From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V13 #74 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Tuesday, March 9 2004 Volume 13 : Number 074 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Missed shows [Eb ] Did you ever wonder... [grutness@surf4nix.com] Re: on top of old smokey all covered in smew [grutness@surf4nix.com] RE: FW: Robin in the news ["Fortissimo" ] Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #73 [grutness@surf4nix.com] Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #73 ["Jason R. Thornton" ] Re: Missed shows ["Jason R. Thornton" ] Re: Year of Death II continues [Ken Weingold ] RE: Missed shows ["Maximilian Lang" ] Re: Missed shows [Tom Clark ] [none] [Jill Brand ] Re: Missed shows ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: Missed shows ["Maximilian Lang" ] Brelinmaniax! Culture war escalates... ["Rex.Broome" ] Re: Back when you could still be post-modern on purpose... [The Great Qua] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 15:27:28 -0800 From: Eb Subject: Missed shows Another list I'm on started a "missed-show haiku" thread. I thought that was a delightful concept, and gave it an extra effort. Here was what I came up with...and you? Eb - --------------- Jeff Buckley's in-store doesn't count as a true gig Missed his other shows Epic Soundtracks crooned at Spaceland, so intimate Was not yet a fan Matthew Jay died too Chose Guided by Voices on night of Jay's Mint show Big Star "reunions" with Posies backing Alex have eluded me Doorman gave wrong time Was late for Wild Man Fischer My name is Sorry Drove miles for WOMAD Gabriel, P.M. Dawn...yes! Publicist lied...no! Small-club Nirvana Gavin Convention approached Went north, so missed show William S. Burroughs Was never supposed to die Spoken-word shows passed Sharrock, Miles, Sun Ra Put off seeing jazz legends And now regret it Talking Heads, Springsteen College friends all bought tickets Was out of the loop Saw young Replacements Barely knew the ragged songs Later concerts skipped Husker Du: never Friend went but I told him no Too harsh for young ears ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 12:29:36 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com Subject: Did you ever wonder... >http://www.area29.com/sfwporn/ > very nice, and very artistic, too - as well as being very funny! Many thanks for that! >Subject: FRESNO??? > >NEW YORK, NY - Esquire magazine reveals its first ever top ten >"Cities That Rock" list as part of "Things A Man Should Know About >Music: A Guide to 2004," a pull-out booklet featured in the April >2004 issue on sale on March 16th. Seeking out the best places in the >nation to see and hear music first, Esquire's editorial staff >surveyed hundreds of cities and judged them on the overall music >scene, the music retail stores and the venues to see live music and >soak up beer. > >The ten cities featured on the "Cities That Rock" list are home to >some of today's hottest artists of past, present and future. The >cities and respective musicians are: > >7. CINCINNATI, OH - Venus Flytrap, Herb, The Stapletons am I the only WKRP fan here who thinks it's great that two of the station staff have finally made it? 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: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 12:29:38 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com Subject: Re: on top of old smokey all covered in smew >Probably the best basic summary of the theory is "The Pre-Adamite in >a Nutshell", a paper Stephen J Gould wrote for 'Natural History' in >about 1998-99 (. If anyone's actually interested, there's no >shortage of debate on the subject (a google search on "pre-adamite" >brings up 16,000 hits). > >Remind me what this has to do with Robyn Hitchcock? In the beginning was the fish. And the fish begat the flaming three - most of whom live in mental homes. And the fish turned to the root, and the root turned to the lover and turned her into a mother. And the mother begat the Myriad Ones. And she said: "Go out upon the water and revise yourselves, my Myriad Ones." Eventually there came into town a little girl, riding on the back of a horse and cart. She was drilling her finger in a tin of baked beans. And suddenly out of the beans came the Myriad Ones, saying "Hey little girl... why don't you feed the fish?" > This reading of >> events also cleans up some of the other apparent inconsistencies in the >> early chapters of Genesis (where the children of Adam & Eve found >> husbands and wives > >Cuz otherwise there'd have to be incest...another thing to throw at >fundamentalists... well, there's always the story of Lot's daughters... (Genesis 19: 30-38) 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, 