Errors-To: owner-chalkhills@sgiblab.sgi.com
Reply-To: chalkhills@sgiblab.sgi.com
Sender: owner-chalkhills@sgiblab.sgi.com
Precedence: bulk
From: owner-chalkhills@sgiblab.sgi.com
To: chalkhills@sgiblab.sgi.com
Subject: Chalkhills Digest #6-16


          Chalkhills Digest, Volume 6, Number 16

                 Tuesday, 25 January 2000

Today's Topics:

             Another look at the drugs thing
                singled out and vitriolic
                Re: David Oh's epiphany...
                  Baby it's Cold Inside
                   Re: AV2 Demo ratings
                Just one of the millions!
                       Re: Sgt Rock
                    Andy on the web...
                 the long and wind-y road
                           MP3s
                 The envelope please ...
                xtc & the beatles (again)
      Dom... he keeps going, and going, and going...

Administrivia:

    To UNSUBSCRIBE from the Chalkhills mailing list, send a message to
    <chalkhills-request@chalkhills.org> with the following command:

	unsubscribe

    For all other administrative issues, send a message to:

	<chalkhills-request@chalkhills.org>

    Please remember to send your Chalkhills postings to:

	<chalkhills@chalkhills.org>

    World Wide Web: <http://chalkhills.org/>

    The views expressed herein are those of the individual authors.

    Chalkhills is compiled with Digest 3.7 (John Relph <relph@sgi.com>).

Hopeless situation I have no doubt.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: fheaney@erols.com
Message-ID: <004201bf668f$659ce200$f1fda4d8@default>
Subject: Another look at the drugs thing
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 12:20:53 -0500

For those not thoroughly sick of the recent drug debate, here's an
interesting article from the Nation that makes some very persuasive points:

http://www.thenation.com/issue/990920/0920massing.shtml

-- Francis

"You shake me up like pre-war lemonade."
  -- Robyn Hitchcock

------------------------------

Message-Id: <v03110703b4b241162df8@[129.74.189.62]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 14:20:52 -0500
From: graw <graeme.r.wyllie.1@nd.edu>
Subject: singled out and vitriolic

