From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V8 #298 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 298 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: the timelessness of quality (not quite as long this time) ["JH3" ] checking in ["jbranscombe@compuserve.com" ] Shovel this! [shmac@ix.netcom.com (Scott Hunter McCleary)] moobies. [Capuchin ] Lesson learned ["Lyall, Jay PJ SSI" ] Re: TheCoolPerson? [Jeff Dwarf ] Re: moobies. [Eb ] Re: MIBies. [Capuchin ] Re: moobies. [ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com] a quick robyn question [**twofangs** {randi} ] Re: the timelessness of quality (even longer still) [normal@grove.ufl.edu] Re: Eb Witch project [Michael Wolfe ] Re: the timelessness of quality (even longer still) [ultraconformist@mail] yes, souvlaki ["Andrew D. Simchik" ] somebody ring the KaTe alarm ["Andrew D. Simchik" ] SH in Minneaspolis [four episode lesbian ] Great Robyn Hitchcock Pix [four episode lesbian ] Re: more mysteries [four episode lesbian ] Naked Chicks. ["Dr.Sticky" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 17:23:10 -0500 From: "JH3" Subject: Re: the timelessness of quality (not quite as long this time) Sorry, this bit I wrote earlier came out all wrong: >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. I didn't mean to imply that comedy that isn't controversial or non- uplifting can't be good; that was just a ham-fisted attempt to make the point that the quality, as well as the quantity, of funny gags, bits, and routines has been adversely affected by social constraints over the years. And it's always possible that the Marx Brothers might have actually been less funny without those social constraints. (However unlikely...) I still stand behind the "self-absorption" comment, but that was all the way down in paragraphs 5 & 6. John H. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 15:48:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: Topical ointment On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Vivien Lyon wrote: > Eb sent this to me, but I think it was for the whole > list. Eb said this was supposed to be email... and it was. But I think he meant that it was supposed to be private email. Whoops. Too late now. - --- Eb wrote: > 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." I see exactly that in the South Park movie. It doesn't matter that it's Winona Ryder or the Baldwins. I mean, it's just a pack of people called "The Baldwins" which is a funny kind of faux aristocratic name and they have this big house under the Hollywood sign... I think it's very clear what their mocking whether you know the Baldwins or not. And you DON'T think Winona Ryder is a funny name? Boy, I've said it before and I'll say it again, you've spent too much time in L.A. She's a starlet and she's called Winona Ryder. It's funny. Even Brooke Shields. Yeah, bimbo girl. I don't think it helps the joke too much that we know who these people are. OK, the Bill Gates joke, I'll give you. But it's quick. As for the political humor, I think it's done in that same vein. They mock racism and radical parent groups and war and baseless nationalism. Hell, I even think Saddam Hussein would be funny if you didn't know him. But you might not get that their making fun of the American image of Saddam Hussein. You might actually think they mean to say he's so evil that he could fuck Satan in the ass and make him like it. > Eb, Very Silly Party, still auditioning actors to play "Vivien," > "Terrence" and "Hal" in the Eb Witch Project I'm playing Vivien, Vivien will be playing Terrence, Hal will be playing me and Terrence will be Critic Rock where Ebert was found disemboweled all those years ago. J. - -- ________________________________________________________ J A Brelin Capuchin ________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 19:03:26 -0400 From: "jbranscombe@compuserve.com" Subject: checking in Re: the posit debate. May I be the first to call Robyn's animal/insect/ fish obsessions 'theriomorphic'? Young Ones - The way I heard it Comic Strip actor/writer/producer Peter Richardson was slated to act in the series but had some kind of nervous breakdown just before filming was due to start, so Chris Ryan was called in at the last minute and the part rewritten/severely edited. This might explain why he/the character seems a little disconnected at times. Have finally heard JfS. On a few listens I think it's in the very first rank of Hitchcock releases - top five definitely - so relaxed and varied, and Kim's guitar on Sally... yum. jmbc. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 19:05:56 -0400 From: shmac@ix.netcom.com (Scott Hunter McCleary) Subject: Shovel this! Was anybody else waiting for Bill Macy to put the harmonica in his mouth and blow his brains out at the end of that Gap ad? Anyone doing the Friday night 9:30 show? Pre-Fegstivities? How about we just have dinner and bag the show? Lemme know. ========= SH McCleary Prodigal Dog Communications Arlington, VA 22206 shmac@prodigaldog.