From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V8 #306 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Friday, August 13 1999 Volume 08 : Number 306 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Neutral Milk Hotel. Robyn Hitchcock [Tom Clark ] RE: Neutral Milk Hotel. No Robyn Hitchcock ["Partridge, John" ] I can't believe I'm bothering to send this: [DDerosa5@aol.com] Re: Spice Girls are doin' it for themselves [ultraconformist@mail.weboffi] RE: Neutral Milk Hotel. Some Robyn Hitchcock [Vivien Lyon ] Re: favorite voices [ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com] Re: Neutral Milk Hotel vs. Adam Ant, only one can survive... [MARKEEFE@ao] Re: Neutral Milk Hotel vs. Adam Ant, only one can survive... [Mark_Gloste] Re: Neutral Milk Hotel vs. Adam Ant, only one can survive... [MARKEEFE@ao] RE: Neutral Milk Hotel/singers/art/Ricky Martin [Eb Subject: Re: Neutral Milk Hotel. Robyn Hitchcock On 8/12/99 7:00 PM, Partridge, John wrote, RE- NMH: >this sucks. Gee, what a coincidence. That's exactly what I wrote on my copy of the CD before I gave it to woj! Your insights are always appreciated here, JP. - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 10:01:11 -0700 From: "Partridge, John" Subject: RE: Neutral Milk Hotel. No Robyn Hitchcock > > I suck at this too, but I'm going to try. John, I have > to admit that when I first read your post, I struggled > very hard with an impulse to tell you to fuck off. Wha-? > But > that's not proper form, and I don't really want you to > fuck off. Whew. > It's just that this album is so > overwhelmingly magnificent and complete, I have a hard > time hearing criticism of it. I grant that Jeff > Mangum's voice isn't naturally pleasing to the ear. If > you don't like it, you don't like it. But to call the > lyrics juvenile and trite? > > This album's greatness lies in its agonized honesty. Confessional poetry became the craze after WWII and I readily admit my admiration for the immense talent of some its best known practitioners, Sylvia Plath, Anne Sexton, Robert Lowell, etc. And I further admit that many of the poems they wrote qualify as "art" (e.g., Lady Lazarus). But I put it to you that the artistic success of those poems had, in the end, nothing whatsoever to do with their agonized honesty and had everything to do with where those artists took that starting point emotion. As I've said in the past, sincerity cancels art. By the way, it's worth noting that like almost *every* post WWII trend in the arts, confessionalism led to stagnation or ugliness. Architecture: Bauhaus. Painting: gad don't get me started. Music: John Cage. Unlike, say, transcendentalism, confessionalism's affect on poetry was to kill it. > He's confessing his abiding fantasy, an embarrassing > but somehow noble obsession with a dead girl. The > fantasy is so consuming and real that it's wrenched > out of him, he *has* to sing about this- it isn't a > choice. > So? The bum outside my building *has* to scratch that itch, it isn't a choice. Hey I like obsessions as much as the next guy; I liked the crazed stalker persona of "Insanely Jealous" and I think Charles Kinbote from Pale Fire is the tops. So a consuming fantasy does not, in itself, add or detract from a piece's success as art. It's just a trait, like which key a song is written in. > >Any song that starts with "Daddy please listen to my > >song" is either going to be a really harsh parody or > >excruciatingly awkward. > > Why, precisely, is that the case? Because parents are > uncool to sing about? No. > Fathers are a poor topic to > address in a 'rock and roll' song? No. It's just to sing about fathers *that way* that's so hysterically pathetic. > At any rate, in a > way I agree with you, the album is excruciatingly > awkward. It's awkward to hear a person expose > themselves so thoroughly. But I admire his courage, > and I identify with his longing. Well everyone's wired differently. Personally, I find people's psychological innards as revolting as their physical viscera. Also, since everyone's innermost pain, angst, loneliness, self-hate, etc. is on exactly the same level as everyone else's, I find the material gets tiresome pretty quickly. I mean *I* could expose myself as thoroughly as Jeff but a) I am not so adolescent as to think my pain, angst, etc. is any more noble or interesting than anyone else's; and b) my job pays better than his (well maybe not...). > > > I think what I'm asking is above and beyond this > > album and dips back into > > the "greatness" debate. Ugh. Forget it... > > John admits that nothing on this album is parodic, and > that is just exactly why it's great, in the deepest > sense of that word. That's a bit overwrought, don't you think? I mean, how many senses *are* there to the word "great"? But anyway, your point is that the album's utter lack of pretence, cynicism, its bravery, make it really really good. What I'm saying