Chalkhills Digest Volume 5, Issue 346
Date: Tuesday, 21 December 1999
Chalkhills Digest, Volume 5, Number 346
Tuesday, 21 December 1999
Today's Topics:
Welcome to Chalkhills, Jeff Azara
Seb's boys; Rex's voice
Upon the track order of CD reissues
Blow, Blur, Blah and Bloody Christmas
Blur & XTC
various threads
Thanks For Christmas!
andy and the elevators
(no XTC) Beatles honors
Beatles, MBE
MBE vs. Knighthood
Re: the age of consent...
Re: we're on a mission from Gahd
Re: English Settlement
A School Guide to XTC
Administrivia:
To UNSUBSCRIBE from the Chalkhills mailing list, send a message to
<chalkhills-request@chalkhills.org> with the following command:
unsubscribe
For all other administrative issues, send a message to:
<chalkhills-request@chalkhills.org>
Please remember to send your Chalkhills postings to:
<chalkhills@chalkhills.org>
World Wide Web: <http://chalkhills.org/>
The views expressed herein are those of the individual authors.
Chalkhills is compiled with Digest 3.7 (John Relph <relph@sgi.com>).
Countdown / Countdown to Christmas / Countdown to Christmas party time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <19991220034528.18608.qmail@web2103.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 19:45:28 -0800 (PST) From: Tyler Hewitt <tahewitt@yahoo.com> Subject: Welcome to Chalkhills, Jeff Azara Jeff Azara wrote: Also, for my birthday I subscribed to Chalkhills. I hope this turns out to be a good thing. The December 17th Digest #5-341 didn't have much in it concerning XTC. I suppose the longer I read the more I will discover that this off-subject banter is not commonplace. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DAMN-THAT'SA THE FUNNIEST THING I'VE READ HERE IN A LONG TIME!
------------------------------ Message-ID: <19991220035526.5070.qmail@web111.yahoomail.com> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 19:55:26 -0800 (PST) From: Ryan Anthony <hamsterranch@yahoo.com> Subject: Seb's boys; Rex's voice Merry Almost Bloody Christmas to all Chalkhillians. Sebastien Maury wrote in Digest #5-342: "Religious nuts, anti-drug freaks, gun-slingin [sic] psychos. Nice to know we're such a stable bunch. If someone's going to tell me to stop sleeping with boys then I'm *really* gonna get mad." Seb seems to be the beneficiary of far more tolerance than he is offering to others. Okay, I'll say it: Stop sleeping with boys. (pause) Restrict yourself to partners who are legally adults. In other XTC-less news, we lost the last of the silver screen cowboys this weekend when Rex Allen, Sr., 78, was run over by his own car in the driveway of his Tucson, Arizona, house by his caretaker. No, not any sort of tabloid scandal; just a wretched miserable accident. Regardless of your musical taste, you are probably familiar with Rex Allen's honey-roasted voice. If you've ever seen a live-action Disney movie with a title like "Pokey, the Petulant Porcupine" or "Larry, the Languid Lemur," you've heard his narration. I visited Rex's home town, Willcox, Arizona, this afternoon (it's 75 miles east of Tucson) and laid flowers at the foot of his statue. Four other persons had done the same before me, so we're not talking about a Princess Diana scene here. The statue, a 7'4" bronze, is an agreeable pose of the young Rex, hat throwed back (*thrown* is correct only in non-cowboy contexts) and leaning against a rock, one knee up and supporting an acoustic guitar. The hole in the guitar, I remarked during the 1991 dedication ceremony to my companion, a poetess (poet, to the p.c.), seemed the ideal hidey hole in which young lovers could leave notes for each other. She agreed and worked the suggestion into a poem about the statue. A poem about a statue, you groan? Hey, it worked for Emma Lazarus! Today, I peered into the hole, and sure enough, there was something in it. Car keys or something. Life imitates art. I love it. Also today, across the street from the statue, I discovered the existence of, and purchased, a CD of duets performed by two of my faves, Rex Allen and butter-voiced Don Edwards, titled *A Pair To Draw To.* Recorded earlier this year in Tempe, Arizona, it presages Rex's death in songs like "There's Nobody Home on the Range Anymore" and "Empty Saddles." Drawbacks: a mere 11 tracks, insufficient liner notes -- oh, and the copy editor in me was horrified by the glaring typo in the title of the song "There's a Bridal Hanging on the Wall." It's not a pun; the lyrics are straightforwardly about tack and have nothing to do with trousseaux. I'll scream this once again into the void: A spell-checker is not enough, people; you still have to learn how to read and write. The ol' Hamster Rancher gives *A Pair To Draw To* four branding irons (out of five). If you appreciate non-commercial authentic soulful unbleached organic whole wheat Country-cum-Western music, check it out while you're waiting for AV2. There! I squeezed in some XTC content, just under the (drums and) wire! Ryan Anthony P.S.: Sorry to take up so much space in this newsgroup on something other than a rant about drugs.
