From: owner-mad-mission-digest@smoe.org (mad-mission-digest) To: mad-mission-digest@smoe.org Subject: mad-mission-digest V6 #273 Reply-To: mad-mission@smoe.org Sender: owner-mad-mission-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-mad-mission-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk * If you ever wish to unsubscribe, send an email to * mad-mission-digest-request@smoe.org * with ONLY the word unsubscribe in the body of the email * . * For the latest information on Patty's tour dates, go to: * http://www.pattygriffin.net/PattyInConcert.html * OR * go to http://www.atorecords.com * . * PLEASE :) when you reply to this digest to send a post TO the list, * change the subject to reflect what your post is about. A subject * of Re: mad-mission-digest V6 #___ gives readers no clue * as to what your message is about. mad-mission-digest Saturday, July 27 2002 Volume 06 : Number 273 Today's Subjects: ----------------- MM: Re: LWG [DM13DM@aol.com] Re: MM: Re: me & Marah @ the Stone Pony ["Rodney M. Norton" ] MM: RE: Re: new Paty cuts on Chicks album ["Willms, Gregory J." ] Re: MM: Re: new Paty cuts on Chicks album [satrngrl ] Re: MM: Re: new Paty cuts on Chicks album ["dana howery" > Only $7.32!!! http://www.alldirect.com/music/msearch.asp?cartID=18473492523020319&srchType=m usicArtist&srchString=patty+griffin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 08:45:25 -0400 From: "Rodney M. Norton" Subject: Re: MM: Re: me & Marah @ the Stone Pony I must agree with the assessment of the new Marah CD. Simply put it is way over produced. I had read that they were not going to be using the banjo, dobro, etc on this new stuff. I like a few of the songs on the new one but it is nothing like the Marah of the past few efforts. I can't understand why a band who is just starting to really take off would change the sound that has won them critical praise and legions of fans. Hopefully they'll chalk this up as an experiment and get back to what they do best. >That is friggin' awseome. I love Marah's first two >albums, and hate the new one so far, but would drop >everything to see them anywhere, much less the Stone >Pony. > >My favorite Stone Pony story is when Paul Westerberg >was playing a solo show there and asked if there were >any locals around. When everyone cheered he called >them a bunch of fucking jerks. > >Congratulations Darcie, it looks like things are >happening for you. > >As an aside, are there any Marah fans on this list? I >think Kids in Philly is one of the best albums of 2000, >and Let's Cut the Crap is even better, but I cannot get >into the new one. Maybe I would like it if I were not >comparing it to two great albums. Honestly though, I >think that if I heard this, not knowing it was Marah, I >would laugh at it. I've already discussed the album ad >naseum on another list, but thought I'd check the >waters over here. > >Sean >np: Travis- Good Feeling > >myself and my >> band are opening for Marah at the Stone Pony in Asbury >> Park this Sunday. > >________________________________________________ >PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart. >http://www.peoplepc.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 07:06:48 -0700 (PDT) From: satrngrl Subject: MM: Re: new Paty cuts on Chicks album "Thomas H. Kercheval" wrote: Is it still called "Truth #2" on the DC album? I absolutely love the song, but always thought that was a terrible title. *** Really? I LOVE that title. It fits so well with the song... there's a theme of mistrust in the song , and the title picks up on that. In life, there's more than 1 version of "the truth", and thus, we have Truth #2 :) Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better http://health.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 10:14:55 -0400 From: "Willms, Gregory J." Subject: MM: RE: Re: new Paty cuts on Chicks album >In life, there's more than 1 version of "the truth", and thus, we have >Truth #2... There's never more than one version of the truth. If there are multiple versions of the same situation, only one of them is the truth. I don't believe this is an issue that can afford to have a gray area. It's either fact or fiction... "based on fact" doesn't cut it. The fact that it's "based" on something makes it fiction. Sorry, that statement really just struck a nerve. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 09:16:27 -0500 From: "dana howery" Subject: Re: MM: Re: new Paty cuts on Chicks album i thought it was called truth #2 because patty has a song called truth #1. >From: satrngrl >To: mad-mission@smoe.org >Subject: MM: Re: new Paty cuts on Chicks album >Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 07:06:48 -0700 (PDT) > >"Thomas H. Kercheval" wrote: >Is it still called "Truth #2" on the DC album? I >absolutely love the >song, >but always thought that was a terrible title. >*** > >Really? I LOVE that title. It fits so well with the >song... there's a theme of mistrust in the song , and >the title picks up on that. In life, there's more >than 1 version of "the truth", and thus, we have Truth >#2 > >:) >Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better >http://health.yahoo.com _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 09:25:32 -0500 From: "dana howery" Subject: Re: MM: RE: Re: new Paty cuts on Chicks album it's often