Precedence: bulk
Subject: Chalkhills Digest #4-117

         Chalkhills Digest, Volume 4, Number 117

                 Wednesday, 22 July 1998

Today's Topics:

                      #XTC Revisited
                   Oops! Barry also...
                 A little *too* ironic?!
                  The grand daddy of 5/4
       Discussion of Lyrical Content Not Religion.
             Shoulda Made It Instrumental....
                   fascinating rhythms
           Smiling Pets / Seagulls Screaming..?
                       I'm Pulsing
       Astrology = Theism at it's braindead worst!
              they put the rhythm in my head
                       Re: box set
                  Rare Canadian Release
                   Re: Rhythm pedantry
                   Record Stores in NYC
              Re: Rhythm pedantry/Dreary 90s
                  Re: In Your Dictionary
                  black sea to be bagged
              Dear Science, deliver us meat.
                 cover of new XTC book...
                        POP? music
                      Other Listens


Remember: no "Dear God", no "time signatures".

    To UNSUBSCRIBE from the Chalkhills mailing list, send a message to
    <> with the following command:


    For all other administrative issues, send a message to:


    Please remember to send your Chalkhills postings to:


    World Wide Web: <>
		or: <>

    The views expressed herein are those of the individual authors.

    Chalkhills is compiled using Digest 3.6 (John Relph <>).

Stage right / Now the son has died, the father can be born.


Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 16:14:54 EDT
Subject: #XTC Revisited


I just wanted to remind people about the IRC chat I'm having on Thursday,
July 24 at 10pm EST.  I just posted the details on my web page at  I hope to see you guys there.



Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 14:16:59 -0600
Subject: Oops! Barry also...


I'll need astro data for Barry also.  My egregious mistake.

- G-Man


Message-ID: <>
From: Robert Wood <>
Subject: Astrology.
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 23:17:27 +0100

>> If I can get the correct data, I can have an astrologer friend of mine
(20 years experience) who will run the charts and reveal the cosmic
forces behind such burning questions as... <<

I so hope that comment is tongue in cheek. Astrology is the biggest load of
crap I hear normally rational, intelligent people talk about. It's genuinely
scary that people believe that just because they were born at a certain time
of the year they're likely to act in a certain way.

God is infinitely more likely to exist than that mumbo jumbo rubbish be


Message-ID: <>
From: Robert Wood <>
Subject: A little *too* ironic?!
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 22:52:14 +0100

I don't want to be disrespectful here, but this made me smile...

First, John wrote at the top of 4-115:

>> Okay, enough with the "Dear God" meta-discussion.  It's fine if y'all
want to discuss the content of the song, but Chalkhills is not a place
to discuss the overall topics of gods, religions, faiths and the sacred.
A few more postings on these will come out in the next issue of Chalkhills,
but after this issue I will reject any such postings.  Y'all should know
better by now. <<

And then the random XTC lyric  was ...

>> You can read it in your bible / Or on the back of this record sleeve. <<

Well, it made me smile!

Now *that's* irony, Ms Morissette! <g>


Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 00:08:10 +0000 (   )
From: Thomas Yates <>
Subject: The grand daddy of 5/4
Message-ID: <>

 >I think the grand-daddy of all 5/4 tunes needs to be mentioned:
>"Mission Impossible!"
                                                Ian D.

Well, I would have to say "Take Five" by Dave Brubeck...can't get more 5/4
than old Dave!


Message-ID: <8191BF798BAFD111817B0001FA0E3A574EDC3E@ZSCED004>
From: "ARCHER-MAY,Mark" <>
Subject: Discussion of Lyrical Content Not Religion.
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 09:47:29 +1000

>If this is the accurate interpretation, it's simply a rewrite of what
the Bible has already declared to have actually happened 2,000 years ago
- the Messiah crucified in the name of religion. If Andy thinks it would
happen that way today (which it would), why hold that the Bible's
account from 2,000 years ago is false ("Father, Son and Holy Ghost is
just somebody's unholy hoax")? Andy's speculation about the fate of a
Messiah in "Pumpkinhead" suggests that the Bible's story is believable,
and yet ironically Andy dismisses this notion in "Dear God."<

