From: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org (idealcopy-digest) To: idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Subject: idealcopy-digest V3 #144 Reply-To: idealcopy@smoe.org Sender: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk idealcopy-digest Tuesday, May 16 2000 Volume 03 : Number 144 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Death in Vegas [ajwells@att.net] Re: Americans and Marxism ["tube disaster" ] Re: he knows ["tube disaster" ] Re: Million Mom March & Second Amendment Sisters ["tube disaster" ] Re: nihilism rears its ugly head. ["tube disaster" ] RE: Chairs Missing [Joshua ] Re: nihilism rears its ugly head. ["tube disaster" ] Re: Chairs Missing [Joshua ] Re: Leicester City: a clarification ["ian barrett" ] Re: Million Mom March & Second Amendment Sisters [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffr] More on Irving Plaza 5/15 show [Max Schmid ] Re: Americans and Marxism ["Michel Faber" ] Re: Devo Liner Notes [Carl Archer ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 10:25:39 -0400 From: ajwells@att.net Subject: Re: Death in Vegas MarkBursa@aol.com wrote: > > AJ, > > << Yes its a wispy piece of dreck with appearances by every indie guy who > ever wanted to hang around Ms Allison... who looks great in pictures, > but rather... English... in person ;) > >> > > ..even though she is, in fact, Scottish! > > Mark Oh yeah... thats what I meant... Scottish ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 11:44:55 -0700 From: "tube disaster" Subject: Re: Americans and Marxism >> 4. I wasn't having a go at Americans re: my comments on Gang of 4 and >> marxists. I'm just intrigued to know as to why a band that is/was so >> devoutly marxist can generate such a following in the US (which I read as >> having a distinctly individualist culture), whereas they >> failed miserably over here (where there was a significant marxist >> audience). A lot of it is to do with Greil Marcus in my >> opinion but this is purely conjecture as I've never been to the States. >> It seems from our side of the pond that once Marcus starts writing >> complimentary articles about bands they jump ship to your side of the >> pond i.e. Mekons. Oh, and I'm *not* a Marxist either. >> > >I don't know - I always felt that GO4's marxism had more to do with marxist >aesthetics than with marxist politics. That was the main reason that got me >to buy their stuff (actually, following a Greil Marcus article...). But >lyricswise, they were less politic than the Clash, for example. > >giluz Now that you mention it, I think Marcus *did* author the long take-out in Rolling Stone on Gang of 4 & a couple of other bands -- most prominently (at least in my memory), perhaps, the Raincoats -- in mid-'79 or so that shot Entertainment up to the top of my must-buy-or-kill-myself list. Mind you, other than relentlessly championing the Mekons, I don't know that he's done anything of any particular worth in the intervening 2 decades. Also, I wasn't aware that the Go4 "failed miserably" in the UK. I'm not taking exception to that description, merely saying that it's new information to me. Dan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 11:45:41 -0700 From: "tube disaster" Subject: Re: he knows > >is "he knows" (which the boys played marvelously at irving last night) a new >song, or am i temporarily delusional? fill me in, please... >preoccupied, >andy Brand new, judging from earlier posts. Dan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 12:19:33 -0700 From: "tube disaster" Subject: Re: Million Mom March & Second Amendment Sisters >The Million Mom March was a political rally sponsored by the Clinton >administration and the democratic party to demonstrate support for new gun >laws that would erode the 2nd Amendment rights that US citizens have to keep >and bear arms. Are you part of a "well-regulated militia"? Am I? Is the infamous "Mark from Michigan"? Otherwise, I'm aware of no "2nd Amendment rights that US citizens have to keep and bear arms," not that, given my politics, I buy into the veneration of a piece of paper like the Constitution. >Their emotionally compelling, but intellectually vacant stand would have us >think that if firearms were taken away from law abiding citizens, children >would be safer. Well, I have no idea how many kids are killed each year by their parents' guns, either because the kids've found them in a bedroom drawer or sneaked them out of a gun cabinet ... or been shot by said parents after being mistaken for a burglar. Such accounts aren't, however, esp. rare in my newspaper (though of course we're part of the Vast Liberal Conspiracy -- never mind that our editorial page is to the right of Phyllis Schlafly & that its editor is the individual who popularized the name "Slick Willie"), & this is one of the smaller states (although, being Southern & rural, I suspect that gun ownership is somewhat higher than the national overall