Since it seems to be the rant of choice at the moment and something that
hits a chord with me, I may as well get in on the singles rant and post my
not so humble opinions on the subject.
As a brief background, I'm 29 and own way too many albums and Cds for my
own good. The first single I ever bought was Queen's theme from Flash
Gordon with saved up pocket money almost 20 years ago. Since then, I made
an effort to always pick up singles when possible as well as the albums for
the bands I like although i have noticed over the last few years that I am
buying fewer and fewer singles. Could this be middle age striking early??
This was firmly noticeable in the last few weeks when i went home to the UK
for the holidays  and bought over 60 albums, several box sets and yet only
3 CD singles.
And although I have been fanatically buying and reading Mojo and Q the last
year whilst in the US, I had no idea of the state of the current UK singles
charts. (nor really the US one either). So out of morbid curiosity and that
is the only way to decribe it I watched several episodes of Top of the Pops
to see what I have been missing and I am not sure if it was because I had
forgotten how bad it was but i was truly appalled at the  brain rot played
there-in.
As far as I could tell, there seems to be two categories for chart songs -
insipid retreads of other peoples songs by 5 faceless assembly line 'hunks'
or novelty dance designed by computer probably for maximum annoyance. In
the former category, we have dreadful versions of things like Seasons in
the Sun and many more normally with some shiny pink faced group of young
boys who as Bill Hicks so elegantly put it are sucking at the 'root' of
Satan for success. And when some bunch of talentless abominations are
covering Kylie for gods sake, shoot me now. And as for the latter category,
the prime examples are that appalling hamster dance song ( i admit it, the
web page and the jesus dance ( especially here at Notre Dame) version were
funny initially) but as a single? And Eiffel (awful?) 65 with that damn
Blue (ba da bee) song. And don't chalk me up as  a dance hater, when its
done well i.e. The KLF, Moby, Fatboy Slim, the orb  for example, it can be
great fun to listen to and shake my skinny white ass to.
I know there are people out there who probably rate such things that infest
the chart  that I just mentioned very highly, probably not many on this
list but it struck home the death of the single this christmas very much.
Or at least that the single as a worthwhile purchase at least although the
death was probably a while ago, the corpse is just beggining to noticeably
stink.
And as for the duration af a number one artist, here one week, gone the
next, nothing lasts either but thats probably a major effect of the pricing
nonsense which i am not going to go into too much.
I am not saying there has never been crap which sells, even back 10 or even
5  years ago when i was still avidly buying singles, there was always the
sort of rot, have we blotted out 5-star, Stock Aitken and waterman's
soulless bullshit and the like that is so pervasive from our memories these
days.
 And whilst my sister (younger) was buying that dreck, I was buying more
credible stuff at the same time And  even then 5 - 8  years ago, back as an
Undergrad, Top of the Pops was still worth watching before going out to the
pub since there was normally one or two bands on worth seeing.Nad maybe you
might hear something new that was worth looking out for.
But now it seems that its either the aforementioned two types of music and
more established bands just dont seem to give a damn about the single
anymore. I would reckon one of the major death knells in the single has to
have been this three track maxim in the uk which was put in place a few
years ago which said to be chart eligible, you had to have only three
tracks and no longer than a certain time, i cant remeber what. Since then,
the number of singles i bought went down dramatically, the last big single
buying was the big batch of singles put out by the Levellers back in 97 -
98 and even then at three tracks ( only two new ones) for 2 to 4 quid, you
still felt kind of ripped off. But in general the extra tracks were good.
This last year, looking at bands i like putting out singles, it seems the B
side is just a dumping ground. I dont remember exactly what the Bsides for
the AV singles were but i think they were just demos which did not excite
me enough to blow $10 or $12 on am import. And its the same with a great
deal many other bands, just dump a demo or a live version and thats it, no
wonder i don't feel like wasting the money any more. As far as XTC, the
first singles i bought were O+L era ( just found a copy of king for a day
yesterday second hand :-)) but for this album, i just didnt have the spark
that had me asking for stuff like Peter Pumpkinhead on day of release back
in the days of yore...
And in general whilst the 'whey faced muppets' as Dominic referred to them
as can affored to sell their arse wipings for 99p in week one of release
whilst I guess its my Scotish nature that makes me pissed at being in queue
in HMV behind a follower of the crap and paying 4 quid for belle and
sebastian.
Of the major box sets i bought in the Uk, and of relevance here were the
1,2,3,4 collection, the Blur collection and the Madness single collection
to replace mine which was stolen. Looking at 1,2,3,4 which is  a hundred
track collection of punk and new wave from 78 to 82, its basically a great
retrospective of singles from the era and a great summary of a genre. The
usual suspects, the clash, the Jam, sex pistols, buzzcocks, Science
friction from XTC, some american stuff Ubu, Devo and the like, some good,
some not so good, some pleasant surprises. But if i were to take the last 4
years, i would be pushing it to come up  with a credible 100 tracks
released as singles that serves the same purpose. And yet the music is out
there. And I dont think 20 years hindsight will make that much of a
difference either but if i am wrong, feel free to look me up in 2020 and
beat me to death because if Boyzone becomes the major cultural legacy from
my 20s I dont want to live anymore. And the scarey thing is that might be
the case. 20 years ago we had punk and a lot of the bands which came out of
it either evolved musically or inspired others who today are the stuff we
listen to with no shame. But what good can possible come out of the dreck
that is clogging up the charts. I cannot see someone in 20 years saying '
well the pivotal event in my musical career was hearing the hamster dance
for the first time'
And the main buyer of singles is the 12-15 year old girls, well thats still
true today but it seems that they are becoming the only buyer which is a
hell of a step from the main buyer. And thgis personally is not a good
thing. since i always saw the singles chart as one of the ways to hear new
bands. If it had not been for singles by th police and new order, i would
have not gotten into such bands in a big way and became a bass player. And
with no quality singles, how do you hear new bands. Word of mouth works to
a certain extent, you can read Q and Mojo but thats only on paper and 10 to
15 dollars or quid is a lot to waste on something which may be good but if
crap is all that sells then radio and music Tv will evolve to playing only
the current crap and nothing else at the expense of actually playing music.
This has already happened as far as i could tell from listening to Radio
One and Virgin seemed stuck in a time loop for the limited bits i heard
playing nothing new except artists on their label. And as for MTV....
I dont equate as someone previously did, the singles chart with mass taste
but I do see that it has a necessary role to fufil and some people may
reply to me that the internet now does that but there are some of us who
although i type here, still are reticent about all the MP3 stuff and i have
several friends who have still yet to get on the web in the first place. Do
we then just get left behind?
And yet, good tracks are still out there, singles collections from Madness,
Blur, Massive Attack, James and yes Fossil Fuel are in heavy rotation as
always on my CD Player. But it doesnt sell enough to topple  Shit-on-me
spears and I think that makes the bands complacent which has lead to the
death of the single as a credible piece of music. Do we actually visualise
a people like Andy and Colin eagerly waiting the arrival of the latest
chart placings and scanning the papers with anticipation. Once maybe, not
any more.And don't get me wrong, I am not singling them out in particular,
most of the bands i like have kind of fallen in to this rut, i don't recall
the last Costello B sides on She but I was not moved either to buy import
singles then.
There are still great tracks, i may see a video on VH1 and think thats a
great song but at the same time, i just wait and get the album.
Well, i guess i dont have much else  in the way of conclusions, some
schizophrenic points put forward though, I am sure some of you may feel the
same way so feedback is welcomed. And it may be funny for people responding
just to mention the first single you ever bought, the last single you
bought and if not too ashamed the worst single evr bought. Or email me off
list and i will post a compiled list.