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 16:31:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: moobies. I am fucking sick of talking about movies on here. When I was in high school, I had drama class first period. Monday morning, we'd hear about any theatrical performances attended over the weekend by classmates. If you went to a play or a dance recital or an opera or a ballet or something, you'd tell the class about it and give a quick little critique. Well, then some good arty movies came out... and some film adaptations of great plays or plays we'd seen, performed or discussed... then some films by playwrights we knew. It all went to hell. Eventually, we ended up wasting all of every Monday just talking about movies people saw over the weekend... it went as far as fucking RENTALS. So we put an end to that. And that's where I fear this thread could take us. On that note... On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Joel Mullins wrote: > I loved the movie. I can't wait to see it again. I don't want to say > much, for fear of ruining the experience for others. But Kubrick > really created a tense, hypnotizing, and sometimes unsettling > atmosphere. It was somewhat unsettling in bits, but mostly those scenes were just arty and glacial like 2001. [extremely vague spoilers in this paragraph, but skip ahead] Actually, the whole movie is a whole lot like 2001, but less dramatic. It's about a weird thing that happens to this guy that turns out to be not such a big deal and his life isn't horribly interrupted by it. So in a way, it's just sort of an eye openning experience this one privelidged fuck with an ugly nose had about his empty little bourgois life. > And it was funny too. Tom and Nicole smoked a joint in one scene, > which is hilarious and very convincing. Jesus Christ, Joel, you are one-note. Did you think it was funny when Nicole Kidman had too much champagne and became sleepy and sexually pliable? Was it funny when Tom Cruise and Sydney Pollack drank scotch? It wasn't a hilarious scene. It was a very serious scene about two fucked up people coming to terms with each other as human beings. > The acting was excellent. The music was great. Damn good film. The music was good. The acting was passable (though I'm sick of movies with stars... I'm having a harder and harder time saying "That's Bill Harford" instead of "That's Tom Cruise") but no more convincing than most (it helped that the characters were mostly pretty shallow... it follows that the two best characters were Sydney Pollack's character and Nick Nightengale... the only real people in the movie). But the film as a whole? I think it's operatic. It's about the mood and the feelings of each scene, but the story is fairly pathetic and unremarkable. I like the long drawn out scenes that give you as much time to think about what's going on as the character does. Although, when you've got a movie with so many long shots, you should have more than four street sets. Oh... and I was looking all over for british spellings in shop windows, which almost always happens in a Pinewood flick. Most of it was pretty good and very New York. The signs that weren't completely american could easily be explained away as a unique proper name for a shop chosen to catch the eye. However, there was a scene where you could read a line in the New York Post that used the words "drugs overdose". Nobody in the US would say that ever. > There were people that disagreed with me, however. As soon as the > closing credits started rolling, there were loud "booos" and comments > like "that sucked!" The woman in front of me left the theater about twenty minutes from the end. She was there with a male friend and they were snuggled up through the whole movie (and it did seem like something was going on in their laps and they both kept leaning forward for long periods of time, but I didn't interupt). They were together in the parking lot going out to their car... I'm not sure why she walked out, though. But nobody booed. (never understood boos or applause at a movie theater. Who is going to accept your feedback? Are they going to CHANGE the way the film works based on your cheering and jeering? Will Hollywood make more movies like this one if you stand up and clap at the end? No. What kind of arrogance makes a person assume that the rest of the audience wants to know that individual feels? Bah.) > Of course, these are probably the same people that liked Men in Black. I enjoyed Eyes Wide Shut somewhat. I didn't feel like it wasted my time. Someone told me at Michael Keefe's birthday party that their friend wished very much to somehow "unwatch" the movie. I didn't feel like that at all. I could have done without all the anorexic nudity. And the extreme heterosexual male aspect of it was disappointing (but maybe that's just indicative of