From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V8 #318 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Thursday, August 19 1999 Volume 08 : Number 318 Today's Subjects: ----------------- RE: Art is a lie. . . . [tanter ] the official title [hal brandt ] Re: separation [Ross Overbury ] RE: Art is a lie. . . . [Ross Overbury ] purple, green and pink addendum [digja611@student.otago.ac.nz (James Dign] mabd nyc [woj sven-woj ] eb all over the world ["Capitalism Blows" ] Re: Monstrous Vermin [Stewart Russell 3295 Analyst_Programmer ] Art is a lie, a damned lie! [Vivien Lyon ] Re: Why Robyn must have an iBook [Michael R Godwin ] Re: crap romantic poets [GSS ] e-dates [DDerosa5@aol.com] something borrowed, something blue [DDerosa5@aol.com] BBs in my brain [DDerosa5@aol.com] Re: something borrowed, something blue [mrrunion@palmnet.net] Re: something borrowed, something blue ["JH3" ] Re: something borrowed, something blue [Stephen Buckalew ] Re: purple, green and pink in the deep south [ultraconformist@mail.weboff] Re: purple, green and pink in the deep south [Capuchin ] Re: purple, green and pink in the deep south [Tom Clark ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 21:45:33 -0500 From: tanter Subject: RE: Art is a lie. . . . >===== Original Message From "Partridge, John" >The notion that art is a relationship, a covenant between art and >audience, is intriguing but I'm not sure what it means. It's one >of those ideas that feel provocative but not productive. Well, think about it this way: I write a symphony. I don't want anyone to hear it. I put it in a drawer and no one ever knows of its existence. It's burned up in a house fire, lost forever. Was it a work of art? we'll never know because it was never played again. I write a symphony. I'm not sure if I want anyone but me to hear it. I play it for myself and I enjoy it. It evokes a different image/feel every time I play it. I am the creator and the audience and to me, it's art because it's been created and an audience responds to it. I write a symphony. I want it to evoke some feelings/reaction in an audience. It's performed by St. Martin's in the Fields' orchestra before 800 people. Some cry, some hate it, some love it, some like it, some walk out, but it's art because an audience has had a reaction to it and my purpose has been served. I write a jingle for Burger King. It's recorded by some studio people and heard 15 times a day on network tv. Is it art? I can hear the argument that says anything can be art but I think that in an instance like this, in which the reaction the creator means to evoke is not meant for any particular audience, probably not. You can argue that anything can be art but when commercial gain is the only reason for the existence of a piece, I think we can draw the line there. I've never met an artist whose entire purpose was money. Money is often a motive for creation, but other purposes will be part of the act of creation. Marcy L. Tanter Assistant Professor of English Tarleton State University Stephenville, TX 76401 254-968-9892 (9039 to leave a message) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 20:52:01 -0600 From: hal brandt Subject: the official title James Dignan wrote: > Little Priestess (?) At the recent Denver in-store appearance as Robyn introduced Gene Hackman, he mentioned that the song that comes before it on the CD is called "Mr. Tongs". /hal ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 23:41:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Ross Overbury Subject: Re: separation On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Ross Overbury wrote: > I dunno if Bayard included enough of Balloon Man in the MP3 for the > throat thing to come out, but I do one in my cover as a little joke. Ross, you're so full of it! That was in an outtake, or more likely just another one of your little fantasies. There's nothing of the sort in the MP3. What was that, some cheap trick to get people to hear your stuff? I misquote Python in your general direction! - -- Orb's Surveyor ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 00:04:29 -0400 (EDT) From: Ross Overbury Subject: RE: Art is a lie. . . . On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, tanter wrote: > Well, think about it this way: I write a symphony. I don't want anyone to > hear it. I put it in a drawer and no one ever knows of its existence. It's > burned up in a house fire, lost forever. Was it a work of art? we'll never > know because it was never played again. > > I write a symphony. I'm not sure if I want anyone but me to hear it. I play > it for myself and I enjoy it. It evokes a different image/feel every time I > play it. I am the creator and the audience and to me, it's art because it's > been created and an audience responds to it. This is fun! You record your song and play it, so it's art. Did it become art due to your multiple reactions from repeated playings of the piece? What of commissioned music where the occasion will never present itself again, or or of improvised dance or music? Let's assume that a single reaction is enough. If the size of the audience can be reduced to one and we still have art, why demand a physical performance? I can react to my own music before I've played it; as a matter of fact making art depends on this if we're not to be restricted to taking random stabs at art and filtering out the things that don't work after the fact. Not that wild chances shouldn't be part of the process, but we don't have to wait for the monkeys before we get Shakespeare. If music can exist as art with no physical performance, art is still art when it's just a concept. Thinking is art! I like that. Particularly since I've got no amp and my multitracker's busted. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 16:50:48 +1200 From: digja611@student.otago.ac.nz (James Dignan) Subject: purple, green and pink addendum >Apologies if the following points have been answwred > >Sally Was A Legend - considering how often I get kiwi music references into oh, and it's also a hell of a lot like Brooooce's "Dancing in the dark". James James Dignan___________________________________ You talk to me Deptmt of Psychology, Otago University As if from a distance ya zhivu v' 50 Norfolk Street And I reply. . . . . . . . . . Dunedin, New Zealand with impressions chosen from another time steam megaphone (03) 455-7807 (Brian Eno - "By this River") ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 01:27:12 -0400 From: woj sven-woj Subject: mabd nyc got back from the second tramps mabd show a little while ago (had to skip the first one, alas). i should be a asleep, but a quick note to satisfy the statisticians: length: 44 minutes with mabd video and wayne introductionm acoustic: cynthia mask / i something you / my wife and my dead wife / viva seatac (with the ruby montana verse and the blessing of the washingtonians) electric: kingdom of love / sally was a legend / freeze sebadohic: listening to the higsons / she doesn't exist shirt: black with big white polka dots, untucked hair: greying eyes: blinking robyn seemed rather relaxed and the electric segement, in particular, was inspired. he appeared to really enjoy playing with sebadoh and, in return, jason loewenstein appeared to really appreciate playing with robyn -- he looked as if he was fulfilling a life-long dream. yes, a recording was made. interested parties know where to inquire. woj "zzzzzzzzzz" the wojster ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 00:22:20 PDT From: "Capitalism Blows" Subject: eb all over the world this'll probably just be a re-statement of what i'd said yesterday. but let me give two examples. i prefer Hearts Of Darkness to Apocalypse Now. (the awful truth is that i find the latter pretty underwhelming, both compared with the book, and compared with the ecstatic reactions it seems to elicit from most viewers.) i've seen Apocalypse Now twice, and Hearts Of Darkness probably seven or eight times. given a choice, i'd rather watch Hearts Of Darkness any day of the week. is it "art"? i don't give a fuck! davison budhoo's Enough Is Enough is written in a style that at the very minimum evokes poetry. it's certainly much more accessible and easier to read (not to mention important) than many a "classic" poem. is it "art"? i don't give a fuck! besides, what is "fiction", anyway? is Guernica "fiction"? War And Peace? _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 09:13:14 +0100 (BST) From: Stewart Russell 3295 Analyst_Programmer Subject: Re: Monstrous Vermin >>>>> "CoturnixMaximus" == The Great Quail writes: CoturnixMaximus> Kafka was a weird fellow. Very nervous. I think CoturnixMaximus> the Coen brothers should make a movie about CoturnixMaximus> him. They haven't, but I'd recommend Peter Capaldi's Oscar-winning short "Franz Kafka's It's a Wonderful Life" which has Richard E. Grant as FK. Capaldi comes from an Scots-Italian family famous for its ice cream. You needed to know that. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 09:14:07 -0400 From: "jbranscombe@compuserve.com" Subject: crap romantic poets Does God have an ass? jmbc. I know Mary and Joseph did. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 08:50:44 -0500 From: steve Subject: Why Robyn must have an iBook http://www.wgx.com/cheesenet/ - - Steve ...Apple is the tail that wags the Wintel dog. - Herb Bethoney, PC Week ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 07:29:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Vivien Lyon Subject: Art is a lie, a damned lie! John Partridge wrote: > The notion that art is a relationship, a covenant > between art and > audience, is intriguing but I'm not sure what it > means. It's one > of those ideas that feel provocative but not > productive. Art doesn't happen in a void. If we destroyed the earth, and Rodin's Thinker somehow wound up whole and floating in space, it wouldn't then be art. And were it to get picked up by sentient creatures from Alpha Centauri, they wouldn't consider it art either. The definition of an object is tied to its funtionality. We 