------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991220100212.007db880@192.168.1.1> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 10:02:12 +0100 From: Giovanni Giusti <giovanni@delizia.com> Subject: Upon the track order of CD reissues Many have complained on and off about the fact that Virgin (this list's Bad Guys extraordinaire) have sometimes put the extra tracks in the middle rather than at the end of the CD editions. To me personally, given that I had to get up to change the side of the LPs anyway, it does not do much of a difference. There was no "flow" do be disrupted between the last track of side A and the first of side B. In fact, having new tracks after what I considered as the "final" song of an album could be even worse. Imagine Andy finishing Mummer with that definitive "bye bye", only to start strumming again in 5 seconds! I suspect that those that are disturbed did *not* own the XTC albums on vinyl but had taped them from their friends on one side of a 90-minute cassette. Shame! Giovanni
------------------------------ Message-ID: <19991220113351.19453.qmail@web3103.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 03:33:51 -0800 (PST) From: Dom Lawson <zackbusner@yahoo.com> Subject: Blow, Blur, Blah and Bloody Christmas Right, just a quick hand up the kilt..... Firstly, for anyone who has been moaning about the drugs debate, ****ing shut it! It has occurred to me numerous times now that people only complain about off-topic discussions when subjects don't happen to coincide with their own sphere of interest. However tenuous the link to XTC (and on this occasion we were practically dissecting the whole "do what you will but harm Satanas" thing, so irrelevant my arse!) we should at least be able to discuss a few non-XTC subjects from time to time, if only because it can be interesting. Hardly a crime, and certainly not worth whining about. Secondly, bless you Tom for your obviously heartfelt views on drugs. I personally think you're talking absolute bollocks, but at least you've thought about it. Sadly it seems that you've elected to believe the "experts" on one side of the argument and not those on the other. That's fine, and probably understandable given your illiberal instincts, but it's not the basis for a decent rational argument. Of course, nor is my "hey, let's get shitfaced!" approach, but then at least I've tried the drugs I'm writing about. Incidentally, they were lovely. Thirdly, Blur fucking rule. Three fat cheers for all the sensible people who have invested in their back catalogue - and don't forget "Modern Life Is Rubbish", a much neglected classic - and if "It Could Be You" isn't "Respectable Street" fifteen years later then I'll eat my cat. Oh, and when you've finished with Blur, buy some Cardiacs albums!!!! Fourthly, thanks for another great year everyone! OK, I have probably pissed at least half of you off at some stage but deep down you all know I'm lovely really. Honest. Anyway, a metaphorical fat spliff goes to Todd, Harrison, Michael, Jefferson, Don & Sue, Jill & Steve, The Mole, Megan, May, Sebastien and anyone else who has polluted my inbox with their foul opinions in 1999. A non-metaphorical and resounding "fuck you buddy!" goes to whoever that prick was who thought we were all so ridicules. Ahem. Any Chalkhills-related mail, abusive or otherwise, should be sent to this, my new not-very-sneaky-now-I've-mentioned-it e-mail address. Dr Busner will be happy to take messages on my behalf... Don't forget to drink until your eyes bleed & I'll join you for the AV2 countdown next year...Merry Christmas y' rotten bastards & death to false Metal!!! Piss & Ecstasy... Dom "What a friend we have in cheeses" Lawson. ===== A post-imperial King Kong who smashes the windows of the department stores and pulls out wriggling handfuls of humans, twined between his digits and caught like the termites that they are in the cable-thick fur on the back of his huge hands. He disentangles them from his fur, eyes their knotted faces, and then pops them between his teeth, each of which is the size of a dentist.
