From: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org (shindell-list-digest) To: shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Subject: shindell-list-digest V7 #40 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 Saturday, February 5 2005 Volume 07 : Number 040 Today's Subjects: ----------------- RE: [RS] RE: shindell-list-digest V7 #38 ["Mark A. Douglas" ] [RS] Re: shindell-list-digest V7 #38 [k.m.oneill@att.net] [RS] Friday night in St. Louis ["adam McIntyre" ] [RS] everytime I hear the news [Norman Johnson ] Re: [RS] RE: shindell-list-digest V7 #38 [Lisa Davis - home Subject: RE: [RS] RE: shindell-list-digest V7 #38 And I think that the problem is that this list demonstrates clearly that it does not know how to discuss the world political without falling into entrenched camps of right vs left vs wrong vs whatever stance one is choosing to espouse. I have zero issue discussing the songs as the political entities that they obviously are. The issue comes from getting away from the songs, away from Richard's music. The point is that you can absolutely discuss Richard's songs, and the politics contained within, but in my humble opinion, those politics can be discussed within the context of the purposes of this list, id est Richard's music. Peace Mark - -----Original Message----- From: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org [mailto:owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org] On Behalf Of Vanessa Wills Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2005 6:26 PM To: shindell-list@smoe.org Subject: Re: [RS] RE: shindell-list-digest V7 #38 Exactly how are we supposed to discuss Richard's decision to record "Waist Deep in the Big Muddy" as a protest against the war in Iraq without mentioning the war in Iraq? I am sympathetic to the complaint that the balance of political to strictly-music-related posts can sometimes weigh too heavily on one side than the other. But please don't make it seem like that balance is so easy to maintain; as though there's one thing, "Richard's Music," and this other thing, "The World," and they are totally separate and insulated from one another. Frankly, I think it's an insult to songs like "Che Guevara T-Shirt," "Abuelita," and "You Stay Here" to suggest that it's even possible to discuss them in any deep or exhaustive way without touching on the real political issues of the day. - --Vanessa On Sat, 5 Feb 2005 19:03:41 -0500, Jeffrey Campbell wrote: > I have to agree with KarenZ on this issue. I have belonged to the Shindell > list for several years. Sometimes I contribute...other times I lurk. But as > of late, it has lost its focus on the one thing we all care for - Richard's > music. I, for one, am not interested in Shiites, Republican vs. Democrats, > etc.....I get enough of that from the daily news. > We should all revisit the wonderful music that Richard provides instead of > wasting time on these other issues. > Jeff - -- "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2005 17:09:46 -0800 From: Terry Woodburn Subject: [RS] Re: shindell-list-digest V7 #39 I agree with Vanessa's comment to the effect that it is inevitable for "issues" to blend into, even take over the discussion for a brief time. This occurs in every artist newsgroup I read. I certainly sympathize with those who are tired of hearing political rants going back and forth, but given Richard's songs and the times we are in, I think it is a bit unrealistic to think that "issues" are inappropriate territory for discussion. Sure, I get tired of it, too. We are indeed here for the music/writing, but remember that the writer himself has (gloriously) articulated on religious, philosophical and yes, political issues. tw ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 01:43:24 +0000 From: k.m.oneill@att.net Subject: [RS] Re: shindell-list-digest V7 #38 I think we share more than just a love for Richard's music. I am sure that we all have the best interest of humanity at heart as well. If we are not permitted to talk about these things how will anything ever be resolved? I am under the belief that individuals can make a difference. Sometimes it takes a while to learn how to talk an issue without inciting someone else's ire. I am still not able to do it myself but I have seen other people who just talk about the issues and they leave out the words that put others on the defensive. I don't think Richard would be upset by people who are trying to learn how to communicate. If something makes us uncomfortable, it is probably worth addressing. I believe something really good can happen right here. I have hope... katie in wa state (who won't be reporting about a concert until he get's his butt up here) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2005 19:44:20 -0600 From: "adam McIntyre" Subject: [RS] Friday night in St. Louis Hi all, I am coming out of lurkville to give you a heads up of Richard's performance last night. It was unfortunately short (because of the fesival format) but excellent nonetheless. Richard performed (in this order): Fenario Waist deep in the big muddy Reunion Hill There goes Mavis Transit All the songs were great. It was absolutely the best version of Reunion Hill I have ever heard both live or recorded (I've seen Richard numerous times). It was a little more up-tempo than the Courier cut. He also made some very funny jokes before doing Mavis about having to suspend disbelief regarding a girl with a canary in a cage at the beach. The other performers (Viktor Krauss, Tim O'Brien, and Carrie Newcomer) were also excellent. Carrie blew the doors off of us- she was the best of the four. All the performers did a couple of numbers together at the end including a stirring rendition of some song about being from Louisiana. I had never heard of O'Brien and was impressed with him as well. Adam ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2005 20:51:03 -0500 From: Norman Johnson Subject: [RS] everytime I hear the news >> We should all revisit the wonderful music that Richard provides instead of wasting time on these other issues.