From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V11 #360 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Wednesday, November 6 2002 Volume 11 : Number 360 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Re: Music reviews [] Kimberley Rew: 1, Angus Young: 0 ["Eugene Hopstetter, Jr." ] Did someone say "Thesaurus"? [Steve Talkowski ] Re: one hit to the body [] FW: fegmaniax-digest V11 #359 ["Poole, R. Edward" ] Re: one hit to the body [Perry Amberson ] Re: Re: Music reviews [Ken Weingold ] Re: Kimberley Rew: 1, Angus Young: 0 [Ken Weingold ] Where's the Love? / Wes Anderson / Through Being Cool ["Rex.Broome" ] Re: FW: fegmaniax-digest V11 #359 [gSs ] Tuesday night [Eb ] hospital [Ken Ostrander ] RE: i wish that i was just paranoid [Ken Ostrander ] Re: Tuesday night [gSs ] Hi - variations on a theme [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)] Re: music reviews [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)] Frightening. ["FS Thomas" ] I met Lawndart! ["Jason R. Thornton" ] Re: Hi All!2 ["Maximilian Lang" ] Up the Swannee [crowbar.joe@btopenworld.com] Re: FW: fegmaniax-digest V11 #359 ["R. Edward Poole" Subject: Re: Re: Music reviews Ken Weingold wrote: > > I think the writers sit there with a thesaurus, > as not to repeat the same adjective twice. picky, picky, picky; there's no pleasing some people. Okay then, after parsing a fully part-of-speech tagged corpus (such as the Brown corpus) we build a ratio of adjectives (and if we're feeling really clever, adjectival phrases) to total wordcount. If this value exceeds a certain level, THEN we display the warning. Will that do you? It's just a SMOP ... Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 12:33:09 -0800 (PST) From: "Eugene Hopstetter, Jr." Subject: Kimberley Rew: 1, Angus Young: 0 "Disconnection Of The Ruling Class" sounds like what AC/DC would sound like if they actually put down their pints long enough to have an idea and write a fresh new song. Kimberley's SG playing really reminds me of one of those later AC/DC songs whose title I don't know because it the song is so generic and unremarkable. Of course, Kimberley could be playing a PRS or a Fender Broadcaster for all I know, but it does sound like an SG. BTW, Kimberley's new solo album turns all the knobs to eleven and kicks serious butt. Seriously. I'm really enjoying it. . HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 12:35:24 -0800 (PST) From: Perry Amberson Subject: Re: one hit to the body Drew wrote the following: >> But I've always hated the term "geek" and have never really felt all that thrilled about "reclaiming" it. << To which I say this: I've never been comfortable with the g word either. The term had become so common that I tried using it for a while to describe myself and like-minded friends, but I quickly grew sick of it. It's as if the "popular kids" (you know them--they're the ones with the atrocious taste in music, movies, books, etc.) decided that nerd wasn't insulting enough, so they had to up the ante to geek. I decided not to indulge them by defining myself with their pejorative term. To me, geek is always going to mean someone who bites the heads off live chickens in a sideshow. Doesn't seem an appropriate label at all for people who just really enjoy their hobbies. These days, I answer to "music obsessive." - --Perry HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 15:44:13 -0500 From: Steve Talkowski Subject: Did someone say "Thesaurus"? http://www.visualthesaurus.com/index.jsp ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 15:44:27 -0500 From: Subject: Re: one hit to the body Perry Amberson wrote: > > To me, geek is always going to mean someone who bites > the heads off live chickens in a sideshow. [aghast]You mean, you don't ...?[/aghast] Stewart (the not-magnificent) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 15:54:06 -0500 From: "Poole, R. Edward" Subject: FW: fegmaniax-digest V11 #359 gSs: >and then setting term limits and >for instance review boards of citizens to police the officials they elect >and eventually to eliminate the election system, replacing it with a >mandatory civil service system in which citizens are essentially assigned >positions in government, local, regional and national which they will hold >for a specific amount of time. no party system, no fraud, no campaign fund >raising, no politically manipulative special interests, no elections, no >bullshit. kinda complicated but realistic. so yes. "in the land of the free..." drew: [Rushmore] ... [Tenenbaums]... OK, OK, I know: "there's no accounting for taste." (I've got a quote/cliche handy for any occasion) >>Pretty much all of the human beings that I find >>worth spending time with (including online time) are, in fact, active or >>recovering geeks. >This is not directed at you, in case it's not clear. >But I've always hated the term "geek" and have never >really felt all that thrilled about "reclaiming" it. I dislike >endorsing, even ironically, the idea that people are divided >into "cool kids," "geeks," and bland "normal" types. I have >trouble slotting the human beings I find worth spending >time with into any of those categories. OK, not to quibble excessively, but point point is thus: the people I like, that I hang out with, that I marry, are the ones whom the world has classify thusly. Convenient shorthand, you see, using the grandfalloon already assigned. >>(eventually, you will find that the people considered the >>"coolest" are the people who do their own thing, regardless of what the rest >>of the world thinks of their choices.) >If the rest of the world thinks their choices are "uncool," >who is considering them the "coolest"? defeated by the syllogism! actually, the "people considered the 'coolest' should have been: "the people who are truly 'cool'" -- a quasi-objective measure of "cool" being equated with (a) self-confidence; (b) individuality; and (c) disinterest in the concept of "coolness." Enough busting my chops, Drew, you knew what I meant! >>no no no, you're missing the point: she called us COOL! and said: >>tell me how to be COOL like YOUSE GUYS! I don't know about everybody >>else, but that triggers a Pavlovian response for me. >It triggered one for me, too, but not the ones you and Jill >are talking about. Oh, yeah? which one was that? are you drooling? ;-) - -ed ============================================================================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: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 12:54:29 -0800 (PST) From: Perry Amberson Subject: Re: one hit to the body Stewart (the not-magnificent) wrote this: >>> [aghast] You mean, you don't ...? [aghast] <<< Not anymore. - -Perry _ HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 15:57:51 -0500 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: Re: Music reviews On Wed, Nov 6, 2002, scruss@sympatico.ca wrote: > Okay then, after parsing a fully part-of-speech tagged corpus (such as the Brown corpus) we build a ratio of adjectives (and if we're feeling really clever, adjectival phrases) to total wordcount. If this value exceeds a certain level, THEN we display the warning. > > Will that do you? It's just a SMOP ... I think you've hit something here. We'll try that. But what's the target ratio? - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 16:00:26 -0500 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: Kimberley Rew: 1, Angus Young: 0 On Wed, Nov 6, 2002, Eugene Hopstetter, Jr. wrote: > "Disconnection Of The Ruling Class" sounds like what AC/DC would > sound like if they actually put down their pints long enough to have > an idea and write a fresh new song. Kimberley's SG playing really > reminds me of one of those later AC/DC songs whose title I don't > know because it the song is so generic and unremarkable. Of course, > Kimberley could be playing a PRS or a Fender Broadcaster for all I > know, but it does sound like an SG. It's not an SG. I don't remember what he was playing, if I even recognized it, but it definitely wasn't an SG. Robyn was playing a telecaster every show. > BTW, Kimberley's new solo album turns all the knobs to eleven and kicks serious > butt. Seriously. I'm really enjoying it. Damn. I was wondering what his solo stuff was like. Does he sing on it? - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 13:06:57 -0800 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Where's the Love? / Wes Anderson / Through Being Cool Times review: >>mixed new tunes with selections from their seminal 1980 collection "Underwater >>Moonlight" and songs by Love and Bob Dylan. There was no Love cover. The reviewer must've mistaken Queen of Eyes, which was dedicated to Arthur Lee, for a Love tune. Could go, circa the first love album. Hey, nobody ever put my setlist in order. It's way wrong. _________________ Drew & Edward on Wes Anderson: You guys are leaving out Bottle Rocket, which is still his best to me. I have a hard time viewing, say, Royal Tennenbaums, as objectively since I was such an early booster of Wes's style... it all seems of one piece to me, although oddly more and more famous Hollywood actors keep appearing. Good for them, I guess, ehhh whatever for us, the viewers. But then again, I don't often like "likeable" characters and I'm mystified by the insisistence that our art be chock full of 'em when life itself ain't. ________ Drew: >>But I've always hated the term "geek" and have