Precedence: bulk
Subject: Chalkhills Digest #5-238

         Chalkhills Digest, Volume 5, Number 238

                 Wednesday, 28 July 1999

Today's Topics:

                         Yes? No!
                       Rock is dead
              Dave Mattacks spotted in Mojo
                Dave on R. Stevie Moore CD
     Half of Chalkhills' music pondering is piffle...
                   To the f*@kin point.
                     more commericals
             three condensed comments in one!
           beyond the boundaries of the garage
                Re: Oh come on you lot...
                      fuzzy warbles
      I can't believe that I'm defending the 70's...
                  Achy Breaky Prog-Rock
                  Yes, Rock is not dead
                     lots o' nonsense
                       Re: Yes, but
               Sound like someone we know?
          on advertising and the music business
                       Misery Guts


    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 <>).

It's cold outside the fold.


Message-Id: <>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 11:54:16 +0200
From: Giovanni Giusti <>
Subject: Yes? No!

Ah, language!

My example of Yes as a flagship band for the 70s wasn't well received. Ah
well, it was just an example. I am personally very fond of them, but, this
ain't the "Relayer" mailing list or whatever so I won't press the point.

The other thing I said was probably ill-expressed: when I said "could it be
that there's no good music in the 90s?" I meant that of course there must
be some. There *must* be someone in the non-academic music scene who's
doing something memorable right now. I have my personal faves, but they are
besides the point.

However, I feel the irresistible urge to say something about the "rock vs.
non-rock being the music of the 90s" sub-thread.

I don't know how to define "rock" other than non-watered-down, non-academic
music, so *my* definition of it includes the Chemical Brothers too.

On a less polemic note: I remember that when I saw the Italian "White
Music" vinyl a friend of mine had (that was the reason we made friends in
the first place), it had an ugly "PUNK" logo printed on it, as if to say
"buy this, it's one of the records from that new wave of ultra-hip music
called 'punk'". That is the scene where XTC originally came from, not pop.
And I'm sure many of us got to know them together with, uhm, Sham 69, the
Buzzcocks and the Sex Pistols.

Then of course we grew up, XTC grew up, and we all have thinning hair....




Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 07:36:00 EDT
Subject: Rock is dead

>I think we're still too close to the 90s to really determine what music
>will be lasting or memorable. Most likely it will be music that breaks
>conventions, and it won't be in the "rock" genre. As much as it hurts me
>personally, I've been coming around to the fact that "rock" music, as we
>know it, is pretty much dead. The only vestiges of the genre that remain
>viable seem to be in hybrids, such as rap-rock or electronica-rock. Most
>artists I've liked in the past few years that actually became successful
>were either a hybrid of some sort or they fell prey to a fickle public who
>saw them as a novelty act. There's no longevity in the straight-ahead rock
>genre anymore, at least at a major label level.

>Chris ( wrote that the last really important rock band
>we had was Nirvana. I can't really think of another choice. I thought
>Garbage, one of those hybrid bands I mentioned, seemed poised to become a
>very important force in music, but they seem to be stuck in novelty hell
>now. Lauryn Hill (and the Fugees), Puff Daddy and Dr. Dre are going to be
>remembered for a while to come, I assume. And time will tell if the new
>hard rock artists (Limp Bizkit, Kidd Rock, Deftones) are going to lead a
>new direction or become pase, like White Zombie.

>I guess ultimately, we should just be open to whatever direction music goes
>in. Instead of defending one genre against another, we should take Dom's

>>Why not take both? More music = more fun!

