From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V8 #241 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Friday, July 9 1999 Volume 08 : Number 241 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: purchases ["Livia" ] Rushmore and the Kinks [Joel Mullins ] Re: Eyes Wide Shut [0% RH] [Joel Mullins ] [Fwd: Robyn Hitchcock] [Joel Mullins ] Re: Rushmore and the Kinks [Ross Overbury ] Re: Rushmore and the Kinks [ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com] Re: Momus song and websurf music [digja611@student.otago.ac.nz (James Di] Re: 'Bots ["Capitalism Blows" ] Re: South Pork ["Capitalism Blows" ] Re: [Fwd: Robyn Hitchcock] ["Capitalism Blows" ] Re: [Fwd: Robyn Hitchcock] [Joel Mullins ] Re: 'Bots ["Livia" ] Robyn In-Store performance [Insomnboy@aol.com] Re: A child was graphically incinerated by igniting his anal wind...(NR) ["Livia" ] Re: South Pork [Livia ] White with no sugar ["Sedgwick, Gary" ] Re: 'Bots [Christopher Gross ] Re: I guess everyone else is doing it? [Michael R Godwin ] off-topic question-a-roonie [Bayard ] Re: 'Bots [Aaron Mandel ] "Let me tell you about my MOTHER!!!" [The Great Quail ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 20:13:52 -0700 From: "Livia" Subject: Re: purchases > I've just come from Reckless Records, and can announce that Joel is now the > proud owner of a signed (by all Egyptians) vinyl copy of Fegmania! (pending > shipment and payment, o'course) I also found a signed copy of the Bells of > Rhymney 12", which led me to believe that some ex-feg (do such creatures > exist?) ha sold off her/his collection, as there is still other vinyl there, > mostly 12" singles and Armageddon LPs. Let me know if'n yer interested... yes! and if you don't want that bells of rhymney, i'll gladly bid, because i love that song and used to listen to it over and over. (and i have a fair bit of welsh ancestry, y'know.) > by the way, of possible interest to chicago fegs, as if this month weren't > busy enough--there was a flyer on the reckless wall that Kim Deal (ex-Pixies, > Breeders, etc.) has been recording her new album in Chill, and will be > playing this Saturday at a relatively unannounced show at Lounge Ax. > Supposedly it's her first show in two years...I'm going, and I'll were a > purple robyn shirt in case anyone else has any interest in recognizing me... and blue-green robyn boots? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 22:15:05 -0700 From: Joel Mullins Subject: Rushmore and the Kinks Just saw Rushmore again. I loved it even more on the second viewing. That's a really a great movie. Very funny and really cool. The first time I saw it, I didn't really notice how kick ass the soundtrack is. There were certain songs I remember from the first time, but almost every song in the movie is great. Anyway, I especially liked "Nothing in this World to Stop Me Worrying 'Bout That Girl," by the Kinks. That's the first time I've heard that song. Actually, until a couple of months ago, I'd never even heard a Kinks album. But, after hearing how much Michael K. likes Village Green Preservation Society, I went out and bought it sometime back in the spring. And, of course, I loved it, but I haven't bought anything else since then (anything else Kinks, that is). So, I'm wondering. What album is that "Worrying 'Bout That Girl" song on? And which Kinks albums would you guys recommend I buy? Thanks Joel ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 22:20:10 -0700 From: Joel Mullins Subject: Re: Eyes Wide Shut [0% RH] D B wrote: > > >Are you fucking kidding me? Jesus Christ! That sucks. Can't people > >just not go see it if it's too offensive? > > People need to be protected from themselves. That's why Bigger Longer and > Uncut is so tame... Yeah, apparently protecting people from themselves is more important than protecting people from other people. That's why you have to be 18 to smoke a cigarette, but only 16 to drive a car. I mean, if a 16 year old is too immature to make a responsible decision on whether or not to smoke, then he sure as hell shouldn't be driving. But I'm getting off the point here... Joel ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 22:24:34 -0700 From: Joel Mullins Subject: [Fwd: Robyn Hitchcock] Someone just sent me this. I have no idea who this person is or how they got my address or why in hell they think I'd pay $45 for a promo, but I thought I'd send it on to you guys just in case there's some of you out there with WAY too much money and WAY too little patience. Bdy22@aol.com wrote: > > Hello. I have the "Jewels for Sophia" CD, in a jewel box with white cover, > for $45 postpaid. This is an original Warner Brotherrs promo disc and not a > CDR. > Please let me know, thanks. > > Bill ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 00:23:07 -0400 (EDT) From: Ross Overbury Subject: Re: Rushmore and the Kinks On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Joel Mullins wrote: > Anyway, I especially liked "Nothing > in this World to Stop Me Worrying 'Bout That Girl," by the Kinks. [snip] > So, I'm wondering. What album is that "Worrying 'Bout That Girl" > song on? And which Kinks albums would you guys recommend I buy? It's on Kinda Kinks, which also features the essential "Tired of Waiting for You", and their throwaway cover of "Dancing in the Street". Ray flubs the words and they leave it alone! I'll defer the recommendations to fegs whose Kinks kollection is less spotty than mine. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 23:48:58 -0600 From: ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com Subject: Re: Rushmore and the Kinks >I'll defer the recommendations to fegs whose Kinks kollection >is less spotty than mine. A good starting point would probably be Kink Kronikles. It's a double-album compilation that covers up to about 1970, with an emphasis on the essential mid-late 60s stuff, and has a few great singles that never made it to the official albums. If you don't want to spring for a double album, "Something Else" would be a good next choice. Love on ya, Susan ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 17:13:40 +1200 From: digja611@student.otago.ac.nz (James Dignan) Subject: Re: Momus song and websurf music >er, what about kraftwerk. computer world, even. not to mention OMD's "Dazzle Ships". And a lot of Laurie Anderson's "Bright Red" (Puppet Motel, anyone?). And there are individual songs by various people, eg Kate Bush (Love and Understanding) "J4S"??? but that's the Josef Stalin Satanist Surfing Society! Why do I think that website is a great way to check out which movies are worth seeing - the ones they complain the most about are the ones to see... James James Dignan___________________________________ You talk to me Deptmt of Psychology, Otago University As if from a distance ya zhivu v' 50 Norfolk Street And I reply. . . . . . . . . . Dunedin, New Zealand with impressions chosen from another time steam megaphone (03) 455-7807 (Brian Eno - "By this River") ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 23:05:30 PDT From: "Capitalism Blows" Subject: Re: 'Bots apparently the harrison ford character in Blade Runner is a replicant. maybe this is way, way old news to y'all. but i'm not a huge fan of the movie. in fact, i could say that i do not like it (though i don't hate it). well, not that that's an excuse, really. although it's better to not pick up on things in movies you don't like than in movies you do, i suppose (like, all those things i missed in South Park...) anyhow, a friend was telling me about this last month. i guess it took a really long time for people to figure it out, or something. and then people were arguing about it and whatnot. so finally somebody asked scott himself, and he said, "well, yeah. the french picked up on that straight away." or words to that effec. From: MARKEEFE@aol.com Reply-To: MARKEEFE@aol.com To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Subject: Re: 'Bots Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 11:37:19 EDT In a message dated 7/7/99 5:03:57 PM, Michael.Wolfe@kp.org writes: << Nevertheless, I would not be surprised to hear that I fail the Turing test in some of your eyes. Let me know if you need some further proof of my fleshly manifestation. >> Well, as an attendee of Michael's birthday party just a few days ago, I can assure each and every one of you that he is, without any uncertainty, a bot. Jeme (who's also a bot) was there, too, and can back me up. In fact, from what I hear, everyone at that party is *still* trying to get the frosting out of the little nooks and crannies of our circuit boards! Oops, gave it away, didn't I? Yup, I'm a bot, too. My bot name is Finky Bot, because I tend to "out" all the other bots I know. It's a terrible thing to do, I know, but I just can't help myself! Please, my fellow bots, I hope you can forgive me :-) - -----Michael K., from Portbot, Oregon _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 23:07:08 PDT From: "Capitalism Blows" Subject: Re: South Pork allen ruch. _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 23:08:54 PDT From: "Capitalism Blows" Subject: Re: [Fwd: Robyn Hitchcock] didn't i see your name once on ebay, joel? having bid for something, i mean. if so, that could be where "bill" got your e-mail address, as well as, natch, picked up on your robyn interest. From: Joel Mullins Reply-To: Joel Mullins To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Subject: [Fwd: Robyn Hitchcock] Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 22:24:34 -0700 Someone just sent me this. I have no idea who this person is or how they got my address or why in hell they think I'd pay $45 for a promo, but I thought I'd send it on to you guys just in case there's some of you out there with WAY too much money and WAY too little patience. Bdy22@aol.com wrote: > > Hello. I have the "Jewels for Sophia" CD, in a jewel box with white cover, > for $45 postpaid. This