Precedence: bulk
Subject: Chalkhills Digest #5-237

         Chalkhills Digest, Volume 5, Number 237

                  Tuesday, 27 July 1999

Today's Topics:

                       Re: Yes but
                      Popular music
       Pop Joy, self-sabotage and X marks the spot
                  Oh, come on you lot...
                   Rock's current state
        XTC Vs. Britney Spears, Lauryn Hill et al.
         Finally a reference to Guided By Voices!
                     rock commercials
       Bong Rips, Fashion Tips, Big Blond Blunders
            wanted: reviews/news on XTC et al.
                    Influence of Media
                      corporate pop
                  Representing the ages
                      Surprise Finds
                  Why You I Oughtta....
            DG photo on R Stevie Moore's site!
                  Enough of hip-hop talk
               SHUTUP!! and be still my son


    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: <>

    The views expressed herein are those of the individual authors.

    Chalkhills is compiled with Digest 3.7 (John Relph <>).

Some of your friends are too brainy to see.


Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 00:28:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Yes but
Message-ID: <>

Hey, I like Yes and other progressive artists and groups of the 70s.  I
don't see what's wrong with them.  Name me some artists and groups that
top any of the progressive groups of the 70s.



Message-Id: <>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 00:54:48 -0700
From: Queenie <>
Subject: Popular music

Question...When did R&B become stuff like Mariah Carey, Brittany Spears,
Brandy, etc???  My husband fronts a ten piece, old school R&B and funk
band, and when he tunes into what is considered an R&B radio station, he
can't believe what he hears.  It sounds absolutely NOTHING like what it
used to.  Never before has a musical genre taken such a turn in a
completely different direction without being given some new pigeonhole
name.  I mean, if you alter rock music even slightly, a new label is
slapped on it, like "alternative" or "rockabilly" or something like that.
But I have to say that, for the record, as far as the airwaves go, R&B is
TRULY dead.  Maybe the new thing will be the revival of the old school
stuff.  I would sure love that.

On another point, it never even occured to me that AP sounds like Sting on
AV1 until I read it here...I have to disagree.  I find them to be two
distinct and very different voices.  (And...I like Sting as much as the
next guy, but Andy Partridge is a far superior songwriter).

And as far as influential, pioneering groups from the 90's go, I agree with
those who mentioned Beck, Radiohead and Nirvana.  Unfortunately, Alanis
Morissette will probably be remembered as the one who brought angry,
girl-power rock to the mainstream, although she might not have been the
first to do it (L7, Kim & Kelley Deal).  But for "alternative" rock (which
has been the major bulk of popular 90s music) it's going to be Nirvana,
Pixies, Jane's Addiction,etc that people remember. (I realize the Pixies
were 80s, but that's really when the movement began...Music doesn't always
move in perfect, 10 year cycles).

My brain hurts. That's all I can say right now.

P.S.  I can't believe that guy that draws "Over the Hedge" reads this! I
love that strip!  It's so weird!


Message-ID: <001601bed66f$e739ee80$>
From: "Drew MacDonald" <>
Subject: Pop Joy, self-sabotage and X marks the spot
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 00:32:51 -0700

I don't know if they've been mentioned here before, but I found a Chicago
band called The Joy Poppers whose music will probably appeal to many
Chalkhillers. It's not that they sound like XTC, but their rich melodies
and clever-yet-heartfelt lyrics are topnotch.

I happened to catch them live on opening night of International Pop
Overthrow, a multi-day all-pop festival now taking place here in L.A.,
which prompted me to buy their CD "The Golden Hour of the Shrine of the
Little Flower " (Ipecac Records 1998). They also have a cut on the two-disc
set given out to attendees of each of the IPO shows. Any other Joy Poppers
fans in these Hills?