09 Mar 2004 17:38:01 -0600 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: RE: FW: Robin in the news On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 13:15:10 -0800, "Jason Brown (Echo Services Inc)" said: > >Consider also that this was exactly the justification for wiping out > the > >passenger pigeon. > > What exactly was so awful about that? Wasn't the problem with the passenger pigeon that it was always telling you turn left here, turn right there, watch out for that truck, slow down, yadda yadda yadda? Really annoying little bird. - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: Solipsism is its own reward :: :: --Crow T. Robot ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 12:57:29 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #73 >On Tue, 9 Mar 2004, Bachman, Michael wrote: > > The problem is, they multiply at an alarming rate. They not also wipe > > out fish population, but they also eat all the foliage in their roosting > > area, so you end up with denuded vegetation. They have devastated the > > Les Cheneaux islands in the Eastern UP of Michigan, with tens of > > thousands of nesting pairs. In the early 1970's we had less than 100 > > nesting pairs in the entire state. Do a search on cormorant problem and > > see all the hits you get. Also, this is not just a Michigan problem. > >But the cause isn't the cormorants... it's something else. What? well, we've probably wiped out the cormorant's natural predator in the area. Not sure what it would have been, possibly the bison. :) - or perhaps :(... 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, 09 Mar 2004 16:05:06 -0800 From: "Jason R. Thornton" Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #73 At 12:57 PM 3/10/2004 +1300, grutness@surf4nix.com wrote: >>But the cause isn't the cormorants... it's something else. What? > >well, we've probably wiped out the cormorant's natural predator in the >area. Not sure what it would have been... It was the assault rifle. Fucking liberals. - --Jason "Only the few know the sweetness of the twisted apples." - Sherwood Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 16:06:07 -0800 From: "Jason R. Thornton" Subject: Re: Missed shows At 03:27 PM 3/9/2004 -0800, Eb wrote: >Another list I'm on started a "missed-show haiku" thread. I thought that >was a delightful concept, and gave it an extra effort. Here was what I >came up with...and you? David Sylvian Once played in San Diego. "Who the fuck is he?" Sold out Strokes concert. No ticket, but singer ill. Rescheduled. Lucky! To New York flew I. Bowie worship. He cancelled. Kiss Me Kate!, instead. Tool with King Crimson, But I did not care that much, Seen Crim and hate Tool. - --Jason "Only the few know the sweetness of the twisted apples." - Sherwood Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 19:19:53 -0500 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: Year of Death II continues On Tue, Mar 9, 2004, Miles Goosens wrote: > Courtesy of the Wire list, I've just been alerted to a "Reap" we may have missed: > > John McGeoch, of Siouxsie/Magazine/PiL guitar goodness. > > http://www.stevenseverin.com/johnmcgeoch.htm Well fuck me. That's really sad. That's the saddest REAP I've seen in a long time, for personal reasons. I've been a huge Banshees fan since the mid 80s. At least it sounds like he died peacefully. I hope it's the truth. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 19:25:42 -0500 From: "Maximilian Lang" Subject: RE: Missed shows >From: Eb >To: fgz >Subject: Missed shows >Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 15:27:28 -0800 >Another list I'm on started a "missed-show haiku" thread. I thought that >was a delightful concept, and gave it an extra effort. Here was I wanted to see the Kinks Mom said no you can't Ray Davies wore a thin tie The Clash opened for the Who older sister went dad thought I was then too young Wire do play very loudly Florida is hot That is where we were that day Got lost before the Yes show Wish I'd stayed so What was I thinking Television playing live Irving is the spot I see Bettie Serveert play we saw Mission Of Burma Almost overslept Somehow found a parking space wanted to see Bob Mould play Macca played A. C. Screw Bob I prefer Sir Paul Tuatara Cancelled had a bad fever Peter Buck so annoys me Max _________________________________________________________________ Store more e-mails with MSN Hotmail Extra Storage  4 plans to choose from! http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200362ave/direct/01/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 16:32:35 -0800 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: Missed shows on 3/9/04 4:25 PM, Maximilian