------------------------------ From: JStrole@aol.com Message-ID: <0.689cbd74.258fa12f@aol.com> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 10:11:43 EST Subject: Blur & XTC It seems there are new Blur fans out there. I wonder if they realize that Andy Partridge was supposed to produce "Modern Life Is Rubbish?" BTW "Leisure" sounded more like a Manchester type record and contained the hit "There's No Other Way" which is extremely catchy and "Modern Life is Rubbish" sort of starts them on their XTC meets The Kinks mode that continues thruogh "Parklife" & "The Great Escape." They supposidly have a new single out in England, any Birts on this list heard it yet? Harry
------------------------------
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19991220115721.007186ec@mail.interlog.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:57:21 -0500
From: David Oh <davidoh@interlog.com>
Subject: various threads
first things first: i really didn't mean to open the can of worms that
was/is the decriminalize/legalize drugs debate. i just stated my belief and
knew that there would be disagreement, but i surely was not expecting the
narrow-minded diatribe from tom johnson, nor the reaction of many of my
fellow chalkers, both pro and con.
i apologize to all those chalkers who are sick of this ongoing debate and
especially to you, mr. relphs, who provided us with this forum to discuss
the music of xtc and have to watch it degenerate into the shit-hole that it
sometimes sinks into (which, i admit, i have been, on a couple of
occations, responsible for some of that degeneration).
for the most part, though, the majority of people who commented on this
thread, either in the digest or to me privately, agreed with me, but
several of those who didn't agree with me, didn't agree with tom's
viewpoint either and thought he was too extreme. i'd like to thank those
who spoke up and supported my viewpoint and to those who do not agree with
me, let's agree to disagree and move on to another topic, ok? i've got a
topic - what about the music of xtc!
----------
next up:
From: Shigemasa Fujimoto, Subject: Re: The Big Express
thank you for your posting, it was by far the best and most detailed
explanation i've had over the confusion of my copy of 'tbe'. yes, you did
answer my question and i thank you for doing so.
for the record, here are the disc's matrix details:
made in the u.k. by pdo
cdv2325 19801011 06 %
as far as your question about the actual bar-code beneath the bar-code
sticker, i took the jewel case apart and here's the number:
5 012981 232528
so, according to your details and my findings, it would seem that i've got
a version 1 disc, which is odd because my wife bought it (new) for me for
christmas around 1995 or 96!
in the words of artie johnson - very interesting!
----------
From: "Diamond" <arnos@nantucket.net>, Subject: TMBG
>2/3 of all the concerts I've ever seen are TMBG concerts.
i think you need to get out more. ;-)
i know, you're a young'un, so you'll have plenty of opportunities to see
other bands.
i must say, though, that it is impressive that a lad of your tender years
appreciates bands such as xtc and tmbg. my nephew, who is now 18, only
likes korn, limp bizkit and tool and has for most of his teen years.
there's nothing wrong with those bands (i like them, too), but he won't
listen to anything else and won't open up to the possibility that there
might be something else out there of equal, or better, value.
so, to you and all of the teens who love xtc, read this list and appreciate
good music in general, i say bravo!
----------
lists of 99/90s/all time:
i must say i've enjoyed reading these lists, too. there are some very
interesting and eclectic tastes amongst us, that's for sure.