Also, does anyone else think that the last line of "Frivolous Tonight"
sabotages the song? As the tune slows and loses its bounce and Colin sings,
"We're also ridiculous tonight," it injects a note of self-aware pathos
which undermines the unpretentious jollity of the earlier verses. Perhaps
Colin thought the song was too goofy without that final little sting, but I
could have done without it.

And finally, I just found out from a co-worker that she considered me a
chemical-abusing wastrel for the first three months of our acquaintance,
simply because she half-overheard a conversation in which I told someone
else that I was "really into XTC" and she thought I meant the drug. I was
amused by her cluelessness, certainly more amused than I am by the people
who think our lads named their band after the substance.



Message-ID: <>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 01:39:54 -0700
From: Robin Holden <>
Organization: RPHolden Software
Subject: Oh, come on you lot...


Why are you all going so hard on Sting?  Apart from writing about
subjects he knows nothing about, which is certainly not a heinous sin
these days, he's a damn good songwriter.  Can someone tell me what the
general problem with Sting is?



Message-Id: <>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 07:48:21 -0400
From: Jason Long <>
Subject: Rock's current state

Derek <> wrote:
>Chris ( wrote that the last really important rock band
>we had was Nirvana. I can't really think of another choice.

I can: Sleater-Kinney. Although they aren't much of a force commercially
yet, they certainly fit the bill artistically. Their only potential
downfall is that many people associate them too closely with the Northwest
"riot grrrl" scene, which, a great deal of the time, seemed to be more
about politics and conviction than actual talent. Sleater-Kinney are
certainly the exception to that rule, and for me, they are the rock band
that matters right now. If they can remain as fiercely passionate and
uncompromising as they are now while developing their playing and writing
further, they'll be one of the greats. And while they will never likely
achieve the same level of success as Nirvana, they do seem to be on the
verge of something greater.  Considering that they record for Kill Rock
Stars, a small indie label, their records already sell reasonably well and
they have received a great deal of favorable press, which their music does

For anyone who hasn't heard them yet, they're a three-piece: Janet Weiss
plays drums, while both Corin Tucker and Carrie Brownstein share guitar and
vocal duties. No bass. While their roots and influences are in punk,
they've been developing more of a pop sensibility on their two most recent
releases, _Dig Me Out_ and _The Hot Rock_, which are both stunners, even
though they do require a few listens to really sink in.

As for whether rock is dead or not, this is a subject that has been
discussed at great length earlier this year on the Liz Phair list I
maintain, and a lot of good points were raised during those discussions.

Myself, I really don't think that rock is dead by any means; if anything,
this is just a resting period. This does seem to happen about every ten
years or so, where it falls out of favor commercially, but it always comes
back after a couple of years. The way that hip hop and rap dominate the
charts now seems a parallel to disco's popularity in the late-'70s. During
a typical week during that time period, as many as eight of the Top 10
singles would be disco songs, and rock took a real backseat
saleswise. Also, during the late-'80s, there was a flood of teen pop
artists (Debbie Gibson, Tiffany, New Kids, etc.) that rose to prominence,
only to find the charts dominated by alternative rock a few short years
later. I think the music industry does work in cycles, and within a few
years, we'll see things shift again.

There seem to be a lot of reasons for rock's (alternative rock, in
particular) demise. Probably the greatest of these is the fact that so many
key artists, critically or commercially, took several years to release
follow-ups to their breakthrough albums. There hasn't been a full-length
Nine Inch Nails release since 1994, both Liz Phair and Hole took four years
to release new albums, and the Breeders and Elastica have both virtually
disappeared, although both have been said to be working on new material for
a while now. The list of examples of this are endless. I think that many
fans got sick of waiting for their favorites to come out with something
new, and they've turned their attentions elsewhere, as have MTV and the

Also, in the case of other artists, while they have released material in a
more timely manner, the quality of their newer albums is nowhere near that
of their past releases. I know a lot of people who were disappointed by the
last releases from PJ Harvey, Sonic Youth, and Smashing Pumpkins, and each
of these artists have seen a decline in sales for their most recent

Many still believe that Kurt killing himself was the beginning of the end
of alternative rock. I'm not sure if I completely agree, but he was one of
the genre's key figures. Drugs have certainly took their toll, not just
with Kurt, but they've killed the creativity of other artists and have been
responsible for other bands breaking up or calling it quits.