At what stage does Andy Partridge get up and say that Peter
Pumpkinhead is a religious figure and that he was crucified for his
religious beliefs. The line "Peter merely said Any kind of love is
alright" seems distinctly unreligious.  The meaning of Messiah that
has always interested me is 3: the awaited King of the Jews; the
promised and expected deliverer of the Jewish people [syn:
{Messiah}]. Deliverer from what, the Roman's, the king that would rise
and throw off the oppressors, the Roman's. To my memory the Jews were
not expecting a Godlike being they were expecting a king, a man to
come and lead them to freedom, the christians then jumped on the band
wagon and twisted the concept to suit their needs. They expected a
man, not one third of a God. So in the end it's all about being
"Merely a Man" and trying to do the right thing by your fellow man,
and you don't need a religion to do that. To me the song is about a
man who comes along and points out the problems in our system, a man
of great charisma, a man that offers an understandable alternative to
the madness of our modern world which can usurp control from the
powers that be and as such has to be removed, this does not have to be
a religious related thing. The nailing of Peter to the tree does not
imply a religious outcome it is a poetic outcome mirroring yes Jesus
on the grounds that he was a guy that said a lets be nice to one and
other, offered an alternative approach to life and really got up the
noses of the powers that be. This song is blissfully free of religious
message, there is no way to link it to Jesus' religious message, in
fact the only way you can link it to Jesus is the fact that he got up
and said hey lets be nice to each other and possibly got nailed to the
cross for that reason. If there is a similarity between Peter
Pumpkinhead and Jesus it is in their message of Love, not in a
religious out look of any form.

Mind you if Andy Partridge ever writes the fantasy, the Resurrection
of Peter Pumpkinhead I may have to reconsider all this.

By the way the Father, Son and Holy Ghost is a form of Hoax because it
is a Political compromise and thus is the corrupted word of a god.
That crafty old Pagan Constantine the Great saw to that in the end.

To all those wonderful people saying don't discuss religion, I'm not
I'm discussing Dear God and the meaning of Peter Pumpkinhead. Bear
that in mind the people who discuss the time signature of English
Roundabout and then blissfully stray from "XTC" content to discuss
other songs with unusual time signatures by groups that have no
obvious link with "XTC".



Message-ID: <000801bdb43d$59339780$5ea1d5d0@hank>
From: "Hank Wirtz" <>
Subject: Shoulda Made It Instrumental....
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 17:20:20 -0700

So I saw the discussion of "No Language," and I'm suddenly reminded of
something I've wondered for years. Did Andy coin the phrase, "Shoulda made
it instrumental but the words got in the way"? Or is that a cliche I hadn't
heard before?

The reason I ask, is because the Urban Dance Squad, (the best rap act to
ever come out of Holland) put out a song in 1991 called "Through the Eyes of
Jason" which used the above phrase to close the song. At the time, wondered
if UDS were XTC fans, but I'd forgotten about it 'till now. It wouldn't
surprise me if they were, but maybe somebody here can shed some light for



Message-Id: <v01540b02b1d98f87cfae@[]>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 12:22:19 +1200
From: (James Dignan)
Subject: 5/4

>        I think the grand-daddy of all 5/4 tunes needs to be mentioned:
>"Mission Impossible!"

oh really? Daddy, maybe - but not grand-daddy...

np - Dave Brubeck - Take 5



Message-Id: <v01540b03b1d991563c65@[]>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 12:45:04 +1200
From: (James Dignan)
Subject: fascinating rhythms

Dave sez:
>        Sorry to belabor the odd-meter thread but I'm a bit of a stickler
>for this stuff and a self-confessed pedant too. Several posts in #114
>responding to the odd meter thread give erroneous info, especially this one:
><off the top of my head:
>* Money - Pink Floyd (7/8)
>* for NZ music fans, Sneaky Feelings' "Walk to the square" is in 5/4
>        "Money" is in 5/4

nope - 7/8. Listen to the bass run in the intro

>"Solsbury Hill" and "All you need is Love" are in
>7/4, not 7/8 (or it can be also thought of as alternating bars of 4/4 and

funny, the sheet music I have for both say 7/8

>"English Roundabout" is emphatically in 5/4, not 5/8, even though the
>tempo is brisk.

agree. the /4, /8 business has little to do with tempo anyway. It is the
way the beats are arranged within the bar that is important. For example
3/4 and 6/8 are different because in 6/8 the beats can normally be paired.
Your comments on "Man who sailed" also indicate this.

oh, and I was wrong, it's not "Walk to the Square", but rather "A letter to
you", off the same SF album.