>= Derek

  Amen to that, and very intelligently put. Perhaps the only new boundaries
white people with guitars can break is use some of the rhythms of
contemporary R&B/rap to reinvigorate popular music the way Elvis and his
cohorts did back in the 50's by marrying blues to C&W and eventually
calling the resulting baby rock and roll. In a way the Rolling Stones,
today's Glen Miller Orchestra as far as their relative age and relavance to
current music is concerned, did an admirable job of keeping up with the
times with Bridges To Babylon. Okay, it smelled of calculated
commercialism, but they get points for trying. Others will stick with what
they do best and that's fine too. In my earlier post I couldn't think of
any truly important BANDS that will be remembered as such ten years from
now since Nirvana(Beck is a solo artist, doesn't count). Certainly not on
the alternative/pop scene; though commercially successful, nobody can tell
me Third Eye Blind, Matchbox 20 and Blink 182 are particularly
innovative. If Radiohead can come up with another album as innovative as OK
Computer, they'd qualify; so would Garbage if they can sustain the promise
they've shown so far, and though I don't like them very much, same goes for
Smash Mouth. Though I have little use for contemporary rap/R&B, from what I
can tell about Lauryn Hill she seems very talented. I can recognise talent
and merit in a form of music that's isn't my cup of tea. In fact, I'd much
sooner listen to Lauryn Hill than Limp Bizkit any day. For the first time
in my life, I can look at the Billboard top 40 and see practically nothing
I can relate to, maybe two or three I can remotely at best. I'm turning
into my parents! AAAAAAAA!



Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 14:56:10 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Martin van Rappard <>
Subject: Dave Mattacks spotted in Mojo
Message-ID: <>

>From the August issue of Mojo on Richard Thompson's new (mid-August)
album Mock Tudor: "Beck associates Tom Rothrock and Rob Schnapf produce;
features son Teddy, Dave Mattacks and Danny Thompson."

The same issue also named AV1 as one of the best albums (yet) of 1999; to
counterbalance such unexpected good taste, they devoted a more or less
equal area of print to Phil Collins's snare drum, which they were giving
away (but who in his right mind would want it?).:)



Subject: Dave on R. Stevie Moore CD
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 00:28:49 -0500
From: steve <>
Message-Id: <[]>

The R. Stevie Moore & Friends CD of "DATES" WITH DAVE
GREGORY is now officially for sale to the general public at:

- Steve

We're all Jesus, Buddha, and the Wizard of Oz! - Andy Partridge


Message-ID: <>
From: "Witter, Karl F" <>
Subject: Half of Chalkhills' music pondering is piffle...
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 15:27:33 -0400 if I only knew which half.

I always wondered if "Smells like Teen Spirit" was the
last song that "everyone knew". Yes, I guess being here marks
me as eclectic, but didja ever feel like you were too young
or smug, and missed out on something? "That'll be the Day",
"A Hard Day's Night" or "Born to Run"?

So, where to find it today? Who's gonna blaze on the scene
and stay there, or grow gracefully into stardom? All the
standard-bearers left, no matter your taste, are at least in
their '40s and on the down side of the bell curve commercially.

I know: I shouldn't care; that doesn't matter to me. But it
does, because it affects how music gets made and whether I
find it, even in the internet era. And that is the curse of
rock. Our young spitfires can grow old gracefully and take
up the troubador mantle, but to the snot-nosed twerps tugging
the ear of the industry they're Andy Williams to their Elvis.
So we snarl and await their comeuppance. And when it comes
it brings us no joy, for everything replacing their crap is
even more derivative.

There must be a way, you say, as you look at your cassettes:
The likes of Buddy Guy, Rosemary Clooney and Barbara Cook
aren't pushed aside because the GenXers into blues, jazz,
and cabaret need to be pandered to above all else.

On the flip side, many of us hate their pre-pube boy groups and
pop tarts, but if rock is rebellion, are we running out of
targets in life or music?

In life, we all have this collective memory of the 1950s:
Stolid, bland, unchanging. Short hair, dorky glasses, white
short-sleeve shirt. For you ladies, heels, pearls, even dorkier
glasses, and that little half-apron a la Donna Reed. Yes, the
image didn't ring true for all, but held for more than even
skeptics like me thought. Perfect time and place for the
genesis of rock'n'roll.

