From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V11 #425 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Tuesday, December 17 2002 Volume 11 : Number 425 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: more boobtubery (heh heh, you said "boob") [Eb ] it's more than a bellyache [drew ] Re: more boobtubery (heh heh, you said "boob") [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffre] Re: Thirteen year old neophyte stoners have come for your daughters ["Ste] Re: My chart shines high when the blue milk's upset (100% ghoti) ["Stewar] TV habits of a lurking feg [Glen Uber ] Re: Potter (slight return) ["Maximilian Lang" ] Interesting Site [Tom Clark ] Re: Two Towers, and more boobtubery [steve ] Re: Two Towers, and more boobtubery ["Stewart C. Russell" ] LOTR, Union "jack" [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)] Re: self-plug [Michael R Godwin ] keeping things in the right place [Jill Brand ] Re: self-plug ["matt sewell" ] Re: keeping things in the right place ["Michael E. Kupietz, wearing a poi] Re: Two Towers, and more boobtubery [The Great Quail ] Re: self-plug ["matt sewell" ] Re: self-plug [Michael R Godwin ] Unbaarable ["Mike Wells" ] Bragg on CNN ["FS Thomas | at work" ] Glass Flesh ["Brian Huddell" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:06:52 -0800 From: Eb Subject: Re: more boobtubery (heh heh, you said "boob") > > Interesting lately to get a glimpse at the general TV viewing habits of > > various Fegs. Do any of y'all bother with any sitcoms any more? My sitcom viewing basically boils down to The Simpsons (though I rarely enjoy it anymore), Friends (though I rarely enjoy it anymore) and Scrubs. Maybe Life With Bonnie and Less Than Perfect, though that's more due to digging the lead actresses than any notable appreciation of the shows. I'd probably watch Malcolm in the Middle regularly, if they'd just get rid of the oldest brother's story arcs. Whenever the setting switches to his life, I ask myself "WHY AM I HERE??" I also think the paraplegic black kid's character is really distasteful -- hearing him gasp for breath is just...not...funny. I'd probably watch Frasier...if only the same actors had entirely different characters and an entirely different situation. That's my only misgiving. Also, I don't think the show was ever as good, once Priscilla Barnes and Joyce Dewitt left. Speaking of comedy, I recently saw the film Fierce Creatures and thought it was far funnier than its box-office success would indicate. I keep finding myself re-giggling at the peripheral sight gag of the robotic panda with the "OUT OF ORDER" sign around its neck. :) Also checked out Godard's Les Carabiniers (1963?), sort of a no-budget, anti-war allegory which is one of the odder films I've seen lately. I have a hard time attaching a thumbs-up *or* thumbs-down to that one...it was just "interesting," for better or worse. Right now, I'm partially through Timecode on tape, another unusual film which has four simultaneous images throughout the movie (sort of like The Brady Bunch's opening credits, if Mike and Carol only had two kids ;)). >Tom: >And speaking of CvB, I got the box set recently and just plowed through it. >I only previously had Telephone Free..., Our Beloved Revolutionary..., and >Key Lime Pie. Nice to fill in the gaps I should say so! The self-titled album is fantastic. It's raining like a mofugger right now...so much for my planned run, later.... Eb np: a stack of mediocre CDs (right now: Coronet Blue) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:11:57 EST From: BLATZMAN@aol.com Subject: Goblet of fire, part 1&2???? In a message dated 12/16/02 2:59:04 PM Pacific Standard Time, owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org writes: << Looks like the whole series is destined for classic status, and that whole "shooting three films at once" thing is paying big dividends. Wonder if that'll become more common practice after this and the Matrix sequels. >> Hey Rex! I'm actually hoping that Harry Potter & The Goblet Of Fire would be done as two films, released 6 months apart, just like the Matrix films. It wouldn't surprise me if that decision depends upon the successfulness of the Matrix sequels... Aren't they done by the same studio? I can't imagine how they could make Goblet into a single film... The series has been so profitable, I can't imagine them not trying to milk it... and the source material is certianly good enough... so I can hope!!! Chamber isn't going to do Stone's business domestically, but I understand it's outpacing the original in foreign markets... If the grosses hold up, I say, go for Goblet of Fire part 1 & 2!!!! That would be the tops! Dave ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:22:52 -0800 (PST) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: more boobtubery (heh heh, you said "boob") Eb