Chalkhills Digest Volume 6, Issue 15
Date: Monday, 24 January 2000
Chalkhills Digest, Volume 6, Number 15
Monday, 24 January 2000
Today's Topics:
xtc & the beatles (again)
Listless
Date Due
Shssss!
those Drunken Jam Sessions
an epiphany
Uffington Horse
FUNK POP A BOWL
tvgohome
Adrian Partridge
AV2 cover art...is there really any reason to speculate?
Apple Venus 2 demo synopsis
Andy IS on the web
High Llamas
Dunk In Doh! Knot
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>).
Now you forced to walk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.20000121122432.00713720@pop3.passport.ca> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 12:24:32 -0500 From: David Oh <davidoh@passport.ca> Subject: xtc & the beatles (again) i'm sorry if this may seem a little redundant, but i've heard, and read, this so many times, i thought i would put to the members of the 'hill for debate. what i've heard and read is that "skylarking" is regarded as xtc's "sgt. peppers". my question is this: do you agree or do you think this is a load of cobblers, as one dom lawson would so eloquently put it? i am a little curious as to what the general concensus is regarding this viewpoint. i have my own spin on this argument, but i'll save that for later...
------------------------------
From: "Mark Strijbos" <mmello@knoware.nl>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 22:33:20 +0100
Subject: Listless
Message-Id: <20000121213059.27CCDA6CE4@mail.knoware.nl>
Dear Chalkers,
First of all: "mass taste" seems a contradiction in terms to me
Our mutual friend Tyler Hewitt said:
> Some songs ARE better than others.
oo-oh! dangerous ground ahead
> Most are obvious-Hey Jude is better than Disco Duck.
welllllll... nes and yo. I have very fond memories of Disco Duck
> Why we need a list to tell us that Respect
> is better than Sittin on the Dock of the Bay is beyond
> me. Prove it!
indeed, we need proof!
It's no good just saying that Hey Jude is better, you have to explain
to us _why_
What makes this forum so interesting is discourse and debate, not
statements and slogans. Or stupid lists...
yours in xtc,
Mark Strijbos at The Little Lighthouse
http://www.knoware.nl/users/mmello/
or http://come.to/xtc
------------------------------
From: "Mark Strijbos" <mmello@knoware.nl>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 22:33:20 +0100
Subject: Date Due
Message-Id: <20000121213058.34C42A6CE2@mail.knoware.nl>
Dear Chalkers,
Somebody asked if this was right:
> This item [AV2] will be released on 3 April, 2000.
The latest catalog from Badlands (a UK specialist record store)
mentions a release date of April 30th but that's a Sunday.
On the other hand i suspect that April 3 might be a bit optimistic.
Albums in general, and XTC albums in particular, are usually late.
Don't hold your breath
PS: does anyone have a tape yet? email me privately please
yours in xtc,
Mark Strijbos at The Little Lighthouse
http://www.knoware.nl/users/mmello/
or http://come.to/xtc
------------------------------
From: "Mark Strijbos" <mmello@knoware.nl>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 22:33:20 +0100
Subject: Shssss!
Message-Id: <20000121213100.0DF54A6CE2@mail.knoware.nl>
Dear Chalkers,
Last issue, my former friend and confidante Debie spilled the beans:
> Just think, you could have a room with a "shed" view from your back
> bedroom windows!
i thought we had agreed we would keep this a secret until I had
managed to get that job at Tesco's, so _I_ could move in there.
> Now I know Mark Strijbos was thinking about possibly moving to Swindon
> one day,
I solemnly swear that one day, when i'm old and gray, i will come
and live in the beautiful Wiltshire countryside. Perhaps i'll even
start that little XTC museum that should have been there already!