However, modern life is already rubbish! How can you alienate
a world like this? How can you shock anyone anymore? What's not
co-opted in an epoch where corporations rock, if you believe
Wired magazine? (And if you don't, what's the point when
every mag out there wants to recreate itself in the image of
Young Asshole--excuse me--Maxim?) They've either stolen our
toys/tools or returned them damaged beyond use.

In music, it's almost as if anything we turned our sights on is
tissue paper torn apart by the slightest zephyr long before we've
hit the button. Ricky Martin me no Ricky Martin; let's see if he
can string together three hit songs in a row, or if "La Vida Loca"
will just be on some movie soundtrack when I hit 50, causing me
to mutter "'Frankie Goes to Hollywood' or 'Dexy's Midnight

I gotta go,

PS Thanx to Derek for piece on UMG. By the by, you couldn't come
up with a name better connoting evil, soulless, all-encompassing
villainy than Universal Music Group unless you owned the
trademark to "Snidely Whiplash".


Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 12:31:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: nross <>
Subject: To the f*@kin point.

THIS post was the best post out of the last digest.
It was so good... one of the few I read in its entirety, that I think
it should be posted again:

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


Bluntness is next to Godliness.


Message-ID: <000901bed86b$74ef6960$>
From: "Drew MacDonald" <>
Subject: more commericals
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 13:06:04 -0700

Okay, Tyler and Ben, how about this one:

"Hello, I'm Andy Partridge for First Alert smoke alarms. Don't settle for
less! Remember, First Alert alarms have one, two, three, four, five sensors
working overtime --  for your safety."


Message-ID: <900822C71730D2118D8C00805F65765C78B8D3@EINSTEIN>
From: Jill Oleson <>
Subject: three condensed comments in one!
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 15:40:53 -0500

To Dan:
Not EVERYONE enjoys music.  My mother hates it;
she prefers the quiet.  Says music makes her nervous!
There's no accounting for genetics, eh?  I adore and draw
sustenance from (artfully chosen) music.

To Queenie:
While Alanis Morissette was very effective in bringing
"angry, girl-power rock to the mainstream," her predecessors
include not only L7 and the Deal twins (2/4 of The Breeders),
but Patti Smith and Chrissie Hynde (of The Pretenders),
whose impassioned estrogen spewed all over the male-
dominated rock-and-roll scene more than two decades ago
and included substantial radio air play (depending where
you lived and what time you tuned in).  I'm sure others
on this list can supply additional "girl-power rock"
examples that predate Patti Smith's first record in 1974.
This EP included a revolutionary intro to a cover of "Hey Joe"
and "Piss Factory," which she co-wrote with Richard Sohl.
Read the racy lyrics at your own risk and see what I mean:

To Victor:
Colin IS too pretty.  (Is too!  Is not!  Is too!  Is not!)


Jill Oleson
Austin, Texas


Message-ID: <900822C71730D2118D8C00805F65765C78B8C7@EINSTEIN>
From: Jill Oleson <>
Subject: beyond the boundaries of the garage
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 17:18:14 -0500 posed the following:

     what exactly is [the equivilant to] "garage" music now?
     and exactly how are people utilizing new media and
     communications to distribute it? and is there still an
     aversion to "selling out"?

My guess, Dan, is that mp3 technology is how garage bands
are distributing their music.  This is based on limited personal
observation--I have no broad expertise on this subject.

I'd be interested to learn the opinions of others on this topic--
particularly from those with more personal insight than I have.
So, Garage Band Experts, how would you answer Dan's


Jill Oleson
Austin, Texas
(back from a well-deserved vacation!)


Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 15:23:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Oh come on you lot...
Message-ID: <>

Robin wrote:
<<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?>>

I like Sting, but I think a lot of people in this group are jealous for
how successful Sting has become.  They also think Sting is a pompus twit
who is not that talented, wchich of course I don't think so.  He does a
lot for charities, but that makes any musician look bad, because rock
stars aren't supposed to care about anything.  That's why Peter Gabriel
isn't successful anymore.



Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 15:04:05 -0700
Subject: fuzzy warbles

can someone tell me what "fuzzy warbles" is (without mentioning
'clockwork orange' if possible)? is it an upcoming release of demos or



From: "Steve and Lauren Perley" <>
Subject: I can't believe that I'm defending the 70's...
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 18:25:10 -0400
Message-ID: <01bed87e$e35db240$>

Time to de-lurk after a long e-hibernation!
We've all seen this:

>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?

Followed by people responding with "Yes!?!  Are you CRAZY!?!", etc.

I got to thinking about the fact that the 70's are often dismissed as a
horrible time in pop music history.  I guess that Disco gave the decade a
bad name.  But if you think about it, that's the first decade of the rock
era that you CAN'T sum up with one group or artist.  Sure, there's Yes.
What about Kiss?  Admit it, you loved 'em!  Aerosmith?  ELO?  Solo Paul
McCartney (i.e. Wings) was huge.  There's Fleetwood Mac, Steely Dan,
Chicago, and countless "sensitive singer-songwriters" like Dan Fogleburg,
Cat Stevens, James Taylor...(they're back again, except they're women now!
Lilleth Fair, anybody?  That's nothing against women, by the way.  Just
observing a trend.)  Even some really cool bands like Big Star hail from
the alleged Age of Crap.

Then there are my personal favorites from the 70's; The Ramones, The
Damned, The Clash, and of course, XTC.

In the 70's, especially early on, FM radio was a lot more diverse.  Today,
it's a joke.  If you don't fit into a neat, little, easy to swallow
catagory, nobody wants to know.  I just saw Jeff "Skunk" Baxter, sometimes
of Steely Dan, on VH-1, and he was saying that today they'd never get a
record deal because some record company weasel would ask the standard "what
kind of music do you guys play?" question, and there'd be no really easy

But back then, all of the groups mentioned above could be heard on the same
station.  Heck, they still are on "classic rock" stations.

Anyway, I'm not here to poo-poo on anybody's choice of Defining Artist of
the _0's.  Just a thought on an underrated musical decade.

As for the 90's, give me 20 years and I'll think of someone interesting.
There's still time to make this the Guided By Voices decade...

(A small footnote here, folks...The artists mentioned above do not
necessarily reflect the musical tastes of the author - except the punk
stuff.  And Steely Dan.  And I kind of appreciate Aerosmith now more than
when I was younger, and...OH, NEVER MIND!  Also, in case you're wondering,
I'll be 36 next month, so this is the music I grew up with.  If you want to
know how an aging punk occupies his time, visit )

And now, back to our regularly-scheduled lambasting of Phil Collins...

Steve Perley


Message-Id: <>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 08:22:33 +1000
Subject: Achy Breaky Prog-Rock

>>Hey, I like Yes and other progressive artists and groups of the 70s.  I
don't see what's wrong with them.

Hell, I like 'em too - King Crimson, Emerson Lake & Palmer, Jethro Tull and
PG-era Genesis were a big chunk of what I listened to high school, and I
don't mind admitting it. Their only failing is that, in 1999, they sound a
tad overblown and pompous (which they probably did in 1973, come to think
of it).

>>Name me some artists and groups that
top any of the progressive groups of the 70s.

Well, okay, since you asked nicely :

Marvin Gaye, Rory Gallagher, Graham Parker & The Rumour, Richard Thompson,
The New York Dolls, Iggy Pop, Elvis Costello, Buzzcocks, Frank Zappa, Bob
Dylan (the '70s were a bit dry for the Bobster, but "Blood On The Tracks"
more than compensates for "Self Portrait"), Warren Zevon, Steely Dan (what
are you laughing at?), Gram Parsons, The Jam, Tom Waits....oh, and XTC, I

That's just my opinion, mind you.....