wrote: > I'd probably watch Malcolm in the Middle > regularly, if they'd just get rid of the oldest brother's story arcs. > Whenever the setting switches to his life, I ask myself "WHY AM I > HERE??" Exactly. It's not even so much that they're bad (well, this season, with him at the dude ranch is pretty awful), just that they are completely out of place. > I also think the paraplegic black kid's character is really > distasteful -- hearing him gasp for breath is just...not...funny. I don't think it's supposed to be. I just think that it's a character trait. > I'd probably watch Frasier...if only the same actors had entirely > different characters and an entirely different situation. That's my > only misgiving. Also, I don't think the show was ever as good, once > Priscilla Barnes and Joyce Dewitt left. And it was funnier when they had straight Jack pretending to be gay so the Ropers of Mr. Furley wouldn't kick him out of the apartment instead of gay Niles and Frasier (who, I guess was converted on the flight back from Boston) pretending to be straight so that their ex-cop dad doesn't find out. Also nice to see some love for Priscilla Barnes, who was much better than Suzanne Somers. Somers and Jeniliee Harrison were barely watchable; with Barnes it was actually a pretty good, if low brow, show. ===== "If we don't allow journalists, politicians, and every two-bit Joe Schmo with a cause to grandstand by using 9-11 as a lame rhetorical device, then the terrorists have already won." -- "Shredder" "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt . Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:00:49 -0800 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Thirteen year old neophyte stoners have come for your daughters Max: >>We watch Andy Richter Controls The Universe, Just Shoot Me(which has >>rebounded from a dreadful last season), Curb Your Enthusiasm(my favorite >>show...Kathy hates it), Sex And The City and Bernie Mac. Ah. Pay cable. We don't get it. We were getting it for free by accident for years, then they figured it out and pulled it. Just after Larry Sanders ended and before the Sopranos started. My folks like Sex in the City but I was never a very good bachelor so it kinda whizzes over my head; even the funny bits seem depressing to me. Interestingly I've never seen Curb Your Enthusiasm but my wife has, and she found it hilarious. ________ Tom C: >>And speaking of CvB, I got the box set recently and just plowed through it. Good to hear. That's the top of my Christmas list. ________ Dunno if Hitchcock could play monkfish. He could play guitarfish. Or "Bass"-- in fact I'm quite sure he has played "Bass". Although actually I think Andy played bass on "Bass". He could play Hagfish, too. From what I've heard, Hagfish rocks your lame ass. Also, Phish could play Hitchcock. So could Three Fish or Jellyfish. Or that guy from Marillion. Throwing Muses played both Fish and Shark. And Shriekback did indeed play Coelocanth--as well as Fish Below the Ice, which did indeed evolve, at least inasmuch as they were remixed. ____ Stewart: >>I can't remember where I read the article that made the point that Jackson started >>as a schlockmeister, and that these are much the same, but with bigger budgets. I dunno. The films are far superior to any other big-budget blockbusters I'vs seen in years. But what you sat is true enough if you discount or feel superior to all pop culture. >>Ain't got no TV. Wouldn't give it house room. Oh, you do discount or feel superior to all pop culture. Cool, go on with your bad self. Honestly, I had not much desire to revisit the Tolkien books when the movies were announced. Hadn't thought about them for years. But I've been impressed by the way they've been handled... not focus-grouped to death, or hacked together by Hollywood writing committees, etc. Juvenile adventure epics have their place, and if you're gonna do one, you might as well use a template that has some history to it. - -Rex, who was once 13 but never a stoner, neophyte or otherwise ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:58:21 -0500 (EST) From: Christopher Gross Subject: Re: Two Towers, and more boobtubery > >Interesting lately to get a glimpse at the general TV viewing habits of > >various Fegs. Do any of y'all bother with any sitcoms any more? I'm very nearly on an all-Joss Whedon TV diet: Buffy, Angel, and the sadly cancelled Firefly. Aside from that, I usually watch The Simpsons and (when available) Futurama, sometimes Malcolm in the Middle and King of the Hill, *occasionally* Enterprise and Monk, plus the odd documentary on PBS, TLC, or Discovery. If we had HBO I'd definitely watch The Sopranos. And sometimes I enjoy the Will and Grace and Just Shoot Me reruns that they show right before my usual bedtime. Somehow watching fictional characters make cruel jokes about each other is more