rate). They have no plan for removing the weapons from those >criminals who actually carry out the criminal deeds. This is pure liberal >fantasy, surpassed only by the infamous 'Visualize World Peace' bumper >sticker. That's true. The police here no longer arrest criminals caught in the act, & they *certainly* don't confiscate their weapons. I had no idea that this was the state of affairs in Chicago, but I gather that it is. Oh, yeah ... the "infamous 'Visualize World Peace' bumper sticker." I wonder how many world wars we can blame it for? Anyway, as with so many issues (things were *so* much simpler when I had Crass to do my thinking for me!), I'm torn on this one. (It comes, I guess, from regarding government as innately evil, but believing that as long as it's an *inevitable* evil, it might as well do as much as possible -- i.e. care for the poor, protect the citizenry from itself, carry out a genuine Welfare State, etc. -- to try to ameliorate its iniquity.) My main problem here, I think, is that the anti-gun-control people too often seem to be outright "gun nuts" (not saying this describes you at all, Ray) whose *general* positions on sociopolitical issues I tend to find abhorrent, even though I might agree with them somewhat on this particular matter, if only because they might be saying some of the right things for all of the wrong reasons ("even a broken clock is right twice a day," after all). To some extent I find myself in the same boat regarding abortion (talk about a divisive issue) -- I find it morally objectionable but am in no way willing to keep company with the Right to Life crowd. And for what it's worth, the divide in this case isn't *strictly* eft/Right -- after all, stepped-up gun laws in California some 33 years ago drew immediate opposition not only from the NRA but also the Black Panthers. Dan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:28:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Joe Turner Subject: nihilism rears its ugly head. Hi! This list was good for info about the tour, but as with any music list that I've seen in the past 20 years, it's degenerated into subjects (both on- and off-topic) that have no end and always show up on every list. For me, with -any- music, it all comes down to two things: No-one can define art, neither the good nor the bad variety. and I may not know art, but I know what I like. Maybe I'm short on patience because I've seen the same arguments, the same dialectic, the same flame wars, the same irrelevant tangents year after year, whether it was on a Kate Bush list, a Spacemen 3 list, a 4AD list, a Wire list, or any specialized list. Once you get past the minutiae of "what's on which rare pressing", it's all pretty much the same endless cycle of conversations about which album is better, "RIYL..." discussions, and then endless debates over the merits of said albums/bands that generally fail to convince *anyone*, because art is personal/undefinable, and taste doesn't listen to reason, and people are, by their nature, stubborn. (Yes, this means that if I had my way, most lists would be nothing but sheer factual data exchange. That's all they should be. Perhaps, 100 years ago, people had the skills to write effective letters, but email is not the medium to discuss anything other than "where are we going for lunch?" and "company meeting at 3pm".) Bye! /joe ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 12:39:21 -0700 From: "tube disaster" Subject: Re: nihilism rears its ugly head. >Hi! > >This list was good for info about the tour, but as with any music list >that I've seen in the past 20 years, People were on the internet 20 years ago? Boy, have IIIIIIIIII been out of the loop ... Dan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 12:56:36 -0700 From: "tube disaster" Subject: Re: Skrewdriver Home's book could've been *much* better, as it's marred considerably at times by over-intellectualizing (I would've appreciated more actual info on the leftist band Crisis, for instance, who eventually sort of mutated into Death in June ... of course, Home's liner notes for the 2CD Crisis reissue from a few years ago are even less useful), but you're right -- it's pretty worthwhile in that regard. Dan >Can recommend two books if you want to read up on this obnoxious bunch and >the neo-nazi skinhead/oi scene: > >Stewart Home, Cranked Up Really High (Codex) >and >a book whose authors names I can't remember here but it's published by >Searchlight (a London based anti fascist org) and it's called White Noise. >If anyone wants to know the authors email me off list and I'll supply the >info after I've been home and checked the authors' names. > >John Roberts > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 15:30:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Joshua Subject: RE: Chairs Missing On Tue, 16 May 2000, webmaster wrote: > >>Anyone know a decent record store on the net somewhere? I'm embarrassed > >>ordering from CDNow or Amazon anyway. > > why's that? <...