> but I reckon this might just get him packing
Only if you'd move in there with me, sweetie... I'll bring my synths,
you can play your guitar and together we'll annoy The Neighbour
until He bangs His head against our wall.
yours in xtc,
Mark Strijbos at The Little Lighthouse
http://www.knoware.nl/users/mmello/
or http://come.to/xtc
------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 13:35:28 -0800 Message-Id: <200001212135.NAA17781@mail14.bigmailbox.com> From: "Sir Demon Brown" <corndogs@farts.com> Subject: those Drunken Jam Sessions Hello, 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! All free. High quality 160 bit, 44.1 khz MP3's. http://www.qartman.com/drunken/drunken.html Enjoy! Sir Demon Brown
------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.20000121173505.0071fdc8@pop3.passport.ca> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 17:35:05 -0500 From: David Oh <davidoh@passport.ca> Subject: an epiphany i just had an epiphany whist in the shower - i hate when that happens, but at least i can clean up afterwards... oh, nevermind! i'm surprised that no one has done a parody song (weird al?) to that bloody awful "mambo #5 (a little bit of...)" song. i can hear, in a bill clinton voice, the song going something like this: "a little bit of monica on her knees/a little bit of monica, please, please, please" etc, etc, and including the names of all the women slick-willie has "allegedly" been with. of course, it wouldn't include hillary... ok, sorry for the off-topic post & i'll shut up now... peace & xtc, davidoh
------------------------------ Message-Id: <v04220800b4adfdba42b0@[208.13.202.228]> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 07:18:11 -0500 From: "Christopher R. Coolidge" <cauldron@together.net> Subject: Uffington Horse At 8:00 AM -0800 1/20/00, Debie <debie@guitargonauts.com> wrote: > >Have any of you ever thought about moving here to Swindon? Nah, I thought >not - nothing much to tempt you here I guess, except for the odd sighting!! > >Well, maybe this will do it? The house one door away from Andy's has just >come up for sale! It is a very nice Victorian end-terrace house in a >tree-lined road in Old Town, Swindon. (Yes, Andy officially lives down a >"road" rather than a street or avenue). Just think, you could have a room >with a "shed" view from your back bedroom windows! Speaking of Swindon, a video on ancient pagan symbols was being shown in the comparative religion class I'm taking, and I couldn't help noticing an aerial shot of the famous Uffington Horse. Cool. Apparently its function was something similar to Stonehenge, which I hadn't realised. As a local, could you perhaps fill me in on its significance?(the Uffington Horse, BTW, for those who didn't know, is the symbol on the cover of English Settlement; it's etched in a hillside near Swindon) Christopher R. Coolidge Homepage at http://homepages.together.net/~cauldron/homepage.html "A Great law protects me from the government. The Bill of rights has 10 GREAT laws. A Good law protects me from you. Laws against murder, theft, assault and the like are good laws. A Poor law attempts to protect me from myself." - Unknown
------------------------------ From: WESnLES@aol.com Message-ID: <9.12af3c6.25ba8306@aol.com> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 22:50:30 EST Subject: FUNK POP A BOWL Patrick M Adamek scribbled: In Chalkhills #6-12 Wes Long wrote: I hate the Stones but can't really argue with "Satisfaction" being #1 ya gotta pick something #1. My question: do you really? I have always found it peculiar that we Americans need to rank everything all of the time Well Pat, I agree with you. BUT, IF you be making a list o the top 100 songs, THEN you have to pick something as the # 1. I'm not condoning the list. By the way, you're not a REAL American, you live in Alaska!(smiley face) Hey, I actually know someone that lives in Juneau. She's a former GA girl. Folks, if you're lookin' for rare XTC audio then look no further, wesLONG @ Optimism's Flames: http://members.tripod.com/~The_Last_Balloon/index.html Thank you, and goodnight.
------------------------------ From: "Gary Thompson" <nero.the.zero@net.ntl.com> Subject: tvgohome Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2000 12:24:12 -0000 Message-ID: <000601bf64d3$9707a180$1814a8c2@garythom> Thank you to whoever posted the address of this site. It is by far the funniest thing I have seen since The League Of Gentlemen appeared on (British)TV. Heartily recommended! 'We won't be told the past was pure gold We were there and it wasn't' Paddy McAloon
------------------------------ From: WESnLES@aol.com Message-ID: <ba.b6fabc.25bb4860@aol.com> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2000 12:52:32 EST Subject: Adrian Partridge Fellow Chalkgeeks: Ran across this on a Belew site: ELECTRIC ChAT The Internet Forum for Adrian Belew Fans Edition #34 Tuesday, June 10, 1997 Hello again Tribe! For all you XTC/Belew fans, there is great news to report. On Tuesday, June 3rd, Mitch Friedman (a friend of Andy Partridge) sent me an Email for Adrian which I forwarded. Long story short... Adrian contacted Mitch, now has Andy Partridge's phone number and according to the story, has contacted Andy. So the possibility of a Belew/Partridge collaboration is one step closer. Probably old news to you all.....not to me, wesLONG
------------------------------
Message-ID: <388A19F7.7FB7BDE7@mail.gci.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2000 11:58:31 -0900
From: Patrick M Adamek <adamette@augustine.gci.net>
Subject: AV2 cover art...is there really any reason to speculate?
