From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V8 #268 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Sunday, July 25 1999 Volume 08 : Number 268 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Guildford, JfS Lyrics [dmw ] Re: can you say "tinnitis"? i knew you could! [Ethyl Ketone ] Re: can you say "tinnitis"? i knew you could! [Bayard ] Re: Hoot-hoot! song [ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com] Re: Hoot-hoot! song [MARKEEFE@aol.com] Rhino in-store @ 8-1 LA gig [Insomnboy@aol.com] Re: Hoot-hoot! song [Joel Mullins ] Re: Hoot-hoot! song [ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com] R.E.M. give me tinnitus ["jbranscombe@compuserve.com" ] Re: Hoot-hoot! song [Joel Mullins ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 09:33:31 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: Re: Guildford, JfS Lyrics On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, The Great Quail wrote: > I think the whole "Now there's a butterfly on my face/and I'm a number in a > drawer" is a reference to leaving. The butterfly? Well, look at another > song -- this new lover, her lips are like a butterfly, yes? And a number in wasn't a moth on the face a death metaphor even in the pre-Thomas Harris world? or have my memes been corrupted? (or maybe rhitchcock's memes were corrupted). but i think, says the gent who's heard the song once at a storefront screening and maybe once live, that it's a spiritual death thing, not a new lover thing. ....someday, there will be an hour that i'm not at work when a record store is open. i have faith and trust. perhaps then i can hear what all the fuss is about. - -- d. n.p. new order _brotherhood_ in a weird retro kick. woke up with one of their tunes running through my head -- how weird is that? n.r. doyle _the adventures of sherlock holmes_ p.s. saw this on a flyer in the hood, and, god, isn't this such a *great* band name? perro perdido wow. if fbeast weren't going so utterly swimmingly, i think i'd quit just so i could start a new band with that name. also thought "the ted offensive" was pretty great. - - "seventeen!" cried the humbug, always first with the wrong answer. - - oh no!! you've just read mail from doug = dmw@radix.net dmw@mwmw.com - - get yr pathos:www.pathetic-caverns.com -- books, flicks, tunes, etc. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 08:43:20 -0700 From: Ethyl Ketone Subject: Re: can you say "tinnitis"? i knew you could! At 3.24 AM -0700 7/24/99, Capitalism Blows wrote: >--his voice wasn't in its finest form (as it wasn't in italia). this >worries me a tad bit. but if he can get it fixed up, i'm thinking his >forthcoming headlining tour is going to be very good. he's just lighting >into that electric guitar like as if he's possessed. This actually touches on something I've noticed the last few times I've seen him as well as with Storefront. His voice seems to be losing a bit anymore. There is an edge to it I don't remember from earlier years. It seems to go hoarse early in the eve. Just noticing. - - c "Questions are a burden for others. Answers are a prison for oneself." **************************************************************************** M.E.Ketone/C.Galbraith meketone@ix.netcom.com carrieg@blueplanetsoftware.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 12:58:43 -0500 From: steve Subject: Re: life is good Tom Clark: > >aaaaah, my plan is working perfectly!!! Wouldn't Eb look cute with a tangerine iBook under his arm? It just might go with that shirt of his. ;) - - Steve _______________ We're all Jesus, Buddha, and the Wizard of Oz! - Andy Partridge ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 15:19:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Bayard Subject: Re: can you say "tinnitis"? i knew you could! > did you know that "tinnitis" is not in the dictionary? tinnitUs. -itis means a disease. (mr. pre-war lemonade!) by the way eddie, i am sending you something via post. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 12:48:02 PDT From: "Capitalism Blows" Subject: i used to be a good spellar i certainly can't agree with his voice having any problems in Storefront! in fact, as i've frequently argued, i think his voice sounded better in 1996 than it ever had before, or had since. making the movie then was *perfect* timing, in my opinion. _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 19:51:55 -0600 From: ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com Subject: Re: Hoot-hoot! song >Hmmm. I'd die happy if Robyn and Tim Keegan harmonized on this "Hoot Hoot" >song. Wow. Can't recall offhand but I am rather feeling like I'm the only person who's really annoyed by it. It's not even really the song itself, which is an OK Barrett-ish little ditty, I guess. It's the -context-. I mean, there