Gaffaweb >
Love & Anger >
1988-07 >
[ Date Index |
Thread Index ]
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
From: Doug Alan <nessus@ATHENA.MIT.EDU>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 88 10:06:14 EDT
Subject: Re: IED gets his comeuppance, again; and misK. mailbag items
Sender: nessus@WONKO.MIT.EDU
> [IED:] Your concern is appreciated, Liz. IED doesn't know how |>oug > feels, but IED harbors no animus toward our Pseudo-Moderator. Well, to be honest, your humble pseudo-moderator harbors animus against the entire human race, so don't take it personally. With the exception of only a handlful of individuals (like Kate, fer instance), humans are wholy devoid of redeeming value. Despite this, humanity is still the most amusing species (in a sick sort of way) your humble pseudo-moderator has found so far, with the exception of the duck-billed platypus and the Betelgeusean MTV-addicted RF flatworm, so he supposes he'll let humanity stay around for a little while longer before engaging the Orbital Gene Recycler. > But isn't it some kind of sin to sleep with one's own auntie, Lizoo? > Actually, though, the idea turns IED on. He's ALL YOURS, Lizooshka, > Lizooshka, Lizooshka-ya-ya! Tsh, tsh. There's a newsgroup, alt.sex, for this sort of stuff. > What |>oug says is true: IED would (and did) make just as big a fool > of himself in Kate's presence as |>oug did -- his foolishness just > didn't happen to manifest itself in quite the same way, that's all. So, are you going to give us all the gory details, or just let all our imaginations run wild? > As for |>oug's statement that there's nothing to indicate the > passage of "large amounts" of time between the verses, IED would > like to know how it is that |>oug knows the length of time that each > of the "We're waiting" sections are meant to indicate? Well, for one, there is no "We're waiting" inbetween "My solicitor" and "Ooh I remember" or "Pockets floating in the breeze" and "There goes a tenner", which are the only points where your large amount of time could pass. If the "We're waiting"'s were supposed to indicate the passing of large amounts of time, then you would expect to find one at the transition point between the two time periods. But this just isn't the case. > Would you also maintain, |>oug, that the recurring, highly emphatic > references to the monotony of waiting cannot have more significance > than your own interpretation allows? I think that the "We're waiting"'s have critical significance, but that the significance is much more straight-forward than you would have it. The "We're waiting"'s exist to give a feeling of the horrible sense of nervousness and helplessness that must occur during the inevitable periods of nerve-wracking waiting that would occur during the process of comitting a complicated crime such as a bank robbery. >> Well, as Einstein said, great minds will always face opposition >> from mediocre ones. At least I have a Philosophy degree from MIT >> to prove that I may not be as stupid as you think. How are you >> going to prove to me that you're not as stupid as you seem? >> -- |>oug > Not that he wants to suggest that you're stupid, |>oug, because > obviously that's untrue; but really, you don't mean to suggest that > an MIT degree in philosophy is "proof" of intelligence? Well, I certainly wouldn't claim that everyone at MIT is stamped in the exact same intellectual mold. However, it *is* indeed the case that they just don't let people into MIT who aren't a bit smarter than the average bear. And they don't give them degrees either. > Michael, for all his tragic delusions about the quality of "AC/DC", > comes off in his posting as passionate about Kate, not "stupid". Why > should he have to "prove" his "intelligence" by waving a credential > from an expensive private university? Such credentials are certainly not the only acceptible form of proof. There are many ways one might show his or her worthiness for intelligent dialogue. However, anyone who would dare question the blinding and awesome brilliance of your humble pseudo-moderator, is calling into question his very raison d'etre. >> It was in the Bay of Biscay her gallant ship did plow > Not "our gallant ship"? There are various written versions of > the lyrics, and Kate's differs from all of them in a few tiny > particulars, perhaps including this one? >> One night among the sailors was a fearful floorin' row > Both the Gordon Bok and the Martin Carthy versions have "flyin'" > or "flurryin'" here. Kate seems to be using "flyin'", though perhaps > with a bit of an Irish twist to the pronunciation. Regarding the lyrics I posted for "The Handsome Cabin Boy", I put togther those lyrics a long time ago. I got the lyrics by finding the song in a book of traditional songs and changing the lyrics that Kate obviously changed. Words for which it wasn't obvious she changed, I left alone. I don't remember the book I got the lyrics from, and there's a chance I didn't get every word exactly right. I believe what I posted is close enough, however, that no meaning was changed. >> Do you want Kate to call you up on the phone and say, "Yes, >> Andrew, "Gaffa" is gaffer's tape!"? > Ooh, yeah! That would be great! Can you arrange it? Kate says she's a bit busy this week, what with the deadline for her new album pressing down and all, and asks if she can get back to you next week? >> And has anyone ever posted a complete list of whispered lyrics in >> "Suspended"? >> [ Sure. Just yesterday I did. -- |>oug ] > Are you quite sure those were the _complete_ whispered lyrics, |>oug? Well, it's everything I hear. I don't think what I posted was official, but it's also what some other people heard. If you have some other ideas, speak up. On to "Jig of Life"... >> For now does ride in on the curl of a wave > Sure that's not "_doves_ ride in on the curl of a wave"? Yeah, well yeah. I got the lyrics from the second issue of *Under the Ivy*. I asked John Carder Bush, who wrote the narrated lyrics, if they were official, and he said "Yes". Perhaps "now" should be capitalized, however. If you think about it, these lyrics make perfect sense. The song has a lot to do with Time, and I think the meaning of this line is "For the present rides in on the curl of a wave". |>oug