----------
copies of av1:
i have bought my 8th and 9th copies of av1, to be given as gifts for
christmas. the only problem though, is that only two of the people i've
given the discs to have bothered to listen to it! so far, that is. i keep
buggin' 'em to listen and they keep saying, "yeah, i'll listen to it. i
just haven't had the time!"
the two people who have listened to it love the disc overall. one says she
will look into xtc's back catalogue, while the other just isn't the kind of
person to go out and buy a band's output based on a single disc. she just
isn't into music on that level.
it's very interesting, though, that these two, who have never listen to xtc
before (and don't really know each other for that matter), like and dislike
pretty much the same things on av1. they both like 'i'd like that', 'easter
theatre', 'greenman' and 'i can't own her'; they both dislike 'your
dictionary' (both are, funnily enough, recently separated, too!), 'river of
orchids' ("too repetative") and 'the last balloon' (they didn't like andy's
voice morphing into the trumpet solo - "it sounds strained" - and they felt
the disc ends on a downer). both were split on colin's songs, interestingly
liking the one the other one didn't like.
neither will, however, be joining chalkhills as neither is the kind of
music fan to dig deeper than an album cover to find out more about an
artist. i tried, though...
----------
movies:
first, i forgot about 'life is beautiful'. this is a great film, too.
however, there are many people who feel that this film is manipulative,
cloying and/or impossible to believe, steven spielberg being one of these
people. there were others who felt that one shouldn't use humour when
telling a story of such a horrific event. i disagree.
i'm surprized, though, that there has been negative comments about
'american beauty'. i found it to be more than "unadmirable characters",
"interesting cinematography" and "great acting" but ultimately "rehashed,
cliched, non-daring, unbold", etc. i liked how kevin spacey's character
awakened when all the other characters around him were either dead or
dying, metaphorically speaking. i also think it is unfair to lump this film
in with 'natural born killers' - now that really was a hollow piece of crap
trying to say something meaningful!
however, it's all just differences of opinion... who is right, who is
wrong? it doesn't really matter, does it?
----------
the moon in hand:
john in sushiland, thanks for the lunar update. i find these kind of things
fascinating (i also find bright, shiny objects fascinating, too, but
nevermind...). i only hope that the sky is clear that night here in chilly
toronto.
also, your musical suggestion for this event is very apropos! may i
suggest, for those who do not have this disc (shame on you!), you might
want to use pink floyd's "dark side" as a substitute? maybe the soundtrack
from "an american werewolf in london" (which has several "moon" songs
including van morrison's "moondance" and ccr's "bad moon rising", among
many others)?
the description of your gig interested me, too. i recently had a national
geographic map of japan laminated onto particle-board, which is now hanging
on one of my walls. i was able to pin-point your location within seconds.
i've long been fascinated with all things japanese and someday i hope to
visit the land of the rising sun. thanks for the geography lesson, john.
----------
and finally;
hey everyone, i've got a great idea for a group new years resolution...
let's all stop bickering, arguing, complaining, name calling, fighting,
etcetera. let's enjoy each other's company, celebrate the music of xtc and
accept the diversity of opinions that belong to the members of this list.
yeah, right... and monkeys might fly out of my butt, too! it was just a
thought...
merry christmas, happy hannukah, happy whatever you celebrate, happy new
year to all.
peace & xtc,
davidoh
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:46:25 -0500
From: Dorothy Spirito <spiritod@techmail.gdc.com>
Subject: Thanks For Christmas!
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.00.9912201137550.409-100000@esun2028>
Last night (Sunday) Dave R. & I went to a Christmas buffet put on every
year by the gal who owns the tavern we frequent on Thursday nights. She'd
hired a DJ who goes by the name Tommy Tunes; we chatted & he told me he
owns a copy of every released XTC album except White Music. His playbook
listed "Dear God", "Making Plans for Nigel", "Generals & Majors", & "Mayor
of Simpleton" (which I requested) under XTC -- but no "Thanks For
Christmas".
I had a great time dancing & singing along to "Mayor..." (-- who says XTC
music isn't danceable?).
How pleased I was when, later, Tommy played "Thanks For Christmas".
Silly me! it was in his playbook under THREE WISE MEN. ("Duh!")
Still smiling,
--Dorothy.