be seeing you

graw.

now playing: Magnetic Fields - 69 Love songs - Volume 1.

You woke up this morning, The world turned upside down.
Things aint been the same since the blues walked into town.
But you're one in a million, you've got that shotgun shine
Born under a bad sign with a blue moon in your eyes..

------------------------------

From: Dorothy Spirito <spiritod@techmail.gdc.com>
Subject: Re: David Oh's epiphany...
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.00.10001241741110.1813-100000@esun2028>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 17:42:10 -0500

It's been done.  Jay Leno had someone on sometime in October who did the
very parody you're describing.

Regards,
--Dorothy.

------------------------------

From: Hbsherwood@aol.com
Message-ID: <9e.43860d.25be3953@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 18:25:07 EST
Subject: Baby it's Cold Inside

>From: Mitch Friedman <mitchf@mindspring.com>
>Subject: AV2 News 4U

>[Andy] says the album will sound like a friendlier
>and more tuneful "Black Sea"

The joyous wagging of my puppy-dog tail upon reading this sentence was
heartwarming and adorable. However, the involuntary piddling that
accompanied it has not made me popular with the janitorial staff.

(Although, the Curious Mind begs to inquire, how the *hell* do you get more
friendly and tuneful than "Black Sea"?)

-----

Goodness me, this list certainly has taken an upswing lately! The
Voldemortian negativity of He of Whom We Do Not Speak (But Who Never Lost a
Logical Argument) seems to have purged a lot of bile. Some of the best posts
I've ever read in six years of Chalkhills have appeared since we kicked over
to Volume 6. In particular I was intrigued by Laura's question about songs
of "lasting and flawless" love.

I'd like to try to embroider together Laura's question with this lovely
object that appeared in #12:

>From: "David Edwards" <david@awed.fsnet.co.uk>
>Subject: Knights In Shining Karma

[regretful snip]

>They will, for example, be with us to
>dry our tears at the sink when our heart lies in pieces amongst the wreckage
>of our broken family; they will warm away our winter jealousy "cold as
>Vichyssoise" soup with the stellar heat of their unconditional love.

I have yet to read a David Edwards post that didn't glow with the clear
white light of enlightenment and humaneness. Seriously, dude: Three posts a
year is Just Not Enough.

Warmth...love...warmth...love... Yes, I suppose it's midwinter, isn't it.
Well, nothing for it but to jump right in, snuggle up nice and close next to
the fire....

David's finely honed thoughts on "Knights in Shining Karma" explored some of
its spiritual underpinnings, but it's the mundane world of personal
relationships that the song (and the singer) ultimately inhabit, and the
friction between the two spheres is what sparks our interest. We can parse
the lovely words and sound-pictures of the song, marveling at their finely
wrought intricacies, tracing the imagery to its Buddhist roots, but
ultimately we have to remember that these words are being sung *to* someone,
someone who inhabits the delusional plane of Maya, to extend the metaphor.

One of the most interesting things about Song Stories is how often Partridge
admits that song interpretations that seem trivially obvious to the rest of
us, don't occur to him until after the passage of many years. For instance,
the Song Story of "Snowman" tells us that "the chilly atmosphere in Andy's
marriage inspired 'Snowman,' although it took [him] years to acknowledge
[it]. '...I can see now that it's about my marriage which was getting rather
cold,'" he admits--18 years after the fact! Perhaps it's his centrality to
the creative process, or perhaps it's simply stupefying emotional insularity
(I sense sadly that it's the latter), but he seems curiously detached from
the implicit meanings of his own songs.

