4ad-l Mail for 04-21-1996

Mail in Archive

Subject: Re: Even more childcatcher and Armpits!
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 09:16:35 -0400
From: Srilank@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: misery loves (the record) company
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 09:38:55 EDT
From: Dez (100702.123@COMPUSERVE.COM)
Subject: Re: volume series. is it difficult to...
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 09:38:53 EDT
From: Dez (100702.123@COMPUSERVE.COM)
Subject: Bowery Electric in Houston 4/22
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 08:50:26 +0000
From: Jason Wintz (moran@HAL-PC.ORG)
Subject: tripe cover art/animals for sale/Cocteaux/Lush
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 10:40:16 -0400
From: naranjas en la cabeza (larry@INTERLOG.COM)
Subject: einexile, ugh.
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 10:02:43 -0500
From: 500 (zelzah@SAT.NET)
Subject: In Ribbons cover/Pale Saints lyrics
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 11:30:56 -0400
From: naranjas en la cabeza (larry@INTERLOG.COM)
Subject: Re: v23 grossout cover art
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 16:08:25 +0000
From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen (larsi@IFI.UIO.NO)
Subject: Looking for FAQ
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 15:36:08 -0500
From: Martin Wagner (hepcats@EDEN.COM)
Subject: Cover Art
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 16:43:46 EDT
From: Dez (100702.123@COMPUSERVE.COM)
Subject: those Pale Saints
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 18:14:56 -0500
From: Jay Datema (z953209@OATS.FARM.NIU.EDU)
Subject: Re: Cover Art
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 17:55:45 -0700
From: esp raincloud (kelli@NETCOM.COM)
Subject: Re: v23 grossout cover art
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 17:51:22 -0700
From: esp raincloud (kelli@NETCOM.COM)
Subject: Re: v23 - ug
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 20:35:35 -0400
From: Joseph Burns (jaburns@ASTRO.OCIS.TEMPLE.EDU)
Subject: 4ad site info / hnia
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 18:00:17 -0700
From: esp raincloud (kelli@NETCOM.COM)
Subject: Re: 4ad site info / hnia
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 13:04:19 +1000
From: Virginia Staggs (vstaggs@EXTRO.UCC.SU.OZ.AU)
Subject: Re: Cover Art
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 19:59:49 -0700
From: Vada Pinson (brettg@NETCOM.COM)

Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 09:16:35 -0400
From: Srilank@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Even more childcatcher and Armpits!


Brian proposed the following 4AD-L dilemma--

>Stupid Question: Is Miki's armpit hair Bright red too?
>(Sorry, I had to ask!)
>
>                               Brian, whoo ha! I got u all in check!

stupid question 2: do you think about this shit before you type?

I mean do you sit there in front of yer keyboard and propose the most
effective way to rub the collective hairs (no pun) of people the wrong way?
 and then think "gosh I sure am witty!"

>(Sorry, I had to ask!)

jason
the curious and curiouser listy.

srilank@aol.com

Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 09:38:55 EDT
From: Dez (100702.123@COMPUSERVE.COM)
Subject: Re: misery loves (the record) company


>I think it's time YOU (and a lot of other people on this list!) stopped
>worrying about 4AD the label and started concerning yourself with buying
>what you like.  After all, who cares what label it's on?  The important
>thing is that you like, and identify with, the music.  If 4AD doesn't
.have the happy tunes you're looking for, look elsewhere.  I did.

>Just my two cents...

>-Rob Wyatt
>robw@visuallink.com
>rob@bedazzled.com

What is happening to this list? Last couple of days have seen a major outbreak
of common sense. Long may it continue.

- Dez


Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 09:38:53 EDT
From: Dez (100702.123@COMPUSERVE.COM)
Subject: Re: volume series. is it difficult to...


>concerning the volume series, that most times has more than a lion's share of
>thislisty contributions, I am wondering how rare the early installments are
>to find.

>this past weekend I saw not one, but two copies of vol. 1 and a copy of vol.
>4.
>Is this a find?

The most recent mailshot I had from those lovely people at World's End listed
only Volumes 14 and 15 as available back issues. All the TEE And TAE stuff is
still available, together with the two compilations, Sharks.. and Wasted.
They're starting two new series, too - Manifest will be dedicated to hip hop and
rap, and another one (whose name escapes me) to country and American 'roots'
music. V16 is out soon, and contains a track by Lush amongst others.

As for the out-of-print Volumes, they're not difficult to get hold of (in the UK
at least), often turning up in second-hand shops.