>>(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

"Achy Breaky Heart", perhaps? (Sorry if I've just spoiled anyone's
ignorance trip - I'm not even sure if my guess was right, but it wouldn't
surprise me).

>>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".

Second that - "Workbook" is a damn fine album, especially "Wishing Well"
(after an acoustic-ish opening, the amplifiers kick in halfway through -
tres mucho groovy). I've got "Copper Blue", but haven't listened to it for
a while - must be time to give it a spin.



Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 17:51:39 +0100
From: chris vreeland <>
Organization: Vreeland Graphics
Subject: Yes, Rock is not dead

Just some musings I've been chewing on:

I noticed Yes popping up here the last few days. When I first heard
River of Orchids, (beyond just saying "WOW") there was a familiarity to
the "chorus" melody line that I could not pin down. I shuffled that
thought to the back of my brain for a while, and dug out my copy of
Remain In Light.  Structurally, ROO resembles what David Byrne was after
on that album- no chord changes, just different melody lines over the
original rythmic structure, and on some of the songs, the melody lines
are superimposed over one another for a really thick texture-thing. I've
always liked that Talking Heads album the best- it has an exuberance
that's rare in music (that Adrian Belew guy!). So, I'd smugly made that
connection, but the melody line was still bugging me. Some time in may,
we (my band) got into the van to drive to Tyler (don't ask) and the
first two disks into the player were AV1 and Close to the Edge. (First
off, I was one of the big Yes detractors all through the eighties, and
was heard to loudly slur their name in public on many occasions. But you
know what? Close to the Edge RULES!) Then, about a minute into Siberia
(track three) I heard it! The Melody line! Could Andy Partridge have
been subconciously influenced by Yes?!?!? compare, if you can:

"River of orchids world overgrows"
"Even Siberia goes through the motions"

Yes-haters take heed!

Rock is dead? Anyone who would utter such nonsense has never seen The
Jesus Lizard live. Those crazy kids today!

And there have been some great, I should say watershed albums released
in the Nineties. Kurt is just dead, and that's sad, but that's all.
Soundgarden's Superunknown is a masterpiece, by my estimation.  Anybody
else out there also think the same about Shudder to Think's Pony Express
Record? The list could go on, but why?

 Chris "My Daughter Loves Greenman!" Vreeland


Message-ID: <>
From: "robert baumgartner" <>
Subject: lots o' nonsense
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 15:53:27 PDT

Yes? YES?????  NO!!!!
Yes were amazing instrumentalists- no doubt. All too willing to show off
their "chops". But as for SONGWRITING (i.e. HOOKS/LYRICS, etc...), there is
really no way to put them at the head of the 70's class of music. Even if
you're looking down the road as to who will be remembered from that era, it
won't be Yes. Sorry.

How about Stevie Wonder? Steely Dan?Bee Gees? Elton John? Pink Floyd? All
worthy contenders. It's hard to put ANY artist over Stevie during the 70's.
Think about it. Actually, if Paul McCartney had never been in the Beatles
I'm sure he'd get a lot more acclaim & recognition for his 70's work. But
Stevie gets the nod here.

Personally, I would choose Elvis Costello from the 80's (listen to
"Imperial Bedroom"), only becuz I hate to say XTC was "80's" because their
2 proper 90's CD's were SO damn good. That's just me. XTC are still great
and relevant.That's not to put down E.C.... but he hasn't come close to a
"Nonsuch" or "Apple Venus V.1" during this decade.

As for the 90's....

It's been a great decade for music. Allow me to namedrop:
Stereolab, Sleater-Kinney, High Llamas, Fountains Of Wayne, Beastie Boys,
Elliott Smith, Cibo Matto, Jason Falkner, Beck, Radiohead, Nirvana,
Cornelius and many more I'm forgetting.

Alanis? Yuck.