is that those are great character traits for individuals to have but not for art. I mean Bono, Sting, Peter Gabriel, Lou Reed, name your whiner, are *all* sincere. So what. > I have never heard a singer mean > what they say so intensely. I can't disagree with that. > It's potentially > embarrassing, it's incredibly personal, but he > unflinchingly reveals it. Yes, I'm with still with you. > He's super-human in his > humanity. > Woah, missed the exit. By the way, I really like The The's Soul Mining; I really like Joy Division; I really like Magazine. But what those guys did with misery as raw material is just so much more sophisticated than what Jeff did. > Vivien > > Sorry to get you pissed off at me but I did want to offer my, albeit contrarian, view on NMH. Their popularity means that Jeff is hitting some kind of chord but as you can see it's a complete mystery to me. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 13:11:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Rodebaugh Subject: "full band" at cat's cradle someone asked about this: i am unsure who they were. i'd guess sebadoh, because they were not cornelius or iqu, and sebadoh was next--but i didn't stay for them, so i don't know. robyn called them friends and called one "mr. pollard." (i think.) s'all i know. i think it must have been a pretty-quick-put-together thing, or else he would've played "kingdom of love" with them instead of on his own. tom FREE music: http://www.mp3.com/tlr3 or FREE instrumentals: http://www.mp3.com/automaton ************************************************************************ *++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- data collection at 4/5s!* ************************************************************************ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 13:14:12 EDT From: DDerosa5@aol.com Subject: I can't believe I'm bothering to send this: capuchin misrationalized: If you count the period, yep. That's three. But I just assumed that the other would have had a period. Silly mea culpa. I wasn't counting the comma, silly, I was nitpicking that you spelled Ric Ocasek's name with an extra k. That was the character. If you're gonna count characters, ya gotta spell check first. dave ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 12:22:12 -0600 From: ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com Subject: Re: Spice Girls are doin' it for themselves >>From: ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com > >>And the funniest one- something about "you anti-Oasis people probably sit >>and listen to Blur and pull your podwhacker". I'm sorry, I nearly fell off >>my chair. What on earth is -that- about? > >I'd pull my podwhacker over 3/4 of Blur any day. Why does that term give me this mental image of people whipping it out to play WhackAMole with it and being thrown out of Chuck E. Cheese? Um, anyway......I think what I found sorta mystifying about that sentence was that it kind of came out of nowhere. It was like "You don't like Oasis, you must like Blur", which is sort of odd. What if you don't care for either? It's a big world out there with lots of bands in it besides those two. Additionally, I guess I'd never thought of Blur as a "gay band". I have no idea if any of them are gay or not, and they may have a huge gay following for all I know, but it did seem as if the reason for this remark had more to do with the fact that they aren't likely to be seen at football matches and have been known to engage in what some people (NME critics mostly, who feed this particular appetite shamefully) might call "art-wank". Which sorta goes back to what some of we Americans don't like about some British music mags- the sheer viciousness of it all. Now you can write and say that a lot of American music mags are boring, and I'll agree with a lot of that- "Spin" IS the pits, and "Rolling Stone" isn't much better (most of the good music writing here is done for smaller publications you'd probably have trouble getting over the pond). But frankly the way some British music mags have of whipping people into odd tribal frenzies of this nature is really off-putting, and while it may make for more liveliness, that liveliness is of an ugly nature that I personally don't care for. Love on ya, Susan ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 10:26:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Vivien Lyon Subject: RE: Neutral Milk Hotel. Some Robyn Hitchcock John P wrote: > Sorry to get you pissed off at me but I did want > to offer my, albeit contrarian, view on NMH. Their > popularity means that Jeff is hitting some kind of > chord but as you can see it's a complete mystery > to me. I'm not pissed off at you, but I agree that NMH is a mystery to you. I think I figured out why. >By the way, I really like The > The's Soul Mining; I really like Joy Division; I > really like Magazine. But what those guys did with >misery as raw material is just so much more >sophisticated than what Jeff did. Well, the key here is that it isn't *misery* that Jeff is relating. His songs are a determination to overcome misery, they express defiant hopefulness and passionate belief in the redeeming qualities of love, no matter how seemingly futile. This album (to me) embodies hope. I don't know how to say it other than that, and that's obviously a very personal reaction. On a different level, it's similar to how I feel about Positive Vibrations, which I also feel is a defiant but blisteringly un-ironic 'fuck you' to negativity. I'm going to stop talking about this now, I don't think I'm making my point very well. Vivien _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 12:34 +0000 From: mrrunion@palmnet.net Subject: Put Off The frequest use of the word "off-putting" in today's posts is rather off-putting. Mike (off to putt around) n.p. nothing...absolutely nothing ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 12:41:04 -0600 From: ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com Subject: RE: Neutral Milk Hotel. No Robyn Hitchcock >physical viscera. Also, since everyone's innermost >pain, angst, loneliness, self-hate, etc. is on >exactly the same level as everyone else's, I find the >material gets tiresome pretty quickly. I would disagree with that actually. I think some peoples' innermost pain is (on a subjective level, natch) more interesting than other peoples'. This is either because a) they're a person I care about or b) they're an interesting person. I think what this boils down to is you don't think Jeff Mangum's an interesting person and wonder why anyone would care or why he'd think they would. While I can certainly appreciate that, I don't think it's a matter of the approach per se. >expose myself as thoroughly as Jeff but a) I am not so >adolescent as to think my pain, angst, etc. is any >more noble or interesting than anyone else's; It isn't really about thinking your pain is more interesting than anyone else's, I don't feel. It's more about catharsis through art and a sort of desperate (though fairly abstract and conflicted) attempt to find kindred souls. Every confessional artist is going to find -someone- who feels that that artist is the first person that, to paraphrase Woody Guthrie, told them something they always knew. I find this -debate- very interesting. As my SO is always saying this about Momus. He's always like "Why would anyone CARE about this shit he sings about? Who's interested?". Well, I do and I am. Lots of people wouldn't, but that's their business. It's all in the be-listener. If it strikes a chord with you, then you can rationalize that as a matter of style or whatever, but I think fundamentally it's about whether or not the music in question resonates with something similar in yourself, or doesn't. Love on ya, Susan ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 13:45:03 EDT From: DDerosa5@aol.com Subject: favorite voices someone on he last digest conceded: I can see where Jeff's voice could rub some people the wrong way. Yeah, me too. On a couple of songs on Aeroplane, his voice just hurts to listen to. those songs, I liked last. But, like Viv, I like all of em now. I must admit that one of the most important criteria for me is if listening to a song makes me sing it, and enjoy singing it. (that last criteria kicks out most of pop music for me, where getting it stuck in your head feels like a disease :"infectious melodies", indeed). It took me a long time to notice this growing up, but for as long as it took me to grow to like Neil Young, Bob Dylan, etc., they caught me (like Robyn says of Dylan, II didn't write these songs, but they wrote me") For a while, I claimed these folks were great songwriters, but bad singers: then I realized, as I heard cover versions, that they really lacked something. As for Jeff Mangum, I can't imagine most of his songs covered by anyone. Like with robyn, there's a match between the voice and the lyrics, which I don't find startlingly profound OR juvenile--just unique, personal. True. As for catchiness, it's funny that sometimes you don't get the song stuck you thought you would. Eddie mentioned Dan Bern's "City of Models", which I don't like much (and dont' think much of as a protest.) Yet, beyond "Marilyn", one of his catchiest songs is a somewhat dopey one, with the chorus "Charles Manson's Real Name is Charles Krautmeyer". Most people I play this for don't think much of it, but all of them are always singing it the next day. Brilliant. It grows on you, organically, like moss or ivy. Or Robyn. Sometimes a person can write great songs, not sign them well (in a trained sense), yet be true to the spirit of the original. My favorite example of this is Daniel Johnston, who was crazy enough to warrant comparisons to Roky Erickson and wesley Willis. (eddie, don't get me started on him--I've