is an original Warner Brotherrs promo disc and not a > CDR. > Please let me know, thanks. > > Bill _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 01:20:05 -0700 From: Joel Mullins Subject: Re: [Fwd: Robyn Hitchcock] Capitalism Blows wrote: > > didn't i see your name once on ebay, joel? having bid for something, i > mean. if so, that could be where "bill" got your e-mail address, as well > as, natch, picked up on your robyn interest. Well, that may have been where he got my email address and my RH interest. But you didn't see my name up there because my ebay username is different. Care to take a guess at what it is? It's Robyn-related. Anyway, I thought the guy was a bit of an asshole trying to charge $45 for a promo. I got the feeling he was trying to take advantage of me. Joel ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 23:56:02 -0700 From: "Livia" Subject: Re: 'Bots > apparently the harrison ford character in Blade Runner is a replicant. > maybe this is way, way old news to y'all. but i'm not a huge fan of the > movie. in fact, i could say that i do not like it (though i don't hate it). > well, not that that's an excuse, really. although it's better to not pick > up on things in movies you don't like than in movies you do, i suppose > (like, all those things i missed in South Park...) > anyhow, a friend was telling me about this last month. i guess it took a > really long time for people to figure it out, or something. and then people > were arguing about it and whatnot. so finally somebody asked scott himself, > and he said, "well, yeah. the french picked up on that straight away." or > words to that effec. scott who? i certainly never guessed that, though i suppose it retrospect it makes fine sense, especially with rachel as a kind of decoy: we already know she's one, so it's her fate we worry about, and we never bother to wonder about him and his. > From: MARKEEFE@aol.com > Reply-To: MARKEEFE@aol.com > To: fegmaniax@smoe.org > Subject: Re: 'Bots > Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 11:37:19 EDT > > > In a message dated 7/7/99 5:03:57 PM, Michael.Wolfe@kp.org writes: > > << Nevertheless, I would not be surprised to hear that I fail the > Turing test in some of your eyes. Let me know if you need some > further proof of my fleshly manifestation. >> > > Well, as an attendee of Michael's birthday party just a few days ago, > I > can assure each and every one of you that he is, without any uncertainty, a > bot. Jeme (who's also a bot) was there, too, and can back me up. In fact, > from what I hear, everyone at that party is *still* trying to get the > frosting out of the little nooks and crannies of our circuit boards! Oops, > gave it away, didn't I? Yup, I'm a bot, too. My bot name is Finky Bot, > because I tend to "out" all the other bots I know. It's a terrible thing to > do, I know, but I just can't help myself! Please, my fellow bots, I hope > you > can forgive me :-) > > -----Michael K., from Portbot, Oregon if i had a porta-bot, then i wouldn't need to waste so much time trying to turn my car into a bathroom. personally, i'm not a bot at all, but a tom. and the baker's boy would certainly agree. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 03:14:39 EDT From: Insomnboy@aol.com Subject: Robyn In-Store performance Hi all, I've been too crazy-busy to pay much attention to Fegmanix lately. However, I got some news today. Robyn will be doing an in-store performance at Rhino Record store in Westwood @ 3PM, 8-1-99. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 01:42:14 -0700 From: "Livia" Subject: Re: A child was graphically incinerated by igniting his anal wind...(NR) >Re: A child was graphically incinerated by igniting his anal wind...(NR) what a fartist > what i find incredibly interesting...and typical...is that while this > reviewer *clearly* sat through the whole of this "extraordinarily vulgar, > vile, and repugnant movie," he "could not stomach" Bulworth and had to > leave after 70 minutes. and this review reminds me of the snippet at the > end of "my love explodes": that is the most obsceeeene...abomination > of a song that i-i-i-i, that is trash, that is dirt, that is filth" etc. "my love explodes" by whom? on what album? because while "trash", far from the "cak" that steward russell (if i remember correctly) called it here a few years ago, is right up there in my all-time favorite RH songs, "dirt" and "filth" don't get very far past my i/i/i. bulworth, on the other hand, sounds quite familiar...some older english novel, surely, though i don't want to stop and track it down, so i guess i'll just let it bubble up. (i'm thinking angela thirkell now, but only as a way-station, since she's far too frivolous and (comparatively) modern) i saw "orlando" in february, and "cold comfort farm", finally (my sister refused to watch it when i rented it during a visit in 5/98), sometime last fall. and that wacky "merlin" bbc movie with sam neill a few months ago. and an alternate version of dangerous liaisons (not the jm/gc one from the 80s) quite recently. argh, and portrait of a lady, and now i'm spinning way too fast. this could be the night, indeed (with a pointy daggery double-edged serrated breadknife, perhaps?) > and eddie, you are SO going to hell. > > see you there. > > "did i say death camps? i meant happy camps!" > > michelle never mind tommy's, i want to visit the leisure hive woo hoo and a half! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 01:52:15 -0700 From: "Livia" Subject: Re: I guess everyone else is doing it? > eddie, I think you need to write another letter. > > And that was a very smart move to change your name back to Eddie Tews from > Capitalism Blows before sending your message. > > > And personally, I thought the "CAP analysis" of The Phantom Menace > > was waaaay funnier: > > http://www.capalert.com/capreports/starwars4.htm > > Well, after reading their review of 10 Things I Hate About You... I > actually want to see it. I had no interest before. then maybe it can make me want to see PM, that fine and subtly- textured, wildly original piece of perfectly-cast cak. i might be one of the last people in the country, or at least in my urban SF-loving demographic, to see the damn thing. and i'll probably be that last person on this list to see storefront H at the rate i'm going. (or did viv say it would be playing in chicago when i visit next week?) > > There was also a band once called "Jobs for America" that always > > abbreviated itself as JFA, so sometimes I think "Jobs for Somalia." diamonds for wisdom. rubies hanging from cute little piggie ears. sapphires slowly sinking into stella galaxea. emeralds up alia's ass. but i prefer east opalescent amethystine with a touch of peridot. or maybe just a glitter starburst for my chain. => UNcap ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 09:02:03 +0000 (GMT) From: Livia Subject: Re: South Pork > To: /R=internet/R=smoe.org/U=fegmaniax/FFN=fegmaniax/@mr.nw.kp.org > Subject: South Pork > Date: Thursday, July 08, 1999 2:39 PM > > Znznzsxx... > > >waiting for michael w. to weigh in on South Park, i remain, and now that michael wolfe has had a turn, i might as well mention that i will never see this movie no matter what anyone says, because i've seen just enough of the tv show to know that i don't like it. for many reasons, but primarily because it's cruel to animals, and i work hard to avoid watching or reading or listening to anything like that. and if i do stumble across something, i'll get out as fast as possible. (though i did read that entire gothic.net story about the sick asshole removing pigeon's legs, and then working his/her way up. and to be quite honest, i was far more upset about the cat than about the possibility that the girl in green boots was his first human victim.) > >i don't understand this. okay, "sex" is a category. fine. no > >sex in movies. but why the "/homosexuality"? is not homosexual > >sex also just...sex? they're being unnecessarily repetitive, if > >you follow me. > > Well, I follow you, and I agree with you. But some folks have > these weird, complicated systems where some sex is okay some of > the time, and some sex is never okay, and so on. Apparently, > it's very important to these folks to rigorously and emphatically > distinguish between types. as if we don't all (or nearly all) have these systems for ourselves. though of course that is a far far cry from imposing them on anyone else, with obvious exceptions having to do with consent, damage, violence, etc. > Eddie, who's your Sensei? That, my friend, was the cherry on top > of the sundae. Beautiful! or the carrot in the cake! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 11:17:30 +0100 From: "Sedgwick, Gary" Subject: White with no sugar There was a song around a few weeks ago which was getting loads of play on GLR, and I think it was called "White With No Sugar". Anyway, most of the lyrical content was about surfing and relationships made over the web (there were also some funny anagram bits: "She told me bedroom is just an anagram of boredom"). Can't remember the name of the band now... anybody else heard this one? And don't forget the classic "RS232 Interface Lead" from Spitting Image a few years back! Gary > From: overbury@cn.ca > To: fegmaniax@smoe.org > Subject: Re: Momus song and websurf music > Date: Wednesday, July 07, 1999 5:44 AM > > Steve wrote: > > > >From a P1 list, a reason to buy the new Momus? > > [Momus song about someone and her iMac snipped] > > ... which connected with something I've been mulling over lately -- > why is it that although computers have become such a big part of > the lives of so many people, they aren't mentioned in songs much? > > There was car and surf music in the early '60's. Why is there > no websurf music? OK Computer, in spite of the title, doesn't > really feature computers prominently. We make art with them; > start romances, friendships