From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V11 #216 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Tuesday, July 2 2002 Volume 11 : Number 216 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Horton Hears Half the Who ["Rex.Broome" ] RE: Ask not for whom ... [Sebastian Hagedorn ] Re: Sunset Strip 1966... Muses... Mould & the Angry Inch [Ken Weingold ] Re: Footnote [barbara soutar ] Appeals Schma-peals ["Poole, R. Edward" ] Robyn Sings and I damn well like it! ["Rex.Broome" ] whoreccomendations ["Russ Reynolds" ] Re: stumbling, forward [gSs ] Only connect ["No Name" ] Re: Minority Report [Steve Talkowski ] Soft Boys RnRHoF eligibility [Steve Talkowski ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 09:54:13 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Horton Hears Half the Who Who: So my coworker gave the show a thumbs up. Don't know him well; he's not the kind of obsessive gig-note-taker, as, umm, you know, some people. I had missed the fact that Zack Starkey was drumming. Apparently the bass player kept to the shadows, little was said, Daltry sounded good and Pete played all the leads and electrics. Still too weird to really contmplate. I'm sure some reviews will surface later today. Buffalo Springfield: So great. The Box Set was cool, too (still lacks the long "Bluebird" that once surfaced on the 2-disc vinyl best-of (nb. not "Retospective") but there you go)... two really weird things about the Springfield. One is that, having just read the Neil bio, I was shocked at what how much everyone involved hates the first, self-titled album. Second, Stephen Stills' songs with the Springfield were really really good. Somehow he started sucking, instantly and intensely, at the very minute that band broke up. Also, how come they are always called "THE Buffalo Springfield" or "THE Springfield" when all of their records are clearly labeled just plain "Buffalo Springfield"? Public Enemy: Let's get it exactly right: "ELVIS... was a hero to most but he never meant shit to me Y'see straight up racist The sucker was simple and plain Motherfuck him and John Wayne! Cuz I'm black and I'm proud etc..." Kinks: Ken, it's so cool that Muswell Hillbillies is amongst your only three Kinks records. Used to be kind of hard to find that one. It has a special place in my heart 'cuz I'm a West Virginia Hillbilly Boy, but my heart lies in old... Muswell. Well, not really, but I love hearing Davies namedrop my much-maligned home state. Cheers! Rex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 18:59:59 +0200 From: Sebastian Hagedorn Subject: RE: Ask not for whom ... - -- "Poole, R. Edward" is rumored to have mumbled on Dienstag, 2. Juli 2002 12:36 Uhr -0400 regarding RE: Ask not for whom ...: > If you could describe the location/energy state of every > sub-atomic particle in your vicinity at the time of this event (and please > don't tell me about heisenberg's or bohr's work at this point; unless, of > course, you would like to argue that quantum mechanics provides a door > through which free will may escape the prison erected by physical > determinism. My conversational familiarity with, say, the uncertainty > principle, doesn't give me the tools necessary to tackle this argument, > but it intrigues me with its surface charm), I'm confident you could > describe the forces at work on your clock that caused its behavior. OK, you are arguing for the kind of determinism that Laplace had in mind. I agree that quantum mechanics are *not* the proof of the existence of free will that many people want it to be, but as far as I am concerned Laplace doesn't work either. If you take the event horizon into consideration, things get rather tricky ... I refer you to Ted Honderich who has put forward an interesting alternative: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctytho/ His book "How free are you?" is a laymen's introduction to his thesis. I'm not sure that I believe it, but it's interesting anyway. FWIW, I think the answer to this question is just as much out of our reach as is the question of the existence of god(s). - -- Sebastian Hagedorn Ehrenfeldg|rtel 156, 50823 Kvln, Germany http://www.spinfo.uni-koeln.de/~hgd/ "Being just contaminates the void" - Robyn Hitchcock ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 10:16:58 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Sunset Strip 1966... Muses... Mould & the Angry Inch From Kay: >>If I ever did get a time-machine, one thing Id programm it for is >>one night where I could catch both the Byrds and Bufallo Springfield live. >>Hmmm, and maybe the Loovin Spondful were in LA at the same time too. >>Niiicccce fantasy. I bet you could catch Love on the same bill... that there is the wet dream. I would make sure to see them at the Whiskey just so I could say "In thirty years I'll be playing on that stage!!!" and it would be true. I would leave out the part about how bad my band would suck, though. Natalie: >>So today I was listening to the Throwing Muses' "The Real Ramona." Also >>much milder than I remember, and lacking the visceral punch of their earlier >>stuff. Hmmm. Guess