Looking forward to listening to a weird, almost hippified (in song selection) Dionne Warwicke (with the e) double lp I picked up. Just looked up why she added the e
” Warwick, for years an aficionado of psychic phenomena, was advised by astrologer Linda Goodman in 1971 to add a small “e” to her last name, making Warwick “WARWICKe” for good luck and to recognize her married name and her spouse, actor and drummer William “Bill” Elliott. Goodman convinced Warwick that the extra small “e” would add a vibration needed to balance her last name and bring her even more good fortune in her marriage and her professional life. Unfortunately, Goodman proved to be mistaken about this. The extra “e,” according to Dionne, “was the worst thing I could have done in retrospect, and in 1975 I finally got rid of that damn ‘e’ and became ‘Dionne Warwick’ again.””
A good Wilko Johnson interview The Big Issue by Franz Ferdinand’s Alex Kapranos . Full Q&A: http://bit.ly/Z1OS5A
It covers Wilko’s recent terminal cancer diagnosis and how it’s changed his outlook on life. Also, his decision to forgo chemo treatment in order to do a farewell tour and record his final album.
In addition, there’s a great bit having to do with a mention of Ray Manzarek made by the interviewer, and Wilko’s priceless response (which is a prime illustration of why I love Wilko and really, really dislike The Doors).
WOW! I’m sorry, but I couldn’t get past the opening 5 paragraphs. What a douche. Honestly, no matter what stance people our age take on “punk” it usually rings hollow to me. For me it was primarily about getting the music back to its short, fast, and powerful roots. Some of the ‘tudes expressed in early punk were worth growing out of, but most of the dumb-ass stuff this guy seems to take issue with is what came long after the fact, like the Class of ’89 Punks who felt the need to buy Ramones and CBGB’s t-shirts long after those things stopped being relevant. The people who glommed onto Alternative Nation ideology, not reading the articles that explained the faux-indie roots of a band like Smashing Pumpkins. It sounds to me like the author of this piece was one of those idiots, and now he’s kicking himself and – more shamefully – his peers for having fallen for all the hollowness of the wannabe punk era. Lame and, more importantly, boring.
I was trying not to judge his opinions that harshly, but it was too hard for me. This seems like a juvenile whiny piece. He’s throwing too big of a blanket over everyone else’s motivations, memories, and situations.
He writes “we” too many times for my comfort when he should be writing “I”. This is the kind of rant that strikes me as someone denigrating a whole transitory scene because it didn’t work out for him the way he wanted it to.
Is this me being whiny about another whiner? Or does he actually have a valid point at all?
This is wrongheaded and ponderous, to boot. I agree that he’s projecting a whole bunch of his own or his friends’ BS on others. I think there are other things going on with people — drugs or just plain laziness — who are frozen into some kind of imagined punk rock lifestyle where you don’t have a bank account.
I’m pretty much in agreement with you guys….For the two or three points he makes that possibly have some weight to ’em, there’s a metric ton of presumption and projection going on in that essay. As far as I’m concerned (at my age), “punk” was just another point on a pop culture timeline, really no better or worse than any other (depending on who you ask, of course). For some of us who were in our teens at that time, and clued in to it, the punk rock movement holds some special memories and meaning, but that’s nothing rare…every generation does that with the pop culture from their adolescence. For a guy in his forties, the author is taking this stuff way too seriously, as well defining it way too narrowly…attributing a load of cultural ills to it with extremely flimsy (or nonexistent, even) factual backup, as if “punk rock” is SO far-reaching and deeply ingrained, that it could be seriously considered as the root cause of ANY culture-wide sickness. It’s a fairly ludicrous proposal.
RIP ALvin Lee; he’s going home…
http://todayentertainment.today.com/_news/2013/03/06/17210670-ten-years-after-singer-alvin-lee-has-died-at-68?lite
Another take on that news from the BBC
Trying to pick away at this Beck article between tasks on an extremely busy day:
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9016745/the-20th-anniversary-beck-loser
Maybe it belongs in the Gondry thread, above.
