lp102911@sjuvax.UUCP (palena) (10/28/85)
In article <1946@pyuxd.UUCP> rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) writes: >Has anyone figured out what Palena's problem is? Did anything he said here >make any sense? Copyright lawyers? "Ahh, art rock"? Given that Palena's ...You know I'm sick of this dude's "Men,net.music is serious business" attitude!! Anybody concur on this point?Jesus,I try to inject some humor on this beat net and it just flies over the head of every "guru".(Maybe because it's usually directed at them).Face it,you take yourself too ser- ously,and the tone that you and that character at MIT have imposed on this net is revolting.... >opinions on Led Zeppelin as god have been no different from Doug Alan's >opinions about Kate Bush in the same role, what's the point? Must he tar ...the point is that I don't just post and post and post and post Zeppelin pieces to the net.EVERY posting has been in response to another one.I respect both Page and Plant and thank them for play- ing together,with probably no rehearsal time to speak of,at Live-Aid. (Of course the fact that they didn't make a dime for their trouble, and it was for a charitable cause,won't be mentioned.)They could've used the opportunity to further their new careers,with Plant per- forming his new material,and Page playing with "The Firm".Did they? No,they gambled and stumbled through some old classics for the ben- efit of their old,beloved fans.Is this clear now?? Need I explain it any more simply???... >everything he doesn't like, while whining about how a criticism of a mediocre ...what I don't like is the guru-dominated tone and attitude of this net.And yes,I will tar that until I die... (applause,applause) >performance by his "idols" is some sort of vicious attack? Go back to putting >your headphones on and listening to Kashmir with the lights out if this is ...and you go back to drooling all over your K--- B--- photos... >what you have to offer. (I wonder what the group would be like if Palena >had his way and posted only Zeppelin articles to this newsgroup [instead of >"only" Bush articles]...) ...if everyone would stop dumping on them for no reason I would stop posting about them.Does Doug Alan need provocation for posting about K--- B---?!?!... lp102911@sjuvax { astrovax | allegra | bpa | burdvax } !sjuvax!lp102911
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (10/31/85)
>>Has anyone figured out what Palena's problem is? Did anything he said here >>make any sense? Copyright lawyers? "Ahh, art rock"? Given that Palena's > ...You know I'm sick of this dude's "Men,net.music is serious business" > attitude!! Anybody concur on this point?Jesus,I try to inject some humor > on this beat net and it just flies over the head of every "guru".(Maybe > because it's usually directed at them).Face it,you take yourself too > seriously,and the tone that you and that character at MIT have imposed on > this net is revolting.... The only "appropriate" tone this net "should" have (according to Palena) would be concordance with his precious opinions about his OWN god, Jimmy Page. I'm not the only one who's (correctly) referred to you as an rectal orifice. Justifiably so. Are the other opinions expressed about you also ravings of "gurus"? Your idea of "humor" is and has never been funny. (Maybe I should order him a copy of "Heavy Metal Classics" for Christmas, where Larry can hear the original versions of his favorites, the Chien Noir aria and "Eine Holen Grosse Lieben"!) >>opinions on Led Zeppelin as god have been no different from Doug Alan's >>opinions about Kate Bush in the same role, what's the point? Must he tar > ...the point is that I don't just post and post and post and post > Zeppelin pieces to the net. You don't? That's news... > EVERY posting has been in response to > another one.I respect both Page and Plant and thank them for play- > ing together,with probably no rehearsal time to speak of,at Live-Aid. > (Of course the fact that they didn't make a dime for their trouble, > and it was for a charitable cause,won't be mentioned.)They could've > used the opportunity to further their new careers,with Plant per- > forming his new material,and Page playing with "The Firm".Did they? > No,they gambled and stumbled through some old classics for the ben- > efit of their old,beloved fans.Is this clear now?? Need I explain it > any more simply???... They "gambled" by resorting to playing oldies? Sorry, but THAT'S the first humorous thing you've actually said. The fact that YOU have a personal problem recognizing the fact that your "god" is not what he used to be is YOUR problem. Why do you see fit to make it OURS? >>everything he doesn't like, while whining about how a criticism of a mediocre > ...what I don't like is the guru-dominated tone and attitude of this > net.And yes,I will tar that until I die... (applause,applause) Obviously Palena seeks to be a "guru" himself. On this net, everybody's a guru, everybody gets the chance to post articles about his/her favorite music. Obviously Palena doesn't like it that way. He wants the applause all to himself. Any applause you hear, Larry, is either imaginary or the result of an activity involving both your hands (as opposed to the one-handed ejaculations you've already offered to the net). >>performance by his "idols" is some sort of vicious attack? Go back to putting >>your headphones on and listening to Kashmir with the lights out if this is > ...and you go back to drooling all over your K--- B--- photos... I don't have any. (Unless you count album covers.) You see, asshole, I'm not one of your "Kate Bush" fanatics (I do happen to have all her albums and a few EP's, but I picked up most of them at ridiculous prices). I like her music, and I am *very* glad Doug has posted information about her to the net. But YOU, with your infinite knowledge of music (does the number of albums made by Led Zeppelin equal the number of records you own?), have decided that ANYTHING asked about on this net that you in your precious hermit cave have never heard of is garbage. It's one thing to be as musically narrowminded and bigoted as you are, but quite another to foist this crap about your holy limited opinions on the rest of us. Be the former if you like being a git, but leave the rest of us out of your personal prejudice and stupidity. >>what you have to offer. (I wonder what the group would be like if Palena >>had his way and posted only Zeppelin articles to this newsgroup [instead of >>"only" Bush articles]...) > ...if everyone would stop dumping on them for no reason I would stop > posting about them.Does Doug Alan need provocation for posting about > K--- B---?!?!... But there is GOOD reason to "dump on" (any criticism is "dumping on") them. Their performance sucked. Yes, I saw it, I taped it, and as I watched it I thought at least "Rock n' Roll" (a song my band used to play back in high school) was done reasonably well. But "Stairway to Heaven" was no better than the way it was done in the movie (I would have vomited if Plant had uttered that banal "Does anybody remember laughter?" one more time.) And on later viewings it was obvious that the emotion of the moment made it seem much better than it was. Unfortunately, that moment hasn't yet passed for Larry. Perhaps when his adolescence ends, it will. (Or perhaps when it begins... :-?) -- Popular consensus says that reality is based on popular consensus. Rich Rosen pyuxd!rlr