he be so much funny

[sdcrdcf!stephen@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU]

] IED, obviously, is one of these revisionists. And, looking at our
] subject with a view unclouded by this acursed century's bizarre
] obsession with The New, he is able to see the superiority of Kate
] Bush to Eno, because he has been able to appreciate the paucity of
] the AN-INNOVATIVE elements of Eno's undoubtedly INNOVATIVE, but
] relatively shallow and frequently sloppy work; and, conversely, the
] profundity, thoroughness and integrity of Kate's every idea, whether
] it should happen to seem "progressive" or not.

Please post this to net.humor

]] I (definitely) respond: I WAS talking about LYRICS, and I didn't
]] say Eno's were as GOOD or BETTER than Kate's, I said they were more
]] INTERESTING.
 
] You STILL don't seem to understand the distinction between judgments
] of overall artistic QUALITY -- inevitably SUBJECTIVE, and
] distinguished by such words as "good", "bad"; "interesting",
] "uninteresting"; "inspiring", "uninspiring"; "valuable", "worthless"
] -- and analyses of qualifiable and quantifiable elements of artistic
] language -- analyses which can frequently be OBJECTIVE, and which
] are distinguished by considerations of such things as the relative
] complexity of two works of art; the relative sophistication of their
] content, vocabulary and language; the coherence of their
] organization; the number of issues or themes which each may be seen
] to address; and the relevance which those issues has to the art's
] modes of expression.

What do they teach you kids in college these days?  OBJECTIVE
analysis?  You yourself use the word "relative" in your list of
"objective" elements.  Relative to what?  Relative to your own
emotions and prejudices, I suspect.  These elements are just as
inevitably SUBJECTIVE as judgements of overall artistic QUALITY.

]] Actually, I don't consider SOPHISTICATION or REFINEMENT to be
]] positive traits.
 
] ONCE AGAIN, let IED point out that he NEVER SAID whether
] "sophistication" or "refinement" were "positive" or "negative"
] traits!! YOU ARE SO THICK.  The challenge -- which you willingly
] accepted -- was to demonstrate the existence of any other album made
] since the early 70s which possessed the same level of sophistication
] as either The Dreaming or HoL.

(I'm THICK!  I'm THICK!  Wait 'til I tell my mommy.  I wonder if
she'll give me a toy?)

I did not in fact accept said challenge.  I was merely commenting on
one aspect of other people's responses.  I believe that what your
challenge boils down to is to name any album made since the early 70's
that is more like The Dreaming or HoL than The Dreaming or HoL.  I
give up.  There probably isn't.

]] Actually, I don't consider SOPHISTICATION or REFINEMENT to be
]] positive traits.

] WHETHER YOU THINK THAT MAKES THE ALBUM GOOD OR BAD, BETTER OR WORSE,
] IS   B E S I D E    T H E   P O I N T !  Mr. Head, if you can't
] stand the heat, GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE WATER.

Why is this beside the point?  If you can fill this group with your
inane blathering, why can't I?  Do you RULE this discussion, dink?
Besides, your water ain't too fucking hot.

] "Refinement" DID give us Bronzino, Pontormo, late Michelangelo, late
] Rembrandt, Titian, Khnopff, Moreau and Whistler, to name just

Late Rembrandt?  Take an art class before you get out of college.

]-- Andrew Marvick (angry, but not as steamed as Doug, apparently!)

b. head (the angriest dog in the world)