------------------------------ Message-ID: <199912201916130910.002CF6A7@mail.tin.it> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 19:16:13 +0100 From: "HowTired" <nopat@tin.it> Subject: andy and the elevators Ok, I've lurked for a few weeks now and before posting I realize I should properly introduce myself : I write from Italy, my name is Toto and I've just turned 30. I think I'll say something about XTC topics popping out here and there : I really can't see what the fuss about XTC not playing live is about: I've always felt that you get the best part of an artist/band listening to the recpords and not on stage: seein' a band playing live only gets you bad notes, sweat and that strange desire to meet them while they're leaving the stage. The only memorable concerts are the one that succeed in creating a particular atmosphere, (a "kind of magic"...): I remember being *really* satisfied with a gig only after a Paul McCartney's concert, and only because I could hear all those songs from another time... Ok, ok, I'm a sentimental. And then, after the last Hole concert (must have been 2 years ago) I finally realized I was too old for this. I only whis everybody would stop asking Andy "Is there a chance of seeing you onstage again ?" I feel embarassed for him. I mean, it's like asking a claustrophobic "When will you catch an elevator again ?" I started listening to XTC during my teenage years: I remember reading a review of "grass" going "oh oh, this song is about the thing you do on grass! " and buying "skylarking"...it was so good ! then I bought Waxworks/Beeswax, the two Dukes LPs and, on a sunny happy morning when school was out, "Mummer"... then for some mysterious reason I stopped... I probably was into something different at that moment, but I didn't bought neither "O&L" nor "Nonsvch", and when "Apple Venus" came out I didn't realize so may years had passed: I bought it just for the sheer surprise of seeing an XTC record exposed at my local store, which usually keeps your regular Madonna/Oasis/Mariah Carey stuff and little else. I guess Cooking Vinyl is making a much better work than Virgin here in Europe, huh ? But after rediscovering them I felt the urge of listening to everything. I bought "O&L" some months ago, and "Nonsuch" is on the way... :) And to finish, I'll throw in my list of 1999 favourites : Mark Lanegan : "I'll take care of you" TLC : "Fan Mail" Chemical Brothers : "Surrender" XTC : "Apple Venus vol.I" I'm sorry I couldn't find anything else, I think 1999 has brought a lot of nice albums, but nothing that really needs to be remembered except the four above. Also, for a taste of what British Pop is these days, I think everyone should listen to the OST of "The Acid House", it's really great. bye toto
------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:01:42 -0800 (PST) From: Benjamin Lukoff <blukoff@alvord.com> Subject: (no XTC) Beatles honors Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9912201249240.28896-100000@locutus.alvord.com> On Sat, 18 Dec 1999 Giovanni Giusti <giovanni@delizia.com> wrote: > In fact, all four of them were knighted at the same time. Then John gave > back his knighthood in the early 70s (I think) to protest about something > that the UK government did - but more probably because he felt awkward > being a pot-smoking, long-haired baronet. Wrong. Paul is the only Beatle to have been knighted. All four *were* made *MBEs* at the same time, in 1965. John gave his back four years later to protest, among other things, "Cold Turkey slipping down the charts". > The other three didn't bother. They're all still Sirs. I'm sure they'd be very surprised to learn that. > I'm surprised, o much-vocal David, by this gaping whole in your > all-encompassing knowledge. > I guess nobody is perfect. It is really not a good idea to say things like these unless you're absolutely sure that what *you're* saying is accurate. Furthermore, while I usually do not mention other posters' grammatical and spelling mistakes, it is also probably not a good idea to misspell "hole" when you're criticizing someone else's lack of knowledge. Just a thought... Ben
------------------------------ Message-ID: <E2D791E2149DD211A78E0008C745F6FC02420FBC@gvrdexch01.digital.gvrd.bc.ca> From: Neil Oliver <Noliver@gvrd.bc.ca> Subject: Beatles, MBE Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:55:33 -0800 Giovanni Giusti wrote: In fact, all four of them were knighted at the same time. Then John gave back his knighthood in the early 70s (I think) to protest about something that the UK government did - but more probably because he felt awkward being a pot-smoking, long-haired baronet. The other three didn't bother. They're all still Sirs. I'm surprised, o much-vocal David, by this gaping whole in your all-encompassing knowledge. I guess nobody is perfect. --I guess not, Giovanni. The Beatles were never knighted. They each received the MBE, which stands for "Member of the British Empire." This is not a knighthood, it is a far less prestigious honour. It was the MBE that Lennon returned in 1969. George Martin was knighted before any of the Beatles were (and to date, only Paul has been).