>P.S regarding King Crimson and the "Discipline" album. Fripp was into
>layering polyrhythms and phrase cycles at that time, a la Philip Glass, so
>the underlying meter is less important than the way the cycles
>overlap--sort of a "meet you in 13 bars when we all land on one" thing.

you and another poster mentioned King Crimson doing just this, mixing two
signatures at the same time. It is a style that originated largely in
Gamelan Orchestra music from Indonesia. AFAIK, King Crimson are the only
recognised rock band to do this frequently. It is an interesting effect.
Robert Fripp's side projects and related enterprises also do this sort of
mixing of signatures - "Yamanashi Blues" by the Robert Fripp String Quintet
is a very good example: Japanese sounding blues in 4/4 and 6/8 at the same
time. The nearest most musicians get to this is running loads of triplets
over 4/4 (for example, Simon & Garfunkel's "59th Street Bridge song
(Feeling groovey)" and Paul Simon's own "Learn how to fall"). Some modern
composers have experimented with gamelan-style polyrhythms (most notably -
at least in this part of the world - Gareth Farr).

Can anyone out there tell me what time signature(s) Jethro Tull's "Songs
from the wood" is played in? It seems to go all over the place!

Academic this discussion may be, but it's a hell of a lot more interesting
than discussion religious dogma!



Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 21:09:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brian Whitman <bwhitman@WPI.EDU>
Subject: Smiling Pets / Seagulls Screaming..?
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.96.980720210654.11590B-100000@wpi.WPI.EDU>

I was browsing the Secret Chiefs Trio's website, and they said that they
were on a Beach Boys tribute album called 'Smiling Pets', released only in
japan. It sounds great -- lots of cool people are on it, SC3, OTC,
Thurston Moore, et. al... then there was this one group called Seagull
Screaming Kiss Her Kiss Her... who are / is this / these people / person?

Well, I never heard of them. Here's a URL:

Brian Whitman -


Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 21:12:58 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <>
From: Michael Kearns <>
Subject: I'm Pulsing

>From one self-confessed pedant (Mike Kearns) to another (Dave Blackburn),
with all due respect:

>	"Money" is in 5/4;

Oops, you mean 7/4!  :)

>"English Roundabout" is emphatically in 5/4, not 5/8, even though the
>tempo is brisk. Picking up the tempo does not change the unit of pulse to
>8th notes.

I emphatically agree.

>	A fascinating song, long debated by musicologists, is "Yesterday".
>The verses use a 7 bar form and yet there is no sense of anything being

Cool.. never noticed that before!

>"Burning with
>optimism's flames" sounds like it is in two different meters at once,
>because it uses a technique called "hemiola". The rhythm guitar(s) are
>mixed up front and play a steady stream of dotted quarter notes (aka
>crotchets) which starts to establish an 'alternative pulse' in your brain.

"Concise Oxford Dictionary of Music" sez: Hemiola consists of "superimposing
2 notes in the time of 3, or 3 in the time of 2". I agree that the device is
used here, but that doesn't seem to have anything to do with why BWOF sounds
like two meters; to me, it simply IS in two meters. The guitars are doing 2
equally spaced attacks in a 3/4 context (one attack clipped short, one held
longer - each short one counted as "1" which establishes a 3/4 pattern, and
when the vocal line joins in, it is clearly metered in 3/4 - "NEVer SEEN her
GLOWing" - NEV being the strong 1-count) - thus, hemiola.

However, four of these 3/4 measures are easily superimposed over three
measures of 4/4, played by bass and drums (the bass plays a 4/4 pattern of 2
quarters and 4 eighths, in synch with Terry playing a slightly more involved
pattern, also 4/4, with snare accents on 2 and 4) thus enabling the band to
come in together on a 1-count on "reaching to the ground.." part.

Try notating the intro polymetrically as I suggest..

Then try notating the guitars as dotted quarters (one short - actually
staccato quarter + eighth rest; one long - full value) in a 4/4 context --
to my way of thinking this obscures the hemiola pattern and results in a lot
of otherwise unnecessary accent marks, ties and syncopations (ONE two-AND
three FOUR one-AND two THREE four-AND..)

Actually, the hemiola is still evident -- you still have 2 guitar stabs
every 3 beats, but.. I don't know, it just doesn't "feel" like the guitars
are playing three such wildly syncopated 4/4 measures (of course this is
subjective.. though I really think the 3/4 vocal line clinches it; "NEVer
seen her glowing/ALL that bright she's throwing" - NEV and ALL coincide with
the short stabs, while 'her' and 'she's' coincide with the longer ones.)

