From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V8 #297 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Monday, August 9 1999 Volume 08 : Number 297 Today's Subjects: ----------------- god, is the weekend finally over? [DDerosa5@aol.com] Pitchfork Hitchcock ["Chaney, Dolph L" ] Re: the timelessness of quality (longer) ["JH3" ] Re: the timelessness of quality (longer) [Terrence M Marks ] more mysteries [**twofangs** {randi} ] to change [Eb ] Re: Beware Dave Matthews Fans. [lj lindhurst ] Re: Beware Dave Matthews Fans. [Eb ] Abercrombie & Fitch "Queen Liz" displays ["Andrew D. Simchik" ] Topical ointment [Vivien Lyon ] Re: the timelessness of quality (even longer still) ["JH3" ] Re: Topical ointment [Eb ] Re: Beware Dave Matthews Fans. [lj lindhurst ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 16:32:47 EDT From: DDerosa5@aol.com Subject: god, is the weekend finally over? I was home working on an anti-nuke pamphlet last night, and actually went to the archives site just as it came back up. Jeez, I guess it's now officially an addiction... I saw Mystery Men and Dick over the weekend, and must say that Dick was funnier. In some ways I liked Mystery Men more, perhaps just because it reminded me in places of one of my faves of all time, Buckaroo Banzai's Adventures across the 8th Dimension (hey, anyone have access to what they shot of the sequel, BB vs. The World Crime League?) I agree with Susan that the Shoveller was the stand-out character, but I think Janeane Garafalo was also kickass talking to her ball. And next up for honors had to be Geoffrey Rush, who I thought had a good time. Also, according to the credits (does anyone else watch them obsessively?), who was one of the Frat Boys gang? No, not Dave Kendall, your other favorite "gone and forgotten" VJ, Rikki Rachtman! I always knew he was a fratboy at heart... Dick, on the other hand, has great performances by Kids in the Hall's Dave Foley (as Haldeman) and Bruce McCulloch (as Carl Bernstein). Plus many others playing the insiders (I was surprised to not hate Jim Breuer as John Dean--not bad) who were funny, and Dan Hedaya is a great Nixon. And the girls are quite naive, and dumb, and yet the shrewdest characters in the movie. And a good ending, simple, that I hope nobody ruins for you... Odd synchronoicity: saw both movies for one price, and both had someone singing "Hello Dolly!" What are the chances? Hey, can anyone answer my query from Friday about Storefront? Eddie, it's right up your alley...Thanks for posting the lyrics to IWDYmarkII. It was hilarious live. OK, back to work, dave whose snide response to DB didn't post over the weekend, but the hell with it, it's like shooting dead fish in a barrel. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 16:42:27 -0400 From: "Chaney, Dolph L" Subject: Pitchfork Hitchcock from http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/ -- Robyn Hitchcock Jewels for Sophia [Warner Bros.] Rating: 8.9 Sometime last Saturday afternoon while listening to Robyn Hitchcock's latest album, I felt a nearly overwhelming urge to lie down on my back in the middle of my dad's van and never get up. I would have too, if I hadn't been driving on the highway at the moment. The song that made me feel that way was "I Feel Beautiful"; the circumstances involved too sordid and ridiculous to go into here. But feel that way I did, and it cemented my feelings of love for Jewels for Sophia. You think that's ass backward, I know, but my fascination for Robyn Hitchcock is based on this urge. Ever since I first found my thirteen- year- old self lying in the middle of my living room floor listening to I Often Dream of Trains, I've based my ratings of various Hitchcock albums on how debilitating their melancholy is for me. It's like this: Element of Light makes me want to lie down on the floor during some of the songs and sit up during others; it's a really good Hitchcock album. Respect makes me want to lie down for one or two songs and spend the other songs doing household chores; it's an okay Hitchcock album. Groovy Decoy makes me want to run around the park; it sucks. And Jewels for Sophia made me want to abandon the helm of a large and fast- moving vehicle and lie in the back, heedless of the twisted guardrails and smoke, and dirty looks from other motorists. That's good Hitchcock. "Mexican God" boots the record off with the satisfying click of a classic- Robyn- Hitchcock- song- shaped peg being snapped into a classic- Robyn- Hitchcock- song- shaped hole: acoustic strumming, jaunty drums, bloodthirsty deities-- three great tastes that taste great together. "The Cheese Alarm" is a fantastic example of what I call the "Hitchcock Switcheroo": a song that starts out sounding silly and winds up telling you more than you wanted to know about yourself. "NASA Clapping" reunites Robyn with fellow former Soft Boy Kimberly Rew with surprisingly good results. "Antwoman" finds its satisfying quirkiness not in its lyrics but