------------------------------
Message-ID: <385EA547.D43FA93D@mail.gci.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:53:11 -0900
From: Patrick M Adamek <adamette@augustine.gci.net>
Subject: MBE vs. Knighthood
Greetings Chalk-heads,
In Chalkhills #5-344 Giovanni Giusti erroneously reported the
following:
>From: David Oh <davidoh@interlog.com>
>my only question is this: why was macca knighted while george and ringo
>were not? what places him above the other two? i don't get it!
In fact, all four of them were knighted at the same time. Then John
gave back his knighthood in the early 70s (I think) to protest about
something that the UK government did - but more probably because he
felt awkward being a pot-smoking, long-haired baronet.
The other three didn't bother. They're all still Sirs.
I'm surprised, o much-vocal David, by this gaping hole in your
all-encompassing knowledge.
I guess nobody is perfect.
Giovanni
In fact, all four beatles were awarded the MBE (Member of the British
Empire) back in 1965 and John gave that back. I do recall that whenever
Paul McCartney was "knighted" there was controversy that the remaining
former Beatles had not been so honored. He was singled out from the
rest of them. I guess nobody is perfect, indeed.
XTC content: Jealousy over not being able to hear "how Frivolous
Tonight got started" caused me to shell out the $28.99 (from
sirendisc.com) for the Japanese Import. Having received my copy last
week, I revisited (for the 50th time) Apple Venus 1 and all of its
genius. I do not necessarily recommend paying the $ to just hear the
one track which was not released in the U.S. but I defend the band's
activities of allowing us fans to get a closer look at their creative
process. What a joy it is to be a fan of XTC's!
Patrick Adamek
Juneau, Alaska
------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:51:24 -0500 From: Dorothy Spirito <spiritod@techmail.gdc.com> Subject: Re: the age of consent... Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.00.9912201639010.409-100000@esun2028> Giovanni said, in a P.P.P.S.: > While you're there, abolish that silly 18-yo age of consent. Teenagers > are going to do it anyway. And it's ridiculous you're allowed to fire > guns before you're allowed to have sex. That's not what an age-of-consent law is for. (And, BTW, the age varies by state here in the U.S.) When two 15yo's have sex with each other, they're not breaking the law. When an adult has consensual sex with a teen under the age of consent, the adult is committing "statutory rape". That means that the teen is considered to be too young to comprehend the ramifications of having sex with an adult. My high-school best friend began having sex with his middle-aged neighbor. He (my friend) was a pre-teen at the time, lonely (this was before I met him) and abandoned (both parents had run out on him, leaving him to be raised by a stern grandmother). The "kindly" neighbor man took an interest in him (yeah, right; that bastard took advantage of a kid's emotional turmoil). If *I'd* been an adult in my friend's life and learned of this situation, I'd've had that rat's ass thrown in jail for statutory rape. End of rant. Whew! ::deep breaths:: Regards, --Dorothy. (enjoying "Snowman" off English Settlement, and "Thanks For Christmas" off Rag & Bone Buffet)
------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:58:47 -0500 From: Dorothy Spirito <spiritod@techmail.gdc.com> Subject: Re: we're on a mission from Gahd Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.00.9912201751500.409-100000@esun2028> Seb said: > Religious nuts, anti-drug freaks, gun-slingin psychos. Nice to know > we're such a stable bunch. Careful; your ultra-liberal bias is showing. Name-calling is the last resort of a poor debater. > If someone's going to tell me to stop sleeping with boys then I'm > *really* gonna get mad. If they're under the age of consent and you're not, stop sleeping with them. Otherwise, in the immortal words of the dad in the movie "Jekyll and Hyde Together Again": "Fuck your brains out, kids!" Regards, --Dorothy. (cueing up "Garden of Earthly Delights"... "...just don't hurt nobody, 'less of course they ask you..." <g>
