From: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org (shindell-list-digest) To: shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Subject: shindell-list-digest V10 #93 Reply-To: shindell-list@smoe.org Sender: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk shindell-list-digest Friday, May 15 2009 Volume 10 : Number 093 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [RS] Children's reactions to Richard's songs [] Re: [RS] Respect and Levity [Laurence Krulik ] Re: [RS] Respect and Levity [Laurence Krulik ] Re: [RS] Children's reactions to Richard's songs [Carol Love ] Re: [RS] Retread [] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 12:52:06 -0700 From: Subject: Re: [RS] Children's reactions to Richard's songs >> The questions are endless..... << The Balloon Song: "Mommy, what's equipoise?" RG ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 16:18:13 -0400 From: Laurence Krulik Subject: Re: [RS] Respect and Levity I was going to keep quiet here, but I can't seem to... I actually think cop-out is the perfect term in this case. While Richard is an artist who's intellect and genius is at the forefront of his writing, it doesn't mean his music is not "adult". If I were to bring my child to an adult concert (and this can apply to a folk show, broadway show, or otherwise), I'm going to expect a level of adult rhetoric during the performance. And if I choose to take my child, I'm aware of the risks of a F-bomb here or there or even the dreadful "god damn". There is no way to completely shelter a child from that language - it's everywhere. It's a matter of parenting to minimize the damage and not have KOMD becomes his theme song over the next 2 weeks because there's a "bad" word in it. That phrase dead-on hits the spot and completely sums up the Kenworth naysayers feelings towards the protagonist. Its actually a brilliant juxtaposition the way he "thanked them all and left one night" and justifies his final decision to leave. On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 14:46, john clary wrote: > rongrittz@cox.net wrote: > >>Perhaps cop-out was too strong a word . . . I guess I just meant that if > it's offensive, isn't it offensive EVERYWHERE? RG<< > > Ron, that sounds like a perfectly reasonable question to me. If I were to > answer it, I'd say, "Yes." It's not offensive to me, so I wouldn't react > the way an offended person might, tho I'd clearly get the emphasis. I'm not > sure why proclaiming something as damned (or G-d damned, same thing, really, > since if you believe in G-d, you surely also believe that only G-d has the > power to damn something) is necessarily offensive. What if it's true? > Perhaps none of us can really know? Maybe the offense is in assuming we > know the mind of G-d? I suppose that makes sense, even to a non-believer > like me. > > Still, I find it hard to censor myself when that phrase really hits the > spot. And I appreciate when the phrase is used by others in certain > circumstances. > > John Clary > 303/589.8099 | http://johnclary.net/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 16:30:50 -0400 From: Laurence Krulik Subject: Re: [RS] Respect and Levity after re-reading this I realized I was confusing posts... regardless, my point still stands. Religious venue or otherwise, he shouldn't be changing the song. For the religious folks out there, it would be like changing the words in a bible reading depending on how religious the audience was. On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 16:18, Laurence Krulik wrote: > I was going to keep quiet here, but I can't seem to... > > I actually think cop-out is the perfect term in this case. While Richard > is an artist who's intellect and genius is at the forefront of his writing, > it doesn't mean his music is not "adult". If I were to bring my child to an > adult concert (and this can apply to a folk show, broadway show, or > otherwise), I'm going to expect a level of adult rhetoric during the > performance. And if I choose to take my child, I'm aware of the risks of a > F-bomb here or there or even the dreadful "god damn". There is no way to > completely shelter a child from that language - it's everywhere. It's a > matter of parenting to minimize the damage and not have KOMD becomes his > theme song over the next 2 weeks because there's a "bad" word in it. > > That phrase dead-on hits the spot and completely sums up the Kenworth > naysayers feelings towards the protagonist. Its actually a brilliant > juxtaposition the way he "thanked them all and left one night" and justifies > his final decision to leave. > > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 14:46, john clary wrote: > >> rongrittz@cox.net wrote: >> >>Perhaps cop-out was too strong a word . . . I guess I just meant that if >> it's offensive, isn't it offensive EVERYWHERE? RG<< >> >> Ron, that sounds like a perfectly reasonable question to me. If I were to >> answer it, I'd say, "Yes." It's not offensive to me, so I wouldn't