so. I've never stopped listening to it since it came out so I can't tell. I know that the end of "Hook in Her Head" is the most chaotic thing the Muses ever did... even their fieriest stuff had a kind of mathematical precision to it. I think Dennis Herring was good for them. Hey-- new Muses record later this year!!! Woj: >>(stuff about Hedwig) Doesn't Bob Mould play on the soundtrack? That seems weird to me, but no weirder than his recent stint as a creative consultant for Pro Wrestling. Rex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 10:12:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Steve Talkowski Subject: Re: Minority Report On Tuesday, 02, 2002, at 12:32AM, guapo stick wrote: >> > ditto. it intrigues me that two "rock musicals" -- this one and rocky >> > horror -- seem to capture the musical essence of rock'n'roll so much more >> > than classic rock records. >> >>Boy, are we at odds on that one. Unless rock'n'roll's essence is >>cabaret and WWF, I can't agree. > >not the visual aspects. if you just listen to the hedwig soundtrack, there >is some cabaret, but it's not key to the music. well, i don't think so >anyways. strip away hedwig's vocals and i still think you have some rocking >tunes -- even the ballads. I wholeheartedly agree. WWF evident in Hedwig?? What a crock! Hedwig is pure brilliance and "Origin of Love" is simply an incredible song. - -Steve http://homepage.mac.com/stevetalkowski ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 13:24:39 -0400 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: Sunset Strip 1966... Muses... Mould & the Angry Inch On Tue, Jul 2, 2002, Rex.Broome wrote: > >>(stuff about Hedwig) > > Doesn't Bob Mould play on the soundtrack? That seems weird to me, but no > weirder than his recent stint as a creative consultant for Pro Wrestling. Yes, he does. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 12:23:08 -0500 (CDT) From: gSs Subject: gimme some of that old time religion what a pity, a 3 million dollar house. that could buy a lot of medicine, food and shelter but i guess god(s) knows best. if I ever see one i think i'll try to kill it. that is the one form of sport hunting I could totally support. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Faith healer Hinn returns to Dallas for crusade 06/28/2002 Associated Press Amid questions about a proposed multimillion-dollar theme park that never materialized, flamboyant faith healer Benny Hinn returned to Dallas Thursday for the first of three services at a downtown arena. Tens of thousands were expected to file into the American Airlines Center for two days of meetings featuring Hinn, the white-suited evangelist whose television shows are aired throughout the world. Hinn, who attracts loyal followers seeking relief from various ailments, is known for a flick of the wrist that sends believers tumbling backward. He is said to be the model for the Steve Martin film "Leap of Faith." Critics take issue with his unverified healings and fund-raising techniques and claim he manipulates his audience. Followers believe he has furthered the cause of Christianity around the world. Hinn, 49, lives in California, where his ministry is building him a new $3 million home. He moved his corporate headquarters to the Dallas-Fort Worth area from Florida in 1999, saying it was a more convenient location for the operation. That year, during a crusade in Dallas, he announced plans for a 50-acre spiritual theme park near Texas Stadium in Irving. If donors could generate $30 million in the next two years, Hinn said then, they would see a multimedia center like no other. The park was never built, and his ministry has declined to respond to questions from The Associated Press. It recently issued a written statement to The Dallas Morning News saying Hinn determined through prayer in February 2000 that the timing wasn't right for the project. Funds raised for it "were used for their designated purpose, or, at the donor's instruction, either returned to the donor or used for an equally important ministry activity consistent with its charitable and religious purpose," the statement said. Hinn has not publicly acknowledged his salary, but told CNN in 1997 that his yearly income including book royalties was somewhere between $500,000 and $1 million a year. A spokesman has said Hinn's tax-exempt organization generates about $60 million a year in donations. http://www.wfaa.com/latestnews/stories/062702dnmetbennhinn.8426f.