> > No different that Tower or any other similar. My point exactly. Speaking of which, why can't I get it from you? - -Joshua ___ ___ http://www.swingpad.com (Digital Art and Artisanship) - --- --- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 13:10:06 -0700 From: "tube disaster" Subject: Re: nihilism rears its ugly head. >On Tue, 16 May 2000, tube disaster wrote: > >> >This list was good for info about the tour, but as with any music list >> >that I've seen in the past 20 years, >> >> People were on the internet 20 years ago? Boy, have IIIIIIIIII been out of >> the loop ... > >http://info.isoc.org/guest/zakon/Internet/History/HIT.html > >I mean, I've been using the net for 10.... > >-Joshua Well, I'm aware that the Net per se dates back several decades, but if music lists & such were proliferating in 1980, it's news to me. (Geez, I was still into sf fandom back then ... you'd think someone in *that* of all subcultures would've said something.) On a related note, I read somewhere within the last month that only 5 or 6 years ago (may've been '93, but certainly no earlier than that) there were something like 50 webpages in existence, whereas now of course probably that many (& quite possibly far more) go on-line every day. I have no idea if that's accurate or not, of course. Dan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 13:11:25 -0700 From: "tube disaster" Subject: Re: Chairs Missing >On Tue, 16 May 2000, webmaster wrote: > >> >>Anyone know a decent record store on the net somewhere? I'm embarrassed >> >>ordering from CDNow or Amazon anyway. >> >> why's that? <...> >> No different that Tower or any other similar. > >My point exactly. > >Speaking of which, why can't I get it from you? I guess he's selfishly keeping it for himself. I'm the same way, actually. Dan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 15:57:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Joshua Subject: Re: Chairs Missing On Tue, 16 May 2000, tube disaster wrote: > >On Tue, 16 May 2000, webmaster wrote: > > > >> >>Anyone know a decent record store on the net somewhere? I'm > embarrassed > >> >>ordering from CDNow or Amazon anyway. > >> > >> why's that? <...> > >> No different that Tower or any other similar. > > > >My point exactly. > > > >Speaking of which, why can't I get it from you? > > > I guess he's selfishly keeping it for himself. I'm the same way, actually. I used to get the WMO catalogue in the mail, and it had everything in it, but I was young and broke. And now I'm less young and not broke and I cant find the album I couldn't avoid before. - -Joshua ___ ___ http://www.swingpad.com (Digital Art and Artisanship) - --- --- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 21:03:29 +0100 From: "ian barrett" Subject: Re: Leicester City: a clarification Before this football diversion gets stamped out, I feel a need to quickly nail my own Leeds Utd colours to the mast. Best thing that could've happened to Leeds and Leicester was the Leicester board vetoing the Leeds move for O'Neill (with all due respect). For the record , Leicester were EXTREMELY fortunate to put Leeds out of the League Cup on both occassions. Good luck to Arsenal against Gala. Not that I blame anybody but those directly responsible for what happened in Turkey and subsequently, but it would be a little too much to stomach if Galatasaray won! Here's to Dacourt and the other record breaking signing (thinks; Fowler? Flo?) Ian - ----- Original Message ----- From: Stuart Fairbrother To: ; Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 9:07 AM Subject: RE: Leicester City: a clarification > There are at least two Leicester City season ticket holders on this list. I > am one. In the last four seasons Leicester are one of only 5 teams to finish > in the top ten in each season, 2 League Cup wins, 1 runner-up, and playing > European football for the 2nd season in three. Even the London based media > had started to recognise that we have a talented and hardworking team and of > course the best manager in the country, yet it seems that there are still > blinkered individuals who have to follow the now clichéd boring boring > Leicester tag. Was it being workmanlike and dour that meant Leicester > knocked Leeds out of the League Cup two seasons running and put paid to the > championship hopes by beating them convincingly and starting the rot that > set in thereafter. No, it was being the better side. That said - David > O'Leary, top man, and I'm glad Leeds got third place (no little thanks to a > certain dour performance by Leicester at Anfield two weeks ago eh?). And all > the best to Arsenal in Copenhagen on Wednesday, lister Paul Rabjohn is over > there supporting the Gooners. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: MarkBursa@aol.com [mailto:MarkBursa@aol.com] > Sent: 16 May 2000 00:35 > To: idealcopy@smoe.org > Subject: Leicester City: a clarification > > > > I'd just like to make it clear that I am in no way a Leicester fan - but I > quite admire their qualities of over-achievement - improbable cup wins > through workmanlike, dour performances. It's a bit like, say, an Inspiral > Carpets roadie making a million selling album. Unlikley but...er...what's > that you say???? > > Mark > > (Leeds, to answer the obvious question) > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 16:01:33 -0400 From: Max Schmid Subject: Million Mom March & Second Amendment Sisters At 01:11 PM 5/16/2000 -0500, "Ciscon, Ray" wrote: >Giluz wrote: >What was the million mom march about? >The Million Mom March was a political rally sponsored by the Clinton >administration and the democratic party to demonstrate support for new gun >laws that would erode the 2nd Amendment rights that US citizens have to keep >and bear arms. The rally was organized by the sister of one of Hillary >Clinton's best friends. Ray, one word of advice - less Limbaugh, more Gang of Four. Or is it Drudge? Where do you come up with this stuff? The rally was organized by women who have lost loved ones to gun violence. >Their emotionally compelling, but intellectually vacant stand would have us >think that if firearms were taken away from law abiding citizens, children >would be safer. This is no liberal fantasy, but hard cold fact. The kids who killed or were killed while playing with their parents pistols are testimony to that fact. >From: Miles Goosens >Subject: FW: FW: Americans and Marxism > >I'm sending this post on to the list, despite its size, in order to let Ray >defend his good name. I tend to play listcop more so with accessibility >issues (quoting, html content, etc.) than with content issues, as I enjoy a >good freewheeling discussion as much as the next guy -- probably more so >than the next guy, actually. But might I suggest the time has come to >continue this discussion off-list, as per Ray's fourth paragraph. I tend to agree that musical taste can be debated, and politics are poison in this sort of forum. But from my perspective, Ray is parroting right wing rot, and other points of view deserve to be heard before shutting down the discussion. I don't expect anyone to change his or her opinion, but if we are going to be exposed to one set of values, I think people with different values should not be shut out of the discussion. From Ray: >The major influences on my moral, ethical, and political stances have been >what I've read, what I've seen, and what I've experienced. As you get older, may you read more, see more, and experience more. >Just because the media elites and Hollywood stars tell you that anti-communists >were bad, you must believe them. Do a little thinking for yourself... you'll >find that much of what the media elites tell you is a complete lie. And just because fundamentalist preachers and millionaire talk-show hosts tell you Clinton is the Devil, you might want to question that too. News flash - they are also among the media elite! Between the Family Radio Network, or whatever that church-sponsored outfit is called, and dear old Rush on just about every station you turn to if you drive ten miles out of any metropolitan center in the USA, I'd say there's more than enough "balance" in the media, so much so that a center network like NPR is considered "liberal" (as in liberal Democrat) in this country, and liberal is now a smear word worse than "Commie" to a lot of Americans. Outside of the Pacifica network (where I work, and proudly so, at least in the context of it's original mission) you will hear nothing from the left of center, except maybe in music like Rage Against the Machine, KMFDM, Gang of Four et al (to bring it back to music!) How can you form opinions about issues when you aren't exposed to them? >Getting back to Go4, I never saw the appeal in any of their music... but >I'm glad that Dave Allen left the band to form Shriekback... They have a >definite appeal for me! Here, Ray, we can bond - Shreikback is in my top 5, along with Wire and the Beatles. I'll have to think about the others are, maybe the Cab Calloway Orchestra circa 1931, but that's also for another list. Peace (no really!) ((except for those guy who charged to the mosh pit the minute Wire started, punching me in the back and spilling beer all over me and others - I should have kicked him harder! Maybe if I'd had a gun...)) Max Schmid - Producer - WBAI, NYC 99.5 FM NOW WEBCASTING! http://www.porus.com/domains/wbai/wbai.ram GOLDEN AGE OF RADIO Sunday 7:30 PM and MASS BACKWARDS Tuesday 3:30 AM Home Page: http://www.oldtimeradio.com Jean Shepherd Catalog: http://www.advanix.net/~jsadur/shepcat.