- Dez

Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 08:50:26 +0000
From: Jason Wintz (moran@HAL-PC.ORG)
Subject: Bowery Electric in Houston 4/22


Hey listmembers,

if you're going to the Bowery Electric show in Houston tomorrow night
(Monday) then come up and say hi to me and darryl.  I'll probably be
wearing a pale saints shirt, and I'll definately have red hair and
glasses.  thoth, you could get a ride with joanna :)

see you there
moran@hal-pc.org


Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 10:40:16 -0400
From: naranjas en la cabeza (larry@INTERLOG.COM)
Subject: tripe cover art/animals for sale/Cocteaux/Lush


>No -- tripe looks like a white terrycloth towel, only slightly =
>glistening. I've only seen it once and found its appearance more than =
>faintly nauseating.

On the inside it has that curious honeycomb pattern that you can see on the
In Ribbons CD label.

>But I never was a "variety meats" kinda guy

What a euphemism that is...sounds like there should be some entertainment
value to it

>new Cocteau Twins album, Milk and Kisses.

It should give you some idea of what a classy outfit this animals-for-sale
place is when they can't even spell the names of the animals they're
selling. It should be "kinkajou" (no s) and "binturong" (no g in the
middle). Besides, aren't these protected species?!

they did for a UPS commercial?

>Anyone feel that they were cheated when Lush put out Lovelife? Everyone
>seems to like them now. I think I deserve credit for liking them before
>they were famous. Their next albums liner notes should read:
>
>We'd like to thank our friends and family but most of all Brian who
>liked us before we were famous. We love you Brian!

I gave up on them when Split came out. Do I get credit for not continuing to
like them before it became fashionable to say they used to be better?

>Stupid Question: Is Miki's armpit hair Bright red too?
>(Sorry, I had to ask!)

No, it's her natural colour: blue.

>                               Brian, whoo ha! I got u all in check!

You certainly have.


Larry

Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 10:02:43 -0500
From: 500 (zelzah@SAT.NET)
Subject: einexile, ugh.


[einexile's blabbring here]

>But you were arguing that it was beautiful. It is beautiful *because* it
>is beautiful? Maybe. Is it beautiful because you get off on it? Great. My
>point was that no one had ever read anything like what you had posted,
>and it was really refreshing to see something so open minded.

Yeah, like what you write is so interesting, e.  I normally see your name
and delete the message (nothing but stuff *I* don't want to read anyway),
but that's just me.  Like you should talk about open minedness.....

-zelzah (the arrogant one)


Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 11:30:56 -0400
From: naranjas en la cabeza (larry@INTERLOG.COM)
Subject: In Ribbons cover/Pale Saints lyrics


e wrote:

>3. There is a flaw in the picture.

Where would that be then?

>4. It's not really very beautiful after all.

No, that's true. It's better if you don't look at it too closely...

Luis wrote:

>when you know i understand you're mad(?)
>and you've got to have your kinky love

I believe that should be: "I understand you're a man..."


Larry

"in another world, it'd be funny"

Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 16:08:25 +0000
From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen (larsi@IFI.UIO.NO)
Subject: Re: v23 grossout cover art


einexile the meek  writes:

> Taking a look at the picture for the first time in several months,
> several things occur to me:
>
> 1. It is a negative image.

I don't think so.
is a scan of the sleeve.  I tried inverting it, and it looked very
*glowing*, which probably means that it isn't a negative image.

> 2. The colors have been tweaked.

Definitely.  I tried making it all red and brown, but I still can't
see what it is.

> 3. There is a flaw in the picture.

Where?

> 4. It's not really very beautiful after all.

I've always thought it was yucky.

--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@ifi.uio.no * Lars Ingebrigtsen


Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 15:36:08 -0500
From: Martin Wagner (hepcats@EDEN.COM)
Subject: Looking for FAQ


Dammit but I forgot where to go to put my hands on this. Could someone
please e-mail me the information. Thanks so much.

