From: owner-support-system-digest@smoe.org (support-system-digest) To: support-system-digest@smoe.org Subject: support-system-digest V6 #325 Reply-To: support-system@smoe.org Sender: owner-support-system-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-support-system-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk support-system-digest Monday, December 8 2003 Volume 06 : Number 325 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [support-system] Three cheers for obvious ["Norman Davis" ] [support-system] It *would* be nice, wouldn't it? [Catherine Molanphy Subject: [support-system] Three cheers for obvious Some of the best music is the simplest. Listen to "Wouldn't it be Nice" by the Beach Boys or "You've Lost that Lovin' Feeling" and tell me that's not great. The real distinction is between music that's about real feelings and situations vs the paint-by-numbers, McDonald's commercial-tie-in crap. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 23:58:03 -0800 (PST) From: bmad Subject: [support-system] Re: support-system-digest V6 #324 i think that the argument that you have to be a parent to enjoy Little Digger is interesting. it might, in some respects, be true. i also think that's why i think it's a mediocre song. i first heard "fuck and run" when i was seventeen. i was sort of a teenage slut. the song was instantly personal to me; it totally resonated because it articulated both the awkward hollowness of sleeping with a trillion guys that you're not really into, as well as the weird, hopeful, romantic impulse that motivates it. BUT, I don't think you need ever to have been a slut to love fuck and run. furthermore, now that i'm not seventeen anymore, and not as easy as i was then, the song still gets me, just in a totally different way. ultimately, it's a song that speaks to all types of people, because it's really just about disappointment and self-defeatedness and wanting something noble but pursuing it in the exact wrong way. "with or without my best intentions." i'm not convinced that i would like Little Digger that much better if i had kids, but if that is the case, it still doesn't redeem the song in any way for me. i think that if a song is really working, the point should be that it reveals something unkown to everyone, instead of reinforcing the pre-existing feelings of certain initiated people (in this case, parents) and leaving everyone else in the dark. a perfect example, as catherine has pointed out, is Divorce Song. It's unkown whether liz was a lady of low standards when she wrote fuck and run, but it's pretty safe to say that when she wrote divorce song, she was not a divorced person. i am not a divorced person either. in fact, when i first heard divorce song, i'd never been in a relationship that had lasted more than an hour or two. that didn't matter at all, because no matter what your experience is, it's a great song. i shudder to think what the result would be if she were to write Divorce Song now, despite the fact that she now has nominally more firsthand knowledge on the subject. probably more fake talk-show psychologist claptrap. "and it's true that I didn't respect your boundaries/and it's also true i lost my composure/ but when you said that i was emotionally unavailable/I knew that we had to reach closure." whatevs. xoxo bennett New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 02:56:34 -0600 From: "Mark J. Foxx" Subject: [support-system] Dig Me Out To be fair to Alanis (who is, by the way, just now around the age in which Liz released Guyville)...Alanis at least presents her lame, tedious psychobabble in a somewhat interesting way. It's sorta fun the way Alanis doesn't change or alter her lyrics at all to fit within the structures of the songs...and she can occasionally write a pretty catchy tune. Any given Alanis album at least has that over LP. The lyrics in LP are just the same vapid, shallow statements without the insane amount of consonants. The only fun thing about LP is mimicking the robots in the background of "Why Can't I" and that weird animal noise after the quasi-bridge of "Red Light/Green Light". I don't have much to add except that Catherine's reply hit the sledgehammer on the elephant's trunk or whatever. It's actually a pretty good analysis of everything I don't like about the new album...which is, essentially, the obviousness, one-dimensional lyrics. Everything else I can take...but the lyrics are...no. _________________________________________________________________ Wonder if the latest virus has gotten to your computer? Find out. Run the FREE McAfee online computer scan! http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 09:11:03 -0000 From: "Paul Spinks" Subject: [support-system] RE: digging deeper > Catherine dug deeper into "Little Digger": > 1) The whole conceit of the song is that it's being told > partially from the point of view of the child. Not true! Look again at the lyrics. Liz is doing ALL the observing and doing ALL the talking. She's reporting to us the words spoken by her son ("You say '...'") because (presumably) they have deep significance for her. > 2) Like Emil, I find the melody to be *paricularly* uninspired [...] And I'd reply that a simple uncomplicated melody is just right. > 3) But back to those lyrics: "I've done the damage / the damage > is done / I pray to God that I'm the damaged one." I *still* groan inwardly [...] > The repetition of "damage" clunks like bricks... both the > assonance *and* the consonance on that word are mediocre and therefore not > worthy of repetition. Or perhaps "damage" is the important word in this song? She did it, she can't undo it, she'll carry the guilt for it always, she hopes her son will not be scarred by it. This song is ABOUT damage. The repetition is entirely deliberate IMO, and totally effective. > [she] wimps out by using abstract concept words like > "damage" and "grown-up complications". Bad, Liz! You know better than > that... you don't TELL in songs, you SHOW. We should FEEL the damage, not > hear about it. We should FEEL the complication. The "grown-up complications" are just the backdrop to this song. There is another complication, and it's the one we are supposed to feel (and which I do feel but many out there evidently don't). > But hey... unfathomability is what others' tastes are all about. Not to > compare, but I don't get opera or Kid Rock either. Something to agree on at last! :-) > I hope some of this was coherent and didn't come off overly jackassy... if > it did, I apologize in advance for hurting anyone's feelings. And I apologise in advance if I've missrepresented you when cutting down your long post to frame my reply. But I suspect that Liz's feelings when she wrote this song are closer to mine than to yours. Paul ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 21:43:27 +1000 From: "Derek McGough" Subject: [support-system] Grammy Nominations Hi there, No surprises that "Liz Phair" did not receive any nominations at the Grammys but The Matrix are nominated as producers of the year for several tracks, two of those cited being "Extraordinary" and "Why Can't I", amongst others by Hilary Duff, Lillix and the Troys. Have never heard of these last two acts. BTW, "Why Can't I" is up to #34 on the Billboard Hot 100 but the album continues to be absent from the Top 200 - for the time being at least. Derek ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 11:27:54 -0500 From: Dan MacDonald Subject: [support-system] liz's sledgehammer holy shit...i had no clue there was this much dislike for Little Digger. this new thread almost rivals the anti-underwear song thread. i think both sides (the lovers and the haters) have really valid points on this song. but you're all wrong. just kidding. i have to chalk it up to the whole parent thing. maybe if i was a parent - - i'd really REALLY "dig" the song. i just don't relate to it that much at all. like - at all. my parents aren't even divorced, so i can't even relate to it on that level. i don't think it's bad - but i have to disagree when i hear people saying it is Exile in Guyville-calibre. sure it's a deeply personal song, and regardless - i'm sure it REALLY means a lot to liz for her to have written such a candid song about her son - but i do not consider it Exile-calibre. deeply personal on Exile was Shatter or Canary. Little Digger would have stuck out as just much of a sore thumb on exile as it does on the new album. fuck, i still can't believe she self-titled this album. initial pop-sound shock over and done with - i think the self-titled aspect pisses me off the most. a few of my friends who are semi-liz fans came with me to see her in Detroit this summer and she did Little Digger and my friends kinda knew the new stuff - but not much. the consensus on Little Digger from them was "it was cheesey". i don't think it's cheesey....but that was what everyone thought. they said it was too obvious. it was just weird how none of them ever really heard the song before - they all LOVED the concert - but they all agreed on the song Little Digger. it's funny how the song that is being dubbed "sledgehammer" obvious is the one that is generating the most debate. maybe that says something too.... what year do u think liz's next one will come out? i'm gonna say 2006. dan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 11:45:51 EST From: LilRussianGirl@aol.com Subject: Re: [support-system] liz's sledgehammer It's probably the last question she wants to hear, but can you ask her about her next album Ken? Simply from the point of the fact that she mentioned that she had 40(?) -plus songs already done and the Internet song subscription thing hasn't taken off yet.... If capitol really wants her out there ... I wouldn't wait another 5 years ... she needs name recognition with the younger set... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 12:24:20 -0500 From: "John A. Johnson" Subject: Re: [support-system] digging deeper In a breathtakingly erudite post in which she touches upon: getting deep-down feelings spiritually empty emotional responses prose and poetry art levels of abstraction telling vs. showing value metaphor quality psychological point of view symbolism and taste, On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 02:52:51 -0500, Catherine Molanphy concludes >But hey... unfathomability is what others' tastes are all about. Not to >compare, but I don't get opera or Kid Rock either. > >I hope some of this was coherent and didn't come off overly jackassy... if >it did, I apologize in advance for hurting anyone's feelings. Well, I found this post to be completely coherent and not at all jackassy. I am not being facetious when I call this post breathtakingly erudite. I felt like I was back in college, listening to my masterful creative writing professor, who explained how Hemingway shows rather than tells. What most intrigued me about this post and some of the others that expressed similar sentiments were the implicit value judgments concerning how we respond to art. In particular, Catherine's post contrasts the "deep-down feelings" evoked by subtle art to the "spiritually empty emotional responses" evoked by obvious attempts to manipulate our emotions. The "deep-full" versus "shallow-empty" contrast clearly implies that the former is in some sense "better" than the latter. But better for what? I can tell the difference between an artistic film and a sappy, grade B movie. Sometimes I am in the mood for a film that is complex, sophisticated, and--whoo--deep, and sometimes I prefer a movie that is simple, crude, and obvious. (The same goes for food and sex--sometimes I want French cuisine and sometimes pizza is fine.) Now, was I a lesser human being last week when I stooped to watch Robby Benson's *One on One*, described by Spike Lee as "the worst basketball movie of all time?" To her credit, Catherine clearly states, "I meant that it would take me a while to explain why *I* don't like the song ... ." She is not directly claiming that her preferences are "better" than others' preferences. She is simply saying that she likes art that shows rather than tells, poetry rather than prose, and, most importantly, the experience of deep feelings rather than spiritually empty emotions. At the same time, when she admits to a twinge to the "my mother is mine" lyric, blurry eyes at the end of Titanic, chills at long-distance commercials, and twitches to a flicker of porn, she is effectively degrading and devaluing these normal, human emotional responses as low, vulgar, inferior, base, shallow, and spiritually empty. The underlying message is that songs that unsubtly evoke these responses do not represent True Art(tm) and that people who can respond only to the obvious are sorry excuses for human beings. I see this judgment as unnecessary. As a father, I reject both pity and derision from those who would criticize the emotional sympathy I feel for Liz when she sings about her son. My feelings aren't hurt by Catherine's observations, but I think Liz's might be. In my view, it is meaningless to describe anything as absolutely "good" or "bad" (in either an aesthetic or moral sense). Things are only "good *for*" causing certain states. No song is good, period. Songs are *good for* evoking particular thoughts and feelings. Some songs are good for subtly evoking what some people call "spiritually meaningful" emotional responses. Others are good for directly evoking common feelings. In no absolute sense is one kind of song better than another. Each is good for bringing about a particular state of affairs. Those who praise one or the other are merely expressing their own, personal emotional preferences. All that said, once again I express deep admiration for Catherine's penetrating observations and thoughtful, incisive comments. Kudos. - --John - ---------------------------------------------- John A. Johnson http://www.personal.psu.edu/~j5j/ My views do not necessarily reflect the official views of Penn State. Penn State is not responsible for my behavior. Nor am I for the university's. "Don't take yourself too seriously/There are precious few things worth hating nowadays/And none of them is me." -- Todd Rundgren ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 21:28:38 -0500 From: Catherine Molanphy Subject: [support-system] It *would* be nice, wouldn't it? > From: "Norman Davis" > > Some of the best music is the simplest. Listen to "Wouldn't it be Nice" by the > Beach Boys or "You've Lost that Lovin' Feeling" and tell me that's not great. > The real distinction is between music that's about real feelings and > situations vs the paint-by-numbers, McDonald's commercial-tie-in crap. "Wouldn't It Be Nice" makes me feel all happy and sunny inside, also kind of poignantly longing. "Little Digger" doesn't make me feel nothin'. Why? Well, see my #2 of "evidence" against LD. The words to the Beach Boys tune might be simple, but the melody and arrangement are masterful. There's probably other reasons, too, but I think that's the MAIN one and anyway my brain is tired. - --Catherine ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 21:28:38 -0500 From: Catherine Molanphy Subject: Re: [support-system] Grammy Nominations This is her first Top-40, right? > From: "Derek McGough" > BTW, "Why Can't I" is up to #34 on the Billboard Hot 100 but the album > continues to be absent from the Top 200 - for the time being at least. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 05:41:48 +0000 From: "over pavema" Subject: [support-system] liz flashed the skin between her toes in prague! photos to follow. ok, it's early and it's certainly possible that the new clay aiken release will change my mind for me. but, assuming that doesn't happen, i think i've got my 10-best list for 2003 already compiled, so i'll toss it out so it can be suitably ignored. someone on this list once said that we only post our 10-best lists to show each other how cool we think everyone else should think we are, by listing deliberately obscure titles. i swear to god on toast that every one of these is worth seeking out and paying for (unless you find that you hate them, in which case you would have wasted your money and gotten mad at me). and i actually think this was a really good year for music, liz's debacle aside. though i do think someone should track what % of 10-best lists posted to this list actually contain "L/P". if you're keeping track, and if mine is the only list posted so far, then at this moment it's 0%. - - evan dando, 'baby i'm bored'. what happens when an artist makes a record and doesn't give a flying fuck what other people think. but also what happens when an artist is simply too talented, even after years of ridiculously self-destructive living, to make a bad record. - - some girls, 'feel it'. juliana hatfield, freda love from the blake babies, with heidi gluck from the pieces. their version of robert johnson's 'malted milk' is brilliant, and the whole album is -- for me -- juliana's best non-blakes record since 'bed' (or maybe ever). - - zwan, 'mary, star of the sea'. very great, sadly underrated, now gone. - - lucinda williams, 'world without tears'. what happens when a really brilliant songwriter doesn't elect to sell her soul to scumbags in hopes of selling a few extra copies of her crummy record. - - allison moorer, 'show'. people who don't know how great allison moorer is, aren't going to figure it out by reading my opinion. but she is very great. - - fountains of wayne, 'welcome interstate managers'. in an early john waters movie, a man sucking his wife's toes, says to her, 'oh, darling, i love you so fucking much i could just shit!' that has nothing to do with fountains of wayne, but it's a funny line. plus, they are such good songwriters you have to take your hat off to them. and then you could shit in it if you needed to. - - white stripes, 'elephant'. could i pick a more obvious choice? but their week-long gig on conan's show sold me, their video for 7-nation army sold me, and i finally caught up with the songs. next, i'll be listing coldplay albums! which, actually -- well, forget it. that came out last year... - - 'lost in translation' soundtrack never knew much about my bloody valentine, and maybe the songs wouldn't hit me as hard if they didn't conjure up some mood moment from the movie: bill murray in the back of a limo waking up to find himself in downtown tokyo, scarlett johanssen rolling over in bed or sitting in a window on the 70th floor of a hotel, or in a purple wig dancing at a party. but, honestly, the music seems to stand on its own, and i am not a bit ashamed to say i love this record. laura cantrell, 'when the roses bloom again' or kathleen edwards, 'failer'. so, i like women country singers. sue me. guided by voices, 'earthquake glue'. if there's no more pavement to be had, then this is the best next thing. if pollard isn't the lyricist that malkmus was, he's more prolific and musically all over the map. maybe like if SM was a drunk. in some spots, this is like one of those almost-psychedelic early Who albums. honorable mention: television, 'marquee moon' re-mixed and re-released. outkast, 'speakerboxx / the love below' (no explanation necessary, except maybe why it's not higher on the list, but i haven't heard it enough times yet). michelle branch, 'hotel paper' (indicating that "L/P" wasn't even the best record released on june 24th). my own sequenced version of "L/P" is right there, too, but doesn't take the place of any of the top-10'ers. record i can't believe i didn't own before this year: neil young, 'on the beach', now remastered and re-released. best cover version: todd rundgren doing george harrison's 'while my guitar gently weeps'. ok, there may be better covers, but i just got this one recently, so i'm still psych'd to have found it. worst cover version (and i'd say this even if it wasn't on this list): liz phair, 'winter wonderland'. that target cd has one inarguably great christmas rendition on it, and that is, of all people, lisa marie presley doing 'silent night'. it is brilliant. liz's song is not, and makes me winter wonder why she bothered. there are already terrific versions of this song, like darlene love's steve goodman's, etta james', and even the annie lennox version. this version makes jewel's sound positively electric. _________________________________________________________________ Cell phone switch rules are taking effect  find out more here. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/consumeradvocate.armx ------------------------------ End of support-system-digest V6 #325 ************************************