and rivalries with them; work and > play with them. They're all over pop culture, books and in movies, > but where are they in music? Their relative absence is conspicuous. > > ____________________________________________________ Gary Sedgwick MKIRisk Midas-Kapiti International 1 St. George's Road Tel: +44 (208) 879 1188 Wimbledon Fax: +44 (208) 944 7963 London Direct: +44 (208) 486 1662 SW19 4DR Email: sedgwicg@midas-kapiti.com UK ____________________________________________________ (The views and opinions expressed in this email message are the sender's own, and do not necessarily represent the view and opinions of Midas-Kapiti International Ltd. This message and/or any attached documents may contain Privileged and Confidential Information and should only be read by those persons to whom this message is addressed.) .:. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 07:58:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: Re: 'Bots On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Capitalism Blows wrote: > apparently the harrison ford character in Blade Runner is a replicant. I'm a *big* fan of Blade Runner, but I've never really cared for the Deckard-as-replicant interpretation. It seems to undercut the moral dilemma of killing replicants. If Deckard is a replicant himself, then *of course* he should think of replicants as real people and not machines. It becomes simple identity politics. But if Deckard is a natural born human being, then seeing the humanity in replicants, falling in love with a replicant and giving up his job killing errant replicants seem more significant morally. Fortunately, morally uplifting movies are not a big priority with me, so I don't care that much if Ridley Scott has confirmed Deckard's replicantness. Sleepily, Chris ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 14:18:37 +0100 (BST) From: Michael R Godwin Subject: Re: I guess everyone else is doing it? On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, JH3 wrote: > So, you don't own ANY Toyah Willcox albums?!? Well okay, that > doesn't surprise me, it's not really the sort of thing we'd expect > [snip] My question is, who's Robert? Is it Smith? Wyatt? Gordon? > Mitchum? Reich? Surely Toyah's long-term partner in Wimborne, Mr Robert Fripp. On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Joel Mullins wrote: > And which Kinks albums would you guys recommend I buy? 'Something Else' gets my vote. And any collection of sixties singles which includes 'Dead End Street' and 'Where have all the good times gone'. On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Capitalism Blows wrote: > apparently the harrison ford character in Blade Runner is a replicant. > [snip] finally somebody asked scott himself, and he said, "well, yeah. > the french picked up on that straight away." or words to that effec. On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Livia wrote: > scott who? Ridley Scott, the director. But what would he know? The person to ask is the late Philip K Dick, author of 'Do androids dream of electric sheep?'. I don't think that there is any suggestion in the book that the private eye is an android, is there? - - Mike "There have always been Starkadders at Cold Comfort Farm" Godwin PS Did anyone notice PM Tony Blair repeatedly saying "There is no disagreement between John Prescott and I" on Question Time last night? Don't they do grammar in Scottish public schools? Or truth, come to that? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 10:40:13 -0400 From: The Great Quail Subject: Oooh! The *horror!!* I just checked out the CAP site, and what a wonderful resource that is. I must say, however, that I was shocked to discover that "Star Wars -- The Phantom Menace" had one hit under the "Sex/Homosexuality" rating -- STATUE NUDITY. My . . . my *God.* I weep for the children. - --Sensei Quail +---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+ The Great Quail, K.S.C. (riverrun Discordian Society, Kibroth-hattaavah Branch) For fun with postmodern literature, New York vampires, and Fegmania, visit Sarnath: http://www.rpg.net/quail "The people asked, and he brought quails, and satisfied them with the bread of heaven." --Psalms 105:40 (Also see Exodus 16:13 and Numbers 11:31-34 for more starry wisdom) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 10:58:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Bayard Subject: off-topic question-a-roonie i need a supercool birthday gift for a two-year-old. i know a bunch of you are child-bearing fegs, so email me with any ideas, things that your child was crazy about when she or he was two. please write me asap. here's a URL for you, too. finally, flash gets used for something really useful! http://www.hotwired.com/animation =b ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 11:31:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: 'Bots On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Livia wrote: > i certainly