Without delving too deeply into matters that are really none of our
business, we know from published biographical sources that the marriage of
Andy and Marianne Partridge ended officially soon after the release of
Nonsuch. But we can, by reading not unreasonably closely between the lines
of song after song in Andy's output that the marriage actually began to go
sour much earlier than that. Furthermore, it's no secret that Erica Wexler
appeared, dressed in tricouleur and Phrygian cap, at just about the time
that the Partridge marriage began its lengthy decline. What these two facts
have to do with each other is precisely where our Right to Speculate ends.

With the foregoing in mind I present for general consideration the
hypothesis that the Marianne-to-Erica story arc is the single most fruitful
tension in Partridge's artistic life, the irritant grain of sand without
which the oyster's pearl does not appear. I also believe that it is not
possible to understand Andy as an artist without knowing the circumstances
under which many of his best songs were written.

Look for a moment at "Ladybird." It's interesting to pair this song with
"Snowman" and think of them as the first manifestation of the Marianne/Erica
conflict. "Snowman" speaks of an unsatisfactory love affair, explicitly
equating wintery coldness with a lover's indifference. (This is, of course,
not exactly a groundbreaking simile, but it is central to our story.)
Twomey's" Chalkhills and Children" tells us that Andy wrote "Ladybird" in
the summer of 1982, during the shell-shocked period after the aborted
tour. We also know that Andy met Erica in January 1981, and that she
inundated him with infatuated mail during this period. "Song Stories" goes
farther and says "Ladybird" "unwittingly [wove] in his thoughts about a
woman called Erica."  (Whether this is a particularly acute insight on
Neville Farmer's part, or Andy supplementing the historical record, is not
clear.)

On closer inspection, "Ladybird" feels like it grew directly out of
"Snowman." Where the earlier song bemoans entrapment in a love gone cold,
"Ladybird" couches a nascent affair in oblique images of impending spring,
warmth and comfort. The song's argument is notably indirect for a Partridge
composition, employing the elliptical language of illicit lovers. But look
at the opposition at work in this verse, emblematic of the song as a whole:

   All through the winter time
   When wood was worm and splintered
   Time seemed longer than a goods train
   Now that spring is back again
   I'll ask your name, your name

Now we must ask ourselves: If--even as early as 1982-83--his dying marriage
to Marianne is symbolically represented as Winter, and the new affair with
Erica is expressed as the return of warmth in Spring, what are we to make of
Andy's revisiting of the theme of the changing of the seasons in Apple Venus
Volume 1, at precisely the moment when Erica is finally ascendant? Who's
pushing the pedals on *that* particular Season Cycle? Enter Easter indeed!

We've spoken before about the interweaving of the Apple and Venus themes in
AV1--how Andy's songs occupy themselves with either nature or love to the
exclusion of all else, and how the two themes become identified in "Harvest
Festival" and--most importantly in the present context--"Easter Theater." I
would suggest on the basis of a comparison with the "Snowman/Ladybird" pair
that this nature/love identity is considerably older than we think. I can't
help thinking that it traces its origin to the self-comforting of a badly
unnerved Andy Partridge in 1982, his professional life in tatters and his
marriage gone cold, clinging to sanity by strumming a guitar in an English
summer garden while thinking about a woman thousands of miles away.

This, I think, Laura, is why there are no songs of lasting and flawless love
in the XTC canon. It's not a condition many of us are blessed to enjoy, and
Andy Partridge (for the publicly acknowledged reasons above, and for many
countless ones to which we are rightly not privy) has been, it seems, less
blessed than most of us. But love, as David points out, is a flame that must
be tended--it's a process, not a state. This admission, which bedevils so
many lovers and provides the bread and butter of so many marriage counseling
practices, may be what Andy meant in his most mature and complete love song
to date: "I Can't Own Her":

   I've got all morning, I've got all year
   It's down in my pocket with the daylight folded there
   But I can't own her...