Lang at maximlang@hotmail.com wrote: >> From: Eb >> To: fgz >> Subject: Missed shows >> Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 15:27:28 -0800 > >> Another list I'm on started a "missed-show haiku" thread. I thought that >> was a delightful concept, and gave it an extra effort. Here was > > I wanted to see the Kinks > Mom said no you can't > Ray Davies wore a thin tie > Max screws up Haiku Is he dyslexic, or what? It's five seven five - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 19:50:28 -0500 (EST) From: Jill Brand Subject: [none] Someone reaped John McGeoch, of Siouxsie/Magazine/PiL guitar goodness. I actually saw all three (OK, I saw Howard Devoto with band; I don't know if Magazine actually toured the States) and was pretty much in love with all three back in 1982-84. How did he die? Jill ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 19:50:35 -0500 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: Missed shows But I got to see Neutral Milk Hotel, oh yes I can die happy ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 19:54:38 -0500 From: "Maximilian Lang" Subject: Re: Missed shows >From: Tom Clark >To: Where The Magpie Struts >Subject: Re: Missed shows >Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 16:32:35 -0800 >on 3/9/04 4:25 PM, Maximilian Lang at maximlang@hotmail.com wrote: > > >> From: Eb > >> To: fgz > >> Subject: Missed shows > >> Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 15:27:28 -0800 > >> Another list I'm on started a "missed-show haiku" thread. I thought >that > >> was a delightful concept, and gave it an extra effort. Here was > > I wanted to see the Kinks > > Mom said no you can't > > Ray Davies wore a thin tie >Max screws up Haiku >Is he dyslexic, or what? >It's five seven five : -) In would like to thank myself for a laugh and Kudos to my wife who reviewed them, she is a professional writer. I did enjoy doing them incorrectly. Max _________________________________________________________________ Fast. Reliable. Get MSN 9 Dial-up - 3 months for the price of 1! (Limited-time Offer) http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 17:02:49 -0800 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Brelinmaniax! Culture war escalates... Jeme: >>This plays into your idea of being "more interdisciplinary" -- if I don't >>take that to mean that the work necessarily bridges media or incorporates >>multiple crafts and take it, instead, to mean multi-dimensional and >>incorporating more human traits. I find a one-dimensionality in modern >>art. It's a kind of primitivism, I suppose, but I see it more as a >>charicature of emotion. I think you're pointing in the right direction there... and I think that one-dimensionality is really (often, anyway) imposed by commercial concerns. There's a bigger emphasis on ease of explanation these days (what might be called packaging or branding or some such thing), maybe based on an assumption that attention spans continue to shrink. I don't think they do, really... but since it's presumed, we get art that treats us like we all have ADD, and, well, that's all you can get, often as not. I don't really think people have gotten dumber... it's more like the people who are now called "content providers" are more contemptuous of us. Eb: >>Twyla Tharp, Mark Morris, Robert Wilson, Peter Sellars.... Bingo. >>Oh, and add David Hockney and Robert Longo to the '80s list? Yeah... and Zbigniew Ryczinski? Video directors in general were a different breed in the early days, springing more from experimental film than commercial backgrounds. >>I have a duller observation to offer: Life sucks. Thanks. In a way, that's not really duller... just more succinct. >>I don't think the "directors" portion of Rex's thesis is so strong. >>There are always arty directors around. Look at how well-known >>Steven Soderbergh is, for instance. I'm willing to concede that one. The fact that there are so *many* arty directors actually kind of threw me on this front... because there are actually more of them, no one small set seems to so completely dominate the public discourse on film as they did back then. Quail: >>Really? Why *should* they necessarily know who Spalding Gray was? He >>was pretty much an artist of the 80s, politically inclined, and one that >>was never very mainstream. I mean, when I was 25, I'm not sure if I knew >>the Spalding Gray equivalent of the earlier generation. Fair enough. Unlike Jeme I wouldn't be surprised the these folks didn't know who Gray was, but I would feel a little old (so you've got me there) and not a little sad as well. Part of it is that you simply don't take stock of every figure from your youth every year, one by one, saying, oh, is he