neverreally felt all that thrilled >>about "reclaiming" it. The only people who could really "reclaim" it are those who bite the heads off of live chickens at sideshows (the true geeks from whom the word derives). I don't hate the term, but the chicken-head-eaters are welcome to it, for all I care. I'm stuck with the term "cool" to describe "good" or "admirable" things. Wish I could purge it from my lexicon, but it seems hopeless. My problem is that it equates quality with emotional aloofness, right? That has its place: you could describe the Velvet Underground as "cool" and it would be all-around accurate. But the Soft Boys... rather more volcanic, yeah? But "cool" seems to be the term that's stuck. The other one is "hip", which I don't use because I don't know what the hell that means, either etymologically or in practice. I never considered myself "hip" but some of my friends used to tell me that I was. Which kinda made me fee-uhl ill. But I think they now see me as more, I dunno, well-rounded or eclectic than hip. But those are my friends, who are themselves either kind of cool or geeky or, for the most part, both. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 16:07:51 -0500 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: Did someone say "Thesaurus"? On Wed, Nov 6, 2002, Steve Talkowski wrote: > http://www.visualthesaurus.com/index.jsp Hey, cool. I have a friend or two who work at Plumb Design. They are in NYC. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 15:10:57 -0500 (CDT) From: gSs Subject: Re: FW: fegmaniax-digest V11 #359 On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Poole, R. Edward wrote: > > kinda complicated but realistic. > > "in the land of the free..." exactly, freedom has empowered us to shape our system as we see fit. or are you in disagreement with us determining what is best for us? gSs ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 13:19:46 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Tuesday night I ended up missing the Soft Boys shows, last night. I had been *planning* to go to Amoeba and then see Eyes Adrift afterwards, but I was really headachy all day and ended up dropping off to sleep during the timeslot when I should have left for Amoeba. Eyes Adrift was just OK...though it was definitely the most crowded and "happening" show I've seen lately at Spaceland, which once seemed like the white-hot center of L.A. indie-cool but now seems "quaintly sleepy" more often than not. It was sorta surreal, seeing Chris Novoselic playing in such a small venue when you consider the sprawling crowds he has performed for in the past. The *huge* tour bus outside was a reminder of his previous superstar status. But as on the last Meat Puppets album, I was disappointed that so many of Kirkwood's new songs are built around mere chord-strumming, instead of the frenetic pickings which are his trademark. I haven't heard the album yet, but I'm not expecting greatness. Novoselic has a surprisingly "ethnic" look now...he has a bushy beard/mustache and (I think?) long, braided hair, which he hid under one of those black, Baltic-looking headwraps (beats me what the proper term is). He sang a couple of the songs, but wasn't exactly dazzling in that role. Then again, Kirkwood isn't exactly Josh Groban either. There may have been a Meat Puppets song or two, but of course, no Nirvana tunes were played. There was also no encore, though the band was onstage plenty long enough. Opening was the indefatigable Mike Watt, playing in an unusual guitarless trio. He was joined by a drummer, and a keyboardist playing an old-school, two-level organ with a vintage Leslie speaker (or so I'm guessing, based on the rotating fan). I didn't catch the other players' names, so I don't know if they had pedigreed recording credits. I apologize for any excess of adjectives in the above description. Oh, and I apologize if you felt snubbed, Rex Broome. I *was* in a down mood but, well, frankly, you've never pursued any degree of correspondence with me so I didn't feel like we had loads to talk about. I didn't look at you "in horror," but I presume you exaggerated that description for comic effect anyway. Lordy, GSShell's political cantankerism is tedious. Eb Reap: http://home.earthlink.net/~elbroome/art/maudlintribute.jpg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 16:20:06 -0500 From: Ken Ostrander Subject: hospital >Just thought I'd say howdy & that I'm back ... got out of the hospital >two weeks ago. great to hear. i had a scary trip to the hospital last week when my wife amy had to have a d&c. she is doing fine after the procedure; but it was a very nerveracking experience as the emergency room staff had to determine what the problem was with