'use' the Thinker as art. Therefore it is. The aliens might use him as a toilet. Therefore (and without any Arthur Dent around to protest) it is. > I have no doubt that it's important to the *artists* > but who cares > about them, I'm talking about the art. Which implies > that a non-artist > might produce a work of art. But could a person create art without meaning to? Let's say not that, Kafka-like, I create a piece of fiction that I dont' think is any good. Let's say that my journal is found a hundred years later, divorced from any information about my life, and everyone assumes that it's a work of fiction. Also, assume that I have written about my life in such a poignant fashion that this account moves many people profoundly and they pronounce it the best novel of the twentieth century. Is it art? According to my paragraph above, I would have to say yes, because they are treating it as art. But according to how I feel about it, my journal is certainly not art, by a long shot. Pollution must have lowered our descendants' IQs to near-moron levels for them to consider my journal art. But who's right? I'm dead. They're stupid. re: R. Mutt > Dude, if you paid to get in, you're being laughed > *at*. Why so concerned with being laughed at? Maybe we sometimes deserve to be laughed at. Maybe some of the assumptions society makes about art (and other things too) are absurd. And maybe one of art's *new* functions in this continually evolving society is to serve as a facet of our collection conscience and consciousness. And anyway, > what artist with any talent has *time* to waste it > on demonstrating > contempt for the establishment. Life is too short > and too ugly to > fritter away on sideshow distractions like shocking > the bourgeoisie. How much great art has incidentally had the effect of shocking the bourgeosie? I'm not saying you should sit down at your conceptual workbench with that goal in mind, but it's something to consider. If you just tread the same accepted ground over and over, you're going to get stale. > No, I think we're on the same page on this one: 2x2 > matrix covering > the permutations of good art/bad art and like > it/don't like it. Our > debate is, I think, about what makes it on to the > matrix to begin with. What makes it onto the matrix is anything that the maker calls 'art' or makes with the intent of producing art. Of course, most of this is shite. But a lot of people like what I consider shite. You also said something about there being no social aspect to your enjoyment of Beethoven. The social aspect of that interaction took place long before you were born. People heard something new and shocking, deliberated for awhile, and it eventually turned out that enough people liked it for it to socially qualify as art. If they hadn't decided that, you probably wouldn't have gotten the chance to listen to it. Vivien Not propounding a coherent theory of art, just joining the discussion with some silly analogies and not-wholly-rhetorical questions. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 15:34:09 +0100 (BST) From: Michael R Godwin Subject: Re: Why Robyn must have an iBook On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, steve wrote: > http://www.wgx.com/cheesenet/ That certainly looks like a skull at bottom right. All we need now is a suitcase and a bottle of wine. - - Mike "Boursin with sweet pickle" Godwin ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 09:41:41 -0500 (CDT) From: GSS Subject: Re: crap romantic poets On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, jbranscombe@compuserve.com wrote: > Does God have an ass? god is an ass. I can say that, because I'm Jewish. GSS ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 12:26:22 EDT From: DDerosa5@aol.com Subject: e-dates jpartridge, of the family, opined: >Yes but the good news is that in the modern world where >global communication and travel are so inexpensive, smart >people are finding each other. ya, great, that explains Viv and Jeme, but still doesn't tell me why I spend a lot of time online and travel constantly, yet never meet anyone new... dave ( 8 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 12:50:08 EDT From: DDerosa5@aol.com Subject: something borrowed, something blue johnny "scythe-hands" hedges replied: ...But in your zeal to condemn (justifiably!) modern society for its admittedly strange taste for ecological self-destruction, you seem to forget that our dads and grand-dads had to put up some pretty darn unhealthy shit themselves, like Polio, Syphilis, Killer Influenza Epidemics, unfiltered airborne industrial waste, The Black Plague, human and animal feces dumped directly into drinking-water supplies, lack of refrigeration and air-conditioning, and of course the Spanish Inquisition. Naw, I don't forget it, and I don't make any ridiculous claim like those things are good cause they're "natural" (a term I can no longer define to my own satisfaction, kinda like "edible"), but in the bad old days, they had less ability to do long term damage to species. Epidemics