At any rate, I think you will at least see that the polymetric notation
visually establishes the uniform patterns with more clarity -- and is easier
for each performer to count, regardless of whether notation was actually
used by XTC in laying those tracks down.

Of course none of this explains how Andy and/or the band actually conceived
it! Any takers?

I really need to get a life..

Mike Kearns


Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 22:44:54 -0400
From: DonSueP <>
Subject: Astrology = Theism at it's braindead worst!

In other words . . .  Go on and let 'em have their fun.  But then you
wouldn't deny me having a little fun in return, would you? ;-)


Message-Id: <l03110701b1d9d44fa859@[]>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 23:38:43 -0600
From: Jason Garcia <>
Subject: they put the rhythm in my head

Re:  "Yesterday".

>The verses use a 7 bar form and yet there is no sense of anything being

Yeah, that IS interesting.   I think those extra four beats are missing
because of the way the chords change- until the end, there's one full
measure of a chord (4 beats) followed by 2 chords that are only 2 beats:
F (4), Em (2), A7 (2), Dm (4)/C, B flat (2), C (2), F (4)/E, Dm (2), G (2),
B flat (2) F (2).  So you only end up with 28 beats.  You're not omitting
anything, it's just the way the chords move.  Pretty sneaky.

And onto weird XTC rhythms:  there are two songs from "Drums and Wires"
that I mishear every time- "Millions" and "That Is The Way".  I'll be
going along pretty well "do this, do that..." and then Terry will come in
with that drum fill and the song rearranges its downbeat all of a sudden.
It's funny how a song or a riff can sound totally different if you hear
the emphasis on the wrong beat.  "Spirits In The Material World" by the
Police does that to me.  Sting's bass line is exactly the same, yet it
will sound completely different depending on whether you're listening to
the keyboard on the downbeat or the offbeat.  Weird.

And I STILL don't know how I'm supposed to hear "Omnibus"...don't even
get me started.  I'm just glad I wasn't Dave Mattacks.

Well, back to the music...



Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 05:01:10
From: Derek Miner <>
Subject: Re: box set

Peter Fitzpatrick <> wrote:
> Do any of our UK based Chalkheads know where chart-return music-stores are ?
> If so : if any of you want to volunteer to purchase CDs on behalf of US
> Chalkheads and mail them...
> then surely the returns will register and hopefully create a bit of movement
> for the Box Set in the UK charts ?

I have to wonder how sales tabulte toward awards in the UK. If they release
the box in the US, the good news is that each box would count four discs
toward gold/platinum status... Entertainment Weekly mentioned this fact in
relation to the question "will anyone ever soutsell the Beatles"... they
mentioned that one Garth Brooks 7-disc box set counts as seven
sales... pretty scary, if you ask me.


Date: 21 Jul 98 14:48:08 AST
Subject: Rare Canadian Release
Message-ID: <>

Fellow Chalkompletists,

I'm seeking more detailed info on this release which is listed in the
Chalkhills discography:
Love At First Sight
     Love At First Sight (edit); Beatown (live); b/w Roads Girdle the Globe
(live); This is Pop? (live).
          7" EP (45/33), Virgin Canada (Polygram), VS 1124,
23 January 1981. no p/s.
I would like to know:
1) From where and when are the live tracks drawn? (eg Canadian performances
or otherwise)?
2) Does anybody have a copy, and if so, would you be prepared to make a
tape copy for me?  *OR*
3) Would someone like to sell or trade the original ep?

I have some rarities to trade/sell.   I would be most grateful for any
info and/or offers to help me obtain these rare live tracks.

Also:  FOR SALE:
1) US Geffen CD of "English Settlement" (full complement of tracks)
2) Mint vinyl copy of Mr Partridge "Take Away/The Lure Of Salvage"

Offers, suggestions to me by private email.  Will consider trades of other
rarities (eg latter day singles - Simpleton, KFAD, etc), or good quality
video material on PAL format.

Thanx   ~p@ul


From: Anders Wallen <>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 10:15:45 +0200 (MET DST)
Subject: Re: Rhythm pedantry
Message-ID: <13748.18357.710886.964025@sperry>

In #115 Dave Blackburn wrote:
> 	Sorry to belabor the odd-meter thread but I'm a bit of a stickler
> for this stuff and a self-confessed pedant too. Several posts in #114
> responding to the odd meter thread give erroneous info, especially this one:
> * Money - Pink Floyd (7/8)
>   [snip]
> 	"Money" is in 5/4; ...