Chalkers,
I have noticed increased discussions of what should appear on the
cover of the new XTC album, Apple Venus Vol. 2. I do not understand
this speculation because I took the cover art displayed in Chalkhills to
be the definitive one. Viewable in Chalkhills for a number of months, I
now wonder if indeed it is the plan for the new cover art or not. It
can be viewed at:
http://chalkhills.org/product/AppleVenusV2.html
I have ordered my Chalkhills T-shirts and I encourage everyone to do
so. What better way to advertise our favorite band/web site?!
Re: Star Park (the album which I commented on in a recent post), I
have listened to it now several more times. I am more comfortable with
it and I have a full appreciation for the fact that it is actually
"pre-XTC." When I had the full picture of an early 70s Andy writing
songs as he appeared on page 148 of "Song Stories" being heavily
influenced by the Stooges and The New York Dolls, it was easier for me
to digest these tracks.
Cheers,
Patrick Adamek
Juneau, Alaska
[ If you hold your mouse over the "cover art", it says NOT
THE ACTUAL ALBUM ART. Just something I threw together,
sorry. -- John ]
------------------------------ Message-ID: <20000123033420.1553.qmail@wwcst212.netaddress.usa.net> Date: 22 Jan 00 19:34:20 PST From: Brian Wysolmierski <bwysol@netscape.net> Subject: Apple Venus 2 demo synopsis To the person who wants to know what the Apple Venus 2 demos sound like, OK, here's my quick synopsis. I heard these from the now defunt XTC Live & Direct: 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. 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. STANDING IN FOR JOE: Colin sounding suspiciously like Davey Jones. Upbeat. 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. 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. 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. PLAYGROUND: Oh, this song is awesome. It's got a rockin' riff, catchy as hell chorus. ...Well, that's my opinion. Hope it helps.-Brian
------------------------------ Message-ID: <20000124033822.23857.qmail@www0y.netaddress.usa.net> Date: 23 Jan 00 19:38:21 PST From: Brian Wysolmierski <bwysol@netscape.net> Subject: Andy IS on the web The fact that Andy contributes to the webpage tvgohome.com proves that he is online. And I bet he checks out the Chalkhills page too. It would suck if he read my comment about You & the Clouds Will Still Be Beautiful (I said it sounded like Stevie Wonder singing a Paul Simon song). Oh well.-Brian
------------------------------ Message-ID: <388C5233.EA703A34@mail.uni-oldenburg.de> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 14:22:59 +0100 From: Volker Dieling <volker.dieling@mail.uni-oldenburg.de> Organization: Universitaet Oldenburg Subject: High Llamas Hi all ! In #6-14, Maggie asked about the High Llamas. I love them. Anyone here who likes Brian Wilson and AV1 should go and listen. Their latest, "Snowbug" is a masterpiece, as are "Hawaii", "Gideon Gaye" and "Cold and Bouncy". Then you'll love them and while you're there, just go and buy every Stereolab album you can get (they're friends of the Llamas), and then buy Ui, as they've collaborated with Stereolab (btw, so have Blur) on the Uilab E.P., and then suddenly I'll find XTC doing a splitsingle with Tortoise, and I'm ready to die. Anyone who likes a massive guitar and some Travels in Nihilon / Voivod atmosphere, like you, Dom, should check out Atombombpocketknife on Southern Records. Their selftitled EP is now living in my CD player, barking at anyone trying to replace it. I guess I'll ony be able to tame it with AV2.... And by the way, maybe I said this before, but all of you having Go+ on vinyl go play it at 33.3 rpm. Cheers all. Lemon -- Lemoncurry residing in the Lemon Lounge at www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/9259 Send your spam to lemoncurry23@yahoo.com Save the Mudokons !
