Re: Other Artists; OK! I Give Up!

["He Is John" <heisjohn@gate.net>]

Dongerous! wrote:
>He Is John wrote:
>>Dongerous! wrote:
>>> What I found distrubing about some of the lists was the fact that 
>many
>>list
>>> members appear to have not discovered a new artist since the 
>'70s!!!
>>
>>Disturbing?  In the early 70s, I discovered Phil Keaggy, David Bowie 
>and
>>Deep Purple.
>
>I hate to break it to you John, but David Bowie and Deep Purple 
>weren't new
>artists in the '70s. There's both from the '60s.

Ooohhhh...  I thought you said you found the fact that some L-H subscribers
haven't DISCOVERED any new artists since the '70s disturbing.  In essence,
an indictment of our willingness to open ourselves up to something a little
more current, as opposed to commentary on which decade a particular
recording artist may "belong" to.    Wait a minute...  that *IS* what you
said  :-)

Calling Bowie and Purple '60s artists is like calling Kate a '70s artist. 
To paraphrase Karen, that would be akin to lumping her in with the
polyester-wearin' Charlie Daniels set.  

> I'm not familiar with PK.

What Paul McCartney would sound like if he could play guitar.

> >A couple years later, I happened upon 10cc.
>
>I hope it was their second album.

Yes, initially, now that you mention it.  *Perfect* pop for those inclined
to listen to such things.

>> Towards the end
>>of the decade, I fell in love with Kate.  Have I missed anything 
>since
>>then??
>
>Apprently not.
>
>I'll bet you don't have the storage problem with CDs/LPs/45s that I 
>do.

Thanks for letting me know I'm all up to date!  And no, storage isn't
really a problem.  I traded almost everything else I owned for Kate and
10cc stuff...

John