Looking forward to listening to a weird, almost hippified (in song selection) Dionne Warwicke (with the e) double lp I picked up. Just looked up why she added the e
” Warwick, for years an aficionado of psychic phenomena, was advised by astrologer Linda Goodman in 1971 to add a small “e” to her last name, making Warwick “WARWICKe” for good luck and to recognize her married name and her spouse, actor and drummer William “Bill” Elliott. Goodman convinced Warwick that the extra small “e” would add a vibration needed to balance her last name and bring her even more good fortune in her marriage and her professional life. Unfortunately, Goodman proved to be mistaken about this. The extra “e,” according to Dionne, “was the worst thing I could have done in retrospect, and in 1975 I finally got rid of that damn ‘e’ and became ‘Dionne Warwick’ again.””
A good Wilko Johnson interview The Big Issue by Franz Ferdinand’s Alex Kapranos . Full Q&A: http://bit.ly/Z1OS5A
It covers Wilko’s recent terminal cancer diagnosis and how it’s changed his outlook on life. Also, his decision to forgo chemo treatment in order to do a farewell tour and record his final album.
In addition, there’s a great bit having to do with a mention of Ray Manzarek made by the interviewer, and Wilko’s priceless response (which is a prime illustration of why I love Wilko and really, really dislike The Doors).
One of the record stores I browsed through today was blasting some REO Speedwagon album. They did “Keep the Fire Burning,” right? It was weird.
Thanks for passing that on.
This was popping up repeatedly on my Facebook news feed. Any reactions/opinions ye townspeople?
http://www.seattleweekly.com/2013-03-06/music/punk-rock-is-bullshit/full/
WOW! I’m sorry, but I couldn’t get past the opening 5 paragraphs. What a douche. Honestly, no matter what stance people our age take on “punk” it usually rings hollow to me. For me it was primarily about getting the music back to its short, fast, and powerful roots. Some of the ‘tudes expressed in early punk were worth growing out of, but most of the dumb-ass stuff this guy seems to take issue with is what came long after the fact, like the Class of ’89 Punks who felt the need to buy Ramones and CBGB’s t-shirts long after those things stopped being relevant. The people who glommed onto Alternative Nation ideology, not reading the articles that explained the faux-indie roots of a band like Smashing Pumpkins. It sounds to me like the author of this piece was one of those idiots, and now he’s kicking himself and – more shamefully – his peers for having fallen for all the hollowness of the wannabe punk era. Lame and, more importantly, boring.
I was trying not to judge his opinions that harshly, but it was too hard for me. This seems like a juvenile whiny piece. He’s throwing too big of a blanket over everyone else’s motivations, memories, and situations.
He writes “we” too many times for my comfort when he should be writing “I”. This is the kind of rant that strikes me as someone denigrating a whole transitory scene because it didn’t work out for him the way he wanted it to.
Is this me being whiny about another whiner? Or does he actually have a valid point at all?
This is wrongheaded and ponderous, to boot. I agree that he’s projecting a whole bunch of his own or his friends’ BS on others. I think there are other things going on with people — drugs or just plain laziness — who are frozen into some kind of imagined punk rock lifestyle where you don’t have a bank account.
Relevant to RTH’s interests, especially regarding the Sexiest Man in Prog-Rock contest from a while back.
http://progbutts.tumblr.com/ (It’s pretty much exactly what it says it is, though all butts are clothed.)
Bonus: The current top pic also features a legendary Philly DJ, the late Ed Sciaky.
I’m pretty much in agreement with you guys….For the two or three points he makes that possibly have some weight to ’em, there’s a metric ton of presumption and projection going on in that essay. As far as I’m concerned (at my age), “punk” was just another point on a pop culture timeline, really no better or worse than any other (depending on who you ask, of course). For some of us who were in our teens at that time, and clued in to it, the punk rock movement holds some special memories and meaning, but that’s nothing rare…every generation does that with the pop culture from their adolescence. For a guy in his forties, the author is taking this stuff way too seriously, as well defining it way too narrowly…attributing a load of cultural ills to it with extremely flimsy (or nonexistent, even) factual backup, as if “punk rock” is SO far-reaching and deeply ingrained, that it could be seriously considered as the root cause of ANY culture-wide sickness. It’s a fairly ludicrous proposal.
Yep, long-winded and lame.