|
|
Post by KooL on Feb 21, 2007 16:42:37 GMT -5
I actually read that on his blog a few weeks ago. That makes me a bigger piece of shit.
|
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Feb 21, 2007 16:55:26 GMT -5
Man, that's awful.
|
|
|
|
Post by loudaab on Feb 21, 2007 18:38:13 GMT -5
What the hell is this? No one visits your blog so you decided to bring your blog to them? Nobody cares about your stupid theories. Since plenty of folks here have been talking about this theory I figured they could benefit from seeing the actual blog post that the theory originated from, so they could talk from a more enlightened perspective... |
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Feb 21, 2007 19:23:47 GMT -5
No one has been talking about the theory other than to say that it is wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by RocDoc on Feb 21, 2007 19:25:08 GMT -5
Enliiightened now, are we?
Pal, these 'musings' you obviously SO enjoy to pull out of your ass...use them to go enlighten someone else finally, willya?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kensterberg on Feb 21, 2007 19:36:03 GMT -5
I just ignore all of PEW's posts now. Keeps my blood pressure down.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Feb 21, 2007 19:41:42 GMT -5
Yeah, that's a good idea, but these boards are pretty slow other than Bozo, so I may as well.
Although he's probably a big reason why they're so slow.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kensterberg on Feb 21, 2007 19:47:41 GMT -5
Well, and you didn't really engage him -- you just pointed out that no one is "discussing" his "theory" other than to say it's wrong. "Dismissing" is a more appropriate term than "discussing," methinks.
Things were actually fairly busy here earlier -- JLLM and Dolly both made appearences! (Though not at the same time, so I'm not sure it was really Jesus and not just Dolly pretending to be Him).
Hey, you may have missed my question over on What Are You Listening To? ... who played the lead guitar bits on Lou's "Coney Island Baby?" That is some sweet work ... has an almost Sterling ring to it, IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Feb 21, 2007 19:50:33 GMT -5
Well, and you didn't really engage him -- you just pointed out that no one is "discussing" his "theory" other than to say it's wrong. "Dismissing" is a more appropriate term than "discussing," methinks. Things were actually fairly busy here earlier -- JLLM and Dolly both made appearences! (Though not at the same time, so I'm not sure it was really Jesus and not just Dolly pretending to be Him). Hey, you may have missed my question over on What Are You Listening To? ... who played the lead guitar bits on Lou's "Coney Island Baby?" That is some sweet work ... has an almost Sterling ring to it, IMO. Yeah, I guess I missed that. Pretty sure that that's Bob Kulick on that album, which is sort of weird. |
|
|
|
Post by Kensterberg on Feb 21, 2007 19:55:15 GMT -5
That song came up on random play this afternoon, and the guitar really reminded me of "Pale Blue Eyes" -- not quite in the some league, but definitely from the same playbook.
NP: Don Henley, "Dirty Laundry" ... from yet another randomized playlist.
|
|
|
|
Post by skvorisdeadsorta on Feb 21, 2007 21:02:37 GMT -5
The Invisible Bowie-Zeppelin line I have a theory that there exists an invisible line between David Bowie fans and Led Zeppelin fans. I say this in part because I've never met anyone (whose musical opinion I actually VALUE anyway) who puts BOTH Bowie and Led Zep on their short list of Greatest Rock Artists of all-time. Ofcourse now that I say this, I'm sure there are 500 contrarians lined up to shoot this theory down like a lead zeppelin. But take myself for instance, I put Led Zep in my top 10 (roughly, I mean I really dont have a list, but if I was forced to come up with one, they would definately be in the top ten). With Bowie however, although I admit he has recorded some good/interesting stuff, there is no way I'd put him anywhere near my top Twenty. And over the years I have seen/felt/heard/smelt and tasted this same sort of sentiment in other Rockists. They either lean toward Led Zep or they lean toward Bowie. But never both. And there are several reasons for this. One reason is that certain Rockists think if an artists is concentrating alot on fashion like Bowie was (or Prince for instance) then it must distract that artist from concentrating on the actual music. Yet other Rockists argue that thinking alot about your image actually focuses an artists on what they are trying to achieve and makes their music better. Then another theory is based on the fact that many Rockists (old school rockists in particular) believe that your music collection is an extention of your manhood. A band like Led Zep personifies the kick you in the teeth, stick a squid up a chick's coochie, expose your chest-hair cock rock attitude that male teens of the 70s thought they should emmulate if they wanted to get laid. While Bowie ofcourse has this sorta sensative, space artist, overt