never guessed that, though i suppose it retrospect it > makes fine sense, especially with rachel as a kind of decoy: we > already know she's one, so it's her fate we worry about, and we never > bother to wonder about him and his. spoilers for Blade Runner... i don't remember how much of this is only in the director's cut, but the evidence in the film points very strongly to Gaff (the Edward James Olmos character) believing that Deckard is a replicant. Deckard has a recurring dream of unicorns, and at the end Gaff folds him a tiny unicorn while saying "she won't live -- but then again, who does?" there isn't that much cruelty to animals in South Park. or at least, when they antagonize animals, the animals usually attack them. a ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 11:27:13 -0400 From: The Great Quail Subject: "Let me tell you about my MOTHER!!!" Chris: >I'm a *big* fan of Blade Runner, but I've never really cared for the >Deckard-as-replicant interpretation. It seems to undercut the moral >dilemma of killing replicants. If Deckard is a replicant himself, then >*of course* he should think of replicants as real people and not machines. >It becomes simple identity politics. But if Deckard is a natural born >human being, then seeing the humanity in replicants, falling in love with >a replicant and giving up his job killing errant replicants seem more >significant morally. Fortunately, morally uplifting movies are not a big >priority with me, so I don't care that much if Ridley Scott has confirmed >Deckard's replicantness. A few things about "Bladerunner," which is one of my Top Five Movies of All Time (The others being "Wings of Desire," "Excalibur," Fellini's "8 1/2," and "Passion in the Desert"): 1. It is only in the Director's Cut are we given real evidence that supports the "Decker as a Replicant" hypothesis. This version -- the intended original one -- contains the controversial "unicorn dream" sequence, which when coupled with Gaff's faux-origami unicorn, seems to hint that Decker is indeed a replicant who is under surveillance. I disagree with Chris though, as I think this is interpretation is just as interesting and profound as the "Decker is a Human" hypothesis. One of the major questions in the book is whether or not replicants can feel emotions as deeply and meaningfully as humans; and Decker certainly does. In fact, he develops a higher system of morality than most of the humans around him. (Though Gaff does let them go at the end.) 2. If Decker is a human, Chris's comments still work for me, too. A good argument can be made either way. 3. If, indeed, the "French got it right away," as Ridley says, it may be because their modern culture is more used to the PoMo deconstruction gig -- in fact, modern French thought is the keystone to this school of thought. Now, that's a hard statement for me to make, because I really don't like the French as a nation and as a culture. So in my heart I would like to think they saw the Director's Cut first, while we Americans all firt saw the narrated film noir version, sans unicorn. But then again, the French smell bad and like really stupid comedy, so no amount of respect for Barthes and Derrida will make me feel less culrturally superior anyway. So there. 4. Let me take this time to point out that "Bladerunner" is rapidly on its way to becoming as classic and respected as "2001." Winner of several critical awards, it was on the list of 100 best movies as held by the Library of Congress. It has influenced so many SF movies that the phrase "A Bladerunner universe" has become a cliché. (Even CAPalert uses it for "The Matrix," which ironically enough was NOT at all a "Bladerunner like universe.") More than just a cinematic touchstone for the Cyberpunk genre, it has also been the subject of much serious critical study -- it has been analyzed in countless college classes, and whole papers have been written about it in various PoMo journals and books. I also find it interesting that what was presented as a dystopia in 1982 has now become an almost fashionably hip way of perceiving the future. 5. Decker was unquestionably a human in the book "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep." The book was radically different from the movie, portrays the androids in a much harsher light, and gets a hell of a lot stranger in the middle. Like all Philip K. Dick, it is mind-expanding, thought-provoking, occasionally frustrating and opaque, but definitely worth reading. - --Skinjob Quail, Mercer Apostate PS: "But a candle that burns on both ends burns twice as brightly, Roy. And you've burned so *very* brightly." Sigh. +---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+ The Great Quail, K.S.C. (riverrun Discordian Society, Kibroth-hattaavah Branch) For fun with postmodern literature, New York vampires, and Fegmania, visit Sarnath: http://www.rpg.net/quail "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 V8 #241 *******************************