] [Thread Prev
I'm not sure what email client your using, but I can't begin to read
your posts. It's text on text. I think your client is using DHTML,
which none of my clients seem to do well with. Can you just send plain
text? I bet there are a lot of us that have this issue.
"Liebig, Steuart A." wrote:
> my question would be why music reviews in the Weekly (both
> LA and OC versions) have to come across as so much 'better
> than thou'? ** i don't know . . . didn't get that from these
> . . . just my silly ol' opinion, though. normally, i like
> reading music reviews, as a resource to check out new
> stuff. with the OC weekly specifically, however, i've
> becomed so disgusted, i've stopped reading 'em. i will go on
> record as saying that OC Weekly's Buddy Seigal is a big ol'
> a-hole, worthy of the Wynton Marsallis award if anybody
> is...** don't have a clue about him. Of all the reviews,
> the LA Weekly one stands out as someone who's trying to talk
> as much about themselves as the band they are reviewing,
> painting their narrow interpretation with childlike glee...
> > artful representation of the cosmic vomit.
> ** well first off, he's trying (so you can decide if he
> gets points for that). second off, i think that what he
> means is that the band has something of catharsis about it
> (i've had more than a few people say this after
> performances). to me this is actually about how the music
> hits him. contrast it with a pre-"review" of a gig that
> someone wrote that basically talked about a private
> conversation with one of the guys in the band about a crush
> said musician had on another crit's wife - - whom he had
> dated pre-marriage (something told in *confidence*). the
> music or other players were *never* mentioned . . . never.
> to me the weekly thing is damn near descriptive in
> comparison. i admit to feeling a little put off by it on
> first reading and then got the gist of it one second reading
> . . . i bounced it off of one of the other guys in l.
> stinkbug and he thought it was a very apt description of the
> emotional nature of our performances (cd is live stuff).so .
> . . to each his own, but a different viewpoint on it,stig
> Confidentiality Warning: This e-mail contains information intended
> only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the
> reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or the employee or
> agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, any
> dissemination, publication or copying of this e-mail is strictly
> prohibited. The sender does not accept any responsibility for any
> loss, disruption or damage to your data or computer system that may
> occur while using data contained in, or transmitted with, this e-mail.
> If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify
> us by return e-mail. Thank you.