audiences. I mean, there was a scene with a naked woman sitting on a naked woman and the camera panned by without event, but another scene with a naked man dancing with a clothed man elicited little giggles from various places around the audience. Fuckin' people). So I thought it was pretty good and hopefully will wake up some stupid fucks, though I doubt it. Too subtle. Oh... and by the way... I snuck into Eyes Wide Shut after watching The Sixth Sense. And I'd say that I'd only change the first and last seven minutes of that one. The Sixth Sense was a very clever and good horror/fantasy flick that would have been more intriguing and subtle if the first and last bits had been handled slightly differently. But overall, I thought it was very well done. No way am I going to spoil this one. Love and kisses, J. - -- ________________________________________________________ J A Brelin Capuchin ________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 08:14:43 -0500 From: "Lyall, Jay PJ SSI" Subject: Lesson learned Aloha folks! After missing Saturdays in store in Austin I learned my lesson about letting my fegmanix subscription lapse...so I'm signed up again....oh, and I brought some chips - help your self kids.... cheers Jay - ------------------------------- Jay Lyall intra/Internet Application Support Group Emerging Technologies Shell Services International 713.245.4921 fax: 713.245.3118 Shell Information Center 1500 Old Spanish Trail 10P21G Houston, Texas 77054 "Can I get fries with that?" - Albert Einstein ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 16:41:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: TheCoolPerson? Brett Cooper wrote: >> From: Jeff Dwarf >>> Was it the Young Ones that they used to show before 120 >>> Minutes on MTV back in the late 80's? >>Yup. That's when I first saw it. (And first heard >>Robyn, actually. Late 80's 120 Minutes was fabulous. >>Come back, Dave Kendall, all is forgiven!) > Does anyone remember Post Modern MTV? That's where I first > saw/heard Robyn in 1989. yerp. whatever happened to Kevin Seal anyways? hell, i remember the one very scary time Adam Curry hosted 120 minutes (i guess seal was on vacation). 'twas a mystic trip. === "America's greatest natural resource, still, to this day, is the moron" --Martin Mull _____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 16:43:46 -0800 From: Eb Subject: Re: moobies. >The woman in front of me left the theater about twenty minutes from the >end. I saw one senior-citizen couple leave the theater, about halfway through (shortly after the orgy, I think). Just them. Then again, there were only about a dozen people in the theater. Heh. Also, right when the film ended, a guy a short distance behind me griped "God, that was dumb." Hrm. >> Of course, these are probably the same people that liked Men in Black. GNatalie and I are laughing our heads off right now...inside joke. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 16:50:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: MIBies. On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Capuchin wrote: > > Of course, these are probably the same people that liked Men in Black. I forgot my whole reason for mentioning this. I loved Men In Black. How could you not? How could any feg anywhere not love a movie with the line "Congratulations, Reg. It's a ... squid!" Huh? Riddle me that. J. - -- ________________________________________________________ J A Brelin Capuchin ________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 19:00:11 -0600 From: ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com Subject: Re: moobies. >I am fucking sick of talking about movies on here. I'm really sick of people constantly talking about Elephant Six. Does this mean that the Fegs who aren't are going to stop? What kind of arrogance etc. etc......... ;) >your cheering and jeering? Will Hollywood make more movies like this one >if you stand up and clap at the end? No. What kind of arrogance makes a >person assume that the rest of the audience wants to know that individual >feels? Bah.) Um, well, I clapped at the end of "Mystery Men" because I really liked it and I sort of wanted to express the joy I felt after watching it. I wasn't under the impression that the rest of the audience was dying to see how I felt about it nor that the studio had a mike in there to gauge post-movie reaction. I just really liked the damn flick. Honestly, I can't really see how it's any different from any other kind of reaction. I mean really, how DARE you assume that the rest of the audience is really interested in knowing you think something is funny? The fucking nerve! The reason I -pay- the highway robbery prices to see first-run flicks is precisely because I -do- want to experience others' reactions. If I didn't want to hear laughing and cheering and gasping and clapping, I'd stay home where the refreshments are better and I can smoke and drink if I want