enjoyable around that time. Looking forward to Two Towers, Chris np: Curve, "Chinese Burn" ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:00:01 -0800 (PST) From: drew Subject: it's more than a bellyache I apologize if anyone is offended by the fact that my subject lines are almost invariably meaningless. I'm usually replying to the digest and it's sometimes difficult to come up with inclusive subject lines, so I rarely try. In this case, I'm listening to Echobelly, and that's all it means. Re: Elixirs and Remedies: v. v. annoyed at the lack of DVD. I refuse to collect any more VHS tapes, and as a result I probably will not be buying this, as much as I'd like to. Are DVDs that much more difficult (expensive) to produce? I ask from complete ignorance. Re: LOTR: don't forget those spoiler warnings, folks. I know these are based on books, but I've actually forgotten most of this middle book (the dullest by a mile), and besides, spoilers about how the books are realized on film are almost as bad in this case. Rex skirted that line but didn't cross it, I think (thanks). I would agree with Stewart that we're not talking about particularly intricate stories here (however intricate the history may be), but I know what Rex means; considering how easily Hollywood habitually botches source material that should be an effortless home run, it's nice to know that these stories are coming through gracefully. Re: television: I had prayed never to be one of those smug motherfuckers who brag about not watching TV but I can feel myself becoming one. I hear from my friends all the time about the cream of the crop, and every time I sample one of these shows I see nothing that would keep me coming back for more. It doesn't help that I react to weekly appointments like a wild horse to a saddle, which extends even to automatic VCR recording. This is a problem, though, because as an improviser I'm often called upon to know enough about popular TV shows to impersonate them. At least I still watch movies. - -- drew at stormgreen dot com http://www.stormgreen.com/~drew/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:13:20 -0600 From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: more boobtubery (heh heh, you said "boob") > > > Interesting lately to get a glimpse at the general TV viewing > habits of > > > various Fegs. Do any of y'all bother with any sitcoms any more? Futurama (when it's not pre-empted: everything currently is actually old stuff that was previously pre-empted...), Simpsons, Malcolm, Angel, Buffy, Gilmore Girls, 24, Firefly (R.I.P.), John Doe. Used to watch That '70s Show until two or so seasons ago when it became boring and a lot less funny (and on at the same time as Buffy & Gilmore Girls). Used to watch King of the Hill until it became annoying and less funny. Thought I'd watch X-Files till the bitter end - but gave up after the first episode of the last season (although I watched the finale - yecch). Occasionally am actually seen tuning into "Noggin" to watch old episodes of Daria. And who's the redheaded young British gal in the show immediately before or after that on that channel, hmm? Geek Hall of Fame Credentials: The Prisoner, The Lone Gunmen, Millennium...but oddly, never a Star Trek fanatic despite liking many episodes of the first two series. ..Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html :: sex, drugs, revolt, Eskimos, atheism ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:21:29 -0500 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: Thirteen year old neophyte stoners have come for your daughters Rex.Broome > > Oh, you do discount or feel superior to all pop > culture. no, we just don't have time for one. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:31:21 -0500 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: My chart shines high when the blue milk's upset (100% ghoti) Michael wrote: > > Yeah. I like Coelacanths better, anyway. It's hard to get a good tone out of them. Zappa could do it, but I think it was all in the telepathy. He could think like a fish. It's a little known fact that Mr Rew was going to be playing a hake on the first recording of "I Wanna Destroy You", but it evolved a few bars in. There's a rare bootleg of the studio tape floating around... much like a long-dead and bloating halibut. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:31:27 -0800 From: Glen Uber Subject: TV habits of a lurking feg Thought I'd chime in on the "Whatcha watchin'?" discussion. My "must-sees": Simpsons, The Man Show, Insomniac Shows I enjoy, but don't plan my life around: Scrubs, That 70s Show, King of the Hill, Malcolm, South Park Shows I watch because my wife likes 'em and I'm in the room at the same time: Friends, Will & Grace, Buffy, Boston Public, Trading Spaces Just saw the Andy Richter show for the first time last night and really enjoyed it. It'll probably find its way into my regular viewing schedule. These days, I find myself watching a lot of the shows on Food Channel, A&E, Home & Garden and the History Channel. My fave shows of all-time: Twin Peaks, Cheers, Herman's Head, Sports Night, WKRP. Cheers! - -g- "What exactly is wrong with inmates running the asylum? It seems to me they're in the ideal position to know what's needed." - --George Carlin glen uber // apostrophe (at) crux of the biscuit dot com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:38:03 -0500 From: "Maximilian Lang" Subject: Re: Potter (slight return) >From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) > >A late addendum to the 'who should be the next Dumbledore" thread - > >does anyone here know if Frank Finlay is still alive? > >James It appears as if he is: http://us.imdb.com/Name?Finlay,+Frank Max _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:54:11 -0800 From: Tom Clark Subject: Interesting Site Find out the names of the songs in your favorite, or not so favorite, commercials: http://www.songtitle.info/ - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:23:32 -0600 From: steve Subject: Re: Two Towers, and more boobtubery On Monday, December 16, 2002, at 03:09 PM, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > I can't remember where I read the article that made the point that > Jackson started as a schlockmeister, and that these are much the same, > but with bigger budgets. Could it have been on the same page as Mr. Hitchcock? http://slate.msn.com//?id=2075292&device= For Futuramaites, it will be showing 4 days a week in the Adult Swim block on The Cartoon Network, starting in January. Buffy and Angel is what I watch. And Inu-Yasha, although I have jumped way ahead by watching 40 some episodes on DVD this last weekend. - - Steve __________ I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either. - Trent Lott ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 23:06:49 -0500 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: Two Towers, and more boobtubery steve wrote: > > Could it have been on the same page as Mr. Hitchcock? > > http://slate.msn.com//?id=2075292&device= the very same -- thanks! Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 20:53:25 -0800 From: Eleanore Adams Subject: suprise Well, I have been working at a local bookstore as a holiday temporary information clerk (which means I don't have to deal with money, just books). Today a woman maybe in her 70's asked me for a list of books and one CD. The one CD was Underwater Moonlight by the Soft Boys, as a gift for her grandson! I told her that was one of my favorite albums. She said it was on her grandson's wish list. Holiday Cheers! eleanore ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:59:52 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) Subject: LOTR, Union "jack" >> It's wild that these books >> have been so successfully translated to >> accessible, massively popular >> entertainment without being dumbed down. > >any further, at least. To think that these books used to be the domain of >13-year-old neophyte stoners, and they're now high art. that's the way with quite a lot of art. Dickens and Conan-Doyle wrote newspaper serials. Mozart did musical shows for the masses such as The Magic Flute. Toulouse-Lautrec and Mucha designed advertising posters. That something translates from low art to high art, IMHO, makes it more worthy than something which started out with lofty goals. It's a hell of a lot more difficult for entertainment for the masses to become accepted as a True Classic. >So, why is it incorrect to refer to the British flag as the "Union Jack"? >You've left me hanging! Inquiring minds want to know. Stewart's pretty much on the money. In normal use, the "Union jack" isn't being used as a jack, but as a national flag. The jack is the small flag at the prow of a ship, indicating the ship's nationality. Although the "Union jack" started its life being used solely as a naval flag, it is now predominantly used on land as a national flag, and as such is a flag, not a jack. Rule of thumb is that flags are flown on land, ensigns and jacks from ships (although this extends a little to cover their use on military bases and painted on the sides of aircraft). The US Jack, FWIW, consists, confusingly, of "the Union". That is, it is simply the blue rectangle with 50 white stars, and no stripes. James 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: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 10:39:55 +0000 (GMT) From: Michael R Godwin Subject: Re: self-plug > Michael E. Kupietz wrote: > > So, why is it incorrect to refer to the British > > flag as the "Union Jack"? On Mon, 16 Dec 2002, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > here's my guess -- a jack is a particular kind of flag, flown from a > particular bit (technical term) of a ship. Perhaps. Yes, but... I had an argument with my 5-year-old stepgranddaughter about this the other day. She said 'Union Jack' was wrong, and I said I've been calling it the Union Jack for 54 years (well, probably more like 50 actually) and I saw no reason to stop now. Fortunately she was unable to back up her assertion with cogent arguments (being more interested in a plate of soya dessert) but I'm not sure that I convinced her. I suspect that a gang of politically correct barmy Brussels bureaucrats are behind this brainwashing attack on everyday English usage. Or possibly a conspiracy of international financiers and pro-Milosevic neo-Marxists. I offer as evidence that this is the normal name. However, I reluctantly defer to James, who kno all there is to kno about flag-lore. Be that as it may, here is a pic of the late great Ox wearing a Union Jacket: - - Lord Kitchener's valet PS You missed a treat down the Green Park Tavern on Sunday. There was an all-comers' performance night and I sang "(Marie's the name of) His Latest Flame" and "Ride a White Swan". Nice! (?) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 06:40:26 -0500 (EST) From: Jill Brand Subject: keeping things in the right place Someone said that he got his monkfish at a prawn shop. I had hoped for a bit of ichthyopurity, but well, this is the year 2002. Jill ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:41:43 +0000 From: "matt sewell" Subject: Re: self-plug It's because a flag is only a jack if it's on a ship. When not on a ship the Union Jack is known as the Union Flag. Of course the Union Jack on a ship shouldn't be confused with the ensign (red or white). Cheers Matt >From: "Michael E. Kupietz, wearing a pointy hat" > >So, why is it incorrect to refer to the British flag as the "Union Jack"? >You've left me hanging! Inquiring minds want to know. > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 04:04:33 -0800 From: "Michael E. Kupietz, wearing a pointy hat" Subject: Re: keeping things in the right place At 6:40 AM -0500 12/17/02, those funny voices I hear when no one else is around called themselves Jill Brand and whispered: >Someone said that he got his monkfish at a prawn shop. I had hoped for a >bit of ichthyopurity, but well, this is the year 2002. I'll ichthyopurity if you'll ichth mine. Mike - -- ======== We need love, expression, and truth. We must not allow ourselves to believe that we can fill the round hole of our spirit with the square peg of objective rationale. - Paul Eppinger At non effugies meos iambos - Gaius Valerius Catallus ("...but you won't get away from my poems.") "Moderation in all things, except Wild Turkey." - Evel Knievel ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:49:26 -0500 From: The Great Quail Subject: Re: Two Towers, and more boobtubery Stewart gripes, > any further, at least. To think that these books used to be the domain of > 13-year-old neophyte stoners, and they're now high art. Ah, I think they were in the domain of slightly more than that, my friend. Some of us even consider them works of literature. > I can't remember where I read the article that made the point that Jackson > started as a schlockmeister, and that these are much the same, but with bigger > budgets. I hope you don't agree with that. I can't imagine a more shallow assessment...! Speaking of which, I just watched the 3.5-hour extended version of "Fellowship." Holy cow! I have to say, if you haven't seen it yet, or you've been avoiding this version because of the often-reasonable "deleted scenes should stay deleted" feeling, put that aside. These are not random outtakes added for filler -- after watching the extended version, I felt like something had been *restored* rather than just added. This is a much more complete and satisfying movie, one with greater emotional depth and more rewarding character development. I have to say, almost every gripe I had after the first film is addressed by the extended version: there's more personality to all the Hobbits, with more emotional depth to Bilbo in particular; the gift-giving scene in Lothlorien is happily right where it should be, the carping between Legolas and Gimli has more substance, and Gimli's reaction to Galadriel totally changes the way you see his character. Even the love between Arwen and Aragorn takes on a greater dimension, and the tensions between Aragorn and Boromir come into sharper focus. I definitely have the feeling that in the future, people will remember and watch *this* version, which I can only assume to be the movie Peter Jackson really wanted to make.... - --Quail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:35:46 +0000 (GMT) From: Michael R Godwin Subject: Re: self-plug On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, matt sewell wrote: > It's because a flag is only a jack