all sorts of invasive tests as my wife was in extreme pain. her body temperature was very low and she had lost a lot of blood. the real interesting part comes in the realization that all of this could and should have been avoided. a couple of months ago, after her miscarriage, she met with the doctor that was handling her prenatal care. at this point, there was a problem with her health insurance. we were in the process of switching from the state funded masshealth plan that she had to apply for before we were married to my mit bluecrossblueshield plan for which she became eligible once we were wed. the doctor agreed to see her; but was very standoffish. she explained the results of some tests and said that her levels were normal. when amy asked her "aren't you going to examine me?" the doctor sheepishly walked over from the other side of the room and just placed her hand on amy's stomach. she only said, "you're going to be fine." it turns out that that was not the case. this woman refused to even conduct a simple test. this is unethical. the fact that there was some perceived problem with the insurance is quite a coincidence. it seems to me that the false assurances of insurance relates to one of the biggest problems in our society, and even the world. the power struggle between the doctors and the insurance companies that dominate policy by denying coverage cuts right to the heart of this. due to this dynamic, the hypocratic oath can become hypocritical, as doctors go against their own code of ethics (and more basic human morality) by denying care to those who need it. the options of lawsuits are being looked into. at the very least, i want to confront this doctor. one of the technitions performing the ultrasound that confirmed the problem said that the d&c is usually performed after a miscarriage; but when amy told her that it had happened at the same hospital, she clammed up. very telling. despite my anger and frustration at all of this; i feel very lucky that everything has worked out so well. ken "nobody wants to be vulnerable" the kenster www.likehumansdo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 16:26:14 -0500 From: Ken Ostrander Subject: RE: i wish that i was just paranoid let me be the first to say, "poor misunderstood winona". >Now the Democratic voters who chose not to show up Tuesday are going to find >out what their decision meant, in a country ruled by George W. Bush, Trent >Lott and Tom DeLay. From drilling in Alaska to regressive taxation to >unilateral war, the agenda of the corporate and religious right will shape >our future. the marginally democratic senate really didn't do much to hold this back. neither did the clinton administration. it's been coming for a long time. but yes, get ready for things to get worse before they get better. with the republicans in charge of the white house, a growing chunk of the supreme court, and now the legislature; we can wonder what the fuck it all means. we can try and blame it on the voters; but can't we blame the democratic candidates for playing the same bullshit political games that the republicans play? dancing around the issues and fingerpointing really doesn't work. those that shout the loudest get the most attention in this game. it seems like the voters are looking (well...that's what they get) for plastic, larger-than-life characters to represent them, when what we really need are real people. >>If _Rushmore_ is "essentially perfect" give me massively flawed >>every time. _The Royal Tenenbaums_ was a little more bearable >>but no less shallow and contrived when you scratch the surface. > >Heartily disagree (of course). Anyone want to defend Wes for me, I'm >feeling a bit lonely out here. sure. wes and owen have a good thing going. not just with 'rushmore' and 'tenenbaums'; but 'bottlerocket' as well. his offbeat comedies have dark underlying themes that resonate for me. the oddball characters seem to capture human nature so much more effectively than your standard movie fare. stalking, infidelity, ego; these are the dark recesses of the human psyche that are given more depth and understanding here than you'll see attempted in your big budget blockbuster. these movies are for and about lonely people. they are willfully strange. maybe that's the flaw. they have to balance the serious undercurrents with the comic elements. >Oh, and since we're talking so much about "cool," I heartily recommend that >you seek out the tune "Jesus Was So Cool," by King Missile. it's 'jesus was way cool'. i love that song! "he turned water into wine...that's so cool." "he could've scored more goals than wayne gretsky" "he could've baked the most delicious cake." >> But I've always hated the term "geek" and have never really felt all that thrilled about "reclaiming" it. << wait...huey lewis didn't change everything with 'hip to be square'? 