in its background "sighing machine" and "antvoices" (the latter provided by Grant Lee Phillips). The two standout tracks, though, are a fleshed- out version of "No, I Don't Remeber Guildford" (originally released on last year's Storefront Hitchcock) and "I Feel Beautiful"-- both of which find Hitchcock doing what he does most rarely and most brilliantly: using his strangeness not as an end, but as a means to convey an emotional state. Most importantly, Jewels for Sophia seems to find Robyn Hitchcock once again relaxing into the idea that, for better or for worse, he tends to write Robyn Hitchcock songs-- an idea he seems to have been resisting on the past few albums. I'm glad for it, personally, even though it nearly killed me. - -Zach Hooker ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 15:41:52 -0500 From: "JH3" Subject: Re: the timelessness of quality (longer) Eddie sez: >>i wonder if we've been socialised to believe this? why should >>brilliant comedy be any less "great" than brilliant drama? Yeah, why shouldn't it? Personally, I think lots of people *have* been socialized to believe that drama is inherently better than comedy, and I think it's grossly unfair and just plain wrong. (It was only quite recently that the really good comedy stuff stopped being badly repressed by the church and the ruling oligarchy, who saw it as a threat.) Luckily, I don't think everyone suffers from this problem. Even if you go back several decades, there are plenty of cultural-historian types who will tell you, as I would, that the Marx Brothers, Charlie Chaplin, etc. were just as worthy of the greatness tag as any of their more "serious" contemporaries, if not more so. And don't forget the Three Stooges... TGQ sez: >Well, there's the classic theory that dramas and tragedies have a >longer appeal than comedies. And that durability factors into >"greatness" and "brilliance." Much of what makes a comedy funny >is highly topical. (Think about your great-grand children watching the >South Park movie. Some of that topical humor will be as over their >heads as the WWII humor in Bugs Bunny was to us.) Of course, not all >of what makes a comedy funny is merely topical -- even Shakespeare's >comedies (which, by the way, are often edited/shorn of the topical >humor) are funny because of our cultural response to the sexes. Which >is another reason why tragedy/drama has a greater durability . . . it >crosses culture more readily than comedy. That's just because we're too self-absorbed as a society to appreciate anything outside of our own narrowly-defined context, isn't it? I'd agree that it's *harder* to make a timeless comedy than a timeless drama, but to me that just makes it all the more impressive when somebody actually manages to do it. That's not to say that you, Q, are wrong; just that it's unfortunate that you're probably right. And as long as I'm posting, Andrew Simchik wrote: >I've had a Slowdive album for years and I only discovered >how incredible it is in the past few months. Souvlaki, right? Sorry it took you so long, but better late than never! I don't think I'll ever get tired of that one, myself. (Speaking of timeless.) John "I get half" Hedges ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 17:02:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Terrence M Marks Subject: Re: the timelessness of quality (longer) On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, JH3 wrote: > comedy, and I think it's grossly unfair and just plain wrong. (It > was only quite recently that the really good comedy stuff stopped > being badly repressed by the church and the ruling oligarchy, > who saw it as a threat.) What has the church repressed lately? Terrence Marks Unlike Minerva (a comic strip) http://grove.ufl.edu/~normal normal@grove.ufl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 16:03:39 -0600 From: ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com Subject: Re: Eb Witch project >with the guts of a Cray.) I hear that they are >tremendously over budget already and haven't shot a >frame. It could be that they are out, even as I type, >soliciting product endorsements from Ross for those yellow >striped shirts.... What I want to know is- will there be killer bees? Oh yeah, and is there a Claudine cameo? >It did ridicule some characters, who had it coming. Well yes. Captain Amazing probably came in for the worst, and of course, the disco villains, but they all deserved it. There was some poking fun at Mr. Furious's macho thing, but it was very gentle and not of the same spirit. I thought I was gonna have a hernia just -looking- at the frat boy gang, too. "Can we bring our brewskis?" *ROTFLMAO*. >that this was one of the things that weakened the movie for >Roger Ebert, I was glad to see such fun performances. You've noticed that too? I've noticed he tends to really have favorites and be sort of, I dunno, peeved at the film itself when other people outshine them. Not that Stiller wasn't good, it's