------------------------------ Message-ID: <4782AD6ADDBDD2119B570008C75DD5C1BD4758@mgmtm02.parliament.uk> From: Lawson Dominic <LawsonD@parliament.uk> Subject: Dunk In Doh! Knot Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 10:31:39 -0000 Lovely Dave said... >>"Mass taste"...in a way yes: they are the media's taste in the same way that popular acts of the past were. Sometimes the media's taste and wider fashion tastes coincide. Not at the moment. Spoken like a gentleman. Yep, you're totally right...there are times when the two things coincide, and I suppose The Beatles are the classic example of this. I think the main difference is that currently the media seem more prescriptive than reactive, but the public tends to get what it deserves a lot of the time so there's little point in getting irate about it. Which, of course, I wasn't. >>A small minority of the British public bought punk records, but the punk phenomenon changed what you saw on the high streets of Britain. I don't see any of the boy/girl bands changing anything. They have neither talent nor the interest of anyone over 15. Ooh you ageist bastard! Ahem. Anyway, yes, you're spot on again.....as I said before, these things are clearly not aimed at the likes of us, and I tend to view it with amusement rather than seething resentment, but it is slightly annoying that record companies would rather make stars of grinning stage-school monkeys than genuinely talented musicians and writers. I suppose boy/girl bands must demand fairly low financial maintenance compared to all-drinkin', all-smokin' rock bands and, of course, they're also very easy to replace with whoever's next on the conveyor belt. In fairness, these kids should really be making a living doing musicals or working as children's TV presenters - jobs for which they are much better equipped - but if the target audience continue to lap this nonsense up then who are we to argue? >>Being a "mass" interest does not necessitate the involvement of the majority. No, I understand what you mean and I will concede that in that context you are right. I think maybe we have a different understanding of what "mass taste" means, although clearly we're not miles apart on the subject. I was taking "mass" to imply a majority, and so my post doesn't really stand up to scrutiny from your perspective. Bah, foiled again. >>So, I would argue that there is a connection between the charts and wider mass taste, and that at the moment it is a weaker one than at many moments in the past (by no means all!). You rational sod. I couldn't have, and didn't, put it better myself. There is definitely a connection, for sure, but I just feel that the low record sales needed to have a "hit" in the UK these days do tend to make a mockery of the idea that the charts signify anything other than the fact that record companies are successfully emptying the pockets of their (not particularly huge) chosen target audience. Easy money, I believe, is the phrase. >>With due respect, you're missing one of my points, or at least dancing around it. Well, I'm a lovely mover after a couple of shandies. >>What is a weak genre to start with is getting weaker due to repetition and lack of originality. Indeed, but then I don't think I said anything different. Initially this was not quite the case - Take That released largely original (in one sense at least!) material, and were, at times, strangely compelling in their own bland way. The stream of increasingly weak versions of the formula which have stumbled our way in recent years are certainly devoid of any real musical value, although I should say that I would gladly stand up for people's right to listen to such things (just in case I get accused of being an elitist again....I mean, come on!), and I don't think the phenomenon does a lot to encourage kids to look beyond the charts for their musical entertainment (although personally I couldn't think of a better advert for non-chart music than the truly dismal Westlife who have actually managed to make Boyzone look like they have at least one personality between them). >> If you believe, as I argued above, that the charts have been important, then the boy band/girl band genre could be viewed as a cancerous growth that is killing them off. Yeah, to a certain extent but I think that's a slight over-reaction. The charts are certainly less important than they were ten or twenty years ago, and the last couple of years in particular have been depressing at times, but I just don't accept that this is damaging to the music scene (as opposed to music industry) overall...it's a mildly diverting (and disconcerting) sideshow, but if you look at how popular Macy Gray or Travis are at the moment, there is evidently still a big audience for well-written songs and talented players, albeit an audience which has a noticeably higher average age than the poor sods who buy Scooch records. I suspect that when the next bandwagon rolls into town - and it could be driven by a Jarvis Cocker, a Kurt Nobrain, an Andy Weatherall or even, Ozzy forbid, a Max Cavalera - the media will find the change far more inspiring than the current situation, much as Britpop seemed like much more fun than all that carbon-copied grunge which appeared post-"Nevermind". >>To me, the