I think another factor might be that since grunge happened, people have
come to closely associate rock music with angst, and after several years of
it, maybe people want to hear something different now, something a little
less cynical and "down."

Ultimately, though, there are still a lot of artists out there putting out
rock albums, even if they're not receiving as much airplay or press
exposure as before. It may take a bit more work now to find the music we
love, and a lot of major label bands may revert to indie status again, but
I wouldn't be too worried.

While I will freely admit that there maybe isn't quite as much good music
coming out right now as there was earlier in the decade, I don't think of
this as entirely being a bad thing, as it has given me an opportunity to go
back and discover a lot of older music I'd wanted to check out but never
got around to, using the money I'd ordinarily be spending on new
releases. My music collection has greatly benefitted from this.

Also, while rock seems down for the count right now, it's never going to
entirely go away, and will likely thrive again in time. It's a lot like in
the movie industry -- horror movies were hopelessly unfashionable for a
period of many years, but right now, they're regaining their popularity --
another cycle that never fails.

As for whether the '90s has produced as much quality music as past decades,
I have to say undoubtedly there have been some gems this decade: anything
by Aimee Mann, Liz Phair (especially her first record), Jen Trynin (XTC
content: Dave Gregory played the solo on "Everything Is Different Now" on
her wonderful _Cockamamie_ album), Elliott Smith, Jason Falkner, The Loud
Family, Matthew Sweet's _Girlfriend_ and _100% Fun_ albums, Beck's
_Odelay_, both of XTC's releases, any of PJ Harvey's first three, and the
latest Spinanes album. And that's just off the top of my head; there's
certainly much, much more.




Message-ID: <>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 22:18:16 +0800
From: Jonathan Dutton <>
Subject: XTC Vs. Britney Spears, Lauryn Hill et al.

The state of the Top 40 is due to a much larger problem - the record
buying public's  apparent inability (or at least unwillingness) to think
for itself.  Instead, they are content to be spoon-fed whatever chaff
record company execs deem sufficiently bland and inoffensive to have
wide (though artificial) appeal.  IMO, anyone with the power of
independent thought could be repelled like insects with much of the
dross that fills the charts.

The truth is, XTC probably would have been international superstars if
the English Settlement tour had run its course as planned.  However,
their fame would almost certainly have been short-lived, like any other
chart act (do you remember what the number one song of 1992 was?  If you
don't, I don't recommend that you find out.  Be blissful in your
ignorance).  If XTC had been stars in the early 80s, by now they may
well be a substantially different (and probably lesser) band, that's if
they still existed. An album like Apple Venus would be out of the

It may not have happened that way.  There are many bands that enjoyed
enormous success at the peak of their careers yet are still held in high
regard - many of them are obvious, such as The Beatles and The Kinks
from the 60s, and Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd from the 70s.  It's a
little more difficult to think of similar bands from the 80s (in
particular) and the 90s, but I personally believe that history will be
kind to Madness and Crowded House, representing the 80s, and Radiohead
and Nirvana, for the 90s.  I am of the opinion that this difficulty is
due to the glut of lightweight trash that proliferated the charts of
these decades, rather than simple recency.

In closing I'd like to make one final observation - people who have
heard of XTC are scarce, but people who dislike their music are far, far


Message-ID: <>
From: "Bob Crain" <>
Subject: Blur-t
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 09:33:51 PDT

>Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 23:07:40 -0700
>From: Adam Tyner <>
>Subject: Re: Clever

>> wrote:
>>Andy's rotten luck: he helps to produce a few songs for Blur's >>"Modern
>>Life is Rubbish" album in 1992, but the band dismisses him because he
>>makes them 'sound too much like XTC.'