Martin

Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 16:43:46 EDT
From: Dez (100702.123@COMPUSERVE.COM)
Subject: Cover Art


I've been half-following this debate, so forgive me if I'm making points already
covered by others. For me, an ideal record sleeve need not be great art in
itself, but should be complementary to the music. V23 are very hit and miss in
this respect. I think their greatest triumphs were with the Pixies up to and
including Doolittle and its attendant singles. Weird, a little disturbing, but a
little silly too - just like the band. And the new Lush series does emphasise
the changes the band have made (I'm not interested in rekindling the debate
about whether this is a good or bad thing). But they do have a tendency to just
stick out something that looks arty, but which bears little relevance to the
music - Scheer for example. Sometimes it must be difficult. The Tarnation LP is
beautifully packaged, but doesn't really reflect the music - but it's better
than a cliched retake on the second Band LP which many people would be tempted
to do. I think the best record art was done by Blue Note (check out Dexter
Gordon's 'Go' LP - doesn't that just ooze atmosphere?), and very differently,
Peter Saville and Mark Farrow's stuff for early Factory which reflected the cold
isolation of many of those records. My current favourite stuff is the very
modern, and street-art influenced sleeves on Mo' Wax. Of course, I'm not
comparing like with like here. Getting Robert Del Naja of Massive Attack to do a
graffiti-art sleeve for Dead Can Dance would be bizarre to say the least.

- Dez


Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 18:14:56 -0500
From: Jay Datema (z953209@OATS.FARM.NIU.EDU)
Subject: those Pale Saints


Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 17:55:45 -0700
From: esp raincloud (kelli@NETCOM.COM)
Subject: Re: Cover Art


  i beg to differ about the tarnation artwork not reflecting the music.
  i see a very nostalgic, almost ghostly quality to the artwork, and i think
  it compliments tarnation's often lonely, road-trippy somber cowpoke
  rather well.


  k

Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 17:51:22 -0700
From: esp raincloud (kelli@NETCOM.COM)
Subject: Re: v23 grossout cover art


> > 1. It is a negative image.
>
> I don't think so.
> 
> is a scan of the sleeve.  I tried inverting it, and it looked very
> *glowing*, which probably means that it isn't a negative image.

  well, given that the colours are tampered with, if it were a negative image
  and you flip the scan then screw with the colours...it would be very
  hard to define what the original was..i would think. you would have
  had to be in the room with whoever is responsible for the photo and/or
  cover and see what it was they actually did to get the finished
  product.

  it was my original impression that the photo was of a cow's stomach,
  but i guess not..? i have now pulled my copy of in ribbons and will be
  going over the photo with a fine toothed comb & a magnifying glass...


  i'm actually more mortified with the position of bugs bunny's carrot
  than the ooky object in the cover photograph...


  k

Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 20:35:35 -0400
From: Joseph Burns (jaburns@ASTRO.OCIS.TEMPLE.EDU)
Subject: Re: v23 - ug


my apologies for those of you that dont care about this stuff... its
long, and unless you're interested in this debate, delete now.

continuing arguements...
> > as usual e, your reactionary stance
>
> This is a reactionary stance?

Yes. Instead of thinking about what was written for a minute to see if
maybe it enlightens a debate or offers an angle you had not
thought of, you simply whip off negative knee-jerk responses that dont
say much more than 'you're wrong and i'm right.' You're response to what
I wrote was chock full of stuff I never even mentioned or implied. Thus I
called this reactionary. As is often the case with 'reactionary responses'
they show a concern not with the issue at hand, but instead a concern
for saving face and treating semantic and symptomatic elements of a problem
in a 'back-lash' kind of way.

In the attempt to appear clever, it is oh so easy to be negative about
something. Whether it be an arguement with a fellow listie, or whether
it be in one of your world famous reviews, the illusion of knowledge or
taste that is supposedly conveyed by slamming something is thin at best.

> > This
> > is a basic tenent of modernism, and not a 'relativist quagmire of hippie
> > pomo culture.'
>
> Okay, explain the difference please.

well, though your use of the word 'pomo' escapes me, I have to assume
that by 'relativist hippie quagmire' you mean the rather annoying and
meaningless state of analysis that says all things are equal the only
thing that matters is your point of perspective. Though this is an
important philosphical and ontological point, you are right to point out
that it is not the best foundation for art criticism.

However, what I was pointing out as a basic tennent of modern art, is
that somewhere around the turn of this century art abandoned trying  "to
present the best things in the best possible way." Instead it started to
explore the idea that art is often found in unsuspected places. I'll spare
you a lesson in art history, but a simple look back at anything from
Manet to Warhol, from that moment in the late sixties when the Beatles
'accidentally' left a howl of feedback at the end of a pop song,
to industrial music's banging on pipes and machines, to just about any
modern band taking a looped sample of something non-musical and crafting
a song around it, might show you what I mean.

