|
Milly Jones
|
 |
« Reply #90 on: 14:49:00, 01-09-2007 » |
|
My husband, who was a star performer at school and was due to be head boy at the next term, was told to "Get your hair cut or don't come back!" He didn't go back. That could have wrecked the prospects of a young man. A lesser one it probably would have - but he made his way in life without any A-levels and worked his way to the top of an international insurance company as an Executive Director. When I met him he was a computer programmer and as he excelled in anything mathematical, he got on fine. All the same......over a haircut?  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
We pass this way but once. This is not a rehearsal!
|
|
|
|
John W
|
|
« Reply #91 on: 14:55:16, 01-09-2007 » |
|
Yeah, just think, if he had cut his hair he would have gone on to do more interesting things than programming or insurance, and would never have met you Milly  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
xyzzzz__
|
|
« Reply #92 on: 13:02:20, 02-09-2007 » |
|
"PS I love the Clash!!!!
So do I. Wonder what xyzzzz__ doesn't like about them. Undecided"
I don't own a copy of 'London Calling', having not listened to the thing in years so I can't be more precise than feelings - that its partly to do with some of Strummer's talk, and the way they sounded like too much of a rock band to me. I've always had this juvenile distinction of what is rock and what is punk and...post edit (after the msg below): The Clash weren't a kind of 'new beginning' that I think The Raincoats, Pistols Slits and Pere Ubu, say, were - new ways of playing and interacting.
Not that I hate rock or anything...but like I say, its just a felling I had.
I should revisit them sometime.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 14:11:54, 02-09-2007 by xyzzzz__ »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Colin Holter
|
|
« Reply #93 on: 14:00:53, 02-09-2007 » |
|
Combat Rock is less rock band-like, but I think if you compare the level of songwriting, you'll agree that London Calling and Give 'Em Enough Rope (my personal favorite) are stronger. In other words, if you don't like London Calling, you may be out of luck as far as the Clash goes! It took me a long time to warm up to them, but now that I have, I hold them in very high esteem.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Swan_Knight
|
|
« Reply #94 on: 22:02:44, 02-09-2007 » |
|
I tried to like the Clash in the late nineties, but it just didn't happen...I do despise the punk period, when armies of useless middle-class urchins, with no talent and a juvenile desire to shock were foisted onto the public by a bunch of similarly self-hating jerk journos. International diplomat's son Strummer may have been an idol to the great unwashed, but - let's face it - he couldn't play guitar or sing for toffee. Political sloganising does not equal songwriting: not then, not now, not ever.
'London Calling' is an OK album, but it's no classic; in fact, it sounds even more dated than Sergeant Pepper.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
...so flatterten lachend die Locken....
|
|
|
|
xyzzzz__
|
|
« Reply #95 on: 23:01:00, 02-09-2007 » |
|
See but the cult of 'talent', 'genius', etc. ws the kind of things that punk - then hardcore/no-wave - ws intent on knocking...to an extent.
'Never mind the Bollocks' goes for a kind of 'anti-classic-this-is-thrash' status - a lot of punk simply didn't aspire to that condition in the first place (although of course the more you read around you find that most ppl weren't on the same page).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IgnorantRockFan
|
|
« Reply #96 on: 20:10:31, 03-09-2007 » |
|
I tried to like the Clash in the late nineties, but it just didn't happen...I do despise the punk period, when armies of useless middle-class urchins, with no talent and a juvenile desire to shock were foisted onto the public by a bunch of similarly self-hating jerk journos. International diplomat's son Strummer may have been an idol to the great unwashed, but - let's face it - he couldn't play guitar or sing for toffee. Political sloganising does not equal songwriting: not then, not now, not ever.
'London Calling' is an OK album, but it's no classic; in fact, it sounds even more dated than Sergeant Pepper.
Seconded on all counts. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Allegro, ma non tanto
|
|
|
|
MT Wessel
|
|
« Reply #97 on: 01:31:36, 05-09-2007 » |
|
Political sloganising does not equal songwriting: not then, not now, not ever.