'ster ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 15:36:37 -0500 (CDT) From: gSs Subject: Re: Tuesday night On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Eb wrote: > playing an old-school, two-level organ with a vintage Leslie speaker > (or so I'm guessing, based on the rotating fan). actually it's a rotating horn, that kinda sounds like a fan as it spins. > Lordy, GSShell's political cantankerism is tedious. yeah well, join the pool. gSs ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 10:41:57 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) Subject: Hi - variations on a theme Ed, your comments rock. >Well, here's the thing. I, for one, am entirely NOT "cool," and I'm very >comfortable with that. Pretty much all of the human beings that I find >worth spending time with (including online time) are, in fact, active or >recovering geeks. Take one of the "cool" kids at your school, move them >through time to the year 2008, and the 2008 version of the "cool" people >would laugh at their clothes, music, slang, hair, etc. If "cool" is so >dependent on changes in fashion, it's not "cool," it's just marching in lock >step with the latest fads. Screw that. If people laugh at your hair, you >must be doing something right (or, at the very least, something YOU like, >which is more important). It's far "cooler" to find what you like and stick >with that. (eventually, you will find that the people considered the >"coolest" are the people who do their own thing, regardless of what the rest >of the world thinks of their choices.) Plus, those of us who like "cool" >stuff that basically no one has ever heard of aren't interesting in keeping >the secret, but would love to see the artists we so enjoy sell a few records >or books or whatever (unless it compromises their art and they get churned >up in the big money making machine). [stepping down from soapbox now, >sorry]. >>Like Dylan and the Beatles my parents listen to so I'll >>totally pass on them, but I'm totally charged to find out >>more about some of the other stuff. They are worth it, honestly. Most groups, if they're asked for their main influences, will either credit Dylan or the Beatles or (more likely) will credit someone whose own influences were Dylan or the Beatles. It's fair to say that 90% of popular music since the 60s, right up to the present day, has been influenced in some way by one or the other (or more likely both) Dylan and the Beatles. Hell, Robyn Hitchcock has put out a whole double CD of Dylan covers, and the Beatles would probably be in his three or four biggest influences. I know it may be hard to imagine anything your parents listen to as being cool (I still have trouble with my late dad's taste for Jim Reeves and Harry Belafonte), but sometimes their tastes may be worthwhile (It may even be that part of the reason your tastes are cooler than your peers at school is because your parents are in some way cooler than theirs!). And sometimes it is worth trying to ignore the fact that your parents like some music, and giving it a go anyway. When you're ready. If you find yourself bored and want to try something different, hunt out "Highway 61 Revisited", or "Rubber Soul" and have a listen to it - preferably without thinking while you're listening "this is the sort of stuff my parents listen to" - that'll just put you off. And if you find you do like it, it's not like you have to tell your mum and dad about it! :) James (nothing like being told we're cool to get the list a-preenin' is there ;) James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand. =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= .-=-.-=-.-=-.- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-. -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= You talk to me as if from a distance =-.-=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time -=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 11:06:48 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) Subject: Re: music reviews >On Wed, Nov 6, 2002, scruss@sympatico.ca wrote: >> > Well I didn't need ALL of them removed, >> > but I mean the absolute barrage of them. >> >> I know. I was being silly. Maybe online reviews should trigger a simple >>filter that checks for key words, and would generate the following alert: >> >> >> Warning! The following live music review uses the word >> "seminal" more than once. >> Do you wish to delete it unread? [Y]/N > >Would be nice, but it wouldn't help. I think the writers sit there >with a thesaurus, as not to repeat the same adjective twice. I'm sure Eb and a few others would