just that he was working with some high-calibre people, and Mr. Furious just really isn't as showy a character as Blue Rajah anyhow. Still, Blue Rajah was in some ways the trickiest to pull off, as it's really a character-within-a-character and requires some tricky spontaneous shifting between "Blue Rajah" and "sweet but very affected guy who lives with his mom", and there aren't a lot of people who could have done it as well as it was done here. Anyhow, Macy's Shoveller was just brilliant. Even Doug agreed with me and he didn't like the movie that much. It's really time for Macy to win lots of awards and make lots of money already, he's long overdue for some major props. >They probably could have let TW develop a bit more, but I >liked how they handled the Captain Amazing character. Even >the surprise which I won't divulge here. I would have liked to see more of TW, too, maybe some explanation of how he got into the "non-lethal weapons" biz, or why he liked to go to old folks homes to pick up chicks. But I thought he did very well. The abandoned amusement park was a very good setting for him, and did you notice all the little carnival girly-show nickolodeon machines and stuff in his living room? Very Waits, it made me smile. >I wish they would have had Screwball and had PR play him. >As it was, he did what he could with the part. That's true. It wasn't a part you could really do a whole lot with. I don't know why it was there except to satisfy that segment of the audience who must have their fart jokes. It was actually a bit jarring, given that the overall tone of the humor is bone-dry- it felt a bit out of place. What I'd be interested in knowing is, with 30-odd superheroes to pick from, how were those six ultimately chosen? >ad, and I was looking for product endorsements. The love scene had the audience roaring when I saw it. I think it was framing it against a brightly moonlit sky that really pushed it over the top. >know that the director was from commercial land, Taco Bell chihuaha (sp?) is his claim to fame. >I agree with Ebert on one thing: the movie and the >characters might have been served better by cheesier >effects, and maybe a slightly cheesier feel. Maybe......it might have helped make the overall gestalt a little bit clearer. The big budget effects were a bit confusing as far as the tone, and maybe it could have done with a bit less slickness. Still, I'm with Dave- it reminded me a lot of my beloved "Buckeroo Banzai", and I really wish somebody'd make more like that. Note to Hollywood- intelligent people over 16 and under 40 go to movies sometimes too. Love on ya, Susan also looking forward to "Detroit Rock City" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 14:06:02 -0700 From: Tom Clark Subject: Beware Dave Matthews Fans. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/19990809/re/life_riot_1.html What, they weren't selling Amstel Light at the show? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1999 17:11:36 -0400 From: **twofangs** {randi} Subject: more mysteries Oh it is so great to be back online...I've be 'sans' computer since July 16.... I've been pining for y'all in the feg globe. The lovely susan mentioned that she was disappointed with Paul Reubens performance as "The Spleen" in "Mystery Men." So was I. I guess I expected to see some of the comedic timing Mr. Reubens was able to exhibit on "Murphy Brown." As for Ben Stiller -- well -- none of my friends would agree with me -- but I've loved him ever since I saw "The Ben Stiller Show" which used to follow the super gorgeous Tea Leoni in "Flying Blind." She had the best clothes in that show In any case, I think, that like Robyn, Ben Stiller's face is one I could wake up next to for a _very_ long time. Right - the movie. Ben's performance was a bit weak -- he is obviously better when he writes his own material -- but I don't know who else I would have wanted to see as Mr. Furious. Here in Toronto, they gave out trading cards for all the characters -- did they do that in the States? > susan also said: > I thought one of the standouts was Hank Azaria, who turned in a very sweet and funny > performance as the Blue Rajah. I loved his character too -- sweet is the perfect description Susan. The other problem with the film would be 'editing!' I know Usher is a director of commercials, so maybe by getting away from the 30 second time slot meant he went a bit crazy. Some stuff was gratuitous and slowed the movie down -- I get *I* would call it a bit too self indulgent...give me an Avid editor and I'll smooth out the choppy bits. Anyone from Universal listening? ;-} Back to Robyn - I am listening to *jfs* so kindly sent to me by sharkboy. *Jfs* is not even out in Canada! I have to call Warner Brothers Canada because maybe *jfs* could be a big 'record release' along with "Storefront Hitchcock" the film. Oh -- anyone who wants to write and say "HI," please do...my server has lost any messages that were sent to me between July 