met wesley over a hundred times in Wicker Park, own a few of his marker paintings, love the guy, and cannot for the life of me enjoy any of his recorded music.) DJ's music was so lo-fi, it was almost unlistenable, though perfectly sung and catchy. He put out one big label album, which sucked, but his old friend K. McCarty from Glass Eye recorded an album of his songs as they sounded in his head, and it's perfect. weird hearing someone channel someone else's heartfelt emotions. Similarly, it's kinda cool to hear Robyn do Syd songs, though of those I must admit that on a recording at least I'd always rather hear Syd's original. Live, though, it's a treat. One thing Syd, Robyn, Jeff Mangum, Daniel Johnston, and sometime Dan Bern all have in common, which I think of as a bit "crazy": they all use their voices to express emotion through melody, sometimes stretching syllables weirdly, varying line lengths, making the singing not easily tracked, almost more like something you graph. I don't know how to describe it, but when I hear it, I usually like it. You don't have to sing along well, you just have to sing it honest. You now how when you know a song too well, when you know each little inflection a singer puts in, where if you had the right voice you could re-record the original, like Pierre Menard's Quixote? These guys all sound like that the first time they sing a song. (I'm suddenly very aware that I don't have any women on that list, which is odd--I WOnder which ones might fir into those criteria? Natalie Merchant seemed liek she would for a while, but then got very dull...) OK, back to work. dave ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 11:03:24 -0700 From: Mark_Gloster@3com.com Subject: Neutral Milk Hotel vs. Adam Ant, only one can survive... I'm going to lightly weigh in on this subject... I probably wanted to dislike NMH when I heard the Airplane over the sea album, but was maybe a little disappointed that I had a positive reaction to it. I listened to it a lot for a month or two. When Tom and others piped up with how much they hated it, I really understood it tho, Jeff's vocals could be 'bad irritating' to me with only a minor adjustment. Over time, the CD has paled for me considerably. It doesn't give me the same reaction or I don't want the same reaction as it used to. Also, most of the "songs" don't stand well for me on their own. The only way for me to listen to some of them is if I'm listening to the CD sequentially in its entirety. I still do like a couple of the songs a lot. The bold painful honesty of some artists that is their initial draw is sometimes their undoing over time. The spleening of every emotion which they feel can become a source of fatigue. Also, how does someone draw from that same vat of childhood pain for a long time without a) killing him/herself, b) eventually just repeating themselves, and/or c) sounding as if they are repeating by rote. I'm not accusing Jeff M. of this, but I am mindful of this when I do listen to their stuff. I guess we can go back to arguing about spelling, usage, and punksheeashun now. I'm going to eat sushi. Neutrally yours, - -Markg ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 14:15:01 -0500 From: "chad leahy" Subject: raving about rufus i was recently given a $50 best buy gift certificate from my employer (they periodically bestow these types of gifts, boosts the morale and keeps the peasants from instigating unpleasant uprisings). i ran out over lunch to pick up a few new cd's. i believe i recall someone on this list raving about rufus wainwright. it wasn't my money so i rolled the dice. anyway, thanks to whomever it was. i'm diggin' it immensely. chad m. leahy ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 14:16:51 -0600 From: ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com Subject: Re: favorite voices >must admit that one of the most important criteria for me is if listening to >a song makes me sing it, and enjoy singing it. (that last criteria kicks out >most of pop music for me, where getting it stuck in your head feels like a >disease :"infectious melodies", indeed). Doug and I (that's my SO Doug, not our own Doug M-W) call this "the voodoo curse". As in, when I notice someone going around randomly exclaiming "JET!", I know that they have contracted the McCartney Voodoo curse, which is a particularly tenacious one as curses go. Whether or not you actually like Paul McCartney doesn't have much to do with it, as it affects everyone equally. >think much of it, but all of them are always singing it the next day. >Brilliant. It grows on you, organically, like moss or ivy. Or Robyn. I've noticed that quality in all of my favorite performers. A review in this week's "AV Club" had a similar observation about Townes Van Zandt. Something about how his genius and commercial downfall were both contained in the way he had of crafting songs that had stealth- they