agree that it's damn difficult to come up with something original to write about when you've just completed ten other reviews. Adjectives can become very cliched but sometimes they're all you've got to fall back on. I run into this problem myself with the art reviews I write. I have to say to myself "this time you are NOT going to use the words 'dynamic', 'vibrant', 'sombre' or 'evocative'!" And yes, I keep a thesaurus beside the computer. Perhaps swapping the rock cliches and the art cliches would help... >> Robyn Hitchcock and his self-referential band the Soft Boys delighted >> fans and impressed critics with a deep tour. This year >> the players released an aesthetically pleasing album, "Nextdoorland," >> and during the group's pointillistic performance Monday at the >> House of Blues, the multi-layered material proved as >> contemporary as anything by all these sombre new acts. > >> In an impressionistic set, Hitchcock and Kimberley Rew, Matthew >> Seligman and Morris Windsor mixed dynamic tunes in earthy colours with >> bold selections from their neo-classical collection "Moonlight" and >> subtle songs by Love and Bob Dylan. > >> Hitchcock has a provocative reputation for eccentricity, >> fueled mainly by his use of vast, intricate metaphors involving >> such things as insects, bones and life to explore delicate >> situations such as love and drama. But on Monday >> his work was as stylistically distinctive as his rough-hewn imagery. > >> On such delightful tunes as "Mr. Kennedy" and tricky favorites such >> as "Insanely Jealous," he and Rew engaged in allegorical, textural >> give-and-take, often spinning into a exquisite sprawl while >> contrasting vivid licks with nascent riffs. > >> And, yes, they played the vibrant song "I Wanna Destroy >> You" but by then the glossy, well-composed band had proved it was >> capable of much more than revisiting the gloomy, subterranean days >> with impressive enthusiasm and evocative panache. ! James (who managed to get the word "crepuscular" into his latest review) PS - Randi!!!! Welcome back!!!! James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand. =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= .-=-.-=-.-=-.- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-. -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= You talk to me as if from a distance =-.-=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time -=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 18:38:37 -0500 From: "FS Thomas" Subject: Frightening. Flash-based silliness: http://www.rathergood.com/chicken/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 16:12:49 -0800 From: "Jason R. Thornton" Subject: I met Lawndart! Monday's concert was a thrill, for numerous reasons. It was great seeing/meeting everybody. I don't really remember the setlist order, either, so I can't really correct Rex's post. The Soft Boys put on a terrific show. Midge Ure was rather bland, though. Lawndart and I amused ourselves trying to remember which 80s new wave superstar sang which line during "Do They Know It's Christmas?" Eb was correct in his assessment. The Ultravox tunes didn't work too well on just acoustic guitar. - --Jason "doubleplusuncool" Thornton "Only the few know the sweetness of the twisted apples." - Sherwood Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 19:37:27 -0500 From: "Maximilian Lang" Subject: Re: Hi All!2 >From: "Greta Swann" >THATS SO TOTALLY COOLIO! COOLIO? Like COOLIO the rapper? If so, how so? Max _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 01:12:56 +0000 (GMT) From: crowbar.joe@btopenworld.com Subject: Up the Swannee To further indict Quail I adduce a couple of literary references. 1) W.B Yeats' poem The Wild Swans At Coole. Attend particularly the line - 'Their hearts have not grown old...' 2) Proust's Swann In Love. Je reste ma valise Crowbar Joe ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 20:40:35 -0500 From: "R. Edward Poole" Subject: Re: FW: fegmaniax-digest V11 #359 On Wednesday, November 6, 2002, at 03:10 PM, gSs wrote: > On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Poole, R. Edward wrote: >>> kinda complicated but realistic. >> >> "in the land of the free..." > > exactly, freedom has empowered us to shape our system as we see fit. or > are you in disagreement with us determining what is best for us? not at all -- I just don't include involuntary conscription into government service as "us" determining what is best for "us." Funny how you only included the "kinda complicated but realistic" part of your original quote -- as if _that's_ what I was objecting to. heh, good one. - -ed ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V11 #360 ********************************