe but > maybe I don't know all the Egyptians' voices well enough? There are no > non-band credits listed but there aren't many detailed notes on the > liner. Just wondering... Yes it was Stipe on "She doesn't exsist" Eleanore ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 10:38:39 -0600 From: "Bret" Subject: Re: Really Bad Things >> The reviews have been *terrible*.... >> >> Eb > >So, what's your point? Don't take this personally, Eb, but I don't >trust critics. Some people seem to think that critics have better taste >than anyone else in the world. But I don't buy into that. I loved Very >Bad Things. It's a great film! Hell, the English Patient got good >reviews and that movie sucked. I saw 'very bad things' and it was just that. I came out thinking hmmmm a dark comedy for people who don't know dark comedies. Pathetic Hollywood attempting to cash in on the success of recent indi films that have gained some success. typical, typical, typical. the reviews should have been terrible. the film was. C. Slater? come on! sorry, just my opinion and all, but best film of the year? only if I were as brainwashed as the general movie seeing public. again, just my opinion. English Patient? decent film. - -b ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:43:04 -0500 (EST) From: Christopher Gross Subject: (polytix) still long, still boring Whew! For a while there it looked like I wouldn't have time to reply. Aren't you all glad that didn't happen? There's a basic disproportion built into this thread. The way it has developed, I am in the position of defending a real-life country and its political and economic system, whereas Eddie is defending a hypothetical utopia. Obviously Eddie is going to have an easier time of it than me! Since Tewsian Socialism does not exist, it has never done anything bad (or anything else). Thus Eddie can point out American crimes and leave the reader with the impression that his ideal is better because it's never done any of these things. Meanwhile, if I take the time to respond every time I think I see an *unfair* accusation against the US, I wind up looking like an uncritical defender of *everything* the US does. This strikes me as unfair. I am not a right-wing nut (or right wingnut). And not everyone who sees things about capitalism that need to be changed is necessarily on Eddie's side. On Mon, 21 Dec 1998, Capitalism Blows wrote: > market economies *do* suck. but one shouldn't mistake a capitalist > economy for a market economy. one thing marx was spot-on correct about > was that capitalism simply *does not work* on its own terms. the > purpose of the state is to protect capitalists from the free market. > nothing could be truer. I'll agree that there's no such thing as a perfectly free market, except in Libertarian theology. But I support the imperfectly free market economy that we have. A market economy is one that functions through people voluntarily buying and selling what they want, based on their own estimations of cost and benefit, without reference to an imposed plan. Which part of that do you want to change? > US caused every evil in the world from war to poverty to crabgrass"> > > i know you're joking. but, i have NEVER stated that the soviet union, > to take one example, was anything other than an evil empire. it's not > the fact of the existence of the united states that *causes* evil. but > anybody who would deny that the u.s. is a MAJOR perpetrator of some of > the most evil deeds ever committed has got his or her head pretty far up > his or her ass. I'm always impressed by the respectful way that you deal with opposing views! ;) Anyway, "some of" the most evil deeds ever committed? Sure, I'd buy that. I just don't buy all the unspoken assumptions: that everything unpleasant that the US has done was an avoidable crime, that the US is the worst criminal in history, that socialism as you define it is the only way to make things better. > as susan mentioned, it's not a competition to see who's more radical > than the next. just because some other fegs are not as outspoken --or > even as active (and, as susan also mentioned, activism can take many > forms. i'm a very strong believer that even trying to live one's life > in accord with one's principles is very political)-- as i am doesn't > invalidate them. I had doubted your statement that all of the Fegs mentioned were "at least as far to the left" as you. I wasn't setting a competition for the most radical, nor was I invalidating anyone. > we've had this argument before. but, why do you insist on labeling as > socialist every state that *purports* to be so? the policies you > mention are *not* socialist policies, simple as that. It's *not* that simple, though. Why is your definition of socialism privileged over those of millions of other socialists over the past century and a half? The policies that I mentioned -- "ranging from massive social spending to violent revolution, expropriation of the rich, nationalization of industry, and a centrally planned economy" -- have been advocated or practiced by numerous socialist parties and governments, ranging from Sweden to Cuba. You're in the position of a Christian fundamentalist denying that Catholics and Unitarians are "really" Christian. > yourselves socialists?> > > communal ownership and control of the means of production. democratic > polity. it's pretty basic. Okay, fine. So, if other Fegs do not want "communal ownership and control of the means of production," then they aren't as far left as you. Agreed? I snipped a bunch of stuff about foreign policy because it all boiled down to two points. First, Saddam Hussein is more dangerous than you think. Second, denouncing US crimes is not the same as proving that your ideal socialism would be any better, assuming it would work at all. > brick with his own two hands.> > > only if they get rid of mr. toad's wild ride. But they did, didn't they? > a > "Radio Free Iraq" to beam anti-Saddam propaganda into the country.> > > again, a pretty major violation of iraqi sovereignty. how would we > react, for example, were castro to start beaming anti-u.s. propaganda > into florida? Oh, okay, so you *don't* support us aiding the opposition, democratic or otherwise, in Iraq. Your earlier statement made it sound like you did. Forget imagining Castro's propaganda radio! Imagine what would happen if some group of *Americans* started distributing anti-US propaganda in the US. Imagine if they had a newsletter -- entitled, say, Eat the State -- a web site, the whole nine yards! Geez, our capitalist overlords would really leap into action then! The paper and web site would be shut down before the second issue came out, the staff would be arrested and sentenced to long terms of hard labor for anti-state agitation, their subcribers would be rounded up.... Man, it would be ugly. Now, compare that to the fate of a pro-capitalist newspaper once Tewsian socialism is instituted. They'd be free to propagandize to their hearts' content, the People's Communal Paper Mill would give them paper to print on, People's Communal Trucking would distribute their paper, People's Communal Telecom would give them a web site, and everyone would be happy. > spectrum is pretty meaningless.