to Love on ya, Susan ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1999 20:21:56 -0400 From: **twofangs** {randi} Subject: a quick robyn question Has anyone made a Robyn screensaver? I would love one -- but I don't have the computer knowledge to make one. Heck - I couldn't even open JH3's robyn lettering font. :-} fading back into yesterday, Randi *what scares you most will set you free* ~~ Robyn Hitchcock ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 20:24:09 -0400 (EDT) From: normal@grove.ufl.edu Subject: Re: the timelessness of quality (even longer still) On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, JH3 wrote: > >> (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... Well, there isn't a monolithic "The Church" (unless you count the rock band.) So, John, what are the really good Afghanistani comedians that we haven't been able to hear about? > 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 I disagree. I think that limits on content don't adversely affect humor. The Goon Show could be produced under Green Book standards. American radio reached its best during WWII, when it had the strictest limits on content. Terrence Marks Unlike Minerva (a comic strip) http://grove.ufl.edu/~normal normal@grove.ufl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1999 23:00:54 +0000 (GMT) From: Michael Wolfe Subject: Re: Eb Witch project >I thought I was gonna have a hernia just -looking- at the frat >boy gang, too. "Can we bring our brewskis?" *ROTFLMAO*. The *best* part about that, though, was that the very frat boy who spoke that line was Michael Bay. And yes, that's his real hair. I shit you not. FWIW, I liked Mystery Men an awful lot, but in spite of the direction. What the hell was up with all those stupid POV closeups? And, gawd, that "was not-was so" sniping between Garofalo and Stiller should have been cut out after, like, the first draft of the SCRIPT -- to say nothing of ever even making it to the editing room. But, yes, Macy and Azaria were fab, and Janeane was keen. - -Michael Wolfe ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 19:58:48 -0600 From: ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com Subject: Re: the timelessness of quality (even longer still) >I disagree. I think that limits on content don't adversely affect humor. >The Goon Show could be produced under Green Book standards. Maybe the "Goon Show" could have. "Beyond The Fringe" surely could not have, and they were (roughly) around at the same time. And don't even think about telling me that "Beyond The Fringe" wasn't actually funny, or alternately would have been funnier without the religious/sexual/class-based humor, because I got a box set of live "Beyond The Fringe" that sez you lie. Love on ya, Susan Apologies for the voluminous postings today, the list has been my respite from (no joke) ten loads of laundry and the accompanying ironing ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 21:57:48 -0400 From: "Andrew D. Simchik" Subject: yes, souvlaki >From: "JH3" >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.) And rightly so. Consider Nietzsche on tragedy, and all that Apollo/Dionysus hoorah. Consider that tragedy was all about Dionysus and the eternal abyss and dissolving into the great mass and being one with everything. Consider that comedy -- e.g., Euripides' knee-slapping dismemberment farce The Bacchae -- was all about Apollo, and creating forms, and being all stiff and unyielding and upward-looking and stuff. Tragedy unites us. Comedy divides us. We're probably more likely to cry at the same sorts of things than laugh at the same sorts of things. I'm talking out of my abandoned brain here (and am skeptical of that last sentence), but it seems to me there's something here. Also consider that comedy is a way of deflecting hostility toward the world and the way it is (some comedy, usually the best comedy, is, at any rate) while tragedy, though it appears to take its subject more seriously, actually seems more accepting of the status quo. > And don't forget the >Three Stooges... Can't we? Please? :) [my Slowdive album] >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.) You guessed 'er. My god, my god, it's EXQUISITE. Are the other albums as good? BTW, if you like Slowdive (or even if you don't), check out the Autumns. I can't see _The Angel Pool_ ever leaving my 12-disc Desert Island portfolio. >From: Vivien Lyon > >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. And, significantly, it's as funny -- or funnier -- to Americans. (ALL Americans! Just kidding.) Often topical humor is even funnier when you don't know the referent. >From: "JH3" >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. See, I don't know -- somehow this social climate isn't really producing any good comedians. People can do more or less anything they want now, and the anger and passion are just not focused enough to make it happen. Instead, the