didn't get you right away, but you'd find yourself thinking about them the next day, or two days later, and singing odd bits here and there. This rang true for me, as I remember that when I first got "High, Low, and In-Between" and "The Late Great Townes Van Zandt", that I wasn't hit right away. But a couple days later it seemed that fragments of "Poncho and Lefty", in particular, had lodged in my brain for good, and that dry, desolate voice was haunting me and I was compelled to go put it on again. Other people had huge hits with some of his songs, but once you've heard him do "Poncho and Lefty", it just boggles the mind someone else had the hit with it. Let alone that that someone else was Willie "Nasal-Man" Nelson. Now Robyn is a different case, because he's a lot more pop, and he can write a mean hook of the voodoo curse variety when he's so inclined. But overall, I think he's more of a stealth guy too. >like that the first time they sing a song. (I'm suddenly very aware that I >don't have any women on that list, which is odd--I WOnder which ones might >fir into those criteria? A lot of female jazz singers. Billie Holiday springs to mind right away. I can't think of any female rock/pop/whatever singers that have it, off the top of my head, but I'm sure someone else can. Love on ya, Susan ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:35:12 EDT From: MARKEEFE@aol.com Subject: Re: Neutral Milk Hotel vs. Adam Ant, only one can survive... In a message dated 8/13/99 11:06:11 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Mark_Gloster@3com.com writes: << Also, most of the "songs" don't stand well for me on their own. The only way for me to listen to some of them is if I'm listening to the CD sequentially in its entirety. >> I'm betting that Eb just *knew* I wouldn't be able to resist replying to this! I'll just never understand why this seems to be considered a valid argument against an album. If it all works together ("sequentially in its entirity"), then hasn't it done exactly what it's promised to do? Would someone say that their main critique of a house is that, while they liked the house as a whole, they couldn't see enjoying the guest room if it were removed from said house and placed on a desert island? I guess you *could* say that, but what would you really be saying that could be considered a useful criticism. I mean, there are probably very few instances where one takes part of a house away from the rest of the house and asks it to stand on its own merit. I evaluate albums in the same way, unless they're *specifically* packaged as a collection of songs, like a greatest hits album. Otherwise, I assume that the artist intended for the songs to be listened to sequentially and in a single sitting. I'm very much pro-CD (of course), but I sometimes wonder if 'random' buttons and remote controls and the like haven't skewed people's perspectives about the nature of what it means to listen to an album in the modern (post-"Revolver") era. Would one say that their enjoyment of a novel was compromised because they didn't think they could enjoy chapter 16 outside the context of the book? Would you say your dinner could've been better if only the sauce could be enjoyed separately as a bevarage? It's my belief that many of the better albums are conceived of in this more "architectural" fashion. I'm not saying that I can't enjoy a McDonald's Value Meal or the Pet Shop Boys' "Discography" or a collection of Hemingway short stories. I'm just saying that I can appreciate it when an artist considers the whole as important as (or even more important than) the individual parts. - ------Michael K. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 12:52:24 -0700 From: Mark_Gloster@3com.com Subject: Re: Neutral Milk Hotel vs. Adam Ant, only one can survive... Michael, you really weren't confusing me with eb were you? I think you make a good point about how an album should work. I will likely enjoy an album best if the songs stand on their own _and_ work as a crucial part of an ensemble. I will appreciate an album if it is full of good songs, even if they don't go well together. Then, I will enjoy a full listen of an album whose whole is greater than its parts. I usually don't make time to listen to entire albums with a couple of good songs on them and crappy stuff that doesn't go together. I don't think I was panning the album, either. I think it would have been more difficult to listen to with breaks between songs and with, really, any other song order. I can still want an album to have lots of great songs on it. Happies, - -Markg ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 17:06:12 EDT From: MARKEEFE@aol.com Subject: Re: Neutral Milk Hotel vs. Adam Ant, only one can survive... In a message dated 8/13/99 12:55:12 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Mark_Gloster@3com.com writes: << Michael, you really weren't confusing