Sting? Uh... no thanx. The Police were pretty cool I guess. But Sting's
self-importance is really grating.That"I've got something important to tell
you" pose got old years ago. He CAN on occasion whip up a good melody.
Wonder why people don't respect Sting so much? What was the deal with that
horrid Sting/Rod Stewart/Bryan Adams "All For Love" debacle a few years
back? Eh?

I'm no Hip-Hop expert, but to me the Beastie's "Hello Nasty" is way, way
more inventive than Lauryn Hill's "Miseducation" CD.

A few Chalkhills ago, I read someone who mentioned Prefab Sprout. Just
wondering if there are any other XTC fans who also dig Prefab Sprout. I
think Paddy McAloon is criminally underrated. If you think XTC are kind of
obscure, just mention the Sprouts to somebody. THAT'S obscure! Great music,
though. Gerswhin + McCartney + Jimmy Webb= a very unique sound for Paddy.
And their last CD (1997's "Andromeda Heights") hasn't even been released in
America. That's not good.

There. I've vented enough.


Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 19:00:25 +0000
From: Brian <>
Subject: Re: Yes, but


Molly typed:

>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.<

Well, who's doing this kind of stuff nowadays?
It's like asking what apple juice tastes better than what orange juice.



Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 20:04:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tyler Hewitt <>
Subject: Sound like someone we know?

An entry from "The Mammoth Dictionary of Symbols"
by Nadia Julien


According to Aristotle and Pliny, the partridge, like the quail, was
sacred to the goddess of love, because of its reputation for sexual

In Christian tradition, it was an incarnation of the devil, and in the
Book of Ecclesiastes, a partridge in a cage (used to lure other birds)
symbolizes 'the heart of the proud; and like as a spy watcheth he for
thy fall. For he lieth in wait and turneth good to evil; and in things
worthy of praise will lay blame upon these.'

In China, the partridge symbolizes mutual attraction.


Message-ID: <>
From: "Amanda Owens" <>
Subject: Snort....yawn.....
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 23:54:21 CDT

She's back, the one, the only........AMANDA. No, haven't died, haven't
abandoned the hallowed halls of XTC-dom, just didn't see much to yank my
chain on the 'Hills lately, until these little gems passed along my

Victor Rocha did sayeth:

>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

I've got one thing to say to this person-FORK YOU! But then again, that's
not knife. (Titter titter) But seriously, I can kinda see the point,
because Dave does have a bit of a more methodical approach to guitar
playing than Andy does. But saying they're glad he left makes my heart
ache. Why must you hurt me so? WHY?!?!?!?!?

Ian Stewart did sayeth:

>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!

And a damn funny picture as well. Honestly though, I think Dave looks more
than Fu Manchu with the funky moustache......and I've told him so

Tis all for now,
Amanda C. Owens
"It seems the thinkers you call greatest are the sort who often fall ill
young or pine away. how can they help but drag the species down?"-Brad
XTC song of the day-Harvest Festival
non XTC song-Someday We'll Know-New Radicals


Message-ID: <>
From: "Megan Heller" <>
Subject: on advertising and the music business
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 00:45:28 PDT

So Nissan is using The Smiths' "How Soon is Now?" and Isuzu is using The
Buzzcocks' "What do I Get?".  Honda is ripping off "88 Lines About 44 Women
(but who's counting?" in its ads.  I met the guy who was responsible for
putting Lush's "Sweetness and Light" and Psychic TV's "Roman P." in
Volkswagen commercials.

My childhood is officially over. (especially considering that my *father*
is in advertising)

and now, to flog that dead horse a bit, "Chauffefamily", er, says--

>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??

again, don't like it, but there's really no need to be insulting.  I
thought this was a discussion list, not a bloody catfight.  Anyway, is
someone not *allowed* to like rap and XTC?  Was there a memo?

>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.