Harrison "Bodhisattva, won't you take me by the hand" Sherwood

------------------------------

Message-ID: <388CEC30.883652D6@home.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 16:20:00 -0800
From: Rich Bunnell <richbunnell@home.com>
Organization: @Home Network
Subject: Re: AV2 Demo ratings

> OK, here's my quick synopsis. I heard these from the now defunt XTC Live &
> Direct:

Fine, I'll throw in my two cents too, along with a few other songs I've
heard that weren't posted to XTC L&D.

>   BOARDED UP: Colin in "bummed out" mode. Im neutral to this song right
> now.  I'll have to hear the finished product.  I couldnt make out the
> lyrics in the fuzzy version I heard, so I'm sure they make the song much
> cooler.  Lyrics in Colins' "bummed out" songs always rule.

Colin doesn't make his demoes full productions like Andy does, so this
fuzzy demo'll probably be heavily improved in the studio. At the core,
the melody seems sort of boring and repetitive, but just imagine what
could be done with it.

>   CHURCH OF WOMEN: Bouncy bass line and a catchy chorus that could go on
> forever. I'm not sure if I like how Andy sings on the bridge, but I'm sure
> it'll sound better in the real version. Excellent song.

Oh, definitely. Andy's in classic mode here, even the little stuttering
("Turn to butter, er, er") really fits the song in my opinion.

>   STANDING IN FOR JOE: Colin sounding suspiciously like Davey Jones.
> Upbeat.

Definitely the best song I've heard from Colin in the '90s, with the
possible exception of "My Bird Performs." This one was originally
destined for the bubblegum album and it shows, but unlike "Boarded Up,"
even the DEMO of this sounds excellent. With crisp, bubbly '60s-style
production, this one could really shine.

>   IM THE MAN WHO MURDERED LOVE: It's got a very "Dear Madam Barnum" feel to
> it. Sweet sounding song with harsh lyrics.  Good stuff.

I agree, it does have a really "Dear Madam Barnum" feel, sort of
plodding but that doesn't hurt the song at all. The chorus utterly
rules. "IIIIIIIII'M! The man who murdered love! YEAH!
WHADDAYATHINKOFTHAT?"

>   SOME LOVELY (MY BROWN GUITAR): A slow, sugary sweet ode to masturbating
> (that's how I interpret it anyways). It's got a multitude of overlapping
> vocal harmonies.  McCartney-esque.

Not sure about your interpretation, but personally while I love this
song, I really hope that Andy adds some more punch to the chorus in the
finished AV2 version. Otherwise, the verses are great and those
harmonies are beautiful.

>   YOU & THE CLOUDS WILL STILL BE BEAUTIFUL: It's the only demo I didn't care
> for, no matter how good the lyrics are.  It sounds like Stevie Wonder
> singing a Paul Simon song to me.

Another song that suffered from its demo recording. However, like "Some
Lovely," it has heavy studio potential (imagine a full-sounding wall of
African instruments playing that backing!), if Andy would actually alter
his studio recordings heavily from the demoes for once.

>   PLAYGROUND: Oh, this song is awesome. It's got a rockin' riff, catchy as
> hell chorus.

Yes!!! The peppiest song the band has made since the early days, but
with accomplished songwriting, a great exuberant gee-tar riff, and
shiny, flowing backing vocals. Radio-friendly to the extreme, not that
it'll actually get radio play or anything. But who knows?

....I've heard four of Andy's other demoes in addition (The only tune I
haven't heard is Colin's "In Another Life," but the description of "A
strange hybrid of the Kinks and Bowie's 'Heroes'" sounds really
promising to me), so here're my opinions of those.

STUPIDLY HAPPY: Very radio-friendly as well, driven entirely by one
riff, but it's a gruff, grumbling riff which counterpoints Andy's vocals
and some shining guitar texturing quite well. Radio-friendly too, more
downbeat and more "pretty" than Playground.

WHEEL AND THE MAYPOLE: Starts out as a chunky riff-rocker for the first
two minutes (the "Wheel" segment) then suddenly segues into a bouncy
tune (the "Maypole" part) which is sure to piss off more than a few
listeners who liked the first part better. I like it, myself, especially
since by the end of the Maypole segment Andy's started to counterpoint
the melody with bits of the "Wheel" melody for the fadeout. Good stuff.
Not sure if it's a closer, but I guess it's the closest thing to it.

WOUNDED HORSE: Haven't heard this one too much. It's sort of an ugly
bluesy song, but I've heard it a total of half a time and it apparently
grew on the band enough for them to skip over "Ship Trapped In The Ice"
and "I Don't Wanna Be Here" for it (Okay, so it's Andy who didn't want
those songs....but still) so I'm still putting hope into this one.