androgenity thing-a-ma-hooie that teen girls of the 80s thought their dream boyfriends should have. In otherwords it is perfectly acceptable for a Rockist to become sexually arroused watching Robert Plant stick his wang in your face or at Jimmy Page fingering his six string like a a teenage boy uncovering the mysteries of masterbation for the first time or watching John Bonham pound on the skins like a drunken sailor pounding on a 2-bit harbor whore after 3 months at sea. But getting aroused while watching David Bowie crawling about like a spider is just weird. Bowie fans ofcourse will argue that Led Zep fans are simply headbanging hippy meatheads who are so homophobic that they can't even admit that they like two ABBA songs--and make no mistake about it, everyone likes at least two ABBA songs, even if you secretly have to listen to them on your car stereo with the windows rolled up (Led Zep fans are actually somewhat famous for getting caught with an ABBA album in their pocession and blaming an ex-girlfriend for leaving it at their apartment). So then, in conclusion, unless you are a record store owner, being a Led Zep completist AND a Bowie completists just isnt possible. (By the way, this rule only applies to Americans). blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.viewCategory&FriendID=66316956&BlogCategoryID=15 Please take your trite bullshit somewhere else, dude. Another fine example of "rockist" sexism that is just not witty nor even remotely amusing or humorous. A welcome lesson is sweeping riduculous generalizations that are so off base. The only ist you are is a cockist. |
|
|
|
Post by loudaab on Feb 21, 2007 22:00:43 GMT -5
The only ist you are is a cockist. And I have the phone numbers of several hot young females who will attest to that fact, my friend. Look, you're too wrapped up in this politically correct nonsense, that only serves to put a damper on the Rock experience, man. You accuse my writing of being homophobic and racist and sexist and every other typical morally snooty adjective in the PC playbook that you can throw at me. Do you accuse the Rolling Stones of being racists and sexists when they sing about brown sugar or puerto rican girls that are just dying to meet you? Or what about your beloved Led Zep (you know that band that you said was in your top ten) do you accuse them of being these things you accuse me of? Either you are being disingenuous or you are being a hypocrit my friend. Either way, it doesnt matter. You will enjoy the music (and my writing) much more if you just take the politically correct lump of coal out of your behind and just let the energy flow and the good time roll... |
|
|
|
Post by skvorisdeadsorta on Feb 21, 2007 23:20:27 GMT -5
#1. Learn how to write and I might give a little more credit in your absurd ramblings.
#2. I know that The Rolling Stones are not racist, but songs like "Brown Sugar" are so fucking cringe-worthy for me. If you look back on it, Iggy Pop and several artists of that era were talking about having sex with African-American women because they wanted to shock the older white establishment and challenge that group's hatred for interracial relationships. The parents of the kids that were buying these artists' records would hate that, thus making it pretty cool and appealing for the more "with it" buying youngsters.
#3. While I like Zep and The Stones, it's alot about the music for me in those particular examples and not the lyrics. I find the lyrics to most of the Zeppelin catalog to be highly juvenille and just plain dumb. I also find some of Jagger's lyrics very humours but also terribly offensive and naive.
#4. There is a prevailing tone of sexism in a lot of music that turns me off. I didn't get into during the era of hair bands and I certainly don't dig on it now.
It's not a PC handbook. Say what you want to, I am not trying to censor you. I think people will take you more serioiusly though if you loose the schtick, dude. For one thing I haven't been the one that's been kicked off of numerous message boards, irritating the general public at large. In my time, I have definitely carried some jokes too far and irritated some people around here, BUT it reeks of nothing of the insincerity that you bring around to this forum.
Also, 900 numbers of the girls that you pay to call don't count. I'm not interested in your conquests because even if it were true, and I highly doubt it, it still doesn't make you a cooler person or a better person.
|
|
|
|
Post by skvorisdeadsorta on Feb 21, 2007 23:24:10 GMT -5
My Top Ten Artists For Me
1. Throbbing Gristle
2. Skinny Puppy
3. David Bowie
4. Fugazi
5. Cocteau Twins
6. Dead Can Dance
7. Led Zeppelin
8. Curtis Mayfield
9. The Beatles
10. Frank Zappa
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Feb 22, 2007 9:36:40 GMT -5
I read that. I am a piece of shit. I just read all of that too....reckon I'm a sack o' shit too. really though, that's quite a theory....I'm actually intrigued how one comes up with that kind of thing. Does this make me a bad person, or just hopelessly confused? |
|