Its not WHAT the art form uses to do its business, its HOW it does so.
Does the end result of Vaughn Oliver's playing with dead things leave a
provacative image? Does it compose itself in a way that is either
aesthetically satisfying or challenging? If not, well it doesn't speak to
you and that's fine. But simply to dismiss it on the basis that its bad
because its just gross dead things, is to miss the point. If having your
notions of 'icky' and 'beautiful' tweaked really bothers you that much,
then fine dont look. But there is a method to this madness.
Perhaps this is apples and oranges, but if we took this stance towards
music criticism we'd be left with dismissing a lot of thislistie music by
saying that 'oh thats just feedback caused by playing a guitar too close
to its amplifier', or 'oh they've just set the echo delay really tight
and eliminated the decay', instead of 'wow isnt it amazing, all the
overlapping sounds and frequencies you can hear in that feedback, it
almost sounds like a violin/whale/freight train/whatever'...
I could go on and on but all you're going to do is pick apart the
semantics of this anyway right?

> But you were arguing that it was beautiful. It is beautiful *because* it
> is beautiful? Maybe. Is it beautiful because you get off on it? Great. My
> point was that no one had ever read anything like what you had posted,
> and it was really refreshing to see something so open minded.

No, I wasn't arguing that it was beautiful. Nor, was I claiming to 'get
off on it'. I was trying to put forward some of the reasons why I found
a few particular images compelling, because other people were saying they
didn't understand why Vaugh Oliver does the things that he does. I
would never go so far as trying to tell other people what was good or bad.
(But I guess I cant expect you to understand that one.) However I will try
to express to those who dont understand what there is to see or hear in a
particualr art form what I see in it, with the hopes that somebody MIGHT
try to understand a view point other than his own. Does that mean I'm
some sort of 'hippie pomo'? If so I guess that's better than banging people
over the head with my opinion, eh meek one? I realized a long time ago
that I have nothing to gain or lose if people disagree with my tastes.

I would think that would be a good purpose for a list that encompasses
not only a diverse group of people but also a very diverse group of
artists working under the banner of 4AD. I can hardly belive that
everybody here likes the whole of the 4AD roster. I for one dont care
for Dead Can Dance,or the Cocteau Twins or Scheer. But I dont go on long
diatribes about how they suck. This has very little to do with
being 'open minded' (the sarcasm of your'open minded' remark by the way was
truly baroque), but instead is just the realization that different strokes are
for different folks. The most we can hope for is a free discourse
surrounding our differences. I've learned a lot from DCD fans who have
taken the time to explain the band to me. I'm stillnot going out and
buying any of the records, but at I can say I understand why they do what
they do.
Hence the origination of this dispute: trying to have a level playing
feild of discussion. If this is 'hippie pomo culture' to you, then I
cant imagine what your concept of culture is in the first
place.  Culture means a consensus among people, NOT of what is good/bad,
beautiful/ugly dead things, but a consensus on what the terms in the
discourse are, the terms which we use to talk about things like ART.

braced for the flames...
jb

Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 18:00:17 -0700
From: esp raincloud (kelli@NETCOM.COM)
Subject: 4ad site info / hnia


  the site says that the hnia ep is due out in the UK on april 29th
  with a US release of may and the full length is set for june. dunno
  what to believe anymore...

  lotsa tarnation and scheer used discs at a local record store.
  i looked over the scheer and opted for the mojave, long fin killie,
  outrageous cherry, and everclear. which reminds me, who is perry
  watts-russell? they are listed for A & R in the everclear cd....


  k


Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 13:04:19 +1000
From: Virginia Staggs (vstaggs@EXTRO.UCC.SU.OZ.AU)
Subject: Re: 4ad site info / hnia


I haven't really been paying attention to this hnia gossip but a friend
has a copy of the new album that apparently sounds very weird and
includes a dismantled cover of the Beach Boys 'Good Vibrations'. Make of
this what you will.

Craig.

Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 19:59:49 -0700
From: Vada Pinson (brettg@NETCOM.COM)
Subject: Re: Cover Art


>   i beg to differ about the tarnation artwork not reflecting the music.
>   i see a very nostalgic, almost ghostly quality to the artwork, and i think
>   it compliments tarnation's often lonely, road-trippy somber cowpoke
>   rather well.

I went and saw them play with Mark Eitzel at the Troubadour in LA on Fri.
They sounded way better than on the record of theirs. Kind of a
sleepy rock ssound. not so much country. Reminded me a lot of
Opal and Cowboy Junkies. Mark Eitzel was not so hot. he is more or
less a jerk and not at all ashamed to display it. I think the best part
of his band is his horn player. That guy really is talented. Meanwhile
Mark was throwing guitars and looking pissed. it was pretty funny, after
he threw his guitar into the back of the stage , someone yelled "rock n
roll."

Brett


erikas@evo.org, last updated by Eyesore Automation on 4-21-1996