permissiveness gets used to make pathetic tripe like Celebrity Deathmatch. I know I've been defending South Park, and it's actually done some of the sniping I want to see, but it could be going farther. I worry that it *would* if it weren't allowed to. >From: Christopher Gross >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. Little dogs are people too. >From: lj lindhurst >A list of girls I would kiss: KD Lang. Melissa Etheridge. Eb. I've heard a lot of straight girls say this and I'm just wondering: is there something about these chicks (not Eb) that is particularly appealing, or are they just famous lesbos and that's the attraction? I mean, when I fantasize, I can tell you it's not about Rupert frickin' Everett or, Christ, George Michael or Elton John. How about Jonathan Rhys Meyer (as long as he doesn't talk)? Or Forest Whitaker? It'll never happen, so why is one celeb more accessible than another just 'cause they're gay? No offense meant. I just don't get it. Drew - -- Andrew D. Simchik, wyrd@rochester.rr.com http://home.rochester.rr.com/wyrd/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 21:59:08 -0400 From: "Andrew D. Simchik" Subject: somebody ring the KaTe alarm >From: Eb >Eb, who adores The Dreaming and Hounds of Love but agrees that Bush's >videos are generally unbearable, and who also would rather slit his throat >than ever preciously call her "KaTe" Heh. I did my time on rec.music.gaffa, and later on ecto. But the only record of that is a quote on Gaffaweb, where I slam the awful B-side "You Want Alchemy." IED slams me right back, and it's immortalized now in those archives, making me look like a grade-A KaTeOpHoBe. It's really annoying and I wish they would take it down. [Citizen Kane] >But you know, the film's editing/direction STILL seems >tremendously ballsy and daring, even when pitted against today's films. Yes, it does. [I said:] >>Oh, please. > >No fair...I have that line copyrighted. You mean Robyn has to pay you royalties for "Cheese Alarm"? :) >From: Michael Wolfe [moi] >>That's correct. Grail-quoting is for losers, unless >>it's absolutely positively perfect for the occasion. > >And I'm afraid that even quoting the series can induce a cringe, >somewhat. Witness the film, "Sliding Doors" (a film, >incidentally, that has not worn well in this writer's memory): I >wanted to smack the John Hannah character. Hard. Gwynneth >Paltrow's character was supposed to think that the "Spanish >Inquisition" sketch repeated ad infinitum was funny?? Charming? Gwyneth Paltrow's characters are all incapable of being funny or charming. But yes, there are certain sketches that are, like Grail, too popular to be k00l. Dead Parrot, Cheese Shop, and Spanish Inquisition are three examples. You can get away with these if they're *especially* appropriate or if you quote material most people forget ("They just told me to come in here and say there was trouble at t' mill, that's all!") or if you do it *exactly* perfectly (which I probably didn't, just now). I opt for things like Bookshop ("Do you have a copy of _Gladys Stoat-Pamphlet and Her Intrepid Spaniel Stig Amid the Giant Pygmies of Beckles, Volume 8_?"), myself. >From: Michael Wolfe [I hope you remember the context, because quoting it all again would be sadistic...if you don't, take my word for it that it was excellent and interesting] >together with care and craft and restraint. They want cassoulet >(Fast, Cheap, and Out of Control), they want briani (Do the Right >Thing), they want brook trout beur blanc with hazelnuts >(Rushmore). Not that you can eat like that every night; it's too >rich, and too expensive (and movies like those don't come along >every week). And sometimes gourmet food just doesn't taste as good as junk food or everyday food. It's startling and innovative and unique in taste and mind-changing, but not always tasty or satisfying. And you're lumping gourmet food in with health food to some extent, I think...or maybe you covered that with the BBC period dramas. >The point is, I think Eddie and Drew have favorite sandwiches >that they could probably eat for lunch 3 or 4 days a week, 7, actually. I'm a peanut butter *fiend* and have been for 20-some-odd years. > but >they also know the importance of having a little variety, so as >to get all of their vitamins. Just like the rest of us, more or >less. That's why I don't *always* listen to Suede, RH, the Autumns, the Cure, the Smiths, Kate, Tori, or PJ Harvey. Yes. [Out of Range nostalgia] >See, and this is a problem with reader response as a critical >modus operandi. A girlfriend that I had told me one sentence >that she had gone to see an Ani Difranco concert, and in the very >next sentence dumped me. Was there a cause-and-effect relationship there? Had she concluded that to be an Ani fan she had to dump her boyfriend? Drew - -- Andrew D. Simchik, wyrd@rochester.rr.com http://home.rochester.rr.com/wyrd/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1999 