Do you know what the bestselling song in the US in 1966, was when the music
business supposedly had so much of a soul?  "The Ballad of the Green Beret"
by Sgt. Barry Sadler-- not exactly an incredible garage band.  I also seem
to remember that the 60s produced such nuggets of sincerity and truth as
the Monkees and Ohio Express (remember "Yummy Yummy Yummy"?).  The music
business has *always* been a business, and crap was easier to ignore then--
it's not that it's being shover down our throats, there are just more
communication outlets in general these days.  Anyway, even when a band was
being sincere, really trying to make a difference by protesting Vietnam
with good music, the record companies were in turn actually *making money*
off Vietnam through these acts-- the longer it went on, the more protest,
the more albums sold.  Record companies have always been fairly slick, and
the cry really isn't so far as you think.

As for today, again, popular music does not equal bad music.  Such an
attitude denotes a very small world indeed.  Now I'm edging insulting, so
I'll leave it at that (don't want to be pot calling kettle black).



Message-Id: <>
From: Lawson Dominic <>
Subject: Misery Guts
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 10:45:05 +0100

>>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.

Gosh, you're terribly open-minded aren't you? How refreshing. Listen,
people slag something off that we like.....we defend it! Why is that odd?
As for talking down to fellow Chalkhillers....ooh, what a nightmare! How do
you cope? Seriously, I've been patronized, slagged off and generally
attacked by various unhappy souls on this list, but surprisingly it doesn't
actually mean very much. Get over it.

>>Maybe you have the wrong website- perhaps you should be in Master P's or
Nationwide rip ridaz's sites??

Why's that? Because you're scared of being seen as 'trendy'? It's the same
old's popular, therefore it must suck.......GROW UP!!!!!
No one's pointing a gun at your head and forcing you to like Hip Hop (not
that you seem to have any clue what Hip Hop is) or Lauryn Hill's album, but
calling the latter a "pathetic rehash of the whole current R'n'B thing" is
staggeringly ignorant. I recently compared that album to "Songs In The Key
Of Life" and although I am aware that I was being slightly generous, the
comparison is not entirely unreasonable. Both albums are riddled with
contemporary sounds from their respective eras, and both are collections of
excellent songs, beautifully arranged and performed. As you scowl and spit
venom towards something you clearly have no right to criticize, perhaps you
might ask yourself why other XTC fans are so keen to defend these things.

>>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.

Oh please! "Alternative" bands (whatever that means) are no more musically
gifted than "rap or hip hop" acts - that's such a feeble argument. Just
because you don't understand something, it doesn't necessarily mean that it
has no creative worth. For a start, your comments prove how little you know
about these genres. DJ's are no more likely to repeat themselves ad nauseam
than the dreary sour-faced pseudo-hippies that pass for "alternative" bands
these days. Garbage and Hole, for instance, are far more reliant on cliches
and formulas than any of the Hip Hop stuff I listen to (which, on the
whole, is considerably less popular than you seem to imagine) and if you'd
done your homework, you'd know that there are numerous hugely talented
people in commercial black music today. It's up to you if you want to have
your little petulant foot-stamping sessions, as you desperately try to be
Mr Anti-Hip, but when your arguments are so wafer-thin you can hardly be
expected to be taken seriously. Well, not by me anyway.

>>I don't want to tie up Chalkhills
with swapping insults

...and that's another thing. If you feel you have to insult people because
they disagree about music and dare to like something
that's....gasp!....popular, then why not pretend to be doing everyone else
a service by taking the discussion off-list? That way no one gets to read
your badly thought-out drivel and feeble, one-sided arguments and you can
kid yourself that you're the good guy! Nice work.....

>>Why are you all going so hard on Sting?

Because he's shit. And anyone who thinks otherwise is a wanker. (See what I
mean? Get it out in the open - you'll feel much better!).....

>>Name me some artists and groups that
top any of the progressive groups of the 70s.

XTC. Anyone else?




End of Chalkhills Digest #5-238

Go back to the previous page.