Surely it's a typo, I guess you really mean 7/4. And who's really
bothered if it's 7/8 or 7/4 or 7/2 or just 7 or whatever. Yes, mostly
you have quarter notes marking the pulse, but not necessarily.

Maybe this is not the forum for further elaborations on the subject.
Let's move to alt.nerds.musical so the moderator does not have to
intervene... :-)



Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 01:23:07 -0700
From: KenL <>
Subject: Record Stores in NYC

Hey folks with good musical taste,

I'll be in NYC from July 29th thru August 1st and I'm looking to do some
record shopping.  As I have not been to NYC in a few years, I was
wondering if anyone out there might know some of the good new/used
record stores.  I only have very vague memories of going to Second
Coming and Golden Disc in some past lifetime.  Do they still exist?  Are
they lame?  Anyway...

Anyone in the know please e-mail me privately by thursday night.




Message-Id: <>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 10:31:48 +0100
From: Dominic Lawson <>
Subject: Re: Rhythm pedantry/Dreary 90s

Sorry, but "Money" has seven beats to the bar, not five. You may well be
right about the rest of it, but if we're going to be pedantic........  Oh,
and "Yesterday" only sounds like it's in 7/8 if you're completely mad.

Brent says.....
>>(Thumbs up, also, to
>>TMBG, Radiohead, Tori Amos and others who have made the music scene
>>faily interesting through this otherwise musically dreary decade!)

Er, yes. While I agree that Radiohead are fantastic, and that both TMBG and
Tori Amos have made some excellent records, your belief that the decade has
been musically dreary is a bit worrying. Maybe you should try avoiding MTV
and take a few risks with your record buying.
"Buzzsaw-guitar-moshpit-fodder" may not exactly be your cup of tea, but from
the way you describe it I can't help thinking that you've limited your own
access to music somewhat. There has been an astonishing amount of brilliant
music in the last few years. I won't go into details because (a) Lord
Harrison will probably go into one about the "tyranny of 90s music" or
something, and (b) I've no idea whether my recommendations would be
appreciated. You should be able to get plenty of good hints from Chalkhills,
but failing that I'd be glad to share my own findings with you.

Needless to say, there is ALWAYS lots of good music around.  Don't let
anyone tell you otherwise.



Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 9:34:00 -0400
From: Eric Brittingham <>
Organization: Online Consulting, Inc
Subject: Monkees!

Saith Andy of the Monkees, quoted in a recent digest (they're coming so
fast I can't keep up):

>"Pisces, Aquarius, Capricorn & Jones, Ltd.", which I would listen to at my
girlfriend's house, is packed with wonderful memories.<

I used to listen to this album, beginning at age 3, which was not long
after its release date, until I finally memorized it and no longer needed
to go through the formality of playing it.  "Don't call on me/ when you're
feeling footloose/ and fancy-free..."  However, I imagine the wonderful
memories I associate with the album as a young shaver (of learning to cut
my own food, etc.) are much different from those of a young man listening
to music in his girlfriend's room.  I wonder if he took as much pride as I
in reciting for his mother Peter Percival Patterson's Pet Pig Porky (he
loved pie, you know).


Message-ID: <B9B4268C8F87D11195DC0000F840FABE0203C477@DUB-MSG-02>
From: Peter Fitzpatrick <>
Subject: listen...
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 16:27:52 +0100 you want to know a secret ?

I've heard some of the material for "Chalkhills' Children '98"....
.....oooooh it's gonna be a good one !

When Richard announces how , where and when you can buy your own copy of

...BUY ONE ! no ! BUY TWO ! give one to your friends !!



From: sfrankli@ECHG.ORG.UK
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 16:34:51 +0100
Subject: Re: In Your Dictionary

I am privileged to have recently heard ' In your Dictionary'. I believe it
was taken off the demo tape circa 95 and will probably be the first single
to be taken off the forthcoming album.
I must say that it is one of the most instantly likeable tracks I have
heard and could well have become the song that finally made it for XTC.
However I can't imagine your friendly advertising standard fearing local
radio station playing it , let alone getting on to the BBC playlist. (see
previous chalkhills ) For those that don't know, the possible controversy
revolves around the use of AP spelling naughty words ... you know the four
lettered type ending in K and starting with F.
Two points. Are there any plans to sell out and may be change the lyric
slightly (hoots of derision) to make it more mass market friendly ? and
secondly as this track has all the makings of a biggy, please tell all your
friends , contacts in the business, great grannies etc. that this is the
best thing they have ever done.
If Virgin were not capable/ willing to and the new label not able, then
lets get this track hyped ourselves and try and get it airplay in what ever