>Did any of those tracks ever surface, even as b-sides?  I'd be very
>interested in hearing them.

      I 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th that motion!  Mr. Partridge has said in
an interview (The Big Takeover #44, go get it folks) that he has copies
("I've got them on DAT, actually.  They sound fine.")


From: "Don Rogalski" <>
Subject: Finally a reference to Guided By Voices!
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 01:02:02 +0800
Message-ID: <000001bed6bf$6aa13540$19f81ea3@user>

I'm grateful to Bob O'Bannon for his plug for
Dayton Ohio's finest rock band ever, and am
surprised it took so long on this list.  He wrote:

> Subject: GBV vs. Nirvana
> From: "Bob O'Bannon" <>
> In my mind, the closest thing lately to the spirit of garage/punk has
> been the low-fi recordings of Guided by Voices. Their CD "Bee Thousand"
> (from, what, 1994?) was the best attempt of the 90s (yes, even better
> than Nirvana) at preserving the attitude and rebellion of rock n roll in
> its purest form.  There's no way commercial radio would ever play
> anything off of Bee Thousand, and yet the album is full of flawlessly
> tuneful songwriting -- proving that GBV are not only defying industry
> trends and standards, but are in this for much more than shock
> value. (Their upcoming new album, I realize, is reportedly abandoning the
> low-fi aesthetic).

1994's Bee Thousand and 1995's Alien Lanes are two mile-a-minute
treasures of the most tuneful and gritty rawk and roll songwriting that
exist.  Period.  Ever.

XTC aren't that gritty in the rawk 'n' roll sense of the word, hence I
make this bombastic statement, and yes, I am referring to rawk
and roll as a genre in the truest white middle-class guitar-bass-
drums sense of the word.

(By the way, I think white-middle-class-guitar-bass-drums can
often be a very beautiful thing indeed, but then that's a provocative
and un-PC sentiment better left to a different thread)

The best quote I've ever read about GBV goes something like
this: "Listening to Bee Thousand is the closest thing to taking drugs
without actually taking drugs."

This is true.

What I especially love about GBV is their disdain for songs of inordinate
length.  Most of their selections clock in at about one minute or so,
the longest three minutes, and various short little vignettes last only for
fifteen or twenty seconds.  If at first listen you find the jumpy, erratic
process of  listening to 25 songs in 30 minutes a little unsettling,
once you warm to GBV you find that deep down they are doing rock
and roll in the truest of spirits, meaning that they don't give you any
bullshit.  It's mainlining straight to the artery, although the metaphor
isn't completely apt because instead of dull heroinesque pleasure you
get a quirky rush of melodious guitar and voice that seems to come
from a bottomless barrel of creativity.  Sure, they're mining the
"rawk" thing for all its worth, but in my opinion they've dug up all the
best stuff.

I want musical ideas, I want them now, and I don't want them to
be predictable and repetitive.  Even better, I want them done
artfully raw, but with the unexpected parts left in.  To wit:

> ... listen to "Hardcore UFOs," the opening tune on "Bee Thousand,"
>and wait for that distorted, buzzing guitar track to suddenly drop out,
>making you think one of your speakers has shorted, then only to
>crackle back in arbitrarily after a few seconds of awkward space --
>now that's rock n roll!




Message-ID: <>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 22:51:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tyler Hewitt <>
Subject: NO

OK, the relentless arguing about the merits of hip-hop are getting
tiring. Count me on the 'Don't like it' side (I'm so out of it in
regards to rap that I actually LIKED Arrested Development), but as long
as I don't have to listen to it, I don't really care if anyone else
does. Don't care if it's the cutting edge or not either. I hope I never
get mistaken for someone who follows the latest pop culture trends. My
relationship to pop culture is fascination/revulsion from a distance.