smell of stagnation is overwhelming. Yeah, sorry about that. I really must change these socks. >>As for club/dance music...that would require a different set of arguments that I can't be bothered to make right now. Suffice to say that that is also formulaic, repetitive and uninspiring outside of a night club. Hmmmm.....that sounds a bit too much like Dunks' piss-weak remark about Metal. I love a good sweeping generalisation myself - "all brooms are great" being a particular favourite - but "club/dance music" is not the one-dimensional musical sphere that it sometimes appears to outsiders (myself, at times, included). There's plenty of musically exciting stuff emanating from that scene, but again, it's rarely served up on a plate for the uninitiated. >>The argument about singles being a waste of space is superflous. Yes they are, and they always have been. That's a constant. Quality of music in the charts isn't. Furry muff. I still don't agree that the charts used to be better, at least not in general terms, but it does seem that the current wave of muppetry is more starkly at odds with both my and your taste than, say, grunge or Britpop. This, I suspect, exacerbates your tendency to disapprove and I'm inclined to agree with the majority of your criticisms. The argument about singles being a waste of space is not one I was particularly bothering with - and since I bought one this morning I should really shut the fuck up - but it's a fact that less people buy them these days, and that the average single-buyer is far younger than previously, which was sort of my (not terribly well made) point. Personally I think I do rather well considering that my posts are written at gunpoint in a freezing cold dungeon, against the clock and with a very itchy blindfold strapped to my delightful face. Go on, spare a thought for a poor urchin! Meanwhile... As someone wise and overpaid once said, Dunks seems to be arguing with a big, scary, cartoon version of me and doesn't seem to want to acknowledge that I might have a sense of humour. I know it's rare for me to make jokes, but I'm sure I wasn't being that cryptic. >> It has been ever thus, pretty much since Frank Sinatra began rocking the bobby-soxers, methinks? Problem being .... what, exactly? None as far as I can see. Point being....what, exactly? >>Why, for instance, is the professional misery-mongering of groups like Live and Korn deemed worthy of airplay, when XTC are to my ears, exceptionally more radio friendly? Answer? It's about marketing fads and fashion, not promoting "good taste" Try living over here for a couple of weeks and then ask that question again, to a soundtrack of uproarious laughter from me. Live and Korn on the radio???? HA HA HA HA HA!!!! Besides, in Korn's case their popularity stems from massive underground support prior to their eventual signing to a major label, so they would have sold shitloads of records regardless of marketing fads and fashion. >>Hmmmm ... pretty bloody large minority, old chap. Yes, but one million (for instance) is only one sixtieth of our population, and only two singles sold anywhere near a million copies last year. It's not a difficult point to grasp is it? You can tit about with semantics as much as you like, but you either know what I mean and have wilfully mis-interpreted my point or you're a bit fick, innit. >>OK they may not sell to people my age, but is it any less valid because of that? Valid how? Artistically? If the records were any good then no, they wouldn't be any less valid as a result of the age of people who buy them, but they're not. They're shit. Therefore, they are less valid. I'm not saying that the tastes and opinions of teenagers are less valid, but that the artistic value of the records is virtually non-existent. Again, you're deliberately missing the point to score rather desperate points. >>Why get so wound up about it? Don't be so silly. If I was wound up about it, I wouldn't have made numerous references to the fact that it doesn't matter. Are you listening at the back? >>And I think attacking "shrieking mid-pubescents" is kind of silly, and I have to say, smacks of both ageism and sexism. ...and that remark smacks of pomposity, humourlessness and a desire to be perceived as old and wise. Honestly, credit me with some intelligence. Furthermore, which part of the phrase "shrieking mid-pubescents" is gender specific? You're seeing demons where none exist I'm afraid. Besides which, fans of Boyzone (for example) ARE generally mid-pubescent and they have a tendency to shriek. That's not ageist or sexist, it's a statement of fact. I don't recall saying that we should conduct a vast cull of teenage girls because they like crap pop records. Mind you, I quite like the idea in theory, as long as I can store them in my dungeon. >>But many of them grow from this intial interest in one band to develop wide-ranging tastes in music and culture at large. And many don't. So? I fail to see how anything I said disagreed with this. >>Nor - thankfully - did they discourage the rampant beast of girl-bandery in the early-mid 1960s (Martha & The Vandellas, The Supremes, The Ronettes) - music every bit as "manufactured" as today's boy-band pop. True. Utterly formulaic they were too, as you say, but they had