Gaffaweb > Love & Anger > 1997-21 > [ Date Index | Thread Index ]
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]


Re: Other Artists; OK! I Give Up!

From: Dongerous! <fastslow@idt.net>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 00:32:53 -0700
Subject: Re: Other Artists; OK! I Give Up!
To: "He Is John" <heisjohn@gate.net>
Cc: "Love Hounds" <love-hounds@gryphon.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: <199707262208.SAA81122@osage.gate.net>

At 2:56 PM -0700 7-26-97, He Is John wrote:
>Dongerous! wrote:
>>He Is John wrote:
>> >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.
>>
>> Kate Bush IS a '70s artist.
>
>Nope, she's an '80s artist.
>
>Fair or unfair, artists are typically classified by the decade in which
>they release their quintessential work, or in which they reach the peak of
>their popularity -- NOT when they first warble about them wiley, windy
>moors (for example...).
>
>Of course, many of the more prolific ones transcend this (lazy)
>classification by virtue of their longevity (Rolling Stones, Bob Dylan,
>etc.), but most do not.  Just by chance, the two other artists mentioned
>above, Bowie and Deep Purple, are perfect examples of this phenomenon.
>
>Bowie will surely be remembered as Ziggy Stardust, the Thin White
>Duke or any of his other '70s personas, not as the writer of those
>mind-numbingly lame show tunes he wrote and released in the '60s.
>Similarly, Deep Purple will go down in the books as a '60s group only in
>the minds of the members who didn't make the cut (Rod Evans and Nick
>Simper), and perhaps their respective mums...
>
>Still don't agree?  Welllll, I suppose you could take a <yawn> poll...

No, no...no poll need. Good points, one and all. However, for many people
"Wuthering Heights" may be the "defining" moment for Kate Bush. Also, I'll
always think of the Rolling Stones and Dylan as '60s artists, though they
did have some '70s moments.

>> >> I'm not familiar with PK.
>> >
>> >What Paul McCartney would sound like if he could play guitar.
>>
>> Paul McCartney CAN play guitar. Ever heard "Taxman"?
>
>You mean that cheesy little solo is Paul?!

Cheesy? God-level is more like it.

> And I thought it was George all these years!!  :-)

Nope. Paul McCartney played more guitar than you might realize...like on
"Ballad of John & Yoko."

>> >>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...
>>
>> What about the guy who plays guitar like Paul McCartney?
>
>Oops!  Looks like you caught me in one of them big (stripey) lies...  OK,
>now that the truth is out -- I kept a copy of Revolver too.

Way to go.

>Regarding the Big Sky article:  congratulations on being published (again?)
>But where does one find a copy of 4-Wheel ATV Action in Backwater, Florida?
> Our local bookstore (Walmart) doesn't carry it.  Neither does the local
>drugstore (Walmart), record store (Walmart), sporting goods store (Walmart)
>or general merchandiser (Walmart)...

The storie is about riding ATVs in Montana (which is a great place to ride,
BTW), and has no content about Kate Bush, other than the quoting of a line
from "The Big Sky." I just threw in the reference to her for me, the layout
artist and maybe a couple of other subscribers. Actually, I'm suprised you
can't find it. The Southeast US is where we sell most of our magazines
(circ. about 45,000).

- Don