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 10:20:44 -0700 From: barbara soutar Subject: Re: Footnote Hi there, Thanks for the Canada Day greeting. You must be Canadian too! Here in Victoria we have great fireworks on July 1st, mainly since we're the capital city of the province of British Columbia. We spent last night on a blanket on the grass on the inner harbour waiting for and eventually watching this light show. Two helicopters flew among the fireworks, keeping their eye on things for some strange reason. Earlier in the day we had gone to the downtown Folkfest which is going on this week and saw a few strange sights. Of all the ethnic groups we watched I was most amazed by the very familiar Scottish group... it involved a most peculiar bunch of little girls dancing highland style, each with a golf club in their hands. Their native weapon? One teenage boy did a solo show with lots of leaps and interesting moves to some modern Celtic music which highly impressed my 13 year old daughter, and myself I might add. We have access to a little boat in which we travelled across the harbour to see the sights. This boat can't deal with the high waves of the REAL ocean. I am lurking and enjoying all musical references on this list, even though I usually skip through most capital punishment discussions... a non-issue in Canada. Barbara Soutar Victoria, B.C. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 13:33:22 -0400 From: "Poole, R. Edward" Subject: Appeals Schma-peals >> On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, FS Thomas wrote: >> >> > You've got to concede that the appeals process (in the broad sense--not >just >> > in capital matters) is too often abused. Appeals are filed simply to >force >> > paperwork and proceedings. Granted, the end result in these matters is >> > higher, but the process is still the same. >> >> So, uh, what? Any process can be abused. >The point is that in any proceeding--be it civil or criminal, petty or >capital--there has to be a cut-off date otherwise the appellate courts will >never be able to keep up with the demand for new hearings. (joining late, with apologies if I repeat ideas I haven't read yet): would you make a distinction in your stance here between (1) challenges to the constitutionality of the trial resulting in guilty verdict, through federal habeas petitions raising either new constitutional claims or seeking retroactive application of constitutional rulings decided after the trial was over; and (2) challenges to the factual support for the conviction itself, through the introduction of newly discovered evidence of innocence or evidence of another's guilt or evidence of the falsity of some part of the government's evidence of guilt? (of course, the rehnquist court has eliminated or severely restricted all of the above). I could see making an argument about the first category (though I disagree with it) along the lines of -- 'just because they decide that [X infraction at earlier trial] is now considered unconstitutional, the prosecutors and judge couldn't predict that -- why give the benefit of a new rule to someone who was tried according to the rule in play at the time?' -- but I cannot even imagine a neutral argument in favor of the latter, other than -- 'these appeals are delaying society's wish to see punishment & clogging up the court system, so it's better to pubnish someone who may be innocent than it is to cause more delays.' That argument, nearly a quote from a Supreme Court case, is not only contrary to the u.s. constitution, but it just disgusting on a moral level - -- and I can't imagine you holding to it seriously. but you should know that if you are on the 'don't drag it out, let's get on with it' camp, you are (at least) implicitly supporting this result, which is part and parcel of that agenda. working backwards to category # 1, if something is unconstitutional, it has always been unconstitutional since the time the relevant clause in the text or relevant amendment was ratified. put another way, the court is in the business of construing the text in new situations, but not in creating new constitutional rights. the recognition that a certain provision requires a certain result -- say, giving of 'miranda warnings', doesn't mean that the 5th amendment principle that a person may not be compelled to incriminate themselves by the state has changed. rather, there is only a recognition that "involuntary confessions" occur in more than just "we'll beat it out of you" situations. so, if the only reason our appellate-recidivist experienced [X infraction at earlier trial] was that it took the supreme court so long to recognize that [Y constitutional provision] applied to make [X infraction at earlier trial] unconstitutional, why should the criminal defendant be punished for the court's delay? why should he be treated differently than someone who commits the same crime, but who is tried after the "new" rule was announced? >> Yes, but not only: in the US, African-Americans are likelier to be >> arrested, likelier to be convicted, likelier to be sentenced to longer >> sentences and be denied parole, and likelier to be sentenced to death - >> for the last, in specific comparison to whites convinced of murder. >That's where I thought you were going with that. ... actually, i'm not sure it has been demonstrating statistically that blacks are more likely to be given death sentences, in comparisons to whites who committed the same offense. If so, I missed it (though it obviously wouldn't shock me). what has been proven conclusively, is that any given defendant, black or white, is at least 10 times more likely to be sentenced to death if the VICTIM is white, as opposed to the same offenses committed against black