WE'RE ALL LIGHT: Completes the trilogy of bubbly, wonderful pop songs on
the album (Playground and Stupidly Happy being the other two)-- great
stuff. The lyrics are based around bad pick-up lines as Song Stories
says, yet the melody is bouncy enough to hold it up. Along with the
other two, this'll probably be a single release. Second one, I'd wager.

Anyway, the album definitely looks to be promising and I don't want to
wait two months for it, but ehh.... Darn.

*----------
Rich Bunnell
http://members.xoom.com/taoster/
*----------

------------------------------

Message-ID: <002a01bf66cd$c03e4b20$0200a8c0@digitalpc>
From: "Digitalmaster" <digitalmaster@earthlink.net>
Subject: Just one of the millions!
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 16:47:25 -0800

Hi, I'm just "one of the millions" to join this list.  Thanks to Jon "The
Mole" for letting me know about it.  I waited a while to join as it seemed
like a lot of tension was going on at the time.  I have been hiding like a
scarecrow person viewing the list for a while at the webpage.  No O&L is not
my favorite album, I just happened to use 2 references :)  (Actually, I
think those songs are in order too!

What kept me away was all the grammar discussions, pro gun talk and
demonology stuff.  The whole mess is over now and it seems like the biggest
debate to have is what AV2 sounds like.  I have not heard anything from AV2,
but I really don't care. Do any of us?  We all know that no matter what Andy
and Collin put out, we would be there like Oliver Twist at a free banquet!

What I want to know is this:  Are the recordings going to contain anything
from Dave?  I would hope so, but will enjoy it just the same.  I say we make
Andy, Collin, Dave & Terry (Hell, I will even push for Barry!) patch things
up and get to making some really good albums!

Last but not least:

1. To David Oh: Skylarking is a great album, but I don't think I would
qualify it as their best.  I would say one of their top 5, as AV1 (which
really only had 1 song that I thought was not as deserving to appear on the
album, I wont say it, because it was a Collin song, and he barely had
anything on the album as it is!)  My fav would have to be either English
Settlement or Drums and Wires.  Mostly due to my age I guess and the fact
that they were the first albums I was hearing from them when they came
out.As for the Clinton thing, that was a skit on either Mad TV or SNL last
week so I think someone beat you to the idea.

2. Adrian Belew And Andy?  Oh daddy!

3. Brian, what's wrong with Stevie Wonder, or even Paul for that matter?
Sure, Paul is really old and borring, but Stevie?

4. Pop music argument:  Consider me an 80's guy.  I still call the music I
listen to "New Wave" as I feel it was the best term for the music.  A "New
Wave" of music.  But in generic form, it was just a division of Pop I guess.
As for popular artists winning awards.  Most of them really suck, but if it
were not for the big artists, their would be no industry and we would have
less groups like XTC.  For every XTC we need a Blimp 182, and for every
Robyn Hitchcock, we need a Mr. Jackson (Mike, Not Joe!).  Get it?  Maybe
not, but it makes sense to me.

Nice to be on the list, thanks Jon!

------------------------------

From: Liddypool@aol.com
Message-ID: <bc.831fbb.25be4963@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 19:33:39 EST
Subject: Re: Sgt Rock

This is my first posting here...I've truly enjoyed being a voyeur here,
but decided to enter the fray...
The debate concerning Skylarking being XTC's Sgt Pepper's...exactly how
would you quantize this? Pepper does not contain the Beatles best work and
yet has a place in history for two reasons...it made the LP the dominant
force over 45 singles and because of the Beatles huge popularity, took
their commercial audience with them during their musical
experimentation's. Skylarking doesn't resemble this at all...
Musically speaking, I'd suggest Oranges and Lemons being XTC's Revolver,
which for the Beatles, was TRULY an experiment in sound. O & L is such a
rich blend of ideas, I see those two works as being more similar in
spirit...  But again, how does one measure these things?

