From: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org (idealcopy-digest) To: idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Subject: idealcopy-digest V4 #34 Reply-To: idealcopy@smoe.org Sender: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk idealcopy-digest Thursday, February 1 2001 Volume 04 : Number 034 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [idealcopy] (off topic?)Punk [giluz ] FW: [idealcopy] Yoko Ono [giluz ] Re: [idealcopy] Re: idealcopy-digest V4 #32 [giluz ] Re: [idealcopy] Yoko Ono [giluz ] Re: [idealcopy] (off topic?)Punk [PaulRabjohn@aol.com] Re: Fw: [idealcopy] OT: worst bass player [PaulRabjohn@aol.com] [idealcopy] Fw: for the list ["squonk" ] RE: [idealcopy] (off topic?)Punk ["giluz" ] [idealcopy] Recommendation - Kids Indestructible ["giluz" Subject: [idealcopy] (off topic?)Punk > Still - if someone does get into punk rock in 2001 > then it just goes to show how subjective > dissillusionment and boredom is. I don't have a > problem with it. I'd rather youngsters got interested > in punk rock than say Marilyn Manson. What is a bit > worrying here tho is the nostalgic element that > inevitablty creeps in, and also with my own (and I > suspect other listers') relation to punk rock. It's > what makes me hate the three piece Husker Du rip offs > that seem to fall under the banner of punk rock these > days: what precisely is punk rock about churning out > formulaic rock music? Thus it's also the thing that > reminds me that punk rock was/is about being anti the > status quo and being critical. Which in turn makes me > both question and accept the mythological status > accorded punk rock. Which, to bring us on topic, is > probably why I like Wire so much: for me they court > this paradox too. I think people on this list have to accept the fact that nowadays, and, actually, in the last 10 years or so since Nirvana, Punk is mainstream, and that's why young people are so interested in the old artists (especially since the new punk artists are so bad). Maybe the youngsters understand the contradiction of being a mainstream artist playing punk today and still claiming punk's anti-establishment ideology, so they go to the old stuff when the ideology had a sound basis. Nostalgia and the myth making is just natural when you're dwelling back on stuff that was written and performed before you could walk. People that were born in the late 60's-early 70's, like myself, looked at 60's and early 70's music the same way. But contrary to the 80's, where alternative music was heavily influenced by the 60's and 70's, there's almost nothing really alternative being done in guitar music today. The 80\s interest in the 60's was justified by the fact that this music was a direct influence on new things being done in the alternative "field". Almost nothing new has been done in guitar music in the last 10 years (even in post-rock, a style that I quite like ideologically, most bands are crap). Maybe it's an American thing, I don't know - I've heard that electronic music is not big in the States as it is in Europe, but electronics really took the place of punk ideology, or I'd rather call it alternative ideology, based on the 80's post-punk alternative scene. As for Wire, you're right about the paradox thing. They did reform now and returned to their punk roots and still manage to sound contemporary and alternative - I don't really understand how they manage to do it (neither do they, I suspect) I haven't seen too many young people at the RFH gig last year, though. > //////// nirvana were still great though. i guess if they were the new > pistols then stone temple pilots were the new eater.p Nirvana were OK, but not much more than that. It's no big deal to be twenty years too late (more like 13 years, actually), and their emergence as superstars was the final straw that co-opted punk completely into the mainstream. giluz ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:27:09 +0200 From: giluz Subject: FW: [idealcopy] Yoko Ono - ---------- From: giluz Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:26:09 +0200 To: Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Yoko Ono > //// my understanding was that big big efforts were made to keep their drug > habits secret in 67/68 (i.e well before "cold turkey") and that they were > both in it together. and even now , they made a big point of airbrushing > drugs out of the anthology videos. which were not "forthright" at all on the > subject. Yeah, it was quite pathetic watching Paul trying to make excuses as to how the drug scene was so naive and different in those days. I might consider grass and LSD as conforming to that, but there's nothing innocent about Heroin and there never was. You also have to remember the Beatles were THE mainstream artists of their times, and even though they were quite adventurous musically, they were very careful about their public statements (except for John's hilarious joke about Jesus, but that was just misunderstood British humour). And don't forget that they were also arrested for using drugs at least once, so I quite understand why they kept it quiet. giluz ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:30:07 +0200 From: giluz Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Re: idealcopy-digest V4 #32 on 31/1/01 22:27, Michael Flaherty at mflaher3@triton.cc.il.us wrote: > George was (also?) on the Paul-bashing "How Do You Sleep?" And Ringo as well. giluz ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:56:33 +0200 From: giluz Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Yoko Ono on 31/1/01 23:48, PaulRabjohn@aol.com at PaulRabjohn@aol.com wrote: > i think EMI pulled a lot of strings on behalf of the mega millions they were > earning the government in tax. there are all sorts of stories of blind eyes > being turned to their (and the stones) naughtiness............. I think all the record companies turned a blind eye at their artists in the 60's. They still do it now, the only difference is that now the record executives take drugs as well. giluz ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:56:26 EST From: PaulRabjohn@aol.com Subject: Re: [idealcopy] (off topic?)Punk nowadays, and, actually, in the last 10 years or so since Nirvana, Punk is mainstream, and that's why young people are so interested in the old artists (especially since the new punk artists are so bad). ////// you know to me punk is an attitude , a state of mind , not a way of playing the guitar. so i don't see limp bizkit/green day/whoever as punk bands at all. just boring old rock bands going thru the motions. but then maybe i'm an old fart :-) Nirvana were OK, but not much more than that. It's no big deal to be twenty years too late (more like 13 years, actually), and their emergence as superstars was the final straw that co-opted punk completely into the mainstream. /////// nah , they were brilliant. not their fault they were the age they were. what more could they have done? they opened the door (like the pistols did here). wasn't their fault not much of any interest walked thru it.p ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-xa05.mx.aol.com (rly-xa05.mail.aol.com [172.20.105.74]) by air-xa05.mail.aol.com (v77.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:34:27 -0500 Received: from smoe.org (jane.smoe.org [216.200.102.14]) by rly-xa05.mx.aol.com (v77.27) with ESMTP; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:34:05 -0500 Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by smoe.org (8.8.7/8.8.7/listq-jane) with SMTP id QAA15976; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:19:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by smoe.org (bulk_mailer v1.10); Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:19:33 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by smoe.org (8.8.7/8.8.7/listq-jane) id QAA15964 for idealcopy-outgoing; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:19:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from nettalk1.netalk-inc.com (nettalk1.nettalk-inc.com [216.33.197.54] (may be forged)) by smoe.org (8.8.7/8.8.7/daemon-mode-jane) with ESMTP id QAA15958 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:19:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from [62.0.70.111] (62.0.70.111) by nettalk1.netalk-inc.com (Worldmail 1.3.167); 31 Jan 2001 16:07:06 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:19:16 +0200 Subject: [idealcopy] (off topic?)Punk From: giluz To: John Roberts , Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20010131181312.22926.qmail@web113.yahoomail.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-idealcopy@smoe.org Precedence: bulk ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 17:02:29 EST From: PaulRabjohn@aol.com Subject: Re: Fw: [idealcopy] OT: worst bass player Hello? A Tonic for the Troops is an excellent album. The Rats were generally good. The steaming pile of shite still applies to his solo career however. ////// sorry to diagree but IMO they were a dire pub rock act with no redeeming features. geldof was a piss-poor jagger impersonator. together with toyah and hazel o'connor he made a holy trinity of duff power pop rubbish. compared to what else was going on at the time they were atrocious. you could say i wasn't a fan :-) p -- Jon ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:07:39 -0600 From: "squonk" Subject: [idealcopy] Fw: for the list From: "charles" To: "dMc" > ibm is in stock; look under the MISC tab. it's bruce gilbert / pan sonic 12" > + 7" on mego > "...more like gates of delirium" - bruce gilbert > > mp3 edit is at http://216.36.194.191/knots/ibm.mp3 > dont forget http://216.36.194.191/knots/dugga.mp3 > > > thanks charles ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 10:40:24 +0200 From: "giluz" Subject: RE: [idealcopy] (off topic?)Punk > ////// you know to me punk is an attitude , a state of mind , not > a way of > playing the guitar. so i don't see limp bizkit/green day/whoever as punk > bands at all. just boring old rock bands going thru the motions. but then > maybe i'm an old fart :-) You're absolutely right - not about being a fart, about punk as an attitude. That's what I mean when I refer to punk as ideology. This has nothing to so with the musical content, though, and could be traced back to 50's rockabilly. That's why all those new bands are so crap, 'cause they seem to think that the ideology is the music, while the music has been a mainstream cliche for years now. This is also what I meant when I said that electronics took over from punk/indie as far as ideology goes. giluz ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 11:32:33 +0200 From: "giluz" Subject: [idealcopy] Recommendation - Kids Indestructible This is ideal copier Tim Robinson's band. Bought it from mp3.com and it's really good. There are a few free mp3's on their mp3.com site (www.mp3.com/kidsindestructible). Check it out. giluz ------------------------------ End of idealcopy-digest V4 #34 ******************************