From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V17 #87 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Friday, March 27 2009 Volume 17 : Number 087 Today's Subjects: ----------------- RE: Quail, Quail ["Brian Huddell" ] Republican Road to Recovery [Jeremy Osner ] Re: well then, call me stupid (heads up, Chris Gross and Quail) [Steve Sc] Re: Republican Road to Recovery [FSThomas ] RE: Fear of Music [Michael Sweeney ] RE: Quail, Quail [Christopher Gross ] Re: Decemberists new CD [Michael Sweeney ] Re: Decemberists new CD [Jeremy Osner ] Re: Decemberists new CD [2fs ] Re: Republican Road to Recovery [Steve Schiavo ] Animals [Christopher Gross ] Quail, keep posting [Jill Brand ] Re: Decemberists new CD [Rex ] Re: Animals [Jeremy Osner ] RE: Quail, keep posting ["Brian Huddell" ] Cool drum solo [Jeremy Osner ] more fodder [Jill Brand ] Re: more fodder [Rex ] RE: more fodder ["Brian Huddell" ] Re: more fodder [Sebastian Hagedorn ] Re: more fodder [Jeremy Osner ] Re: more fodder [Jeremy Osner ] Re: more fodder [Rex ] Re: more fodder [Rex ] Re: more fodder [vivien lyon ] Re: Decemberists new CD [vivien lyon ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:00:11 -0500 From: "Brian Huddell" Subject: RE: Quail, Quail > But still, it stuns me how many people apparently didn't get the parody > in this particular post. Was the parody really so hard to spot? The parody came off really angry, like he wanted it to hurt. If Quail says he didn't want it to hurt, then I believe him, but that's how it seemed to me. I wish I hadn't jumped in and accused him of shitting on the list. I was in a bad mood, and it hit me the wrong way at the wrong time (I'm basically an unspeakable hybrid of all the worst prog and punk stereotypes, or at least sometimes I feel that way). I made a bad choice, and I'm sorry for adding to the tension around here. +brian ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:03:32 -0400 From: Jeremy Osner Subject: Republican Road to Recovery Hi all, the GOP have proposed their alternative to Obama's socialist hell-hole budget. Be sure to look at the graphic on p. 17, it sort of sums the whole thing up very nicely: http://www.gop.gov/solutions/budget/road-to-recovery-final.pdf J If we do not say all words, however absurd, we will never say the essential words. -- J Saramago http://www.readin.com/blog/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:09:01 -0500 From: Steve Schiavo Subject: Re: well then, call me stupid (heads up, Chris Gross and Quail) On Mar 27, 2009, at 12:45 PM, Jill Brand wrote: > am actually COMPLETELY bummed out by the fact that I got HOL on > Tuesday, played it once, and haven't felt the urge to listen again. I was bummed the first time I heard Skylarking, but it turned out that it's not that bad an album. Listen again when you're feeling better. Besides, you're not required to love everything by a band, even if it's your favorite band. Download the podcast from NPR and listen to the album done live - I think the transitions between the songs are better. And there will probably be another Decemberists album. > I'm 53 years old I'm older. - - Steve _______________ Interconnectedness among living beings can be accounted for by nonlocal quantum entanglement. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:15:34 -0400 From: FSThomas Subject: Re: Republican Road to Recovery Jeremy Osner wrote: > Hi all, the GOP have proposed their alternative to Obama's socialist > hell-hole budget. Be sure to look at the graphic on p. 17, it sort of > sums the whole thing up very nicely: > http://www.gop.gov/solutions/budget/road-to-recovery-final.pdf > I prefer the projections on pages 5, 7 and 16. They paint a much more succinct picture. Whatever. - -f. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 19:33:59 +0000 From: Michael Sweeney Subject: RE: Fear of Music Brian Huddell wrote: >> Michael "Let's see what I can recall...Mi, mi, mi, mi - ahem: 'And I >> saw you too / He looked just like you!'" Sweeney > >I DON'T KNOW HIM!! ...Good one! And, one of the nights we did it, "Peter" -- who was supposd to shove me down (roughly!) as he sang that reply -- was apparently a little amped up, cuz he managed to toss me competely off the riser (we were doing it on a stage and connected riser islands to spread out the scenes throughout the audience) down a few feet to the floor. The audience thought it was part of the show...but my not-onstage-at-that-moment-co-stars rushed over to check that I was OK... Michael "And, at only the age of 16 (or just weeks before), thus began my life-long back-pain problems..." Sweeney _________________________________________________________________ Quick access to Windows Live and your favorite MSN content with Internet Explorer 8. http://ie8.msn.com/microsoft/internet-explorer-8/en-us/ie8.aspx?ocid=B037MSN5 5C0701A ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:38:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: RE: Quail, Quail On Fri, 27 Mar 2009, Brian Huddell wrote: > I wish I hadn't jumped in and accused him of shitting on the list. I was in > a bad mood, and it hit me the wrong way at the wrong time (I'm basically an Judging from comments I've seen on and off the list, a lot of people were in a bad mood yesterday. Including me. I think Woj should run a mood meter and simply turn off the list on days like that! What do you say, Woj? - --Chris ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 19:41:57 +0000 From: Michael Sweeney Subject: Re: Decemberists new CD kevin wrote: >> So I think of Dark Side and The Wall and Animals (briefly my favorite >> Floyd record, to my lasting embarrassment) > > >Nothing wrong with Animals - I certainly prefer it to any of the subsequent >Floyd output. ...I like -- in varying ways, at varying levels -- much of the pre-Waters-departure Floyd stuff, but..."Animals" is prob. still my fave PF rekkid as well... Michael "But I broke bad on the used-to-think-I-liked-but-now-find-it-horrible 'Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking,' which I shall never listen to again..." Sweeney _________________________________________________________________ Internet Explorer 8  Get your Hotmail Accelerated. Download free! http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/141323790/direct/01/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:07:41 -0400 From: Jeremy Osner Subject: Re: Decemberists new CD On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Michael Sweeney wrote: > kevin wrote: >>Nothing wrong with Animals - I certainly prefer it to any of the subsequent >>Floyd output. > > ...I like -- in varying ways, at varying levels -- much of the > pre-Waters-departure Floyd stuff, but..."Animals" is prob. still my fave PF > rekkid as well... When I first listened to it "Animals" just rang all my bells, it seemed like exactly what a rock record should be. This lasted for about 3 months and then I started feeling like it was a con, like there wasn't any reality to the critique of capitalism and imperialism that I had thought Pink Floyd was giving me. (Ok, ok -- I can't read that sentence without laughing either. I was only 15 for gods sake.) At that point I stopped listening to any Floyd except Piper and the Barrett solo records, which the same friend who played Animals for me had just given me. (Don't look for consistency here, there is no critique of capitalism in Piper and Barrett solo. Or for that matter in anything else I was listening to at the time, making allowances for the Dead Kennedies. Kennedys? And I was listening to Crass somewhere around that time.) Kept the Floyd records I had in my collection though and started listening to them again a couple of years later, and found that they are actually pretty good. But I still feel embarrassed about my fling with "Animals". Also: I have never owned or really listened much to any of Ummagumma, Atom Heart Mother, Meddle, and I often find myself wondering about those records. J If we do not say all words, however absurd, we will never say the essential words. -- Josi Saramago http://www.readin.com/blog/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:33:53 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Decemberists new CD On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 11:26 AM, kevin studyvin wrote: > Again: how is _Aqualung_ a concept album? In order for something to be a >> "concept album," it needs to have a concept. What's the concept for >> _Aqualung_? I mean, yeah, our titular character is mentioned in one other >> track - but that's really about it. Oh - two songs talk about God. >> > > Well, ya know, people always called it one, even though Mr. Anderson's > always denied anything of the sort. > I'd say "people" are wrong - as I said, in the '70s you'd see a "concept album" everywhere, because that was, you know, the non-top-forty, non-pop-radio thing to do as a serious rock artiste (which was regarded as a good thing then - of course, one of the attitudes punk rebelled against). But still: I can't see any "concept" that would unify the tracks on that album...unless it's "bad things sometimes happen and it's a bummer man"...which, uh, isn't much of a concept. Rex said something about Gabriel's first batch of albums - I think he did say they werent given titles because he wanted them to be received like issues of a magazine...but that doesn't imply concept-albumness (any more than the run of a particular magazine exemplifies a particular concept) - more like "this is a series of dispatches of what's on Peter Gabriel's mind." Gabriel, though, is a good illustration of the problem of taking things too seriously: there's just no way a frakkin' record should take a decade to make. Beethoven wrote symphonies in plenty less time than that. Someone should lock Gabriel and Kate Bush in a room (not necessarily the same one) and tell them they're not being let out until they've written and recorded an album. Enough of this "ten years later, here's my masterwork..." I suppose I should say, though, there's much that's impressive about _Up_ - but I don't buy that it's ten years' worth of impressive. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.wordpress.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:37:43 -0500 From: Steve Schiavo Subject: Re: Republican Road to Recovery On Mar 27, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Jeremy Osner wrote: > Hi all, the GOP have proposed their alternative to Obama's socialist > hell-hole budget. Be sure to look at the graphic on p. 17, it sort of > sums the whole thing up very nicely: > http://www.gop.gov/solutions/budget/road-to-recovery-final.pdf As ususal, Nate Silver has the true poop. - - Steve __________ There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - Kung Fu Monkey ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:42:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: Animals On Fri, 27 Mar 2009, Jeremy Osner wrote: > When I first listened to it "Animals" just rang all my bells, it > seemed like exactly what a rock record should be. This lasted for > about 3 months and then I started feeling like it was a con, like > there wasn't any reality to the critique of capitalism and imperialism > that I had thought Pink Floyd was giving me. (Ok, ok -- I can't read > that sentence without laughing either. I was only 15 for gods sake.) > At that point I stopped listening to any Floyd except Piper and the > Barrett solo records, which the same friend who played Animals for me > had just given me. (Don't look for consistency here, there is no > critique of capitalism in Piper and Barrett solo. Or for that matter > in anything else I was listening to at the time, making allowances for > the Dead Kennedies. Kennedys? And I was listening to Crass somewhere > around that time.) Kept the Floyd records I had in my collection > though and started listening to them again a couple of years later, > and found that they are actually pretty good. But I still feel > embarrassed about my fling with "Animals". Also: I have never owned or > really listened much to any of Ummagumma, Atom Heart Mother, Meddle, > and I often find myself wondering about those records. Scary! Except for a few details, I could have written that entire paragraph myself. The exceptions are that I listened to Meddle and Ummagumma pretty heavily not long after my Animals phase, that I didn't *entirely* stop listening to post-Barrett Floyd after that phase was over, and that I didn't hear Crass or solo Barrett until a bit later. But the bulk of that paragraph could but cut and pasted directly into my biography. I was even the exact same age, 15. Anyway, now that I'm old and all my musical opinions have matured to perfection, I think Animals is pretty good. Not their best album, but not an embarrassment by any means. So did any of y'all have the cassette of Animals that faded out the middle of "Pigs (Three Different One)" at the end of side 1 and faded it back in at the beginning of side 2? - --Chris np: Pink Floyd, _Animals_ ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:03:07 -0400 (EDT) From: Jill Brand Subject: Quail, keep posting God, now I just feel like an idiot. It was late when I read the post, I'm sick comme un chien, and, oh, please, no, keep posting. This is ALL silly. And anyway, none of you knows what the fuck you are talking about because I've seen Colin Meloy with a beard. ;-) It's Friday. I taught today. My colleagues all told me to go home. Class was bliss for 3 hours. The sun is shining. I'm in the mood for short sentences and warm fuzziness. My father and his lovely (read sarcasm here) wife are arriving tomorrow and don't know I'm sick. Yeah. Robyn in just over 2 weeks. I promise not to cough on him. Jill ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:03:23 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: Decemberists new CD On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 1:33 PM, 2fs wrote: > > Rex said something about Gabriel's first batch of albums - I think he did > say they werent given titles because he wanted them to be received like > issues of a magazine...but that doesn't imply concept-albumness (any more > than the run of a particular magazine exemplifies a particular concept) - > more like "this is a series of dispatches of what's on Peter Gabriel's > mind." Sorry, I didn't mean to connect that to conceptiness... I was just bringing it up a a more honest flipside to Lou's claim of albums as chapters in novel. In fact, I thought the "magazine" idea was a great construction: songs as articles, unified more by the tenor of the times than their content. I should say that I love every last one of the self-titled PG albums and most of the other ones, too. That probably doesn't entirely square with my not being too keen on prog, but, you know, and stuff. > Someone > should lock Gabriel and Kate Bush in a room (not necessarily the same one) > and tell them they're not being let out until they've written and recorded > an album. > The rooms should be next door to each other, and once or twice every episode Kevin Shields would come over to ask to borrow some laundry detergent. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:13:39 -0400 From: Jeremy Osner Subject: Re: Animals Hi Chris! Nice to know you're only me... Here is something I experience as strange, now that I'm thinking about Pink Floyd discography. I am 35; my first exposure to Floyd was listening to "Another Brick in the Wall" at age 10 or so on a friend's cassette deck. Then the whole discovery, rejection, reacquaintance discussed in the previous mail. But here's the thing: I have some friends who I play a lot of music with, who are in their 50's and listened to Floyd a lot in the mid-to-late 70's. I was talking with them a couple of years back and it came out that they didn't know there were any Pink Floyd records before 1973. I was surprised. Was Dark Side of the Moon a breakthrough hit for a previously unknown band? (Oh and another anecdote as long as I am telling them: this morning I was telling a friend of mine about a house concert we are having next month, "Woody Rediscovered" -- any Woody Guthrie fans in my vicinity, if you'd like to come hear shoot me a mail -- and he told me, when he was growing up in Indiana as the son of the local John Birch Society organizer, his parents listened to Pete Seeger and The Weavers, and he has never been able to square that with their politics.) J ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:55:32 -0500 From: "Brian Huddell" Subject: RE: Quail, keep posting > God, now I just feel like an idiot. You shouldn't. What Quail wrote was biting. It was effective. It stung. If he meant it to be somehow lighthearted or fun, he failed. I apologized to the list for calling him out on it because I think I made things worse, creating more tension than if I'd kept my mouth shut. But I'm certainly not sending in my humor-meter to be recalibrated. Regardless of intent, in that context, with that tone, no way was it ever going to be a happy read. You did nothing wrong. +brian ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:57:25 -0400 From: Jeremy Osner Subject: Cool drum solo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ix_11UeGwYY If we do not say all words, however absurd, we will never say the essential words. -- Josh Saramago http://www.readin.com/blog/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:07:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Jill Brand Subject: more fodder So............. as to music that we might not like........ Is there any music that you don't like, that you've tried to like, and that you wish you liked? Opening myself up for huge derision here, I will list artists who don't inspire the love in me that they are supposed to: Bob Dylan (I'm a dead person, I know) Van Morrison Shane MacGowan Led Zeppelin after the first album Pink Floyd after Syd's departure most jazz (although there is some that I like but I don't know what school it is) The Who after Tommy (and I like Tommy, even though everyone else seems to hate it) Jill, who loves the early Bee Gees ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:28:30 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: more fodder On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Jill Brand wrote: > > Is there any music that you don't like, that you've tried to like, and that > you wish you liked? Lord, yes. May I introduce you to King Crimson? Van Morrison makes my list, too; I do like him fine, but I think I'm supposed to revere him as God Like Genius; he's never grabbed me that deeply. I know I have no soul. I'm similarly... well, not really underwhelmed, but not-as-whelmed-as-I-should be by Leonard Cohen. I know I have no mind. And although I like the ambiance of his style of music, I just can't worship Sinatra. I think it's partly because I have a feeling that he's unfairly singled out as practically the only guy of his era that is still listened to when there's probably plenty of equally deserving cats of that kind in the dustbin of history. I know I have no swing. And of course, all metal. Though I've never reall tried *that* hard. I know I have no COOOOOKIIIEEE. And Morrissey. Moreover, even The Smiths. I've had all their records forever, thinking that someday I'll get it, but if anything, they become more irritating as their ubiquity and critical status increases. I know I have no wit. These problems do solve themselves sometimes. I eventually got Elvis, The Cure, and, later still, Zeppelin. I don't think Crimson is entirely out of the question yet. Oh, and I don't think it's that unusual to not like Dylan. He doesn't really have the most accessible of sounds, as evidenced by the fact that people have been making fun of his voice for over forty years now. I love the guy, but I don't expect everyone else to, especially if they're going to go about it out of misplaced sense of duty. Like him or don't and live peacefully with your choice, is my thinking. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:30:57 -0500 From: "Brian Huddell" Subject: RE: more fodder > The Who after Tommy (and I like Tommy, even though everyone else seems > to hate it) Tommy is one of my favorite albums, just sayin'. > Jill, who loves the early Bee Gees Me too! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 23:47:32 +0100 From: Sebastian Hagedorn Subject: Re: more fodder - -- Jill Brand is rumored to have mumbled on 27. Mdrz 2009 17:07:28 -0400 regarding more fodder: > Is there any music that you don't like, that you've tried to like, and > that you wish you liked? > > Opening myself up for huge derision here, I will list artists who don't > inspire the love in me that they are supposed to: > > Bob Dylan (I'm a dead person, I know) > Van Morrison > Shane MacGowan > Led Zeppelin after the first album > Pink Floyd after Syd's departure > most jazz (although there is some that I like but I don't know what > school it is) > The Who after Tommy (and I like Tommy, even though everyone else seems to > hate it) I like most of the ones you list above. I love some Bob Dylan records (the obvious ones, especially Blonde On Blonde), but not all of them. I love "Astral Weeks" so much that I'd probably put it among my to 10, but I don't know much about the rest of his career. Led Zeppelin are an acquired taste for me, but when I recently listened to the actual albums for the first time (instead of compilations), I was struck by how consistent they were. It's not really my kind of music, but I can appreciate its greatness. Sometimes I like Pink Floyd (even The Final Cut!), sometimes I don't. As for The Who, I don't really get how you can like Tommy and *not* like Who's Next?! I'm not as convinced by Quadrophenia as others round here are. I don't like it as much as the earlier stuff. I've got a soft spot for You Better You Bet, because it was the first Who song I ever heard. The one that I get the most flak for not liking is Tom Waits. Can't stand him. BTW, so far I also can't stand Of Montreal! I've listened to Hissing Fauna ... (admittedly only once) and thought it was incredibly grating and annoying. What am I missing? OTOH, I like both old-school and new-school Decemberists. - -- Sebastian Hagedorn Am alten Stellwerk 22, 50733 Kvln, Germany http://www.uni-koeln.de/~a0620/ "Being just contaminates the void" - Robyn Hitchcock ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 18:57:13 -0400 From: Jeremy Osner Subject: Re: more fodder I've never thought of Zeplin, Crimsin, Smiths, really any rock band as music I'm "supposed" to like. I don't much care for any of those three (though I love the cover art on "Court of the Crimsin King" o.c.) It always makes me sad to hear somebody does not like Dylan. Irrational to be sure. But it makes me want to go over to their house bearing records and marihuana and a goofy grin, and ask them to listen to some tunes... (Hey speaking of: I've got a plan for tonight after my daughter goes to bed and my wife goes to a show with her friend, and it is this: get myself altered and listen to "Goodnight Oslo", and write on my blog about the songs. I did a similar thing two years ago with "Perspex Island", which you can read here http://readin.com/blog/perspex.php if that's the kind of thing that rocks your boat. Oh and a note about PI: It seems to me to occupy a similar-tho-not-identical place in Robyn's oeuvre to what Animals occupies in the Floyd discography; and yet I do not feel any embarrassment about having PI be my favorite Hitchcock record, though perhaps I ought.) My big music-I-don't-like-as-much-as-I-should entries are all jazz and classical, and they mainly are because I don't listen to those genres as much as I would need to to really appreciate them. The only jazz I really love is old dixieland, which I've listened to a fair amount of, and some swing, although I have trouble differentiating what band is playing when I'm listening to swing, because I don't listen to enough of it; Monk and Davis and Coltrane and other giants of modern jazz either don't move me when I'm listening to them (because I don't have the chops to hear what they are playing) or don't stay in my memory after I've stopped listening. This is true of most classical music as well, for similar reasons. J If we do not say all words, however absurd, we will never say the essential words. -- Josi Saramago http://www.readin.com/blog/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 19:10:33 -0400 From: Jeremy Osner Subject: Re: more fodder After a little more consideration, here are three rock bands that I feel bad about not liking enough: The Fall (except for "Live at the Witch Trials" which is a major part of my consciousness), The Gang of Four (except for "Entertainment!" which ditto), and The Who. Again I think it stems from not spending enough time listening to them. I like songs by The Who when I hear them, they just don't stick in my memory. I guess I also feel bad about not knowing enough Talking Heads, but not as strongly because I'm pretty confident that I will both dig any music of theirs that I listen to and know who is performing -- like I'm familiar enough with their sound even though I don't know enough of their music. J If we do not say all words, however absurd, we will never say the essential words. -- Josx Saramago http://www.readin.com/blog/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:14:34 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: more fodder On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Jeremy Osner wrote: > > My big music-I-don't-like-as-much-as-I-should entries are all jazz and > classical, and they mainly are because I don't listen to those genres > as much as I would need to to really appreciate them. Same here. I really dislike being uninformed or a dilletante, so I sort of just sock away the information I encounter on those genres for use when I really dive into them "some day". I know enough about them to not come off as a complete moron, but I don't want anyone thinking I fancy myself an authority or anything. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:34:23 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: more fodder Oh, and Springsteen. I know Miles will be disappointed I haven't corrected this yet, but there it is. I know a lot of people equate this with the Dylan "can't get past his voice" thing, but with me, I just don't know. I'm not a huge fan of the vocal style, but I'm not totally against it by any means. And... Radiohead. I don't dislike them, they're just not that interesting to me. But I don't worry about that one as I will always always hear lots of Radiohead in passing since everybody I know loves them, and that's enough for me. Jeremy: > After a little more consideration, here are three rock bands that I > feel bad about not liking enough: The Fall (except for "Live at the > Witch Trials" which is a major part of my consciousness), Dude, believe me, it's a major undertaking. You've gotta really want to go there. Most folks don't. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:07:34 -0700 From: vivien lyon Subject: Re: more fodder On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Brian Huddell wrote: > > The Who after Tommy (and I like Tommy, even though everyone else seems > > to hate it) > > Tommy is one of my favorite albums, just sayin'. > > > Jill, who loves the early Bee Gees > > Me too! Me three! My roommate's band does a cover of the song "Holiday" that is just mind-blowing. I tried to do it at karaoke, but it wasn't very effective. Jill, I second the Bob Dylan, the Shane MacGowan, and the "most jazz," though to be fair, I haven't give "most jazz" much of a chance. Sadly, and even more so because I 'know' several people in the band peripherally, and then EVEN more so because many people whose musical taste I highly regard worship them, I'm not a fan of the Decemberists. But I do like prog and concept albums, so I'm going to give Hazards of Love a listen. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:12:45 -0700 From: vivien lyon Subject: Re: Decemberists new CD On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 1:33 PM, 2fs wrote: > > Gabriel, though, is a good illustration of the problem of taking things too > seriously: there's just no way a frakkin' record should take a decade to > make. Beethoven wrote symphonies in plenty less time than that. Someone > should lock Gabriel and Kate Bush in a room (not necessarily the same one) > and tell them they're not being let out until they've written and recorded > an album. Enough of this "ten years later, here's my masterwork..." > > > Wow, I don't understand this mindset. What difference does it make if an artist takes a long time to create something? And does this opinion extend to other forms of art, like the novel or the visual arts? I mean, I can understand if you listen to an album and wonder why it took ten years to make because it doesn't seem very good to you, but perhaps, even so, it is exactly what that artist meant to produce, and it just took a long long long time for everything to gel to their satisfaction. Vivien ps- I am posting a lot because I am in escape mode from real life right now. Just by way of explanation. Also, I missed some folks on the list. ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V17 #87 *******************************