16th and Sunday, August 8th. fading back to yesterday before tomorrow comes, Randi *what scares you most will set you free that's what the 'sharkboy' said to me* ~~ R. Hitchcock & R. Spiegel ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 14:15:51 -0800 From: Eb Subject: to change Susan: >>while Titanic got some decent reviews and won a gaggle of oscars, i'd hardly >>call it a critical smash. it's the all-time box office champ, of course. >>but the perception is that it's grosses were driven largely by massive >>repeat business, and not really by a wide demographic cross-section. > >I feel that there is a lot of accuracy to that perception. I never saw it, >but I know people who saw it 4 or 5 times, and I think those folks made up >a LOT of the ultimate gross, cause there were loads of 'em. And of course, the same goes for Phantom Menace, probably to an even greater extent. I mean, maybe the Eyes Wide Shut word-of-mouth was "F," but the Phantom Menace buzz was certainly "B/B-" (substantially worse than the Titanic buzz). And yet, I believe it's now the third all-time grossing film, after Titanic and Star Wars. Clearly, there are a lot of weenies who ignored the bad publicity and made the "pilgrimmage" multiple, multiple times. JH3 (?): >...there are plenty of cultural-historian types >who will tell you, as I would, that the Marx Brothers, Charlie Chaplin, >etc. were just as worthy of the greatness tag as any of their more >"serious" contemporaries, if not more so. And don't forget the >Three Stooges... Right. And those "ageless" comedians opted to make their comedy highly untopical. As did Monty Python. No such luck for South Park. Eb (my my, doesn't the Smothers Brothers' act seem quaint today?) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 17:18:06 -0400 From: lj lindhurst Subject: Re: Beware Dave Matthews Fans. >http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/19990809/re/life_riot_1.html > >What, they weren't selling Amstel Light at the show? A few things about this: #1-- I like a good refreshing Amstel Light, dammit. But then again, I do believe that Budweiser truly is the King of Beers, so take that into account (in other words, I have taste for shit)(if ony those nice Gallagher boys would market their own beer, I'd be in heaven!) #2-- see what I mean about kids these days? #3-- On an unrelated note, The Eb Witch Project has been the best movie I've seen in a VERY long time! I especially liked the part where he kills Carl Palmer! Chilling! That's it for me. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ LJ Lindhurst White Rabbit Graphic Design NYC ljl@w-rabbit.com http://www.w-rabbit.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "who do you what do you why do you do?" --Elvis Costello ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 14:17:36 -0800 From: Eb Subject: Re: Beware Dave Matthews Fans. >http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/19990809/re/life_riot_1.html > >What, they weren't selling Amstel Light at the show? If I was forced to sit through a Dave Matthews show, I might be inclined toward violence, too. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 14:17:51 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andrew D. Simchik" Subject: Abercrombie & Fitch "Queen Liz" displays The homoerotic/homo-in-the-know imagery at A&F gets more and more blatant every time I walk by. Now, obviously plenty of gayboyz shop there, but so do all sorts of dull (clarification, not redundancy) breeder types, the ones looking for alternatives to khaki. My question: yeah, I know they're young and preppy, but is it that they don't know A&F is masterminded by SCREAMING QUEENS or that they don't care? Either alternative appeals to me immensely, but I can't figure out why they work. Let's get down to business, shall we? > From: ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com [Mystery Men] > I could have done without Spleen. That's my only real > complaint. Agreed. Is Janeane Garofalo still single? I hope? > From: BC-Radio@corecom.net (Brett Cooper) > Does anyone remember Post Modern MTV? That's where I > first saw/heard Robyn > in 1989. Wasn't that pretty much interchangeable with 120 Mins.? Except, of course, that PoMoMTV was 30-60 mins. > From: "Capitalism Blows" [CB said:] > < > i acknowledge that if so many people think so highly > of > > it that it must be a > > great work of art. [I asked:] > Does the same obtain for _Titanic_?