------------------------------

Message-ID: <003f01bf66cf$491157c0$0200a8c0@digitalpc>
From: "Digitalmaster" <digitalmaster@earthlink.net>
Subject: Andy on the web...
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 16:58:24 -0800

Oh, and about Andy being on the web, I am sure he is!  I am also sure he
checks this and other fan pages.  Wouldn't you if you were him?  He does
need to do some market research if he plans to survive and put out albums.
But I am sure he also goes to the market, wipes downward and cuts his toe
nails, so it really would not be a surprise to me to find out he was on the
web.  I would love to meet Andy, and would love even more to talk to him or
chat with him on the web. But really, why?  Unless he was going to give me a
DAT (CDR or Metal Tape accepted) of Rare material, there is no reason I need
to talk or meet him or Collin!

My point is, its just great listening to the music, we don't need to ANALyze
their life and how they spend their time.  If we worry about little things
like that, we are just as bad as the 13 year old girls who listen to
Backstreet Boys! (Not that I have any right commenting as I have never heard
their music!)  I like reading Song Stories to find out the history of the
songs, and it was even cool reading about Wexler, but its not what made me
like XTC and is not something I will focus on.  This is more of a general
message to fans who worry about details of an artists life, and is not
pointing directly at anyone on this list.

------------------------------

From: OMBEAN1@aol.com
Message-ID: <3c.c7cbcb.25be5130@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 20:06:56 EST
Subject: the long and wind-y road

Buoys & Gulls,
  My two degrees of separation (a friend of a friend) has heard the five new
songs and said they were "F***in' Great". The light is at the end of the
tunnel. We can finally start discussing XTC all the time.
 Dom finished his last novel with  "My. That was a long one." Like a good
healthy poop. FLUSH!!!!
  Back to the lurk mode. Roger

------------------------------

Message-Id: <200001250115.UAA17957@nantucket.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 20:13:53 -0800
Subject: MP3s
From: "Diamond" <arnos@nantucket.net>

>   Out of the goodness of my heart, I've put
>   up a page where XTC zealots can grab hold
>   of those lengendary "Drunken Jam Sessions."
>   Ya know... supposedly during the Black Sea
>   sessions they got a little tipsy and started
>   doing some major wanking. Well.. here it is!

Wow, how cool is this? I mean, I don't condone drinking, especially 'til
you're, as the folks round here call it, "shit-faced," but I don't know
how I could pass up the oportunity to see my musical heros at thier
lowest!! I'm dowloading now!!!

On a related note, all of you with MP3 players, after downloading these
jam seasons, if you wouldn't mind, swing on over to
http://www.mp3.com/frenchelectric , and you can hear a couple of songs by
MY band, French Electric. I really think that some of you would enjoy
it. We have two songs up right now, niether of them sound anything like
XTC, but, then, if they did, I'd just be copyin, wouldn't I? I feel that
we have a pretty orriginal sound. The core of the band is my friend Caleb
Kardell and myself. He plays synth, I play bass. These two tracks include
our part-time drummer Josiah Fader-Brock, who isn't half bad, but really
not half-good either. He's become steadier since we started practicing,
but he's not really the most orriginal drummer ever. The two songs are
Medusa's Locks, written by Caleb, which is a very eighties love-ballad
type of thing. The closest comparison I could draw would be to Elvis
Costello. the second song up, In Your Oubliette, is by me. It's pretty
much just a simple new-wave, power-pop song. The lyrics are really nothing
but fluff, but there are a couple of good lines in there. Check it out, I
hope you enjoy.

Kevin Diamond
____________________________________________________________________________
"She thinks she's Edith Head,
But you might know she's not
the accent in her speach
she didn't have growing up."
        -John Flansburgh/They Might be Giants

------------------------------

Message-ID: <20000125014430.15074.qmail@hotmail.com>
From: "Duncan Kimball" <dunks58@hotmail.com>
Subject: The envelope please ...
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 17:44:29 PST

Well, folks, it's time to announce my choice of the lucky individual who -
for acts of conspicuous bastardry - gets to wear the celebrated Colonel C***
Hat for an entire week!

[Drum roll ... ]

And the winner is:

Wow! It's a tie!! Sharing the legendary genital chapeau for the next set of
seven are:

- Mr Eric Nicoli, chairman of EMI, and
- Mr Roger Ames, head of Warner Music.

Yes, it's official: Time-Warner has proven yet again that the pirate spirit
of good Old Father Monopoly hisself, John D. Rockefeller, is alive and
kicking (heads).

With the blood still dripping off its fangs after its last meal, the
rapacious corporate Godzilla has confirmed that it is now about to gorge
itself on EMI, thereby creating the world's largest record company. EMI, in
its turn, have demonstrated that 100 years of proud British tradtition is
worth ... oooh, about US$12 billion.