talent. Therein lies the difference. Diana Ross could (can?) sing, Westlife don't have a half-decent voice between them. >>I don't much care for Britney Spears, but I have to admit that her first single was a great piece of pop music and a pretty damn good production too. Best selling single of the year mate, and the great British public couldn't possibly be wrong could they? >>Hmmm - bit of a logical flip-flop there matey. Are you anywhere near Westminster, perchance? Yawn. >>I question your egregious generalisation about the expectations of "most kids", though I do think that "the majority" probably do listen to a pretty limited range of music, as you alluded to earlier. Thanks, that saved me from responding to the first half of the sentence. >>You can't blame people for taking what the system offers. Why not? My childhood was no different to most, I wasn't party to any inside information on the music scene and had no relatives or friends introducing me to new music, but music meant enough to me that I was prepared to get off my arse and hunt stuff down, explore different genres and take a few risks. This is not something that requires masses of effort or bags of cash, just a genuine love for music. >>With all due respect, I think your whole argument is a bit elitist, Dom. I don't see what's wrong with letting kids have some fun and get involved in the pop scene of the period they're growing up in. Nor do I! What a peculiar interpretation of seemingly straightforward views. I have absolutely no objections whatsoever, I just think it's a bit unfortunate that the current UK pop scene is so bereft of ideas. >>It doesn't have to be rocket science for Ozzy's sake - it's just ENTERTAINMENT. Yes, obviously. And mentioning Ozzy doesn't do you any favours, trust me. I can be adequately patronized at home, thank you very much, so I don't need it from you. >>I might (and in fact do) think that a lot of what might loosely be termed "metal" music is dull, formulaic, riddled with cliches, emotionally stunted and profoundly silly. I imagine that your once the expletives had died down, your next response to such a statement would probably be to say "Oh, you don't understand the genre ... that's only the mainstream acts ... you need to listen to Such-and-such ... " No, I wouldn't say anything because it's like talking to a particularly verbose brick wall. Of course, since I keep abreast of such things I have a fully formed and perfectly adequate understanding and appreciation of the current pop charts, boy bands and even Cliff "Look! I'm Jesus!" Richard. Don't assume that just because I like Manowar more than Boyzone that I'm speaking from a position of ignorance. >>Also with all due respect - bollocks yerself! Current pop music may not be "cool" or "deep" or very meaningful (was it ever?) but dismissing it out of hand like that is ridiculous. Oh bloody Nora.....listen carefully.....I'm not saying that boy bands (etc) are crap because they're not "cool" (JEEEEZUS!!!!!) or "deep" and I'm fully aware that some of the best pop music is as shallow as a pool of piss. I am "dismissing" it because there is nothing interesting about bad cover versions and completely unmemorable disco-pop-by-numbers. If we're talking about music then boy bands barely deserve a mention, because the music is not the point of the exercise. Without TV, promo videos, boyish good looks and the media machine these "bands" would die on their perfectly formed arses. It doesn't matter whether they can dance a bit, sing a bit or even juggle fucking bowling balls, they have no creative input, no musical ability and zero personality. It's not ridiculous to dismiss these bands as irrelevant to the music scene when the music is almost an afterthought. >>I am a big advocate of live music performance, and these big pop bands also mount big expensive tours which provide lots of work for lots of people and provide a bit of glamour and spectacle in people's hundrum lives. Ah, bless the little people with their "hundrum" lives. Aren't they lucky to have such generous and gifted pop stars to entertain them? If you want glamour and spectacle, try blowing up a fashion show. That's what I call entertainment. ...and then you waffle on about manufactured pop music. Very nice. We were talking about something specific, so you can mention the rather splendid Monkees as often as you want, it won't miraculously become relevant. >>What IS the problem with pop? It's just one facet of the industry. Nothing, and yes, I agree. Do I actually need to be here at all? I think I'll go and have a fag..... >> Not liking it is, of course, your right, but you can't just toss it aside because it doesn't meet your high-falutin' criteria for what is or isn't cool or important. Oh please! Stop putting words into my mouth! That's so weak I can't quite believe it. Cool? Important? What???? Read my post again, this time with your brain open. >>>Just don't spend too much time bemoaning the existence of the >kiddie-pop >freakshow... >>Erm ... wasn't that what you've just done, at some length? No. My, that was a long one. Matron. Dom "all brooms are great" Lawson.
------------------------------ End of Chalkhills Digest #6-15 ******************************
Go back to Volume 6.
24 January 2000 / Feedback