After all, the 50s had Elvis, the 60s had the Beatles, the 70s had Yes, the
80s had XTC...


How bout "the 70s had Can"?


Message-ID: <>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 23:00:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tyler Hewitt <>
Subject: rock commercials

Yeah, I was sort of shocked and surprised when I heard the Buzzcocks on
that car commercial.
Could be fun to think up some, um, interesting songs to sell products.

How about....

'Sister Ray' to sell Trojan Condoms?
'See Me, Feel Me' for a massage therapist?
'Happy Families' for Planned Parenthood?

ok, so its been a long day. I'm sure you all can do better.

Have fun!


Message-ID: <>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 22:18:20 -0700
From: "May O'Mahoney" <>
Subject: Bong Rips, Fashion Tips, Big Blond Blunders

Good Evening Chalkies:

A word of advice:

Could we possibly condense some of our thoughts?  No offense, no....I
take that back....MUCH offense......but this last posting had paragraphs
that were so huge that I just gave up in the middle of some of them
because I actually had a life I had to get back to!  I find a lot of
little pearls of wisdom in these writings (why the hell else would I be
here) but PLEASE lay off the bong before you write!  (grin)

XTC in fashion?  XTC will always be in fashion because they have never
been in fashion.  AP said in an old article that he used to wear the
most obnoxious pants to a bar just to see if he'd get his ass kicked.
Enough said.

And what is up with Bob O's statement about Kurt Cobain being another
Huh?  Um, I hate to burst your bubble Bob but Kurt never actually
appeared on "Baywatch".  And, uh, he didn't really care what &*%$in
color his hair was as far as I could tell.

Very Offended,

- Nostalgia Girl


Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 01:27:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: Miss DIY <>
Subject: wanted: reviews/news on XTC et al.

Hello, I've been lurking for a while on chalkhills,
and the spirit and discussion on this list is part of
my inspiration for

XTC is part of a huge swath of great music which is
consistantly overlooked.

Hypeless is run strictly for music lovers. People that
have their own tastes, their own style and their own

The thing is, many music sites are owned or run by
someone with a direct interest in a product. SonicNet
and MTV, WallOfSound and Disney, and now CDnow and
Sony Inc. All magazines are influenced by its
advertisers. Emailed newsletters contain links and
links of ads. And MTV? Well...

We need a site where real music really matters.

Hello, I'm Winslow Leach. And I'd like to introduce, the site where YOU become an inside
source. Where you post your thoughts an opinions under
a nom de plume. As a result, you can say anything
you'd like.

I've been on a number of mailing lists for some time
(chalkhills included, of course), and there are a
select few getting this email, because you care, but
mostly because your genre or band is not getting the
attention and respect it deserves.

We'd like to change that.

For the skeptics, I'd like to restate the authenticity
of the site. We are not out to make a profit, not out
to capitalize on my contributors. Hypeless is a site
where insiders can speak honestly about the industry,
the music and independence. You get information on
tour dates? New albums? Events? Share them with

Please excuse the interruption, but I'm looking for
some talented, passion writers, and this list seemed a
good place to be.

Let's make some change:

Winslow Leach
Hypeless is _always_ on:
ICQ#: 42690349
Yahoo! Pager: win5low
PowWow: winslow
Don't believe the hype.
Believe Hypeless.

thanks for your time, XTCers.


Message-Id: <>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 10:38:35 -0500
From: Erik Meyer <>
Subject: Influence of Media


The recent discussion about the influence of media on public
opinion got me thinking a little  (Allow me to ramble a
little).  I agree that whether or not an artist is popular
should not affect one's opinion of that artist, although it
does affect mine on occasion.  Working in radio, I often get
tired of mainstream music faster than the average bear.
Consequently, I'm constantly on the lookout for music that
doesn't fit the bill as "a single".  Bands like XTC allow me
to love music, and still see the humor in a Gwar or ICP live

Oh, sorry, the influence of media.  For those of you
concerned, radioplay doesn't always make the difference when
forming public opinion.  We had one record label give us a
flyaway to see a well known band, in exchange for playing a
lesser known band.  It just so happened that the lesser
known band sucked, in every sense of the word, and even
after ten or twelve plays a week for almost a month, they
couldn't sell any more than 100 tickets.  Hopefully I
haven't strayed too much, but my point is that radio has to
adapt to the public just as much as the public adapts to
radio.  Progressive/adult alternative stations will continue
to play bands such as XTC for those willing to listen.  XTC
is not for everybody, and I like it that way.