> > > i see what you're getting at, but i'm not so sure i agree. i think you > can say that the more you would like people to be free, you tend toward > the left, and the less you would like them to be so, you tend toward the > right. Well, what you're arguing here is for a *new* left-right spectrum. (I could suggest some more: maybe the more internationalist you are, the farther left you would be, and nationalists like Ho Chi Minh would be on the far right.) But I still think that the old, traditional spectrum doesn't work. Ideologies near each other on the traditional spectrum don't necessarily have much in common. > the begging question, of course, what about "libertarian" capitalists? > it's a crock. a world controlled by those who own the most property > doesn't sound anything like freedom to me. yes, some of them (maybe > even most of them) say they're for the "small" business-owner. but this > is hopelessly naive. even more naive than the socialist, methinks! I dunno ... a naivete contest between libertarians and socialists ... too close to call, I'd say. And then, On Tue, 22 Dec 1998, Capitalism Blows wrote: > do you think the people of vietnam felt very "free" when > we came down and killed three million of them, made half the population > refugees, defoliated the country, and then slapped a twenty-year embargo > on them for having had the audacity to request reparations for a war > they supposedly won? Do you think they felt very free living under Communism? And if capitalism is so exploitive, you'd think twenty years of no trade with the US would be the best thing that could happen to Vietnam. > the people of ontario passed a > no-fault single-payer auto-insurance scheme. it was struck down by > *u.s.-based* insurance companies for being a restraint on trade. how > "free" would you say the people of ontario felt then? > the multinational coroporation is probably the most totalitarian > institution ever devised. Wow! That's a pretty sweeping statement, even allowing for Tewsian hyperbole. Better watch out that you aren't thrown into the Exxon-Mobil concentration camp (so much more totalitarian than Hitler, Stalin and Mao's versions). But seriously, I agree that multinational corporations are too powerful, and that they often misuse their power. But they aren't omnipotent, and "communal ownership and control of the means of production" is not an effective way of dealing with them. Eddie-style socialists might do a lot of good on specific causes, boycotting here and educating there. But your brand of socialism itself is not going to happen and wouldn't work if it did, so effort spent promoting it is just so much effort pissed down the drain without helping anyone. > i think you've got it completely backwards. what are the differences, > say, between the soviet union and nazi germany? not semantic > differences: actual, tangible conditions. there aren't very many, > right? yet, one is called a right-wing dictatorship, and one is called > a left-wing dictatorship. why? is it completely arbitrary? No, it's not. Why is the Soviet regime considered left-wing? Because its leadership were Marxists and employed Marxism as a guide to society, because it abolished private ownership of the means of production and the market economy, because its supporters were almost all socialists (with, yes, a leavening of anarchists), because the Communists thought that they were building a workers' and peasants' state. By every commonly accepted criterion used at the time by leftists themselves, the Soviet regime was leftist. This isn't arbitrary, and it wasn't just invented by the World Capitalist Conspiracy in 1948 to discredit leftists everywhere. > or is it political? why should we analyse a society from the inside > out? why should we say, "well, let's see, according to president truman, > the soviet union has a leftist government. and, ok, it's also a > dictatorship. ergo, it's a left-wing dictatorship," rather than, "ok, > the soviet union is a murderous totalitarian empire with a small > bureaucratic-military elite living high on the hog. ergo, it is a > right-wing dictatorship"? We've been over this in previous discussions, but the problem is that you attach emotional rather than structural definitions to "left" and "right." Why can't a leftist regime be bad? Can't you at least call the Soviets a "perversion of the left" or something? > of course, i really don't give a fuck *what* we call it, or how we label > it. what really matters is speaking/acting out against lies and > injustices. but it *would* be nice --and most likely helpful-- if we > were able to communicate. if there were actually such a thing as a > political discourse in this country. I couldn't agree more! This is the last I'll post for almost a week. Thus, you all have a perfect opportunity to let the thread die, or spend lots of time writing a killer reply, or flame me without fear of immediate response, whichever you prefer. - --Chris ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:46:18 -0500 From: lj lindhurst Subject: RH in Alt-Rock-A-Rama, and a question about God Almighty Himself So one of Q's Christmas presents was the Rolling Stone Alt-Rock-A-Rama book, which I've been thumbing through all morning. It's quite entertaining, actually, and full of lots of good info-- I would definitely rate this as Feg Recommended Reading (someone should compile a list)(no! no! I take that back! Do NOT compile a list!). Some of the chapter headings are stuff like, "The Ten Most Important Hardcore Bands" and "Thirty One Artists Who Influenced Julian Cope" (attention, Runion-1!). There is also an essay by Robyn called "Cobalt Blue Sonata"-- apparently, it's a trippy Robyn tale about his guitar bleeding blue paint. (Robyn is also mentioned in a zillion other places) But anyway, one of the chapters is called "Fifteen Alt-Rock Feuds", and it lists "Elvis Costello vs. Bonnie Bramlett." Who is Bonnie Bramlett, and why is she feuding with Elvis? Does anyone know what this is in reference to? On a completely unrelated note, speaking of movies, has anyone else seen "Passion In the Desert", about the guy who gets stuck in the desert and he becomes LOVERS (no shit!) with a jaguar?? It's not a great movie by any means, but it was certainly one of the WIERDEST FUCKING MOVIES I have ever seen!! Obligatiory Jennifer Love Hewitt comment: such a nice girl. your friend, - --What is Up With This French Shit? ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V7 #483 *******************************