victims. (the study to which I refer shows this for aggravated sexual assualt and/or rape, and homicide). hmmm. chew on that. the implications are arguably more chilling, if you ask me, than sentencing bias -- which tends to play up one group's fears/assumptions/prejudices about another. in the victim-centered bias, there seems to be a direct judgment about the value of the human life extinguished (or violently disrupted/damaged, in the rape example). ============================================================================This e-mail message and any attached files are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the addressee(s) named above. This communication may contain material protected by attorney-client, work product, or other privileges. If you are not the intended recipient or person responsible for delivering this confidential communication to the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, copying, or other distribution of this e-mail message and any attached files is strictly prohibited. If you have received this confidential communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail message and permanently delete the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, send an email to postmaster@dsmo.com Dickstein Shapiro Morin & Oshinsky LLP http://www.legalinnovators.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 10:43:02 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Robyn Sings and I damn well like it! Natalie: (posts review of "Robyn Sings" by schizophrenic "Willow" fan and then adds:) >>Keep in mind that I am posting this link because I cannot imagine why anyone >>would buy or listen to this record, and this review simply confirms my >>prejudice. Okay. I can understand that and most of my local friends who like Robyn couldn't be arsed to even contemplate buying it. But... here's why I bought it and why I love it, also why I jumped back on this list... careful, it's a bit mushy. A little over a year ago when my daughter was born, I decided she need to grow up knowing that music didn't just come out of a box, that actual people played it could do so whenever or wherever, etc. (Comes from having a folksinger for a father, no doubt.) So I started playing guitar again, and singing for really the first time, and I would do little songs to help her go to sleep. Played her a lotta stuff but probably the two artists most frequently represented were Robyn and Dylan, cuz, like, on an acoustic, that's what I know. It was fun for both of us, and even got me back into writing songs. "Visions of Johanna" was just perfect, because, firstly, I could change the title name to hers ("Visions of Miranda"), and it was so damn long I could just keep playing it without running out of verses or having to think of a whole 'nother song on the spot. Plus I could keep getting quieter and quieter as she passed out. So when I got my Robyn Sings in the mail and put it on and heard him say "This is my favorite song, it's why I started writing songs" right before "Visions", I got kind of a lump in my throat and thought, "Wow, a record for baby and me!" And I kinda kept smiling through the rest of it. Okay, you can all puke now. Also, I never had the Beautiful Queen EP so it was all new to me. - -Cheesasaurus Rex PS: she doesn't fall asleep when I sing for her now... indeed, she hammers on a banjo and goes "owwwooOOoooauughhh!!!" when I get to the instrumental bits. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Jan 1980 04:35:12 -0500 From: overbury@cn.ca Subject: Re: Minority Report On 2 Jul 02, at 10:12, Steve Talkowski wrote: > On Tuesday, 02, 2002, at 12:32AM, guapo stick wrote: > > >> > ditto. it intrigues me that two "rock musicals" -- this one and rocky > >> > horror -- seem to capture the musical essence of rock'n'roll so much more > >> > than classic rock records. > >> > >>Boy, are we at odds on that one. Unless rock'n'roll's essence is > >>cabaret and WWF, I can't agree. > I wholeheartedly agree. WWF evident in Hedwig?? What a crock! >Hedwig is pure brilliance and "Origin of Love" is simply an incredible song. Well, Steve, I'm reacting to that claim having been made for Rocky Horror. I had to do a web search just now to find out what you guys meant by "Hedwig". Meatloaf; Tim Curry; essence of rock'n'roll. I just can't get there from here. If Hedwig is more of that sort of brilliance I'll leave it where I should have left Moulin Rouge. That web page where I found out about Hedwig did say this: "Stylistically, the film version of Hedwig  directed, written and starring John Cameron Mitchell, who created it for the stage in 1998  owes a debt to Tommy, This is Spinal Tap and even Cabaret." That's a big "Mr. Yuck" label to me, especially if Tommy refers to that Anne Margarock/Elton John puffball. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Jan 1980 04:40:00 -0500 From: overbury@cn.ca Subject: Re: Sunset Strip 1966... Muses... Mould & the Angry Inch On 2 Jul 02, at 13:24, Ken Weingold wrote: > On Tue, Jul 2, 2002, Rex.Broome wrote: > > >>(stuff about Hedwig) > > > > Doesn't Bob Mould play on the soundtrack? That seems weird to me, but no > > weirder than his recent stint as a creative consultant for Pro Wrestling. > > Yes, he does. ... and damned if that's not the WWF connection. "Danger, Will Robinson!" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 11:02:39 -0700 From: "Russ Reynolds" Subject: Re: The Who's Left Tour >> Who's Dead: Drummer, Bass Player. >> Beatles Alive: Drummer, Bass Player. >> >> you don't think THAT tour would be a money maker? > > Yes, but a mismatch. Baker and Bruce have the chops and > the agression the Who needs. Macca could do some interesting > things with the more melodic Who numbers, but Ringo? No question that Baker & Bruce would be better musically. So would fifty other bass & drum combos. But the Mod/Fab Four, although a mismatch, would be a guaranteed box office smash. Like interleague play: a weak concept that would bring out the fans. - -rUss ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 11:24:03 -0700 From: "Russ Reynolds" Subject: whoreccomendations That subject line looks like something other than what it really is. Remind me not to run "Who" together with words that begin with "re". Nothing beats the early stuff. Forget woodstock, just watch their performance of "A Quick One" on the Rock & Roll Circus one time to see the true energy of this band. I'm pretty sure that's the version that's on the Kids Are Alright soundtrack. "A Quick One" and "The Who Sell Out" are two musts as far as I'm concerned. Quadrophenia is a damn fine record too, but it gets stale fast. "Who's Next" is unbeatable if you're into the later stuff...but the early stuff rules. If you just want the hits "Meaty Beaty Big & Bouncy" covers the early ones and the new 2CD Ultimate Collection has them all, although IMO any Who retrospective that leaves off the pioneering "A Quick One" is lacking. - -rUss "A doctor can bury his mistakes but an architect can only advise his clients to plant vines." -- Frank Lloyd Wright ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 13:21:51 -0500 (CDT) From: gSs Subject: Re: stumbling, forward On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, FS Thomas wrote: > The use of a weapon in committing a crime doesn't preclude you causing > injury with that weapon. Guns, by design, are more dangerous than, say a > knife (though in properly trained hands this can prove a less effective > argument). Using a flintlock rifle in a robbery is different than using a > Mac-10, don't you think? The /potential/ for harm is higher, isn't it? So you think we should punish people for what they could have done, even though they didn't? Murder is murder is murder is murder..... Should we distinguish a murder committed with a small caliber revolver from a murder committed with a large caliber revolver? What about a semi-automatic pistol from a revolver. What is the difference? If I shoot you from across the street with a .22 caliber rifle and you die, should i spend less time in jail than the person who used a 30-06 to do the exact same thing or the person who boiled little children in a deep-fryer before eating them? If i kill someone with a knife does that mean I shouldn't be punished the same way as someone who used two knives or a big sword? If so, why? The crime is the same. gSs ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 18:30:41 +0000 From: "No Name" Subject: Only connect From the Pitchfork review: >I will burn this house down if you don't connect me with someone who >knows who Bob Dylan and Robyn Hitchcock are! A common plight. Thanks woj - ------------------ Godwin: >And didn't Bob Dylan play the piano for Buddy on one tour? Huh? Wait, youre not really Greg Shell, now are you? You're kidding, right? But thanks for the once over on Hollys direction. Thinking of him going back into country(with some Ray Charles on the side) is alot better than thinking of him in a fat jumpsuit in Vegas. >No, I just can't help liking a record that finishes: >"Emptiness! Emptiness!" ding ding dig-a-ding dig-a-ding DING! Its a killer, aint it. I have a weakness for songs where it seems the singer has lost it in front of the mike. You feel awe at the rawness of it. And if its also good music, you feel even greater awe at the artistry of it. - --------------------- Ross0 >I probably play Tommy least of the Who in my collection, >though it's not because I don't like to hear it. Its just been so overplayed its hard to hear fresh. Still adore the Overture and the Underture thou, as they tend to get underlooked. I wish there was more orchestral stuff like the Overture, which is so strong it just crashes thru you and then spits you out on shore for the "Its a boy" bit. Wheew. >I'd forgotten there were two. I have the original, and don't think I've ever heard the other. Am I missing out? I did see the movie when it came out, but don't remember what I heard. I own the older one too. Im not sure how I noticed there are differences but I believe there are. The story, (well, guess it had to) changed a bit tween what was originally printed/photoed in the LP and the movie. I should be a properly obsessed fan and know all the