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 16:09:31 EDT From: "stephen graziano" Subject: Re: Million Mom March & Second Amendment Sisters >From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey >To: Grand Mute Proof >Subject: Re: Million Mom March & Second Amendment Sisters >Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 12:13:37 -0500 (CDT) >> >I'll be brief: the 2d Amendment begins "A well-regulated militia being >necessary to the security of a free state..." The second and third words >clearly connote *regulation* - not the unrestricted ownership of every >kind of weapon by anyone. > >Yes, and it continues "the right of the people to bear and possess arms >shall not be impeded. How do you reconcile any regulatory mesure with not >impeding a "right" ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 13:15:28 -0700 From: Brian Barnett Subject: Re: Chairs Missing You may whant to try this one. http://gemm.com/index.cgi http://www.itn.is/~olijoni/ tube disaster wrote: > >On Tue, 16 May 2000, webmaster wrote: > > > >> >>Anyone know a decent record store on the net somewhere? I'm > embarrassed > >> >>ordering from CDNow or Amazon anyway. > >> > >> why's that? <...> > >> No different that Tower or any other similar. > > > >My point exactly. > > > >Speaking of which, why can't I get it from you? > > I guess he's selfishly keeping it for himself. I'm the same way, actually. > > Dan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 15:22:54 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: Million Mom March & Second Amendment Sisters On Tue, 16 May 2000, stephen graziano wrote: > >From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey > >> > >I'll be brief: the 2d Amendment begins "A well-regulated militia being > >necessary to the security of a free state..." The second and third words > >clearly connote *regulation* - not the unrestricted ownership of every > >kind of weapon by anyone. > > > >Yes, and it continues "the right of the people to bear and possess arms > >shall not be impeded. How do you reconcile any regulatory mesure with not > >impeding a "right" Because: a) the second clause is grammatically subordinate to the first: that is, the first clause sets conditions under which the second clause can be true; and b) "the people" does not mean "each individual person"; in context, it refers to the composition of the "well regulated militia" mentioned in the first clause. Another question: how do you reconcile "not be impeded" with "well regulated"? - other than in the manner I've just suggested? - --Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/reviews.html ::When the only tool you have is an interociter, you tend to treat ::everything as if it were a fourth-order nanodimensional sub-quantum ::temporo-spatial anomaly. __Crow T. Maslow__ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 16:57:26 -0400 From: Max Schmid Subject: More on Irving Plaza 5/15 show >From: "giluz" >Subject: RE: Wire, Irving Plaza 5/15/2000 > > > Who was that extra guitarist who got up with them during "Drill"? > > Tom > >I've heard Max's radio show today via the internet, and he said that the >crowd was shouting so loud after 12xu that he didn't get the name of that >guitarist either. Anyway, I listened to the RFH CD with RealAudio's real >crappy quality, which made it sound a bit like Document & Eyewitness, which >was nice. And next week, forty versions of The Internationale! Tune in. As to the mystery guitar player, I believe I heard the name Poss, who I read here was in The Band of Susans and has gigged recently with Bruce Gilbert, so it would make sense. I guess someone will confirm it eventually. As to the demeanor of the band, I wonder if they've been reading some of the feedback. Colin seemed to engage the crowd at times, if slyly. At the NY show, the crowd did indeed shout "that's the lowdown" in the gaps, with Colin echoing back. He did his duck waddle swimming thing during 12XU. He also mentioned the name of the new song after they did it, but it seems like any time anyone spoke between songs, it was very difficult to hear. At the end of the show, Graham, who was the last to leave the stage, tried to say something (thank you, maybe?), but the mike was off and he walked off looking annoyed. He wore a black shirt and jacket, with a red flower in the lapel, which he threw into the crowd during the Drill. When he did his backing vocals, he seemed quite earnest and engaged with the audience, in a strange way. (Of course I could be reading a whole lot into it). Bruce, as always, was turned 3/4 to the back facing Gotobed. Robert looked positively blissful, eyes closed for the whole show, and as someone said earlier, like a Hari Krishna (the shaved head helped that look). The playing overall was crisp. My only criticism of the material (other than there being so little of it) is that I don't think "Boiling Boy" (one of my favorites) comes of well in this arrangement. On the recordings it kind of swirls around, with different elements coming and going and coming back. That dreamy aspect just isn't there in the live version, and it sounded rather flat. The hour flew by, and any hope of last-show-of-tour bonus tunes was dashed immediately when the