21:52:07 -0400 From: four episode lesbian Subject: SH in Minneaspolis got this information today: storefront hitchcock will be shown in minneapolis by the university film society at the end of august. details... >7:15 pm Friday, August 20th, through Thursday, August 26th >5:00 pm Saturday and Sunday, August 21st and 22nd >at University Film Society >Bell Museum Auditorium >17th & University Aves SE >(612) 627-4431 or www.ufilm.org woj ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1999 22:09:58 -0400 From: four episode lesbian Subject: Great Robyn Hitchcock Pix >From: Dave Liljengren >Subject: Great Robin Hitchcock Pix >Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 18:14:42 -0700 > >There are some great Robyn Hitchcock pix at this url: >http://seattlesquare.com/pandemonium/Gallery/RobynHitchcockPic1.htm > >Feel free to link to it and pass the word along to the mailing list, > >thanks, > >dl > >---------------------------------------------------------- >http://seattlesquare.com/pandemonium>http://seattlesquare.com/pandemonium ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1999 22:13:04 -0400 From: four episode lesbian Subject: Re: more mysteries MC 900 Ft **twofangs** {randi} rapped: >*Jfs* is not even out in Canada! really? i thought all of north america got the album on july 20th? +w ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1999 22:40:58 -0400 From: "Dr.Sticky" Subject: Naked Chicks. Hello there. Andrew D. Simchik gurgled: >And what does it mean that I've seen all 12 Young Ones episodes so often that >I *am* the Young Ones? Best TV series of all time? (Maybe*.) I haven't these boys since the 80's. They used to be on MTV Sunday nights before '120 minutes'. Oh, to be a teenager again... Vivien Lyon rambled: >He was on a few episodes of Absolutely Fabulous, >playing Edwina's first ex-husband. I seem to remember >something else too....but no, I guess I don't. I also remember him on, what I believe was a movie or two. Can't quite recall a name though. I watched an Absolutely Fabulous marathon a few months ago on Comedy Central. Back when I owned a tv. It has since broken. And after roughly 5 hours of it, I came out the other end feeling physically ill. Has anyone else experienced this? Perhaps my system just couldn't take all that Patsy. >Also, I have a question for those who have gotten this far: should I pay $20 for The >Kershaw Sessions? >Is it worthwhile? I diggit'. Capitalism Blows coughed: > why should brilliant >comedy be any less "great" than brilliant drama? They aren't. Are they? Who can forget Laurel and Hardy's piano scene? Although suggesting that Mojo Nixon is great, well, not in the loosest interpretation of the word. IMHO. >TRAINS is one album that will *never*, ever, ever lose its appeal. or so i >suspect. Amen. I'm certain I'll still groove to this disc when I'm like 150. Mike Runion mumbled: >I posit that there is no such characteristic as "greatness". There are >only things that "I think are great" or "you think are great". The way I see it is. "If I like it, it's got to be cool. If you don't. Fuck off, you're wrong!" > but, honestly, aren't those > albums that you > listen to a couple or more times a year *every year*, and > like *just as much > if not more* than you ever did better records, in > retrospect, than those > which you listened to a million times one summer but > never since? This is me. 100%. I took me years to sink my teeth into the Church's "Sometime Anywhere". And I will purposely not buy discs that I'm quite certain I'll love for a couple of years for the sole reason that I know there will be a dry spell of music that will interest me. Then when that drought hits. I pick up the disc I've neglected. As I've only recently ordered Roy Harpers "Stormcock". It still hasn't come in yet. MARKEEFE spit: >Re: Subject: Robyn Hitchcock, hip with the kids Speaking of Robyn and kids(well it was mentioned in the same breath). I had always thought that just maybe, Robyn missed his mark. I figured he would have made a helluva childrens writer. Listen to "The Man Who Invented Himself" for further details. Can't help but think perhaps somewhere out there there's some poor sap sitting at a computer slowly rotting away, as a result of too much of that Sesame Street bullshit dousing the flame of imagination. hal brandt mentioned: >I always think of Neil when I hear RH's "Mellow Together." As do I. It has got to be the voice. Has anyone picked up the new Harvest Festival boxed set? It seemed interesting as I was eyeing it at my local shop. But at over 75 quid. I'd have to go without sustenance for weeks. Hmm. It may very well be worth it though.....Hmm(again) Only two weeks till Robyn hits my town, Cleveland. Whoop! Cheers, Dr. Sticky. "Tragedy is when I cut MY finger. Comedy is when YOU slip on a banana peel and die". Mel Brooks. ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V8 #298 *******************************