One more thing.  Ben, Sugar-"Copper Blue" is an incredible
album.  If you don't own them already, get some of his solo
stuff, specifically "Black Sheets of Rain" and "Workbook".

Thank You for allowing me to vent,



Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 10:28:55 -0700
Subject: corporate pop

keep in mind, all, that we (people on chalkhills and other fan lists)
are *music fans*! anyone who bothers his/her ass to subscribe to a list
like this, follow the discussions, respond from time to time (not to
mention the regulars who have posts in almost every digest) is bound to
take music pretty seriously and will exert a fair bit of thought &
energy into finding interesting, new, "good" music to listen to and talk
about and purchase. i think we are the minority.
my theory is this: everyone likes music, to greater & lesser extents.
but most people don't spend a great deal of time lurking about record
shops & the www. looking for ever new tantalizing gems to add
to/complete their collection, or will buy something they've never heard
of b/c andy produced a couple of songs on it. indeed, do most people
even know who or what the producer is? for myself music is a hobby. xtc
is a specialized branch of research, if you will, of that hobby. but i
think that the majority of the music-buying public doesn't want to have
to hunt for it. they hear a song on the radio or mtv, they like it, they
buy the album, lather, rinse, repeat. its sort of like when a person
comes home and will turn on the tv and then leave the room to do other
things. it doesn't matter what's on, as long as it's on. music doesn't
play the same role in most peoples lives as it does to your average
rabid xtc fan. or guided by voices fan, rocket from the crypt, kate
bush, beatles, [insert cult-favorite here].
so should we blame the nefarious "music industry" (whoever they are.
seagrams, inc.? see c-h digest #5-236, 'Rock Music: The State of the
Union'. very interesting). i think not. obviously they're going to
market & promote what sells, and if the pockets of people with good
taste get left out, too bad. also, just because something is popular,
doesn't mean it sucks, it just appeals to the broadest marketing base.
xtc and any of their producers know exactly what to do in order to get a
smash hit single, they just don't do it. there are no evil masterminds
in secret command stations pulling strings to ensure mediocrity in
popular music. there are evil masterminds looking at sales figures
saying "make more of this! this sells!" for better or for worse.



Message-Id: <>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 18:08:29 -0400
Subject: Representing the ages
From: "Diamond" <>

>I humbly surmise that there are bands today that make creative and
>interesting music that will last well after the end of the millennium...
>After all, the 50s had Elvis, the 60s had the Beatles, the 70s had Yes,
>the 80s had XTC... could it be that this is the first decade which will
>produce no memorable new music at all?

The way I always looked at it was

50's: Elvis
60's: Beatles
70's: Pink Floyd
80's: U2
90's: Nirvana.

Now, these aren't necessarily MY favorite's from these generations, I just
think these are the artists that will define the generations. Not that we
need just one for every generation. I think all of these would be better
defined by several bands. Not all the music of the sixties was like the
Beatles. You'd need to include west coast american stuff, like the byrds
and the beach boys. as wll as the doors (They were sixties, right?). In the
70's you'd have too include the bee-gees, and Elton John, not to mention
Talking Heads, and the sex pistols late seventies early eighties. In the
eighties, REM, the New Wave bands, Maybe Sting and the Police. In the
ninties, You'd have to include some rap groups (I don't like rap, so I
wouldn't know who).  And I almost forgot about the Motown stuff early on,
like the supremes. It's a very broad category, music, and defined so
surely, it becomes boring.