lights came up and the screen came down. As to the opening acts, I missed DJ Otefsu [Foetus], so I can't comment. I caught the pair of dial twiddlers - twaddle. Mildy amusing in it's own way and not too long, but for this sort of amusement I'd like a chair. I have a toy sound effects device somewhere that is about 15 years old - it had three knobs, volume, oscillation, and (pitch?), and if i hooked it up to big enough amps, I could open for Wire too. Like sitting in a studio and creating feedback echoes by talkingalkingalkingalking, probably more fun for those doing it than for listeners. Maybe this should have been an audience participation stunt! No doubt there were those who loved it. I see in last week's Voice they are called Pan Sonic, and described as ferociously chilly eloctro-minimalists - whatever. I would have preferred the mummy band. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 22:42:37 +0100 From: "Michel Faber" Subject: Re: Americans and Marxism michelfaber@ablach.freeserve.co.uk using "From" header Sender: owner-idealcopy@smoe.org Precedence: bulk Dear John, Thanks for your email. The references to Tube Disaster's (evidently very recent) contributions to the debate you say may "run and run" left me a bit puzzled, as I unsubscribed from idealcopy on the 13th (see below) and have missed whatever anyone might have had to say on the subject of Americans and Marxism since then. As for your points: >I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong in enjoying music >for music's sake - if such a thing is possible (see your point from >Eno). e.g. I don't just listen to Crass (like Tube Disaster 8-) ) >everyone needs something to relax to for christ sakes. 'Relaxation' is a strange and complex concept. At first glance, it would seem obvious that there's self-evidently hectic music (like Crass) and self-evidently relaxing music (like ambient). But nothing's self-evident when you look more closely. Relaxation is linked with feeling good about the universe, and if a certain piece of music is highly offensive to us, it will fail to relax us no matter how gentle it may be, decibel-wise or melody-wise - Conversely, if we love a certain piece of music enough, we will find it relaxing no matter how discordant or disturbing someone else might find it. For example, I get extremely irritable when I hear more than a few seconds of commercial country music or soft jazz muzak like Kenny G, despite its aim to put me at my ease; conversely I can write my novels quite happily to a steady background of Gilbert & Lewis or Miles Davis, despite some sounds that would drive other listeners crazy. >I think that there is a huge problem in writing off any audience in >terms of 'consumer surrender'. As you say, it's only history that >enables us to perceive any situation wherein there is a consumer >and a producer. >There is a lot of academic research in this field. Particularly >regarding how consumption is regarded as a feminine/passive >activity. I'd be intrigued to read this research. Can you give me the names of the relevant text(s)? In particular I would love to see how someone manages to defend the idea of consumption as a feminine/passive activity, given how, in my experience, there is a stronger (if just as over-simplistic) case to be made for men tending to value THINGS and women tending to value EXPERIENCES. >Two questions (objective/subjective): how do you explain a young >girl's relationship to the Spice Girls? and, what does anyone here's >friends think of the fact that they spend their time reading and >writing emails to people they've never met in their lives about a >band that hadn't made a record in years? I wouldn't imagine >anyone here's views on the Spice Girls relationship with their fans >is complimentary; and I daresay that most people outside of this list >think we're a little bit sad. 8-) I would explain a young girl's relationship to the Spice Girls in the following terms: when a young girl approaches adolescence she is likely to hanker after role models who present an image of her future as some sort of constant party brimming with exciting and implicitly sexy experiences. If she's lucky, the pop groups who happen to be around when she reaches this crucial age will embody those qualities PLUS be interesting musically (in a way that will lead her through interesting musical doors when she's ready to walk through them). If she's unlucky, the pop groups who happen to be around will embody those qualities AND NOTHING ELSE. Teenage girls in the early sixties who wet their knickers over the Beatles had about as much interest in the Beatles as musicians, as Spice Girls fans have in the elusive talents of the Spice Girls. Let's face it, they went nuts because they were of an age when they needed to go nuts, and the Beatles were there - they were cute, had adorable haircuts, funny accents, they cracked jokes, smiled a lot and jumped around, etc etc. They were Spice