if it's on a ship. When not on a ship > the Union Jack is known as the Union Flag. Of course the Union Jack on a > ship shouldn't be confused with the ensign (red or white). Continuing the fight-back against this absurd nitpicking: "I live in an apartment on the ninety ninth foor of my block And I sit at home lookin' out the window imaginin' the world has stopped Then in flies a guy that's all dressed up like a Union Jack He says I've won five pounds if I have this kind of detergent pack" Jagger-Richard [not Richards in this instance, I think] Now no-one is seriously suggesting that the guy flies in hung on the back end of a ship, are they? (London-inflected rising tone at the end of the sentence) - - Mike "let there be less pedantry" Godwin PS Don't forget the blue ensign. Can't remember what it's used for now, but it used to be the flag of a particular squadron of the RN. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:07:50 +0000 From: "matt sewell" Subject: Re: self-plug Quoting Mick Jagger in your argument - the last refuge of a scoundrel, as I'm sure anyone will no doubt tell you. And anyway, if the apartment with the 99th floor on which Mick lives is on a naval barracks, well, that's deemed to be a ship... Then in flys a guy that's all dressed up like a Union Flag He says I've won five pounds if I have a look in his plastic bag As Mr Jagger no doubt meant to sing... Absurd nitpicking - well, really! ;0P Cheers Matt, pedant without a cause... >From: Michael R Godwin >Reply-To: Michael R Godwin >To: IncessantPumpkinRaga >Subject: Re: self-plug >Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:35:46 +0000 (GMT) > >On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, matt sewell wrote: > > It's because a flag is only a jack if it's on a ship. When not on a ship > > the Union Jack is known as the Union Flag. Of course the Union Jack on a > > ship shouldn't be confused with the ensign (red or white). > > >Continuing the fight-back against this absurd nitpicking: > >"I live in an apartment on the ninety ninth foor of my block > And I sit at home lookin' out the window imaginin' the world has stopped > Then in flies a guy that's all dressed up like a Union Jack > He says I've won five pounds if I have this kind of detergent pack" > > Jagger-Richard [not Richards in this instance, I think] > >Now no-one is seriously suggesting that the guy flies in hung on the back >end of a ship, are they? (London-inflected rising tone at the end of the >sentence) > > >- Mike "let there be less pedantry" Godwin > >PS Don't forget the blue ensign. Can't remember what it's used for now, >but it used to be the flag of a particular squadron of the RN. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:31:18 +0000 (GMT) From: Michael R Godwin Subject: Re: self-plug On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, matt sewell wrote: > Then in flys a guy that's all dressed up like a Union Flag > He says I've won five pounds if I have a look in his plastic bag [MJ thinks: "It's not a cormorant, it's not a shag..."] ... and none of your double-crested rubbish at this site, either: - - MRG ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:35:17 -0600 From: "Mike Wells" Subject: Unbaarable Gads, this smells like a Godwin special... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2541761.stm Michael "in charge of the sheep dip" Wells ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:26:00 -0500 From: "FS Thomas | at work" Subject: Bragg on CNN Nice interview/article on the politics of Billy Bragg: http://www.cnn.com/2002/SHOWBIZ/Music/12/17/billy.bragg.ap/index.html F S Thomas ferris@ochremedia.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:17:19 -0600 From: "Brian Huddell" Subject: Glass Flesh Fegs, I got my copies of Glass Flesh 1 and 2 last week and I'm very impressed. Everything including the packaging is extremely well done. Many of the versions (particularly on GF2 but on GF1 as well) are much more interesting than the typical tribute-album fare. I'm sure one reason for that is the kinds of artists that are attracted to Robyn's songs, but I also think it's a byproduct of the independent sensibilities of the project itself. This is a case where a bigger label with a bigger budget would have made something far less enjoyable for Robyn's fans. Imagine Sum 41 doing Balloon Man -- that's what's not here. That said, I had a prejudice about this project before I heard it, along the lines of "independent = guy with acoustic guitar (or synth) and 4-track cassette". To anyone with a similar prejudice, that's what's not here too. The production and arrangements are surprisingly varied. Check it out! Here's a link for them what missed it: http://www.glasshotel.net/glassflesh/ +brian in New Orleans ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V11 #425 ********************************