in general, of course, have been exacerbated by people traveling, bringing genes and germs with them...and memes, of course, like art (good) and religion (bad) and clothing styles (indifferent). No, my claim is not that I can burrow through an elephant, but rather that we have made changes which may be more irreversible. Certainly, the pyramids are impressive, and have lasted thousands of years, but shit, our detritus will remain dangerous for millions. As for the effect on culture, I never weighed in on that. Ironically, I think it has become more disposable, less "for the ages", not that I think Da Vinci or Rembrandt of Bach was thinking of what we'd think in the 21st century. But I don't think it has become worse, necessarily--perhaps there is less importance in "universal themes", much like the world no longer needs (or can sustain) a "catholic" church. Except as a landlord, of course. Art is satiric now, often, (reified?) and sincerity seems (whether NMH or Pollock)(or whomever) a lack of irony, much like "peace" has become simply the absence of war. I like diversity, don't get me wrong, but when I talked about our distractionary culture, I refer to things Jeme has said about being fragmented into subcultures so that the "dominant" paradigm becomes irrelevant. Which works great when the subcultures have their own planets. I would look forward to a time when art matters again, like my friends (many of them) who write plays and poetry, or dance ballet or breakdance, or other once meaningful arts that seem drained of their purpose. I think the point about shifting audiences is exactly right, and so is the reason for art consumption. Think about how cool it must have been to go to church once, if only to see that amazing stained glass window, the most beautiful thing in your daily life (unless you're gnostic, or eating rye bread with ergot on it.) Flash forward to modern times, and it's a Dead show, or a rave. People don't have the idiom for older arts--and if we are in fact getting stupider, it may never come back. Then again, maybe someday we'll really understand what those cave paintings and earth tracings actually meant, cause we'll regress to them. Who's to say exactly what "Progress" means? dave sending a shout out to all richard brautigan fans, whose entire last book was about looking for ammo so he could commit suicide. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 12:54:21 EDT From: DDerosa5@aol.com Subject: BBs in my brain Steve, just very pleased that there's going to be a Buckaroo Banzai TV show. what? where? when? with whom? and, do I have to get cable and buy a VCR now? dave ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 13:06 +0000 From: mrrunion@palmnet.net Subject: Re: something borrowed, something blue Hey y'all. Permit me to babble... >I would look forward to a time when art matters again, Art never mattered. It just gives us something to argue about and occupy time while we wait for death...sorta like chess or socio-economics. >like my friends (many of them) who write plays and poetry, >or dance ballet or breakdance, or other once meaningful arts >that seem drained of their purpose. I think the point about >shifting audiences is exactly right, and so is the reason >for art consumption. Think about how cool it must have been >to go to church once,if only to see that amazing stained >glass window, the most beautiful thing in your daily life >(unless you're gnostic, or eating rye bread with ergot on >it.) Yeah, and then next Sunday your thatch hut was being torched by the local monks because you didn't pay your monthly pig taxes. Every single damn hole-in-the-wall in Europe still has a big ornate monstrosity of a church, with bums sleeping on the steps, the smell of urine in the corners, tour groups gawking, and skateboarders scratching the chipped marble stoops and stairs outside. And I've got a sneaking suspicion it was the same 500 years ago, albeit the skateboarders were pathetically "old skool". >Flash forward to modern times, and it's a Dead show, or >a rave. People don't have the idiom for older arts--and if >we are in fact getting stupider, it may never come back. >Then again, maybe someday we'll really understand what those >cave paintings and earth tracings actually meant, cause we'll >regress to them. Here's my rather cynical-seeming opinion. People do what they like to do, and that's about all they do. "Art" is relative and something altogether different. Those rich bastards that paid Beethoven or Mozart or whoever to write pleasant ditties did so for egotistical reasons...now they could invite their friends and social elite 'round over to the mansion and show 'em how much money and power they have, or how much they love the arts, or how much more intelligent and cultured they were; and squalid little burgs like Vienna could finally get put on the map and play with the big boys (sorta like lobbying for an interstate ramp and a Stuckeys). One day, people are gonna pay big bucks to stroll through old refurbished fast food restaurants and