react >> the way an offended person might, tho I'd clearly get the emphasis. I'm not >> sure why proclaiming something as damned (or G-d damned, same thing, really, >> since if you believe in G-d, you surely also believe that only G-d has the >> power to damn something) is necessarily offensive. What if it's true? >> Perhaps none of us can really know? Maybe the offense is in assuming we >> know the mind of G-d? I suppose that makes sense, even to a non-believer >> like me. >> >> Still, I find it hard to censor myself when that phrase really hits the >> spot. And I appreciate when the phrase is used by others in certain >> circumstances. >> >> John Clary >> 303/589.8099 | http://johnclary.net/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 17:26:00 -0400 From: Carol Love Subject: Re: [RS] Children's reactions to Richard's songs Buffy, When my teenager was more your childrens' age we had a few moments like that in the car!! We have to go waaaaaaaaaaay back.. In response to the TNBW line "and the preacher is on fire..." Katy asked, "If the preacher is on fire, why isn't anyone putting him out???" Another gem, and I actually shared this one with RS after show a 7hbz years ago.... Katy had heard "The Ballad of Mary Magdalene" so many times that when her little Episcopal preschool would sing "Jesus Loves Me" -- Katy would carry on with the line -- "Why on Earth did I ever let him go?" Try explaining that to the teacher!!! :-) ....Carol ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 17:34:02 -0400 From: John McDonnell Subject: [RS] Retread Hi All, Interesting for me to be now on this list so long that an issue has resurfaced--the one/two couple/s of LFOTD. I remember not really caring about whether it was one couple or two all that much because I found the song, while enjoyable, somewhat weak. I thought the single couple theory had a certain corny consistency, because I never really saw anything about the separate couples which made me care about either of them. I didnt see the 9/11 references and didnt initially think the song dealt with that attack in a meaningful way. I remember some testy exchanges on this, but nothing like what we have just witnessed, but the discussion did prompt a tangent away from the song itself, if I remember correctly. Anyway.......for those of you who felt the 9/11 references were there, are they still as vivid today, over seven years after the attacks? I am not being confrontational when I ask that, I am making a genuine inquiry, as my view of the song has not changed in that regard. I did derive a greater appreciation of the songs from various postings, and my own view of the cab-driver-as-hierophant lets me see him as symbolic, from which I derive a lit/crit geeky comfort (btw--I have been driving more in Manhattan recently, and it strikes me that cabbies are not like dolphins in the ocean, unless you think dolphins are a--holes). I am with Ron on the integrity of the song and keeping the lyrics regardless, though I also think an author may change those lyrics if he sees fit--to a certain extent. This may have something to do with my not being religious in the same way Ron G seems not to be, because the mention of God, or Jesus or any other deity, even if it is in a derogatory way, does not offend me. I feel this is different from the drummer boy of Arrowhead going from the Third to the Ninth Brigade, the "murderous" horde of Transit becoming "well-insured" and different from turning a cheek AND taking it on the chin. The brigade number change seemed arbitrary to me, but perhaps there was a difference between the third and ninth brigades of the Confederate Army. The "well-insured" from "murderous" horde made me think of well-heeled weekenders going to their vacation homes, and so really captured that sense of suburban congestion--a keener eye, I thought. Changing the lyric out of sensitivity, however, I dont like--it subverts the integrity of the aesthetic, sacrificing it to the "feelings" of its audience. That's a slippery slope, which usually results in vapid, insipid works like [insert artist's name]. John McD ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 14:52:14 -0700 From: Subject: Re: [RS] Retread >> The brigade number change seemed arbitrary to me, but perhaps there was a difference between the third and ninth brigades of the Confederate Army. << It was just an accuracy thing: there WAS no ninth brigade in the Confederate Army in the Civil War. I was actually at the house concert in NJ back in 1997 when a military historian in attendance broke that news to Richard. Of course, now people are telling Richard that whippoorwills don't fly around in the afternoon, and don't eat seeds. Finally, I was looking at the liner notes to the "Sparrows Point" CD -- and listneing to "Nora" this morning -- and can find no example of "AND taking it on the chin." Hasn't it ALWAYS been "or"? RG ------------------------------ End of shindell-list-digest V10 #93 ***********************************