very hard to tell what the "truth" actually is. many people will tell you something is the truth, but it is usually just their opinion. there is a huge gray area; that's why there is so much conflict in the world. >From: "Willms, Gregory J." >To: "'satrngrl'" , mad-mission@smoe.org >Subject: MM: RE: Re: new Paty cuts on Chicks album >Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 10:14:55 -0400 > > >In life, there's more than 1 version of "the truth", and thus, we have > >Truth #2... > >There's never more than one version of the truth. If there are multiple >versions of the same situation, only one of them is the truth. I don't >believe this is an issue that can afford to have a gray area. It's either >fact or fiction... "based on fact" doesn't cut it. The fact that it's >"based" on something makes it fiction. > >Sorry, that statement really just struck a nerve. _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 14:32:50 +0000 From: xenacrazy@att.net Subject: Re: MM: RE: Re: new Paty cuts on Chicks album Sounds like the show "Beyond Belief"... "A similar story happened in the 1970's...." - -Lisa > >In life, there's more than 1 version of "the truth", and thus, we have > >Truth #2... > > There's never more than one version of the truth. If there are multiple > versions of the same situation, only one of them is the truth. I don't > believe this is an issue that can afford to have a gray area. It's either > fact or fiction... "based on fact" doesn't cut it. The fact that it's > "based" on something makes it fiction. > > Sorry, that statement really just struck a nerve. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 09:36:56 -0500 From: LouAnn Muhm Subject: MM: Finally seeing Patty! Hi Guys-- After all of my angst over the rescheduled Minneapolis show (which I still think sucks), I am FINALLY going to get to see Patty live at the Gem in Detroit. The show just happened to coincide with a trip at the last minute, and the generous and well-prepared Madtaper has tickets for us. I gave him the tickets to the Ark that I couldn't use, so I guess karma works after all. Peace, LouAnn ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 07:50:45 -0700 (PDT) From: satrngrl Subject: Re: MM: Re: new Paty cuts on Chicks album - --- dana howery wrote: > i thought it was called truth #2 because patty has a > song called truth #1. Has Patty ever given an explanation for the title "Truth #2" ? If not, then we have a prime example of two perspectives on "the truth"... 1) There is an observation that the song is called "Truth #2" because there is a "Truth #1". End of story. 2) I think there's more to it -- it's called "Truth #2" because mistrust is a theme in the song. Besides... why entitle a song "Truth #1" unless you fully intended to write a "Truth #2" ? Why not call the original "Truth" and the sequel "Truth #2" ? If the only reason for naming it "Truth #2" was because of "Truth #1", wouldn't she have just come up with a different title? I think she named BOTH songs as they are for a particular reason. Only Patty knows the real truth :) Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better http://health.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 10:49:39 -0500 From: "dana howery" Subject: Re: MM: Re: new Paty cuts on Chicks album i don't know; i think it has a nice kind of "ring" to it to call one song, "truth #1" and another song, "truth #2". i guess we'll just have to wait for "truth #3". :) >From: satrngrl >To: mad-mission@smoe.org >Subject: Re: MM: Re: new Paty cuts on Chicks album >Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 07:50:45 -0700 (PDT) > >--- dana howery wrote: > > i thought it was called truth #2 because patty has a > > song called truth #1. > >Has Patty ever given an explanation for the title >"Truth #2" ? If not, then we have a prime example of >two perspectives on "the truth"... > >1) There is an observation that the song is called >"Truth #2" because there is a "Truth #1". End of >story. > >2) I think there's more to it -- it's called "Truth >#2" because mistrust is a theme in the song. >Besides... why entitle a song "Truth #1" unless you >fully intended to write a "Truth #2" ? Why not call >the original "Truth" and the sequel "Truth #2" ? If >the only reason for naming it "Truth #2" was because >of "Truth #1", wouldn't she have just come up with a >different title? I think she named BOTH songs as they >are for a particular reason. > >Only Patty knows the real truth :) >Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better >http://health.yahoo.com _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 12:34:14 -0400 From: "Rebecca Simonelli" Subject: MM: song title explanation of truth #2 I saw Patty perform this song a few years back in NH. I think she may have just written it too, because it seemed new to her. Anyway, she explained she had written a song and wanted to call it Truth, but since she already had a song called Truth, she therefore just called the new song Truth #2. Also, I have a setlist from a subsequent show where she has written the song as Truth #2, so in her mind, that is in fact the real title. Hope this clears up the controversy. _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ------------------------------ End of mad-mission-digest V6 #273 *********************************