------------------------------ From: WTDK@aol.com Message-ID: <0.ef04ef41.2590054a@aol.com> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:18:50 EST Subject: Re: English Settlement Speaking of Geffen it's curious that in America Geffen's edition of English Settlement doesn't have a booklet with lyrics. A bit strange when considering that all other US editions match the Virgin counterparts exactly. I miss the hand lettered lyrics that appeared on my vinyl edition (it was on the inner sleeve for the US single disc edition put out by Epic Records). The inner sleeve had a homemade quality which I miss on the import CD I have now. Have to correct myself...the American edition is a little different from the UK edition of Drums and Wires I have (with more tracks and a complete booklet). Don't know if it was reissued in the UK this way or not. I've been following the drug debate with interest. You can't "unopen" Pandora's box once it has been opened. The best you can do is tape it shut or use a lock on it to reseal it. Most of the laws regarding the use of drugs for illegal or illicit purposes in the US attempt to reseal Pandora's box without regard as to why it was opened in the first place. IF you can't stem the curiosity about the contents (i.e., the result of using the drug in question), it becomes difficult or impossible to prevent others from opening the box. A lot of laws function as band aids for society. You can't close the wound or undo it, but you can protect it from further infection. While this may work for the bulk of society, it doesn't work for all of it. There are always going to be those folks that want to pick at the wound or check out what's under the band aid. To use a cliche, It's human nature. Unfortunately, using this band aid makes a number of assumptions about the condition of the wound, i.e., what created it in the first place. Without going to the root of the cause (whether it be psychological or biological), you can't prevent the band aid from falling off (or if you want to use the other poor analogy above you can't prevent the box from being opened). I guess the bottom line is always going to be that those that want to abuse drugs (whether legal or illegal substances) will find a way to do so. The drug laws in the US protect may protect society, but it's a very poor way to fix the problem. Making all drugs legal doesn't address the problem just takes away the allure for a minority of people who take them because of the allure. Most drug victims are drawn into a drug's sticky web for reasons more complex than the allure. Until you understand the root cause using the law to regulate drug use protects some people and prevents others from access. Those folks that want it bad enough are always going to get it. They usually pay a high price as well; arrest, prison and death. Pot and other drugs aren't that different from alcohol or cigarettes. They serve the same purpose both psychologically and biologically that the latter two drugs do and did in the past. The reason people are drawn to these drugs and abuse them are similar as to why others choose to do so with illegal drugs. Would legalizing drugs make the problem go away? I doubt it. Would keeping them illegal make the problem go away? Not unless you have a society with laws similar to those in Taiwan where smuggling illegal drugs into the country means the death penalty. It is a harsh law, but it solves the problem. It also puts society's freedom at risk. To maintain balance in society you've always got to choose the lesser of two evils. I personally would go with a society full of band aid laws (despite their frequent ineffectiveness) vs. killing people for bringing in drugs (and using them) or making them all legal. It's a complex issue and it has no moral black or white only areas of gray. As a result, I prefer the gray that the laws currently provide. I also suggest we try and understand why we do drugs better in order to curb the appeal and deal with the problem. Otherwise, all the solutions posted so far amount to little more than band aids. As we know sooner or later band aids fall of whether or not the wound or cut is healed. Wayne
------------------------------ Message-ID: <004901bf4b3f$9ea50160$d944113f@unlpm> From: "Jamie Lowe" <jamielowe@email.msn.com> Subject: A School Guide to XTC Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:06:05 -0600 Seasons Greeting Chalkers, This is probably old news so forgive me if you've heard this one before. But if you search www.sirencd.com in their future releases under X you will discover: A School Guide to XTC with a 96 page book containing a discography, photos, story and interviews. It includes XTC, Dukes, Compilations, and Tributes. CD tracks include Star Park, Yabber-Yabber-Yabber and more. The release date is 01/17/00. The cost $19 plus s/h. I ordered it! Other Musings: Legalize and regulate the drugs, Uncle Sam you can't beat them, why not join them and take your fair share? Enough said. Good Riddance to Santanas and his evil twin. I for one am very glad that debacle is OVER. How about a XTC Desert Island Disc? We already have the title track (my choice) If you had to pick one song what would it be? Happy Christmas and a Merry Millennium to you all, Jamie Lowe
------------------------------ End of Chalkhills Digest #5-346 *******************************
Go back to Volume 5.
21 December 1999 / Feedback