> > > while Titanic got some decent reviews and won a gaggle of > oscars, i'd hardly > call it a critical smash. Oh, I see. When you said "people" I didn't realize you meant critics. :) > anyways, if, sixty > years down the line, Titanic tops all known best-of movie > polls, then, i'd > say, yes, the same obtains for Titanic. See, I just wouldn't be able to accept that. I taped it off pay-per-view (thought about going to the theater for the FX, but (a) I was rebelling, and (b) I don't give a tin shit about FX qua FX), both to judge for myself and also to ogle DiCaprio and Winslet (if we are being honest). It was a vast steaming pile, and like most vast steaming piles only notable for its vastness. Its class/age rebellion plot was tailor-made for its target demographic (the repeat-viewing crowd you mentioned), but to anyone over a certain that rebellion must surely have looked like the fish-in-a-barrel contrivance it was. I can't imagine deciding that it was a great work of art that I just can't appreciate on the basis of popular or even critical acclaim. With Citizen Kane, on the other hand, I can look at it and see a well-crafted, solid, rich movie that just doesn't happen to be wildly entertaining into the bargain, so the respect it receives makes sense to me. The number of fans it has might prompt me to pay attention, but it wouldn't prompt me to genuflect if I didn't honestly agree on some level. I'm not trying to suggest you'd base your opinions on others' democratic votes. On the contrary, I doubt you would, which is my point: you have some sense in you of what makes a great movie that's at some level independent of popular opinion. > From: Aaron Mandel > > good movie, not great. the Flaming Carrot comics are > being reprinted in > big collections, and i highly recommend them. (Burden's > sexism and > McCarthyism are upsetting, but superficial.) McCarthyism? Explain. Is this like the problem with Cerebus (which, to be fair, bored me anyway, hideously sexist author or no)? > From: Mark_Gloster@3com.com > I completely agree. They kinda stole the show, though I > went in predisposed to liking Paul R, and Ben S. I'm sure Ben Stiller makes me FURIOUS!!! I can't figure out why. Drew === Andrew D. Simchik, schnopia@yahoo.com _____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 14:34:27 -0700 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: Beware Dave Matthews Fans. On 8/9/99 2:18 PM, lj lindhurst wrote: >#1-- I like a good refreshing Amstel Light, dammit. But then again, >I do believe that Budweiser truly is the King of Beers, so take that >into account Keep trying lj, but they're NOT going to let you back into St. Louis!! > >#3-- On an unrelated note, The Eb Witch Project has been the best >movie I've seen in a VERY long time! I especially liked the part >where he kills Carl Palmer! Chilling! AHHHH - SPOILER!!! Oh yeah, and speaking of Hartford Superior Court (were we?), I once had to drive a friend up there so he could appear on a public disturbance charge. He was arrested for dancing outside of a Dead show. On the way back to Danbury we picked up a hitchhiker who gave us a sheet of acid for dropping him off at his aunt's house in Poughkeepsie, NY. Needless to say, my friend and I ended up tripping our faces off at a roadhouse bar until 4AM. It's amazing I can even hold down a steady job... Well, back to designing your next OS, - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 14:39:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Vivien Lyon Subject: Topical ointment Eb said- > Right. And those "ageless" comedians opted to make > their comedy highly > untopical. As did Monty Python. No such luck for > South Park. Monty Python's humor only seems untopical to you because you aren't from England. Plenty of their shows reference then-current events and personalities. No, the humor doesn't totally rely on that, but it is there in sufficient quantities. Vivien Sufficient for what, I can't say. _____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 16:44:19 -0500 From: "JH3" Subject: Re: the timelessness of quality (even longer still) >> (It was only quite recently that the really good comedy >>stuff stopped being badly repressed by the church and the >>ruling oligarchy, who saw it as a threat.) TM>What has the church repressed lately? If by that you mean to ask, "is the church still repressing things," I would ask in turn, "have you been to Afghanistan lately?" OK, so it isn't the same church. I should have just said "religious authorities." Sorry... Still, there are those who would call CAPALERT and similar things "repression" - even if they lack direct political power, their activities still have an adverse effect. Of course, when I say "recently" I'm talking about the long-term, which is to say that direct forms of repression in the United States had pretty much ended by the late 60's, assuming you were white. And by "really good comedy stuff" I mean anything controversial or not "morally uplifting." The Marx Brothers were really good, but just think of how much better they might have been if they'd worked in a social climate that let them do anything they wanted. JH3 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 17:55:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: Re: Beware Dave Matthews Fans. On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Eb wrote: > >http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/19990809/re/life_riot_1.html > > > >What, they weren't selling