I most certainly could not agree less. You sound even more dated than xyzzzz__ , if that is possible.  |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 01:41:12, 05-09-2007 by MT Wessel »
|
Logged
|
lignum crucis arbour scientiae
|
|
|
|
TimR-J
Guest
|
|
« Reply #98 on: 09:52:59, 05-09-2007 » |
|
How does not liking the Clash make you "dated"?  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Baziron
Guest
|
|
« Reply #99 on: 09:58:47, 05-09-2007 » |
|
Polite question: is this thread about "Popular Culture", or (alternatively) is it something to which I should be contributing?
Baz
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
richard barrett
Guest
|
|
« Reply #100 on: 10:48:48, 05-09-2007 » |
|
Polite question: is this thread about "Popular Culture" We'll soon find out when it's taken over by the muscle-flexing of cultural theory heavies! I'm not so keen myself on the music of The Clash, but that's at least partly beside the point, since as far as I'm concerned what they were using the music for was entirely admirable, ie. as a platform to communicate directly and urgently with an audience who were (and still are) otherwise force-fed a pack of tranquillising lies by media and politicians. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Sydney Grew
Guest
|
|
« Reply #101 on: 11:17:44, 05-09-2007 » |
|
. . . is this thread about "Popular Culture", or (alternatively) is it something to which I should be contributing? Here Members will no doubt ask themselves in wonderment, what difference could there be between " or (alternatively)" and plain old " or"? For "or" (no more in the end than a phonetically reduced version of the obsolete conjunction "other") already in itself serves to co-ordinate two elements between which there is an alternative. It were preferable we find to have retained the plain and simple "or" for the "exclusive" signification (Latin " aut"), and to write "and/or" or "or both" when the "inclusive" variety (Latin " vel") is in question. Is this startling "or (alternatively)" something the Member found on one of Fowler's unreliable pages? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Don Basilio
|
|
« Reply #102 on: 12:09:14, 05-09-2007 » |
|
It were preferable we find to have retained the plain and simple "or" for the "exclusive" signification (Latin "aut"), and to write "and/or" or "or both" when the "inclusive" variety (Latin "vel") is in question.
Is this startling "or (alternatively)" something the Member found on one of Fowler's unreliable pages?
As a enthusiast for the prose of the late Doctor Samuel Johnson and (despite his flippancy in matters sacred) that of Edward Gibbon, Gent, I am always warmed to hear an echo of those masters of the language in Member Grew's formally constructed contributions. However in this case, he is mistaking the use of literary and conversational English. In considered writing "or (alternatively)" is indeed tautologous. In conversation it is common to repeat and paraphrase. This is not called a chatboard for nothing. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven.
A time to weep, and a time to laugh: a time to mourn, and a time to dance
|
|
|
|
Baziron
Guest
|
|
« Reply #103 on: 12:10:01, 05-09-2007 » |
|
. . . is this thread about "Popular Culture", or (alternatively) is it something to which I should be contributing? Here Members will no doubt ask themselves in wonderment, what difference could there be between " or (alternatively)" and plain old " or"? For "or" (no more in the end than a phonetically reduced version of the obsolete conjunction "other") already in itself serves to co-ordinate two elements between which there is an alternative. It were preferable we find to have retained the plain and simple "or" for the "exclusive" signification (Latin " aut"), and to write "and/or" or "or both" when the "inclusive" variety (Latin " vel") is in question. Is this startling "or (alternatively)" something the Member found on one of Fowler's unreliable pages? The Doctor labours under a false assumption (as ever)! The exact purpose of adding "(alternatively)" was simple enough: it was to indicate that (from my point of view) the only alternative to a thread on "popular culture" to which I wished to contribute was one that was not on popular culture. This particular resonance would have been lost without my "(alternative)", and I am surprised that The Doctor was insensitive to it (especially since I think it is a resonance with which he himself would express some empathy). I'm sorry if he found that difficult. Does The Doctor require that everything we wish to express (with the particular resonances we wish to evoke) must be "permitted" by some long-dead dude like Fowler or Sweet? Wake up and get real! Baz |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
richard barrett
Guest
|
|
« Reply #104 on: 12:18:22, 05-09-2007 » |
|
I hereby pronounce this thread well and truly derailed.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