 S-T-E-V-E      F-R-A-N-K-L-I-N    (Pronounced as  Bristol City )


Message-Id: <>>
From: Jonathan Monnickendam <>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 12:00:09 +0000
Subject: black sea to be bagged

An original  copy of Black Sea, bag and all, is to be found for not a lot at
Reckless Records, Brewer Street,  London W1


* ---------------------------------------------------------------
The views expressed are of the individual, and do not
necessarily reflect the views of The United Bank of Kuwait PLC.
* ---------------------------------------------------------------


Message-Id: <>
Subject: Dear Science, deliver us meat.
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 98 11:05:55 -0500
From: Rednoise <>

***Note: technically, no reference to the D*** G** thread***

>Jefferson Ogata wrote;
>D*** G** is just a song *about* the dilemma, and both sides are
>presented in a nicely balanced way, complete with a paradoxical
>twist (paradox -> logic -> science).

I'm not much for the ' The D*** G**' discussion, but Science is my religion,
this casual connection of the terms science and paradox really burns me up
(My fingers are smiling, if you can't tell)

Paradox: (1) a tenet contrary to received opinion
	(2) a self-contradictory statement that at first seems true.

Science (1) knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding
             (2) a knowledge of a system......esp as obtained through

Thats a large leap in my mind. Not quite as large as using the words
'astrology' and
'science' in one sentence, but disturbing none-the-less.

>Coincidentally, Jeff also said;
>It's a good example of what I like about XTC most:
>they include the occasional song whose theme has some real meat
>to it.

I believe that there are few XTC songs whose theme is not 'meaty'....
contrast their lyrics to (almost) any modern band making 'pop' music.

   " I do not pretend to know where many ignorant men are sure--
     that is all that agnosticism means."
    (actually, the last line  was Clarence Darrow's...
     plagiarism being the worst sin...or is it bad spelling ?)


Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 12:01:23 -0700
From: "HALSTED :: the monkey claw is smelly" <>
Message-Id: <199807211901.MAA29049@brak>
Subject: cover of new XTC book...

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet
but has the Neville Farmer
XTC book for pre-sale...and the only reason that
I'm mentioning this is because you can click on
the cover and see the artwork nice and fullsize.

Thought some of might want to take a peek at the
cover as a teaser...

Michael J. Halsted : ILM


Message-ID: <>
From: Jill Oleson <>
Subject: POP? music
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 14:27:17 -0500

I find it curious that so many people, from music
critics to devoted fans of XTC--including Chalkhillians,
refer to the band's music as being "pop."  The term
"pop" is short for "popular," which statistically speaking,
XTC's music is not.  Sure, their music is wildly popular
among their fans, but clearly not with the general public.

Pardon the upcoming sermon, but the term "pop" was
developed to describe the subject matter of 1960's artists,
such as Andy Warhol, Roy Lichtenstein, Claes Oldenberg,
and so on, who borrowed imagery from "popular culture,"
like Campbells' Soup cans, newspaper cartoons, and
common household objects.  At the time, the subject
matter for these artists was "popular" even if their works
of art were not.

I'd like to suggest that we Chalkhillians develop a new
term to describe the music of XTC, so the misused term,
"pop," can be returned to its rightful place:
-- with Michael Jackson.

Any suggestions folks?

Jill Oleson
Austin, Texas


Message-Id: <v03007802b1da573d984b@[]>
From: Ken Herbst <>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 14:40:09 -0600
Subject: Other Listens

Okay, I'll admit I've been away from Chalkhills for awhile. So I don't know
the latest scruff on what is or isn't appropriate on this wonderful public

Anyway, here goes.........

One of the things I loved the most about Chalkhills before my absence was
the references to less known bands and musicians that I might not have
heard about. Some great examples are Jason Faulkner, Poundcake, The Lilic
Time, Spooky Reuben, St. Surreal, Sugarplastic, Eric Matthews, and many
many others.

Is this now a taboo thread to pursue?

I sure hope not.

Who else are you folks listening to that bring these artists to mind?


End of Chalkhills Digest #4-117

Go back to the previous page.