still valid? Do people still pay attention to her stuff? So when one of those names comes back around, it can be a little surprising to realize how much cultural currency they've lost while you weren't paying attention. >>As far as I remember the 80s mainstream, while it had some good and some >>bad, I would hardly say it was less "obvious." (snip) the current >>"cool mainstream" features groups like the White Stripes, the Strokes, the >>Yeah Yeah Yeahs, Outkast, and even the Flaming Lips, among others. That's music, and you have some valid examples there, sure; you could and do point to quality work on TV or in movies as well. I think what Jeme and Eb and I are missing (not to put words in anyone's mouths) are the cultural wild-cards, the less-categorizable figures who were more visible back in tha day. I think there are fewer "celebrities", or household names, representing the fine arts or literature or underground/experimental sensibilities these days. >>You think "Blue Velvet" is more gentle than "Pulp Fiction?" God yes. It's the sensibilty. Lynch is appalled at what he's compelled to represent, as I usually see it; Tarantino gets off on it. Which again doesn't mean one approach is better than the other... it's just how I read the respective bodies of work. Sounds like Jeme's basically on the same page here. >>I think rather, that post-Tarantino, a >>certain violent, stylized aesthetic may have entered the mainstream; >>but that has more to do with my generation aging than it does with the >>mainstream getting more "mean-spirited," I think. I think I let a slight distinction slide there. I wasn't really talking about the mainstream per se, but what you might call the "acceptable fringe" just to the left of it. It seems more imperative that "artsiness" is characterized by misanthropy (and per Jeme, one-dimensionality, and I agree) than it used to be. That's just my reaction to it, though... it seems that an equation has come into being where you know it's art only if it viscerally disturbing. Jeme: >>U2, REM, and The Smiths are certainly not in the category that Rex was >>describing. They're just pop bands. That's true, although REM and maybe sort of the Smiths skirt the area. The REM aesthetic had some of the same artiness that Byrne laid claim to (see both bands having Finster do LP covers) and certainly alluded to a bit of the NY Art Scene that Eb correctly noted my list of "forgotten figures" was heavy on. >>I don't think anyone's saying that the 80s mainstream was more interesting >>than the mainstream of today. It's just that the avant-garde was closer >>to the mainstream, culturally... not that the mainstream was any more or >>less avant-garde. Right, that's where I was going. There were more cracks in the mainstream facade throug which you could glimpse something... else. Even if you were growing up in West Virginia. Another possibility is that the corporate machine has become more efficient and speedy at co-opting avant garde sensibilities... you don't even have time to register that it's there and odd before it's a Quiznos ad. Sort of a different issue, but not unrelated. >>I don't think you'd compare it to, say, Eraserhead. But what WOULD you >>compare to that? What is a modern experimental work that is well-known >>and referenced in the mainstream today? Right. And pointing out that Lynch still has the occasional succes doesn't change this. He's an anomaly as a survivor. Same thing with Byrne, Anderson, a lot of the others I listed. They have a history which means they'll always be noticed and tracked by some. As Jeme said, we know where they are now (and I'd say they're farther out of the spotlight than they were, or than Quail sees them as now), but where are the emerging figures of their ilk? The current version of a "renaissance celebrity" seems to be someone who, in addition to their main gig, runs a record label or produces films or something. A business distinction more than anything else. I mean, yeah, Wayne Coyne, but he's almost an elder statesman himself... and... well... Neko Case screws around with pinhole cameras, and... Ah well. There's certainly some nostalgia informing my position here, but I am pretty damned sure, Quail, that it's worse than you think. The cultural fix is in. I make it a point not to bitch about teen-pop and such because it's not *for* me, kind of irrelevant... but it's easier to avoid because the venues that present it are *utterly* devoid of anything else of interest to me. And that wasn't always the case. But as I see it, yeah, the general corporate climate is such that very little that's not easily grasped and market-tested slips through... do you not agree that there's more truth to that than there was in 1985? - -Rex PS John McGeoch? That flat out sucks. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 20:06:05 -0500 From: "Maximilian Lang" Subject: RE: Missed shows Okay, another try. the kinks were in town Ray Davies wore a thin tie Mom said no you can't The Clash and the Who my older sister saw this I was then too young Florida is hot Wire do play very loudly I was very hot I went to see Yes we Got lost before the show Wish we had stayed so Irving is the spot Television playing live I see Serveert play Almost overslept but made Mission Of Burma somehow found parking Macca played A. C. wanted to see Bob Mould play I prefer Sir Paul Peter Buck annoys I do not know why Tuatara bailed _________________________________________________________________ Create a Job Alert on MSN Careers and enter for a chance to win $1000! http://msn.careerbuilder.com/promo/kaday.htm?siteid=CBMSN_1K&sc_extcmp=JS_JASweep_MSNHotm2 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 20:15:45 -0500 From: The Great Quail Subject: Re: Back when you could still be post-modern on purpose... Capuchin writes, > I don't consider him "an artist of the 80s" at all. Consider that two of > his four monologues on film were made in the 1990s Yikes! I suppose I am showing my age here -- the 90s are blending into the 80s! > You can't deny that there is a permissiveness in modern culture that > allows for more blatant description of human action that diminishes the > prevalence of metaphor and allusion. I think the sex in mainstream songs may have become more open, but that's about it, and I really cannot think of any reason to support your sweeping claim. Sounds like it would need a pair of contrasting thesis papers to me - -- not something I want to hammer out in email bits. In fact, I think after this reply I am done. It may not be politics, and we may be behaving politely to each other, but this argument is going nowhere. > Are you kidding? The Strokes? The Yeah Yeah Yeahs? I think they fit > very well with the American Idol pap. Hmmm....have you, uh, actually *watched* "American Idol?" > U2, REM, and The Smiths are certainly not in the category that Rex was > describing. They're just pop bands. Well, I can't subscribe to that totalizing label: "just" a pop band. The Beatles were "just" a pop band, then? But perhaps I misunderstood Rex. > I don't think anyone's saying that the 80s mainstream was more interesting > than the mainstream of today. It's just that the avant-garde was closer > to the mainstream, culturally... I disagree. I think the real difference here is that you and Rex -- and myself -- were more plugged into the scene at the time. Things made sense to us in a way that they may not make sense to us now. We were more a part of the cultural scene, and there was a coherence that seemed "natural" to us. Now...? What makes Outkast less avant-garde than Frank Zappa? I really don't know, but I don't feel able to pass judgment. All I have is my taste, and a constant but often failing desire to keep an open mind. Really, I do think you sound like a cranky, aging radical! It's almost cute. I for one am trying to come across as the "aging neo-hippie trying desperately to keep an open mind even if he *is* a bit of a snob." > There was an understanding in the mainstream that there > was interesting work going on out in the fringes and there was an > awareness of what those things were and why they were good and > interesting. And there's not today? See, I think this is a matter of your *taste.* For instance, later you dismiss Bjork; but in fact she is doing tremendously exciting and even avant-garde things. So is Radiohead, so is Sigur Ros, so is Beck, and a few others I don't know, because as I age my brain fills up, and I lose tabs on everything I should get to know better. Things come in at a slower rate. For instance, I just discovered Current 93 and Eminem! I mean, for heaven's sake. > Today, there is more marginalization and more segregation of cultural > sects. I think it's just the opposite, myself. There are plenty of bands that combine and blend styles quite freely, not to mention traditions, racial and ethnic elements, and so on. Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but I feel that today's music scene is very kaleidoscopic and cross-pollinating. I just saw Macy Gray -- what a delightful cross-cultural freakshow that was! And a few weeks ago, the Black Eyed Peas were on SNL -- same thing. > This has nothing to do with popularity, it has to do with cultural > acceptance and mainstream recognition. I am not sure how you can disentangle popularity with "cultural acceptance" and "mainstream recognition." > To me, it all comes down to the false tolerance we have today. Well, here your politics enter the picture, and I will not venture into that zone, other than indicating politely that I cannot accept your totalizing statement again: "false tolerance." > The fringe is no longer a cultural force as a subcultural force. They're > not breaking ground for the mainstream to follow so much as running out in > the field to show how far out they are, not to show how a person can get > there. I kind of see that point; but I do not agree, although I think it is thought-provoking and deserves further discussion. I am just not sure a fruitful discussion will occur between us, because we have different understandings of the basic terms of argument: "mainstream," "cultural force," "breaking ground," etc. > No, I mean art, generally. Seemed like a discussion of popular art to me. So I left out Western art music, professional painting and photography, sculpture, and so on. I would rather leave these things out, because I don't think that's exactly the point Rex or yourself were making. Do we really want to get into a space where we compare Steven Reich with Thomas Ades, or Bruce Naumann with Michael Currin, etc.? >> One-dimensionality? Well, then.... What about Radiohead? Bjork? Sigur >> Ros? Norah Jones? Eminem? > > While I've never listened to Sigur Ros, the others don't give me much hope > for finding what I'm describing. These aren't cutting edge artists... > these are multi-platinum recording industry product. The fact you consider these artists to be so bankrupt only tells me that we have no common ground here, and that this discussion is ultimately pointless. You think Bjork is not cutting edge? That Radiohead is only about "product?" It is pointless to argue with you about this, we just come from different universes. >> What about the HBO TV renaissance, which brings shows like "The Shield" >> in its wake? > > The cutting-edge stuff is still left out in a void, though. There's > nothing particularly groundbreaking about either Sex In The City or The > Sopranos (though both are quite entertaining!). Well, I personally don't like "Sex in the City," but regarding "The Sopranos," of course it's groundbreaking television, and I won't get drawn into the tedium of discussing something that should be self-evident. The problem is, you define groundbreaking as "something I have never seen before, except maybe back in the 1980s when I first discovered art in college." Also, "The Wire," "Curb Your Enthusiasm," "Six Feet Under" -- all these HBO shows have redefined or refined what "good" television can do, just as much as "Twin Peaks." > There isn't any kind of > greater exploration of humanity there. It's not what you'd call > avant-garde. I do not accept your definition of the avant-garde as that which enables a greater exploration of humanity. Furthermore, I disagree with you: I think these HBO shows *do* explore humanity in interesting and even fresh ways. >> What about the surprising popularity of films like "The Lord of the >> Rings?" > > Is there anything more simplistic than a good v. evil fantasy tale? That is reductionist and I think you know it. But anyway, I meant the films in the context of them being such an epic, complicated, strange, rich fantasy. > I don't think you'd compare it to, say, Eraserhead. Well, of course not. But "Eraserhead" also has numerous failings; nor is it *meant* to be compared to "The Lord of the Rings." You can't just scare up a bunch of art films and lament that the popular masses haven't flocked to the banner of "Eraserhead!" Otherwise, all we'd have to watch would be the Kremaster Cycle! >But what WOULD you > compare to that? Just did. I would also add the Brothers Quay, and numerous wacky Asian films. And more, but again, I feel like I am just treading water. And believe me, there are no shortage of inscrutable film-student works out there. Lynch just hit in something very, well, Lynchian. It's not something that can be -- or should be -- necessarily replicated. I mean, the guy's a genius, and he's still with us, making good films. Right? Let the guy have a career, for goodness sake! It's not over yet! >What is a modern experimental work that is well-known > and referenced in the mainstream today? The closest you might get is Pi, > but can you name-drop Aronofsky as a punchline for Jay Leno in the same > way that Johnny Carson did DID with David Lynch in 1984? Well, the fact that the guy was supposed to direct the next Batman film, and that "Requiem for a Dream" was up for an Oscar for best supporting actress, doesn't exactly put Aronofsky into "Eraserhead" territory! And by 1984, Lynch had directed "The Elephant Man" and "Dune," not exactly obscure films. Oh, and Jay Leno is no Johnny Carson! (But