marvel at the little plastic boxes full of colorful web pages and old Seinfeld episodes and think how artistic and innovative those 20th Century geniuses were. Real life episode: We were in the Metropolitan Museum of Art recently, strolling through the Egyptian stuff, the old musical instruments, etc. As a bad joke we ventured down into Museum bowels to view the "Costumes"...just a bunch of old ratty clothes from the last few 100 years. Art? Nah. But, there on the wall was one of those thin, LCD, video-display screens (the hang on the wall type) showing old Style With Elsa Klench episodes. I was enthalled. My hands were all over this wonderful...thing. I even accidently popped off a little battery cover or something off the back and tried desperately to put it back as I heard the whhhhiiirrr of the security cameras turning towards me. A guard strolled through like 30 seconds later, as I sat admiring some putrid Hollywood ball gown or something. Anyway... >Who's to say exactly what "Progress" means? Progress doesn't exist. Just the gradual acceleration of superficial change. Mike (take everything I say with a grain of salt) Runion (actually, I'm having a really great day!) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 13:28:20 -0500 From: "JH3" Subject: Re: something borrowed, something blue Dave writes: >...People don't have the idiom for older arts--and if we are >in fact getting stupider, it may never come back. Then again, >maybe someday we'll really understand what those cave >paintings and earth tracings actually meant, cause we'll >regress to them. You make some good points there, Dave. But I fear you're forgetting one thing: Sooner or later, ultra-sophisticated "Gattaca"-like genetic engineering techniques will turn us all into a race of Adonis-like super-geniuses, capable of virtually anything. We'll be loads smarter, but then things will *really* be fucked up, don't you think? Food for thought, indeed! John H. Hedges PS. Where did "scythe-hands" come from? Did you think I looked like Johnny Depp? (Hmmm, perhaps those genetic re-sequencing experiments I performed on myself have finally paid off...) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 15:03:26 -0400 From: Stephen Buckalew Subject: Re: something borrowed, something blue Mike Runion wrote: >Art never mattered. It just gives us something to argue about and occupy >time while we wait for death...sorta like chess or socio-economics. Well, really, the art we make, the things we say, and the DNA strands that code us are all just little bits of information in the midst of the big ol' noise of the "universe." It's fascinating that there is anything other than noise at all. I think it's kinda "cool" to not-be-noise for a little while. Why that is...who knows? Although some in this recent discussion might claim that a lot of art is noise. np: IODOT (not noise?) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 15:09:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Bayard Subject: Re: purple, green and pink in the deep south Jimmy D: > Mexican God - ambiguous - is it "Time will destroy you like a Mexican god > would", or "Time will destroy you like it would destroy a Mexican god"? I think it's both, but mostly the latter. "at least when I die, your memory will too"... Gods cease to exist when there's no one left to worship them. > I'm tempted to book this one for the next Glass Flesh... Please do. > Sally Was A Legend - considering how often I get kiwi music references into > my posts, I'm a little reticent about comparing this with the Muttonbirds, > but it must be done. This wouldn't be out of place on Envy of Angels... > where's the euphonium? One of those rare songs that I feel I've always > known. Still get the feeling that it's about someone who committed suicide, > though. I don't think so - I think the veins comment refers to a young person (the narrator) noticing an older family member's veins... they get more noticable when you get older, right? I mean, right? And why would you sit at a table to kill yourself? Doesn't make sense... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 14:21:52 -0600 From: ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com Subject: Re: purple, green and pink in the deep south >I don't think so - I think the veins comment refers to a young person (the >narrator) noticing an older family member's veins... they get more >noticable when you get older, right? I mean, right? Yeah, they usually do. But I still think James is right that this is about a suicidal person, though it's unclear whether or not she actually went through with it. >And why would you sit at a table to kill yourself? Doesn't make sense... You might sit at a table, holding a knife, contemplating it, looking at the veins beneath your wrist and how delicate they are, looking at the knife and pondering how easily you could cut them. At this moment, you might well close your eyes and see the faces of people you love "on your lids", and picture their reactions, and see them crying. Makes quite a lot of sense