Amstel Light at the show? > > If I was forced to sit through a Dave Matthews show, I might be inclined > toward violence, too. I must admit, I was forced (didn't want to give up my spot) to sit (actually stand) through the Dave Matthews set at last year's Tibetan Freedom Concert, and it wasn't nearly as bad as I had feared. It probably helped that I was hearing all but one of those songs for the first time. Lucious Jackson was another pleasant surprise at the TFC. How's that for a thread topic: bands you expected to hate, but ended up liking, or at least tolerating.... I deleted the message, but Susan was unsure of her spelling when she mentioned Taco Bell's current mascot. It is, in fact, spelled R-A-T, rat. The thing is a rat. People should just admit it. On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Tom Clark wrote: > Well, back to designing your next OS, > -tc Are you taking requests? I'd like to keep the classic Finder instead of this rumored NeXT-style file browser, or at least as an option alongside of it. How 'bout it? - --Chris ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 14:53:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Vivien Lyon Subject: Re: Topical ointment Eb sent this to me, but I think it was for the whole list. - --- Eb wrote: > Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 14:51:05 -0800 > To: Vivien Lyon > From: Eb > Subject: Re: Topical ointment > > >Eb said- > >> Right. And those "ageless" comedians opted to > make > >> their comedy highly > >> untopical. As did Monty Python. No such luck for > >> South Park. > > > >Monty Python's humor only seems untopical to you > >because you aren't from England. Plenty of their > shows > >reference then-current events and personalities. > No, > >the humor doesn't totally rely on that, but it is > >there in sufficient quantities. > > Ehhh...but it rarely gets that specific. Just a > passing namedrop, now and > then. And the pure phonetic of the name is usually > enough to sell the joke > ("Dimsdale!"). And if the show gets "political," > it's usually based on very > general enduring concepts, like "Dictators and > policemen are stupid and > evil" and "The government is full of pencil-pushing > bureaucrats." > > Eb, Very Silly Party, still auditioning actors to > play "Vivien," "Terrence" > and "Hal" in the Eb Witch Project > > > _____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 15:13:22 -0800 From: Eb Subject: Re: Topical ointment No, it was intended to be email. Eb http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Hills/6906/stringy.jpg ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 18:26:22 -0400 From: lj lindhurst Subject: Re: Beware Dave Matthews Fans. >On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Eb wrote: > >> >http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/19990809/re/life_riot_1.html >> > >> >What, they weren't selling Amstel Light at the show? >> >> If I was forced to sit through a Dave Matthews show, I might be inclined >> toward violence, too. > >I must admit, I was forced (didn't want to give up my spot) to sit >(actually stand) through the Dave Matthews set at last year's Tibetan >Freedom Concert, and it wasn't nearly as bad as I had feared. It probably >helped that I was hearing all but one of those songs for the first time. >Lucious Jackson was another pleasant surprise at the TFC. How's that for >a thread topic: bands you expected to hate, but ended up liking, or at >least tolerating.... I didn't think much of Dave Matthews until I saw him live on PBS (I think). I thought he put on such a fucking great show! He was so passionate and crazy, and I was very intrigued by some of his lyrics, especially that song, "Don't Drink the Water" ("don't drink the water, there's blood in the water," etc.) He just built that up to this crazy frenzy. I was so impressed that I bought a couple of his albums, which are certainly not as good as his live performance...can't say I ever play them. Maybe I'll open an Amstel Light and put them on now to see if I can get TGQ to go out on the street and start rioting. As a side note, a male friend of mine (who shall remain unnamed) ended up getting shitfaced with Dave Matthews one night, and told me that Dave planted one big huge kiss on him, right on the lips! My friend is not gay, but he said he remembered thinking, "oh my god, my girlfriend is right over there, but wait-- this is DAVE MATTHEWS!!" so he went on kissing him. heh. A list of girls I would kiss: KD Lang. Melissa Etheridge. Eb. >I deleted the message, but Susan was unsure of her spelling when she >mentioned Taco Bell's current mascot. It is, in fact, spelled R-A-T, rat. >The thing is a rat. People should just admit it. Hey, quit calling TGQ a rat! * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * LJ Lindhurst White Rabbit Graphic Design http://www.w-rabbit.com NYC ljl@w-rabbit.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V8 #297 *******************************