Red Mosquito

Soma. wrote:I feel like people are still going to be talking about McParadigm 100 years from now. For whatever reason.

I'm like half a gnats wing away from my Alasteir Crowley sex magick phase. You just wait.

To be honest, I think the entire forum could do with less snark when it comes to people's opinions.

McParadigm wrote:

malice wrote:

Soma. wrote:I feel like people are still going to be talking about McParadigm 100 years from now. For whatever reason.

he's pretty spot on most of the time (to me).

After the testicle incident, when I didn't take your advice and subsequently wished that I had, I got a WHAT WOULD MALICE DO tattoo on the other, undamaged ball. I glance at it before every single post, now, so that might be why you approve of a lot of what I end up saying.

I... uh. thanks?

(anyway - I appreciate your posts)

malice wrote:I wasn't referring to anyone specifically, it's just a difference I noticed in general over the years about how the Beatles are looked at - as events recede, the biggest impacts fade. that's fine with me though- I think with a band like the Beatles, most people have a healthy respect for their influence and I don't really need everyone to also worship their music too - I was only making an observation

The more it feels like people are just assuming greatness about something...especially if you don't like it...the more inclined you are going to be to dismiss the claims.

And to be fair, there really are a lot of people out there who will tell you the Beatles were revolutionary or that they changed everything or what-have-you, and, when asked about it, blink and say, "Uh, they were the Beatles, man."

I... uh. thanks?

The ironic thing is that getting the tattoo is not one of the things that malice would do. but I'm learning.

That fucking testicle story gave me nightmares. True story.

Anyway, The White Album and a bourbon for me. Thanks.

I don't know what it's like in the States, but here, the Beatles are obviously a national institution. So it's very rare that I've even been able to get into a discussion about what people are enjoying about their songs. The conversation is closed well before I've even expressed any distaste for them.

This thread has been a treat to read this afternoon.

McParadigm wrote:

malice wrote:I wasn't referring to anyone specifically, it's just a difference I noticed in general over the years about how the Beatles are looked at - as events recede, the biggest impacts fade. that's fine with me though- I think with a band like the Beatles, most people have a healthy respect for their influence and I don't really need everyone to also worship their music too - I was only making an observation

The more it feels like people are just assuming greatness about something...especially if you don't like it...the more inclined you are going to be to dismiss the claims.

And to be fair, there really are a lot of people out there who will tell you the Beatles were revolutionary or that they changed everything or what-have-you, and, when asked about it, blink and say, "Uh, they were the Beatles, man."

I... uh. thanks?

The ironic thing is that getting the tattoo is not one of the things that malice would do. but I'm learning.

I'm rarely involved in a situation where people think: what would malice do... yet, have no tattoos.

Assuming mia cooperates I am going to listen to those songs in a few minutes, evenslow

Gods' Die wrote:Durden, Lament, KD, & Plat...your shit has been very good to read.

Stip, I really enjoy reading when you discuss any band but Pearl Jam...haha, I really hate the way you like your Pearl Jam.

Damn it. Those are the only opinions I have I think anyone should give a shit about

i wonder if I could use the experience of not liking the beatles to help explain white privilege.

stip wrote:i wonder if I could use the experience of not liking the beatles to help explain white privilege.

I'm both afraid to ask what you mean and really curious - please could you explain?

harmless wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

harmless wrote:There's quite a lot of it in the 00's but a lot of it is dismissed as shallow.

And is that much different than the Beatles being dismissed as shallow? Or cheesy?

I didn't say it was different, just that dismissing the Beatles as such is far more likely to result in uncomfortable feeling, just because of the vast amount of positive critical reception the Beatles has going for it.

On this we agree.

stip wrote:Assuming mia cooperates I am going to listen to those songs in a few minutes, evenslow

I'll head over to watch the baby. This is important.

Okay: if I fell

I don't like the plinking sing songy guitar. I don't like the reedy sweetness in the vocals. I think it is a nice melody, and the harmonies would be great if I liked the vocals. As is they definitely soften the stuff I don't like. I hate the start until they start singing together. There's something cloyingly sentimental about this song that is unappealing, because it also feels inauthentic. Parts like" 'Cause I couldn't stand the pain and I would be sad if our new love was in vain' seem way too Hallmarkish for me. I can't imagine the people signing this song ever feeling pain, and so in that respect it almost makes me feel like the song is being, I don't know, disrespectful in some way. Like it's a joke at my expense. Not quite mocking, but approaching that. Actually, there's something curiously courtly about this song. Like someone read about love in a book and decided 'gee that would be swell, I'll go ask someone to be in love with me' Innocent in a way, but not innocent enough to be charming.

malice wrote:

stip wrote:i wonder if I could use the experience of not liking the beatles to help explain white privilege.

I'm both afraid to ask what you mean and really curious - please could you explain?

How being a beatles fan means you never have to explain or justify yourself, how your opinions are automatically valid by virtue of liking the Beatles, and how someone who doesn't is suspect, other, existing outside, and having to fight for their inclusion.

And your bird can sing:

Don't like the tone on the guitar.

Jesus, evenslow, why did you pick this song? I can't really find anything redeeming about this. Same reedy vocals, a guitar tone I don't like, and no memorable musical parts to distract me from the vocals. This is just a really boring song.

There can also be something extremely petulant about the beatles, and it's on full display here. Granted the lyrics encourage that, but still.


this was terrible. There were parts of If I fell I could see myself liking, or at least not minding if it was on in the background. I would get up to change this song.

God damnit, stip.

Haha, I fucking love "And Your Bird Can Sing". What a song.