I also wanted to say that... ummmm... I can't remember now. It'll come to
me later. Oh well.

Kevin Diamond


Message-ID: <>
From: "frederick rains" <>
Subject: Surprise Finds
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 14:39:07 PDT

long time since any post from out my way, just wanted to quickly write into
the list to let everybody know of a great surprise "find" this morning. Out
on some errands for the band I'm in I came across the classic "Queen Elvis"
by Robyn Hitchcock AND the "3-D EP"!! Both in amazing relatively new
condition and incredibly inexpensive!
HOORAY for bargain vinyl outlets!
And now The countdown to "Fuzzy Warbles" And "AV vol.2" continues...


Message-ID: <000c01bed7b8$deff9a40$>
From: "Victor Rocha" <>
Subject: Why You I Oughtta....
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 15:47:41 -0700

Hello Chalkaholics,

A couple of weeks ago someone said they were glad that Dave Gregory was
gone because his playing was too slick.....TOO SLICK???  saying that Dave
Gregory's playing is too slick is like saying that Andy Partridge is too
clever......or Colin is too purty

Victor Rocha

just don't hurt nobody, unless of course they ask you


Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 20:08:04 -0400
From: Ian C Stewart <>
Subject: DG photo on R Stevie Moore's site!


while doing "research" on R Stevie Moore for the upcoming HOMEPOP
EXPLOSION issue of AUTOreverse, I came across a photo of DAVE GREGORY
posed rather frighteningly accurately like R Steview Moore himself. It's
crazy wacky fun!

Ian C Stewart
you record it | we review it


Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 23:01:07 -0400
From: Ben Gott/Loquacious Music <>
Subject: Sell!


The lady who works in the office next to me is a huge XTC fan!  I lent my
copy of "AV1" to her, and she loves it!  So, there!

Also, here's a commercialism alert: Nissan is using The Smiths' "How Soon
Is Now?" to advertise the new Maxima.  What's next?  "Greenman" selling
Scott's "Turf Builder"?



Message-ID: <003101bed7ef$5cfb9620$e6c62499@oemcomputer>
From: "Chauffefamily" <>
Subject: Enough of hip-hop talk
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 22:14:47 -0700

Hey Chris D.- You seem to find it more important to defend hip hop & Lauryn
Hill ( yes, I heard her CD and I still think it sucks and is a pathetic
rehash of the whole current Rn'B thing) and talk down fellow Chalkhillers.
Maybe you have the wrong website- perhaps you should be in Master P's or
Nationwide rip ridaz's sites??  For your information, there was once a time
in the 60's when quite a few incredible garage bands were able to break the
airways, which was helped even further when FM radio was truly
"underground" until finally it too became commercialized as well. True,
label owners were always in the business to make money, but it was a far
cry from today. For the record, I am very knowledgeable about "today's
music" but that doesn't mean I have to accept it or like it. As to
alternative bands, at least they can play instruments, which does seem to
be a problem for most rap or hip hop acts. It's not my fault that DJ's are
programmed to play the same mindless 10 songs over and over again. Given a
few listens, I think most young kids would give a thumbs up to XTC- as I
have seen this happen. On a closing note, since you feel the need to know,
my name is Charles, and if you want, I'll get you my E-mail address to
discuss all these issues personally, as I don't want to tie up Chalkhills
with swapping insults. As to my 'pappy' at 77, he can still kick a lot of


Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 23:32:13 -0700
From: Randy Hiatt <>
Subject: SHUTUP!! and be still my son

On the Sting comparison.....

Every Tenor sounds like the Three Tenors,

Irish dancing reminds me of River Dance,

am I an idiot?!  no.

Randy (hikuu) Hiatt

what you here is the measure of your listening



End of Chalkhills Digest #5-237

Go back to the previous page.