me with eb were you? >> No, just thought I'd use Mark's (your) comment as a springboard for writing a little essay. Ya know -- these things cross your mind, and the only place to relaly talk about them is in a place like Fegland, where everyone's a music geek and actually cares about stupid things like this. I hope I didn't come across as jumping all over Mark. Just thought it might keep the thread going or start a new one or just add to heap of meaningless verbage that contaminates the void :-) - ------Michael K., being ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 14:13:30 -0800 From: Eb Subject: RE: Neutral Milk Hotel/singers/art/Ricky Martin The palindromic Chi-gal posted, with a typically apologetic tone: >Well, the key here is that it isn't *misery* that Jeff >is relating. His songs are a determination to overcome >misery, they express defiant hopefulness and >passionate belief in the redeeming qualities of love, >no matter how seemingly futile. This album (to me) >embodies hope. > >I'm going to stop talking about this now, I don't >think I'm making my point very well. Actually, I think you made it quite well. Meanwhile, Eb-baiters like Hal will notice that I'm not jumping in here with a hysterical pro-NMH rant. As for the what-makes-a-good-singer question, I think my own criterion is pretty simple: the voice should sustain my attention, and compel me to listen to the words. This may or may NOT mean the voice is technically adept. Maybe this is part of my irritation with the "mannered" thing -- the words aren't emphasized, but rather the enunciation and timbre. I mean, I could hardly quote a goddamned line out of the entire Bauhaus catalog. Who gives a quail's ass what Murphy is singing, as long as he can sound "scary," right? And regarding John Partridge's comment that "sincerity kills art"...whew, what garbage. I guess that Hitchcock's detachment must be a real breath of fresh air to you, then. Much more comfy to just sit outside a work of art and smirk post-modern style, I guess. Eb PS The Ehhh List, another installment of an occasional series: the Go, the Souvenirs, Chicklet, Oneida, "Clusterfuck," the Stereophonics, Zenith, Trina & Tamara, "Punk-O-Rama V4" (despite the puzzling inclusion of a Tom Waits track), Red Stars Theory, Powerman 5000, Headcase, Vitro, "Runaway Bride" soundtrack, Burning Spear, Limp Bizkit, Chris Rock, Dream City Film Club, Sophie B. Hawkins, "Latin Mix USA 2," Wheat, Delirious?, Stroke 9, Red House Painters, Destiny's Child, the Blue Hawaiians and Showoff. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 16:53:16 -0600 From: ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com Subject: RE: singers/art/Ricky Martin >words aren't emphasized, but rather the enunciation and timbre. I mean, I >could hardly quote a goddamned line out of the entire Bauhaus catalog. Who Oh yeah, there's -nothing- quotable in Jarvis Cocker's lyrics :). >what garbage. I guess that Hitchcock's detachment must be a real breath of >fresh air to you, then. Much more comfy to just sit outside a work of art Hitchcock's detachment wha? You did mean that guy who does "You and Oblivion" and "Insanely Jealous" and "Glass Hotel", right? Or is there some other completely un-emotional guy who goes around impersonating him? Perhaps I just missed a joke here. It seems to be happening a lot lately. Love on ya, Susan just got -drenched- taking FOUR bags of papers out to the recycling. bleh. off to the grocery store to get drenched again. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 18:05:41 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: RE: singers/art/Ricky Martin On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com wrote: > just got -drenched- taking FOUR bags of papers out to the recycling. bleh. > off to the grocery store to get drenched again. Hey, if you don't want that rain, send it to Maryland. Please! - --Chris, an NMH-listenin', Bauhaus-quotin' fool ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 17:1:34 -0600 From: Paul Christian Glenn Subject: Re: RE: singers/art/Ricky Martin At 8/13/99 4:53:00 PM, you wrote: >just got -drenched- taking FOUR bags of papers out to the recycling. bleh. >off to the grocery store to get drenched again. Hey, Susan, I got this real neat invention I'll sell ya for a mere $100, if you promise to keep the secret. It's a short little stick that you hold above your head, and when you press the button, a little tent pops up and shields you from the rain! ;) Unless, of course, you're talking about humidity, instead of rain, in which case my already lame joke becomes even lamer. :P Paul Christian Glenn | "Besides being complicated, trance@radiks.net | reality, in my experience, http://x-real.firinn.org | is usually odd." -C.S. Lewis Currently Reading: "The Tempest" by William Shakespeare ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V8 #306 *******************************