are these beautiful, erotic, poetic, very intimate songs right before it. It just feels to me like sticking that and "Gene Hackman" on the end have almost a negating effect on what came before, like saying "but underneath all this I'm still just a -wacky- kinda guy, heh heh". I find that very frustrating. And yes, I AM one of the ME fans who's having trouble digging this one. It's starting to look as if whoever thought there was a correlation (was that you Eddie?) was spot-on. At the heart of what's bugging me is that I have a copy of the upcoming Momus album, and it just sounds so funny and fresh and bright, that the contrast is really sticking in my mind. On the other hand, Robyn's genius is much less flashy than Momus's, so it could be that this one will be a quiet grower and will need some time. Love on ya, Susan ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 21:56:13 EDT From: MARKEEFE@aol.com Subject: Re: Hoot-hoot! song In a message dated 7/24/99 5:52:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time, ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com writes: << Wow. Can't recall offhand but I am rather feeling like I'm the only person who's really annoyed by it. >> I wouldn't say that I'm really anooyed by it, but I usually jump up and turn off the CD before it gets to the bonus tracks (as is generally my wont). << It's not even really the song itself, which is an OK Barrett-ish little ditty, I guess. It's the -context-. I mean, there are these beautiful, erotic, poetic, very intimate songs right before it. It just feels to me like sticking that and "Gene Hackman" on the end have almost a negating effect on what came before, like saying "but underneath all this I'm still just a -wacky- kinda guy, heh heh". I find that very frustrating. >> I don't infer anything about Robyn intentions, but I agree with you about the context being all wrong. << And yes, I AM one of the ME fans who's having trouble digging this one. It's starting to look as if whoever thought there was a correlation (was that you Eddie?) was spot-on. >> I believe I posited that theory, based on Eddie's review. Interesting to see that the correlational support is mounting. So, where are the people who really like both or who don't like either? You must be out there! (well, I guess we don't *really* need to hear from those who don't like either album . . . what are ya, crazy?) ;-) - ------Michael K. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 00:31:27 EDT From: Insomnboy@aol.com Subject: Rhino in-store @ 8-1 LA gig Any fegs going to be at either of these next Sunday? I'd love to meet up with some other list folks, even though I haven't been paying much attention to the list lately. I'll fer sure be at the Rhino in-store (I work there, but have the day off. A rare occasion for me to set foot in that place when I'm not working!!!) as well as the Palace show. Russell in LA ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 23:37:05 -0700 From: Joel Mullins Subject: Re: Hoot-hoot! song MARKEEFE@aol.com wrote: > So, where are the people > who really like both or who don't like either? You must be out there! (well, > I guess we don't *really* need to hear from those who don't like either album > . . . what are ya, crazy?) ;-) Well, my feelings have been kind of mixed the last couple of days. As far as Moss Elixir goes, I think it's one of Robyn's best albums ever. And for those first few days, I liked Jewels a lot. But now I just can't decide what I think of the new album. I think I like it, but I don't really have that much desire to listen to it. Maybe it's just my mood. For the past few days, I've been pretty much rotating Jewels, Her Wallpaper Reverie, and When Your Heartstrings Break, and I've been enjoying the latter two more than Jewels. Now I've kind of cut JfS out of the rotation. I'm not sure why this is. Maybe I'm just not in the mood for Robyn right now or maybe I'm already sick of the album or maybe it's just something I'll like much more at a later date. (It was months before I really got into ME). I do think that it's somewhat hard for many of us to make an unbiased decision. We've all devoted many years to listening to Robyn Hitchcock and I'm sure all of us *want* to like each album he records. Our expectations will always affect our reactions. So, I just can't decide if it's 1) a great album, 2) a shitty album disguised in my love for Robyn Hitchcock, or 3) a decent effort that's somewhat dissapointing. Basically, sometimes I listen to it and love it, and other times I listen to it and wish I was listening to something else. Does any of this make sense? Anybody else feeling a bit confused? - --Joel ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 00:09:54 -0600 From: ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com