The merger is the lastest in a series of ominous mega-deals which are
rapidly concentrating the ownership of major multinational corporations in
many industries. It follows on from the US$7 billion acquisition of Polygram
in 1998 by Canadian booze-and-circuses conglomerate Seagram (who already
owned the Universal studio and music groups).

(Interestingly, just prior to Mlle Polygram falling into the sack with Mr
Seagram, Granny EMI herself was offering to show him a good time - but
ultimately she asked for too much money. Time-Warner, it seems, was more
willing to pay this happy hooker's price.)

The Polygram/Universal music merger and the Time-Warner/EMI deal has now
reduced the number of major record companies from 6 to 4 in less than two
years.

And that's GOT to be good for business, right?

It also creates a lucrative new conduit for marketing the product of the new
music colossus via the Internet, thanks to Time-Warner's (yet-to-be-blessed)
marriage of convenience to AOL. Another notorious gold-digger, Little Miss
AOL established herself as the world's largest and most profitable Internet
provider thanks to her ruthless gouging, charging the hapless American
consumer exorbitant fees (and providing lamentable service) for the use of a
resource they themselves, as taxpayers, had already paid to create. What
acumen!

The London Sunday Telegraph predicts that "the merger will also enable the
combined group to shrink its middle management and sales force" - so I
imagine you can see former EMI and Warner execs lining up at unemployment
offices near you in the very near future.

* * *

And now to the runner up, who wins our coveted second prize - the Major
Arsehole hat. The winner of our consolation prize?

Come on down - Steve Jobs!

Jobs, head of the once-proud Apple Corporation (now a subsidiary of
Microsoft Global Domination Inc.) has just been given his own private Gulf
Stream jet by the grateful Apple board of directors, in recognition of his
services (to competition, no doubt). In accepting this obscene gratuity,
Jobs proves yet again that standing up and being counted is nowhere near as
rewarding as bending over and taking it up the bum - especially when Bill
Gates is standing behind you.

* * *

Meanwhile, in local news ...

Dom, Dom, Dom ... I should have known better than to try to match wits with
the master. Forgive me please! ;)

Dunks

------------------------------

From: BobB22@aol.com
Message-ID: <d3.b50841.25be63f7@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 21:27:03 EST
Subject: xtc & the beatles (again)

In a message dated 1/24/2000 5:43:05 PM Eastern Standard Time,
<owner-chalkhills@chalkhills.org> writes:

<< xtc & the beatles (again) >>

I love XTC more than anyone but to compare Skylarking with Sgt Pepper is
crazy.....Both albums are terrific.......But ask how many people have even
heard of XTC.......It is hard to believe they can NOT find the right public
relations people.....their music should be heard by many more ears.......but
thats Andys problem........Bob Bianco
Bob Bianco's Home Page
http://hometown.aol.com/BobB22/index.html
BEATLES WEB SITE......please visit and sign my guestbook......I need for my
page counter to start revolving!!!!

------------------------------

Message-Id: <200001250237.VAA25218@nantucket.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 21:33:39 -0800
Subject: Dom... he keeps going, and going, and going...
From: "Diamond" <arnos@nantucket.net>

>I took the cover art displayed in Chalkhills to
>be the definitive one.

If you notice, before the picture uploads in the square, there are the words
"ot the actual cover ar" which I believe is "Not the actual cover art" with
the N and the T clipped off at either end. Although, personally, I find it
to be a good enogh cover. But I think that Volume one and Volume two should
be connected in some way.

I asked this before, and perhaps I am looking to far ahead, but at any rate,
since I didn't recieve any responses from anyone, I'll ask again. Does
anyone have any ideas for titles of the NEXT XTC album? If it were to be
named after a line from a song on AV (either volume), what would you want it
to be?

Also, I wasn't aware that Standing In For joe would be on V2! I love that
song!

Looking foreword to buying his Chalkhills shirt, and hoping they have 3XL

Kevin "Yeah, I'm big" Diamond

P.S. Dom, methinks you need to spend less time in front of the computer
typing these messages. Egad, that was the longest post I've ever seen! How
many cups of coffee did you have to slug down to finish that sucker up?

____________________________________________________________________________
"She made love like a metronome"
        -The buggles

------------------------------

End of Chalkhills Digest #6-16
******************************

Go back to the previous page.