details, but I dont. - ---------- Rocky and Hedwig, The point is that they are visual and aural. That they assult all of you. Theyre like opera, a wrap-around experience when done right. It amazed me that Hedwig didnt do better. I thought it was first rate. - ----------- Poole: >I'm confident you could describe >the forces at work on your clock that caused its behavior. Probobly. But Id like to point out that what we seemed to have produced was some kind of time-jumping physical manifestation of a psychological state. Some day it may be explainable, but we don't know for sure it will be, do we? Its an unproven hypothosis that fits with your world view(and mine.) Nevertheless, your hypothosis is no more provable than the hypothosis that it was a polergeist. I do agree that the supernatural is probobly just nature from a different viewpoint. But until we reach that other viewpoint, what are we to do with such phenonomena? Our culture seems to have two modes. Either refuse to admit such phenomana can occur, which is irrational, or be a credoulous crackpot, which is also irrational. I think both attitudes are shortsighted and do us no good. Kay, unexplaining the unexplainable since 1954 "Your hair is reminiscent of a digesting yak." Surrealist compliment generator. _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:37:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Steve Talkowski Subject: Re: Minority Report On Friday, 04, 1980, at 04:35AM, wrote: >Well, Steve, I'm reacting to that claim having been made for Rocky >Horror. I had to do a web search just now to find out what you guys >meant by "Hedwig". > >Meatloaf; Tim Curry; essence of rock'n'roll. I just can't get >there from here. If Hedwig is more of that sort of brilliance >I'll leave it where I should have left Moulin Rouge. > >That web page where I found out about Hedwig did say this: >"Stylistically, the film version of Hedwig  directed, written and >starring John Cameron Mitchell, who created it for the stage in 1998 > owes a debt to Tommy, This is Spinal Tap and even Cabaret." > >That's a big "Mr. Yuck" label to me, especially if Tommy refers to >that Anne Margarock/Elton John puffball. Oh! I do hope you give it an objective chance, despite those poor analogies. (Spinal Tap??) Simply rent the DVD one night - if you don't like it i'll personally reimburse you the rental fee! All this Hedwig talk prompted me to cue up the album on my iPod and I'm revisioning the movie as I rock out. When I saw the film last summer I had no prior knowledge of the off Broadway production and now I'm kicking myself for not getting the chance to see it performed live. I'm very curious to see what Mr. Mitchell comes up with next. Of course, I thoroughly enjoyed Moulin Rouge, so you can see I'm quite open-minded to these fresh and often times missunderstood "experiments". - -Steve ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:41:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Steve Talkowski Subject: Soft Boys RnRHoF eligibility I can't believe this hasn't generated all sorts of congratulations on the list for Robyn yet!! We're all happy with the news over on COSTELLO-L... And XTC too! Rounds out my all-time fave top three. - -Steve http://cdnow.com/cgi-bin/mserver/SID=1607501831/pagename=/RP/ALLSTAR/article.html/fid=330752 The Police, Elvis Costello, & Iggy Pop Among Rock Hall's Eligible July 1, 2002, 12:35 pm PT The Police, the Clash, Elvis Costello, Iggy Pop, and Cheap Trick head the 2003 class of newly eligible, first-time artists for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. In all, there are 44 artists eligible for the first time. To become newly eligible, an artist had to have first recorded 25 years ago (1978). Others eligible for the first time are Beausoleil, Black Uhuru, Karla Bonoff, the Boomtown Rats, Buzzcocks, Cameo, Marshall Chapman, Clifton Chenier, Chic, Elvis Costello and the Attractions, Dead Boys, Dixie Dregs, Ian Dury, Joe Ely, Foreigner, Generation X (with Billy Idol), the Germs, Robert Gordon, the Heartbreakers (with Johnny Thunders), Nona Hendryx, the Jam, Evelyn "Champaigne" King, Patti LaBelle, Kenny Loggins, Mink Deville, Eddie Money, the Motors, Motorhead, Teddy Pendergrass, the Romantics, the Rumour, Shalamar, the Soft Boys, Squeeze, the Stranglers, Stuff, Suicide, Wire, and XTC. Costello is actually eligible twice as a first timer as a solo artist and with his group, Elvis Costello and the Attractions. Precedence was established when Patti Smith and the Patti Smith Group were previously nominated. The solo Smith made the final ballot twice but was never enshrined. Pop, meanwhile, was previously nominated as a member of the Stooges, which made the final ballot in 1997 and 1998 but also failed to enter the Hall of Fame. Both LaBelle and Hendryx were members of LaBelle; Pendergrass was a member of Harold Melvin and the Bluenotes; all three went solo in 1978. Loggins was part of Loggins & Messina, who have never been nominated. - -- Bob Grossweiner and Jane Cohen ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V11 #216 ********************************