Re: Suspended In Goats

[kyrlidis@athena.mit.edu (Angelos Kyrlidis)]

Cynthia writes:
>
>>If I were a raving bitch (Hey!  I AM!), I might say:
>>Looks like both you guys are going ba-a-a-a-a-a-a.
>
>>Everyone's
>>been ragging on various artists on this particlar subject, but
>>as soon as somebody Sacred to you guys gets mentioned, you get
>>all sweaty.  Lighten up, MANY artists have been made fun of in
>>this Kate Tribute CD thread.  Geez, you guys.  Get those
>>panties unwadded, they're strangling your senses of humor.

Well I personally think my point was to do subtle humour targeted at
'CHARACTER' of the artists involved in my original post. I had no intention
to say that this artist is good and this artist sucks. I think this is where
Richard's post went sour. He essentially selected two artists favored by 
many in this group (with whom he clashes with every now and then (Hi Vickie))
and made humour aimed at the abilities of these artists. I didn't particularly
laugh at the Happy Rhodes joke, because anybody who has given Happy a listen
distinguishes her from Kate. 

[Kate vs Happy aside]
Saying that Happy is a Kate wanna-be is as silly
as saying that Kate is a Happy-wannabe. They are SO DIFFERENT there is no point
in comparing them. Kate feeds the mind and can be emotional (there we go again)
but Happy feeds the soul and talks to the heart. Happy's songs have an element
of tragedy in the way it was defined by Aristotle. The listener can feel what
is going on, laugh/cry, and at the end feel the 'catharsis'. 
[end of aside]

But then again what's the point of posting one's opinion? KATE SUCKS :-) How'd
ya like that as a joke?

Jeff writes (to Cynthia):
>You seem to have been too busy raving (you *are* Love-Hounds occassionally-
>friendly neighborhood raving bitch, aren't you?) to actually read Steve's
>post.
>
>He did not say that Richard was wrong to rag on either Jane Siberry or Happy
>Rhodes.  He merely said that it seemed as if Richard was not making that
>post to be witty but rather to annoy specific people--get their goats, as
>Steve put it.
I agree. 100%.

>Yes, many artists have been made fun of.  Most of the 'jokes' were witty
>and/or clever.  I didn't find either of Richard's comments to fall into
>this category.  And it's not just because they both happen to be artists I
>really like; I loved Angelos' comment about Madonna, and I love her stuff.
>There have been a few funny comments about Sting and the rainforests.
>I think Sting is a great musician, but I still enjoyed the jokes about
>him.  There was a subtle dig at Sinead O'Connor that I thought was funny.

I like 6/11 of the artists I made fun of, and actually SOC is my favorite
even though I get frustrated by her inability to make up her mind about 
anything (yes I like her better than Kate). I like Madonna too, and the quote 
was in Madonna character, a variation of an original quote I read in Sinead's
SPIN interview. So there. The only artist I intentionally made fun of is Phil
Collins who is now officially TOTALLY BORING in my book. Genesis' new song
'No son of mine' has a social ring to it but IMHO is so pretentious that it 
shows, and musically is worhtless. [Now that I said that I'll end my post]

Loosen up guys'n'girls, THIS IS ONLY A NEWSGROUP!

Angelos
+=====================================+
|'My ears have parasites'-hApPy RhOdEs|
+=====================================+