Subject: Re: Hoot-hoot! song >can't decide what I think of the new album. I think I like it, but I >don't really have that much desire to listen to it. Bingo. That's very much how I feel about it. I don't dislike it at all, but it isn't really grabbing me like "I GOTTA listen to this". Actually, I kind of have to make myself put it on. >I do think that it's somewhat hard for many of us to make an unbiased >decision. We've all devoted many years to listening to Robyn Hitchcock >and I'm sure all of us *want* to like each album he records. That's part of it. I feel really guilty for not being ecstatic. Maybe that's why the contrast with the new Momus really hit home- cause that one, I genuinely really like, and I'm feeling like a very disloyal person right about now. Like I'm cheating on someone or something. It's a very strange and unpleasant feeling. >expectations will always affect our reactions. So, I just can't decide >if it's 1) a great album, 2) a shitty album disguised in my love for >Robyn Hitchcock, or 3) a decent effort that's somewhat dissapointing. For me I think it's going to turn out to be 3. The thing that really separates this one from ME in my mind is that it's very much "a collection of songs", rather than an album. I mean, it comes off a bit disjointed. I do like records that have many shifting moods to them, when those moods tie into each other and there's sort of a flow to it, but on "Jewels", one kind of lurches from mood to mood in an abrupt way that's a bit disconcerting. IMO, "Cheese Alarm", "Sea-Tac", and "NASA Clapping" don't really belong on this record. That's not to say that they are bad songs in and of themselves (well, actually "Cheese Alarm" kind of would be without the tablas). Just that I think the album would be a good deal more coherent without these three and definitely without the stuff at the end. Love on ya, Susan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 06:36:19 -0400 From: "jbranscombe@compuserve.com" Subject: R.E.M. give me tinnitus Doug asked about the band I used to be in. We were called The Locomotives (shit name) were generally described as something like a cross between Dr Feelgood and XTC (though to my never ending joy one fanzine compared us to The Soft Boys) and released two records. A six-track mini-album called From The Finest Rolling Stock on Media Burn Records in 1986: and a 12-tracker on Big Beat (home of The Damned, Motorhead, Screaming Blue Messiahs et al) called Bourgeois Voodoo the following year. The latter did a bit of business on American college radio. In fact I'm still the proud owner of a chart from I think it's the Univ. of Minneapolis which has us at number 7 and Document at number 8! 'Enough about me let's talk about...'. I have to say I'm with Eddie on the voice question. Two shows (quite long ones) on two consecutive nights in a smallish, smoky room (you try to stop Parisians smoking in a bar...) and he still hit everything perfectly. I think the vocal barometer in his catalogue is Glass Hotel, and he served up two perfect renditions in Paree. What effect a longer tour will have, albeit with shorter sets, is obviously a different matter. Finally, my only contribution to the Great Fag Debate ( and it's not even mine). The New England Journal Of Medicine recently published a paper entitled 'Passive Smoking The Risk Of Coronary Heart Disease - A Meta-Analysis Of Epidemiologic Studies'. Conclusion: a slight increase in heart attacks in passive inhalers. jmbc. P.S. I don't think anyone has mentioned this during the to-ings and fro-ings but Robyn snaffles the odd ciggie now and then. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 21:33:37 +0930 From: dlang Subject: jar jar binks shock horror If you havent already visited this site go there now ye fegs , its well worth it http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0899/jar.html feg x ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 12:57:59 -0700 From: Joel Mullins Subject: Re: Hoot-hoot! song ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com wrote: > > The thing that really separates this one from ME in my mind is that it's > very much "a collection of songs", rather than an album. I mean, it comes > off a bit disjointed. I do like records that have many shifting moods to > them, when those moods tie into each other and there's sort of a flow to > it, but on "Jewels", one kind of lurches from mood to mood in an abrupt way > that's a bit disconcerting. This may be the problem I'm having with it. The strongest part of the album, IMO, begins with Sally Was A Legend and continues to the end. There seems to be a nice flow with those songs. The first half of the album just doesn't seem to have that. Joel ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V8 #268 *******************************