Lads. Fortunately for some of those screaming fans, these four moptops had ambitions to change the face of popular music - and they did. Within a few years, as their fans grew a little older and were ready (some of them) for more complex things, the Beatles offered to take them on a musical journey that included Stockhausen, Indian classical music, the recording-studio-as-instrument, tape loops, electronic collage, etc. It remains to be seen what the likes of the Spice Girls and Billie are going to offer their young fans as they grow out of the initial blush of pre-adolescence. Deplorably little, I suspect. As for the Wire listmembers being judged as 'sad' by their friends, it all depends what people's reasons for being involved are. If people are interested in discussing issues that have wider relevance than the love of a particular LP made in 1977, I don't see anything sad about it. If people are using the forum to continually remind themselves and others how cool they are for liking the "right" music and detesting the "wrong" music, then yes, it's sad. >I wasn't having a go at Americans re: my comments on Gang of 4 >and marxists. I'm just intrigued to know as to why a band that >is/was so devoutly marxist can generate such a following in the US >(which I read as having a distinctly individualist culture), whereas >they failed miserably over here (where there was a significant >marxist audience). Gang of 4's Hugo Burnham felt that the Americans understood one vital thing about the band that the British failed to appreciate: that they "kicked ass" and were "bloody good live". The Go4 had their ideological side, but on the musical front they'd always had a burning ambition to make a cripplingly loud and wonderful noise, and the Americans responded to that with enthusiasm. John, thanks again for emailing me. I'm happy to receive other posts from you, but if they're "further instalments" in debates generated on idealcopy, you'll need to reproduce the relevant posts into yours for me to really know what you're talking about. Best wishes, Michel _______________________________________________________ From: "Michel Faber" To: wireadmin@mindspring.com Date sent: Sat, 13 May 2000 09:59:21 +0100 Subject: au revoir Copies to: idealcopy@smoe.org Dear Miles, In recent weeks, I've been receiving from fifty to a hundred idealcopy emails a day. Just reading them takes an age, let alone when I'm motivated to write one of my characteristic essays in reply. Regrettably, I just don't have the time just now, as I have a publishing deadline for my next novel. Also, I dread the prospect of going away for a week and coming back to find five hundred emails banked up. So, please unsubscribe me from the list. My best wishes to all the Wire fans out there. Yes, all of you - the avant-garde European soulmates and the Cheap Trick-lovin' Yanks who just wanna raahhk, the intense discussers of Wire's ideological ethos and the desperate searchers after T-shirts, the balding old men who saw Wire in 1977 and the perky young girls who discovered Wire on an internet video the day before yesterday... Au revoir, all. Michel Faber ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 17:55:10 -0500 From: george.m.hook@ac.com Subject: Devo Liner Notes Let the discussion begin! Excerpts from liner notes booklet of the new (and excellent) Devo anthology from Rhino: "Pioneers Who Got Scalped" An audacious rant, to be sure. Devo always looked forward and outward with a clear-eyed vision that even the finest of their contemporaries either avoided or were simply incapable of. Think about it for a moment: Who else could touch them? The Sex Pistols choked on their own curdled nihilism. Patti Smith and Television were more interested in aping French poets from the 1920s. Talking Heads, Pere Ubu, and Wire produced art for art-school's sake. The Clash indulged themselves in Bolshevik nostalgia and messianic arena-rock fantasy. Joy Division's claustrophobic despair was a one-way interior monologue. Only Devo had the courage to document the de-evolving world around them without recourse to sentiment or nostalgia, fearlessly looking into the future with which they were on a collision course. Elsewhere, "Freedom Of Choice" presents a fatalistic depiction of the triumph of complacency over free will--"Freedom of choice is what you got/Freedom from choice is what you want"--a critique of Western capitalism far more stinging than anything agit-rockers like Gang Of Four or The Clash ever managed to devise. True to their work ethic, a flood of activity followed the release of Q: Are We Not Men? A: We Are Devo! in the fall of 1978. A landmark appearance on Saturday Night Live--including superb performances of "Satisfaction" and "Jocko Homo" as well as film footage of Booji Boy and General Boy--exposed the truth about de-evolution to millions of unsuspecting viewers and helped propel the album onto the charts. The centerpiece of New Traditionalists, however, is "Beautiful World," the most oddly poignant song Devo ever recorded. A seemingly carefree catalog of the joys and pleasures of the world around us, it's brought up short at the end by Mark Mothersbaugh's simple declaration that "it's not for me." The result is as stark and primal a declaration of alienation as anything Kurt Cobain ever penned. Though they made the point even more explicitly nine years later by titling a song "Devo Has Feelings Too," the high cost of de-evolution was never more evident than in the guileless honesty of "Beautiful World." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 19:06:28 -0400 From: Carl Archer Subject: Re: More on Irving Plaza 5/15 show They were talentless. I did better stuff when I was 14 and bored with an organ, a flanger pedal, a digital delay, and a boombox. For those non-musicians on this list: Music like that is only okay if there is show involved. They did not have any special skill, and the only good thing is that they weren't pretending to play while a DAT tape played (ahem Crystal Method). Those two guys looked liked they just closed the GAP at the local mall and were counting out the register before they locked up. Bore-Ring! Carl > From: Max Schmid > Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 16:57:26 -0400 > To: idealcopy@smoe.org > Subject: More on Irving Plaza 5/15 show > > I > caught the pair of dial twiddlers - twaddle. Mildy amusing in it's own way > and not too long, but for this sort of amusement I'd like a chair. I have > a toy sound effects device somewhere that is about 15 years old - it had > three knobs, volume, oscillation, and (pitch?), and if i hooked it up to > big enough amps, I could open for Wire too. Like sitting in a studio and > creating feedback echoes by talkingalkingalkingalking, probably more fun > for those doing it than for listeners. Maybe this should have been an > audience participation stunt! No doubt there were those who loved it. I > see in last week's Voice they are called Pan Sonic, and described as > ferociously chilly eloctro-minimalists - whatever. I would have preferred > the mummy band. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 19:08:40 -0400 From: Carl Archer Subject: Re: Devo Liner Notes "Is it on? Is it off? Is it on? Reply!" "Race...Of...Doom!" Right to the point. - -Carl > From: george.m.hook@ac.com > Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 17:55:10 -0500 > To: idealcopy@smoe.org > Cc: idealcopy@smoe.org > Subject: Devo Liner Notes > > Let the discussion begin! Excerpts from liner notes booklet of the new > (and excellent) Devo anthology from Rhino: "Pioneers Who Got Scalped" An > audacious rant, to be sure. > > Devo always looked forward and outward with a clear-eyed vision that even > the finest of their contemporaries either avoided or were simply incapable > of. Think about it for a moment: Who else could touch them? The Sex Pistols > choked on their own curdled nihilism. Patti Smith and Television were more > interested in aping French poets from the 1920s. Talking Heads, Pere Ubu, > and Wire produced art for art-school's sake. The Clash indulged themselves > in Bolshevik nostalgia and messianic arena-rock fantasy. Joy Division's > claustrophobic despair was a one-way interior monologue. Only Devo had the > courage to document the de-evolving world around them without recourse to > sentiment or nostalgia, fearlessly looking into the future with which they > were on a collision course. > > Elsewhere, "Freedom Of Choice" presents a fatalistic depiction of the > triumph of complacency over free will--"Freedom of choice is what you > got/Freedom from choice is what you want"--a critique of Western capitalism > far more stinging than anything agit-rockers like Gang Of Four or The Clash > ever managed to devise. > > True to their work ethic, a flood of activity followed the release of Q: > Are We Not Men? A: We Are Devo! in the fall of 1978. A landmark appearance > on Saturday Night Live--including superb performances of "Satisfaction" and > "Jocko Homo" as well as film footage of Booji Boy and General Boy--exposed > the truth about de-evolution to millions of unsuspecting viewers and helped > propel the album onto the charts. > > The centerpiece of New Traditionalists, however, is "Beautiful World," > the most oddly poignant song Devo ever recorded. A seemingly carefree catalog > of the joys and pleasures of the world around us, it's brought up short at the > end > by Mark Mothersbaugh's simple declaration that "it's not for me." > The result is as stark and primal a declaration of alienation > as anything Kurt Cobain ever penned. > Though they made the point even more explicitly nine years later by titling a > song > "Devo Has Feelings Too," the high cost of de-evolution was never more evident > than > in the guileless honesty of "Beautiful World." > ------------------------------ End of idealcopy-digest V3 #144 *******************************