<< Is this the same Richard who wrote Fishing and Che Guevara T-shirt? Is this the same Richard who wrote I am? Is this the same Richard who has covered and talked about Waist Deep in the Big Muddy? I think the political implications of the songs that Richard wrote and covered are fair game for the list. And if you want to talk about the music that Richard provides, do so. Set an example. Norman ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2005 21:26:46 -0500 From: Lisa Davis - home Subject: Re: [RS] RE: shindell-list-digest V7 #38 Funny, I went to Falconridge with one of my many, many 50-something friends, whose memories of the 60s is a lot sharper than mine (I'm of the Babysitters Here vintage too) and what struck HER the most was how peculiarly NON-political "folk" music is in this generation. In her "generation," you practically could not claim to be a "folk" musician without getting political. I remember Richard being characteristically humorous about this. What's bothering me is I can't remember which song, Courier or Things That I Have Seen, that he joked about how if you're a folksinger you HAVE to write a folk song, and that this was like a rite of passage, an initiation. But some joker in the crowd came up after and said it wasn't anti-war ENOUGH. You can't win! He might have said, . It must be said that Richard has been getting a bit more overtly polemical in the songs he's doing; I think the earliest songs are a lot more oblique and express more general comments, e.g. Courier, "You Stay Here," "Money for Floods"," "Sparrow's Point," of course "Fishing," all are about, in a sense, social issues or war, but indirect. Well, Big Muddy does say "draw your own conclusions," but all you have to know is that Pete Seeger wrote it! On the subject of "what topic." It lies to those who are annoyed about the non-Richard-ness to do their own contributing if they want to draw things back. I've been on one music listserv or another for 11 years and you always get the cycle: (1) enthusiasm about the artist; (2) digression as the topic wears thin and there is no news and people have other interests; (3) annoyance and rage on the part of those who say "why can't we talk about the artist." It ought to be forbidden to SAY "talk about the artist." Just do it! Lisa (who does also think we ought to be a bit more forgiving of each other, even when we think each other is (are?) utterly misguided) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2005 21:18:31 -0500 From: Norman Johnson Subject: Re: [RS] RE: shindell-list-digest V7 #38 - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lisa Davis - home" To: Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2005 9:26 PM Subject: Re: [RS] RE: shindell-list-digest V7 #38 > Funny, I went to Falconridge with one of my many, many 50-something > friends, whose memories of the 60s is a lot sharper than mine (I'm of > the Babysitters Here vintage too) and what struck HER the most was how > peculiarly NON-political "folk" music is in this generation. In her > "generation," you practically could not claim to be a "folk" musician > without getting political. > > I remember Richard being characteristically humorous about this. What's > bothering me is I can't remember which song, Courier or Things That I > Have Seen, that he joked about how if you're a folksinger you HAVE to > write a folk song, and that this was like a rite of passage, an > initiation. But some joker in the crowd came up after and said it > wasn't anti-war ENOUGH. You can't win! He might have said, . It > must be said that Richard has been getting a bit more overtly polemical > in the songs he's doing; I think the earliest songs are a lot more > oblique and express more general comments, e.g. Courier, "You Stay > Here," "Money for Floods"," "Sparrow's Point," of course "Fishing," all > are about, in a sense, social issues or war, but indirect. Well, Big > Muddy does say "draw your own conclusions," but all you have to know is > that Pete Seeger wrote it! > > On the subject of "what topic." It lies to those who are annoyed about > the non-Richard-ness to do their own contributing if they want to draw > things back. I've been on one music listserv or another for 11 years > and you always get the cycle: (1) enthusiasm about the artist; (2) > digression as the topic wears thin and there is no news and people have > other interests; (3) annoyance and rage on the part of those who say > "why can't we talk about the artist." It ought to be forbidden to SAY > "talk about the artist." Just do it! > > Lisa (who does also think we ought to be a bit more forgiving of each > other, even when we think each other is (are?) utterly misguided) ------------------------------ End of shindell-list-digest V7 #40 **********************************