we all know that.) > Uh... really? Because she used to appear on network television. So did Andy Warhol. What the heck does that prove? I guarantee the average person in 1985 did not listen to Laurie Anderson, nor did they know who she was. > OK... I think you're missing the point here. He's not saying "Where are > they now?" He's saying "Who's taking up the mantel?" And I am saying, this is nothing more than a nostalgic trip down memory lane for you guys! Laurie Anderson did what she had to do, she sort of lost focus, and now we have Squarepusher or Bjork or Matmos or someone else to do something new with technology and music. David Byrne did what he had to do at the right time, and now we have Beck. And so on. You sound like my parents, or even my grandparents! As if all those artists had "mantels" which have been sadly dropped by the youth of today. I mean, once you go and dismiss Bjork and Radiohead and (I am sure you would) Sigur Ros and Beck and so on, well, what am I going to say? (And Lord knows, all those cats are in their 30s, which only shows how out of touch I probably am with the real cutting edge!) I mean, come on. You think that anyone who actually makes a few bucks is a corporate shill, and you don't really like much new anyway, unless it passes some sort of "sincerest pumpkin patch in the world" test. > For this one, anyway, I would say Wayne Coyne fits fairly well. Yeah, I can buy that, sort of -- though Coyne doesn't pull together so many threads into a syncretic whole. >>> Phillip Glass, >> >> Now more popular than ever, actually, and drifting closer to the >> mainstream. Look at "The Secret Window." > > Ah, more popular than ever, sure, but more a part of the mainstream > consciousness? He's got a bigger audience, but it's a ghetto (or, more > apt, a gated community). Yeah, being nominated for all those Oscars and Grammys -- being parodied on the Simpsons and South Park -- having numerous commercials rip off his music - -- ??? What more do you want, Capuchin? President Bush to announce "Philip Glass Day?" > Perhaps, but his name was universally known. Who compares? What work has > had that much mainstream cultural impact even for its controversial > subject matter? Mel Gibson. Heh. But seriously, you overestimate Mapplethorpe's "cultural impact." > I don't think "gentle" is the word I would use, but it's certainly more > human. Blue Velvet certainly has characters with amplified quirks, but > they're just amplified human flaws. Pulp Fiction is (and surely was > intended to be) nothing but one-dimensional characters who are more > mechanical than human. If I may quite Eb: "Yawn." > To beat the horse, Pulp Fiction was 100% mainstream. Look at its box > office ranking for the year. Compare that to Blue Velvet. And if "Pulp Fiction" would have tanked, you would be holding it up as a work of genius. I bet back in school, if too many people started liking your band, you found someone new to listen to, eh? > What about it? Punk rock was poorly understood by much of the mainstream, > but at least it was recognized and on the radar. What compares today? Sorry, I meant it as an example of something from the 1980s that was decidedly not gentle, and certainly a bit mean-spirited at times. I was probably being unclear, and that should count for the following, too. > Spalding Gray was cutting-edge performance art. Which modern cutting-edge > performance artist is having his work filmed by acclaimed directors? Again, I was talking about non-gentle stuff from the recent past, such as Karen Finlay and Chris Burden. But to answer your question, I'm not sure. What performance art is still being done? The closest thing I can think of is "The Waking Life," and that's not really the same thing at all. > In the 1980s, you could see a concert film at the cineplex or the mall, > today they're at "the art house" pretty much exclusively. Well, back in the 1980s we didn't have cable TV and home surround systems. There are zillions of concert films on TV and available on DVD. > What does your aging have to do with the violent, stylized aesthetic > entering the mainstream? That sentence makes no sense to me. Sorry -- I mean, people of my generation grew up with a certain cartoon violence, not to mention a Schwarzenegger and Hong Kong action movie aesthetic. While this offended my mother and grandmother to a certain extent, as my generation began making movies, it drew more upon these elements and stylized them even further. In general, I think, violence has become more mainstream, for good or bad. But then again, so has pot smoking, racial tolerance, and gay rights. - --Quail ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V13 #74 *******************************