to me. Love on ya, Susan ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 12:28:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: purple, green and pink in the deep south On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Bayard wrote: > Jimmy D: > > Mexican God - ambiguous - is it "Time will destroy you like a Mexican god > > would", or "Time will destroy you like it would destroy a Mexican god"? > I think it's both, but mostly the latter. "at least when I die, your > memory will too"... Gods cease to exist when there's no one left to > worship them. Heck no! I do think there's a tiny big of interesting double meaning there about the Mexican Gods being destroyed by time and the wearing away of their memory, but that's not at all what Robyn has in mind for the primary meaning. Heck no. It's about time being like this horrible curse. It's about the pain and suffering of aging and how it's the evil that he's wished on so many. The decay he's experiencing as an aging person is the same sort of desication and failing of facilities that he'd imagined all those people he'd hated throughout life contracting as punishment for their transgressions. Mexican gods were cruel and vicious and slow in their destruction of their enemies. I was watching some awful movie on some awful free movie channel on my once-digital cable and heard a very funny bit from a very unfunny flick. A bear had attacked a man and killed him Man in crowd: Let's hunt it down and kill the beast! Cowardly leader: No no, just think. In twenty years the ravages of time will have left the bear toothless and weak, easy prey for his former enemies and a feable shell of his former self. He will live out his days in suffering and pain reflecting on mightiness he can no longer muster. Man in crowd: Ahh! Revenge IS sweet! I paraphrased, but that was roughly it. Made me think of Mexican God. J. - -- ________________________________________________________ J A Brelin Capuchin ________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 15:44:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Bayard Subject: Re: purple, green and pink in the deep south On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Capuchin wrote: > > Heck no! I do think there's a tiny big of interesting double meaning > there about the Mexican Gods being destroyed by time and the wearing away > of their memory, but that's not at all what Robyn has in mind for the > primary meaning. Then we are agreed, both meanings are evident. Which is big and which is tiny is no big deal, Tiny. GREAT song. =b ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 12:51:50 -0700 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: purple, green and pink in the deep south On 8/19/99 12:28 PM, Capuchin wrote: >I was watching some awful movie on some awful free movie channel on my >once-digital cable and heard a very funny bit from a very unfunny flick. > >A bear had attacked a man and killed him >Man in crowd: Let's hunt it down and kill the beast! > >Cowardly leader: No no, just think. In twenty years the ravages of time >will have left the bear toothless and weak, easy prey for his former >enemies and a feable shell of his former self. He will live out his days >in suffering and pain reflecting on mightiness he can no longer muster. > >Man in crowd: Ahh! Revenge IS sweet! > >I paraphrased, but that was roughly it. Made me think of Mexican God. Makes me think of The Simpsons. Perhaps that's just because it was run through the Capuchafilter. - -tom "the ring fell off my pudding can!" the tomster ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 15:57:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Bayard Subject: Re: purple, green and pink in the deep south All very sensible, except for the problem with tense - remember, she could see me crying, and -now- she's at the table. Also I just can't quite reconcile the happy, upbeat tone of the song with a family member (or other loved one) wanting to kill herself. Would RH do a song like that? On Thu, 19 Aug 1999 ultraconformist@mail.weboffices.com wrote: > > >I don't think so - I think the veins comment refers to a young person (the > >narrator) noticing an older family member's veins... they get more > >noticable when you get older, right? I mean, right? > > Yeah, they usually do. But I still think James is right that this is about > a suicidal person, though it's unclear whether or not she actually went > through with it. > > >And why would you sit at a table to kill yourself? Doesn't make sense... > > You might sit at a table, holding a knife, contemplating it, looking at the > veins beneath your wrist and how delicate they are, looking at the knife > and pondering how easily you could cut them. At this moment, you might well > close your eyes and see the faces of people you love "on your lids", and > picture their reactions, and see them crying. > > Makes quite a lot of sense to me. > > Love on ya, > Susan > > > ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V8 #318 *******************************