MaryJanes2ndLastDance
-
Content Count
5,189 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
171
Posts posted by MaryJanes2ndLastDance
-
-
1 hour ago, martin03345 said:It's not contradictory at all. That last verse is in reference to Sherman's march to Georgia where he went and scorched the earth and left nothing of use for the South. It has to deal with the war yes, but not race as a whole.
But the whole war was about race! Again, it's fine if you don't want to interpret the song that way, but surely you can see why others might or if not that, could use it as entry point for the discussion of race...since the song directly references a war about the very subject...! Again, I don't expect you to see it that way but surely you could be open to the idea of why others might...
What else? For me, the irony here is I'm in the middle of a conversation on race and the civil war when I thought the book itself went on too long in those directions, see my initial post and I put Southern Accents in the cellar along with Echo, Last DJ And Highway Companion.
Trying to see things from other's perspective to a limited degree can be interesting to me but I"m usually quite clear on what I do believe and won't hesitate to say so: case in point, I thought the set lists for TPATH were largely mediocre overall given the amount of material they had to draw from and the collective talent and ability within the band. That's something I believe.
cheers
-
40 minutes ago, martin03345 said:y. Ignorance of American history is no excuse for defending the South's misguided cause.
What are you talking about? Where did I ever defend the South's misguided cause. And for that matter, misguided doesn't do it justice, it was downright fucking evil.
41 minutes ago, martin03345 said:Though slavery was the crux of the war, in this song, Tom's not trying to get at that. He's not that deep in his lyrics folks.
You're ignoring the fact that someone could interpret it that way, which, since the Civil War was fought to end slavery this lyric directly deals with and race. I don't know why you refuse to see that even as a possibility for others to have. I don't get it.
42 minutes ago, martin03345 said:And again, just because you have a certain interpretation of things, doesn't mean it's equally acceptable. If it comes from ignorance then your ignorance hinders your ability to understand because you don't have the necessary information to interpret the subject matter. I'm not saying these are your own ideas and interpretations, but if you put them out there, expect people who have a little foresight to shoot them down because they're filled with nonsense.
I'm not above acknowledging my ignorance, but a discussion of an issue isn't a tacit endorsement, again, I don't understand why you can't see that.
I freely admit that the idea, even as a concept regarding the true motivations of the civil war were as I learned them originally which was the elimination of slavery, but again, discucssing it or any other interpretation, well informed or otherwise again, isn't an endorsement of said concept.
cheers
-
2 hours ago, martin03345 said:the Civil War being Federal vs. States Rights because it was about slavery. Confederate state constitutions state clearly the idea that slavery is necessary because "Negroes are inferior to whites and thus to be subservient to them". The whole states rights issue is southern revisionist bullshit.
I actually spoke to an amateur Civil War historian just a few minutes ago and came on to say that yes, I agree with you on this point; southern revisionist bullshit.
cheers
-
1 hour ago, martin03345 said:No, you can't make an argument about the Civil War being Federal vs. States Rights because it was about slavery. Confederate state constitutions state clearly the idea that slavery is necessary because "Negroes are inferior to whites and thus to be subservient to them".
I'm not making that argument. I said, "One could make that argument" because many people have, as to the validity of it, I honestly don't know. I'd like to think the basis of the Civil War was eliminating Slavery but I'm also familiar with how governments screw over their populaces. But to reiterate, I'm not making that argument.
1 hour ago, martin03345 said:The whole states rights issue is southern revisionist bullshit.
Could very well be. And certainly, slavery couldn't last in this country and Thank God it didn't. And thank those who fought to end it.
1 hour ago, martin03345 said:Nothing there about race folks.
On the one hand you're saying the Civil War was fought over slavery but at the same time you're saying there's nothing to do with race in a song that talks about cornfields burning down..during the civil war! It seems contradictory to me.
1 hour ago, martin03345 said:This is my favorite song of all time, and after listening to it a billion times, theirs nothing grand about it besides the sound. That's a dichotomy. The sound is grand and happy while the message itself is not.
I agree about the message in contrast with the music. However you want to interpret the song is fine, and certainly if this is your favorite TPATH tune I could see why you feel the way you do about it. But I can see someone reading those lines:
Even before my father's father
They called us all rebels
While they burned our cornfields
And left our cities leveled
I can still feel the eyes of those blue-bellied devils...and returning to the Civil War and the issue of Slavery and thus race. I'm not saying you have to view the song that way but I can see why the author (or others) did or do.
I should also point out that I don't really have a horse in this race, I enjoy exploring the different interpretations or what I perceive them to be in the book and with the meaning of the album or in this case, the song Rebels. But please don't confuse examining these different points of view with any particular endorsement of them, that's not my intent.
What I was going for was understanding (maybe) how or why from the first track of the record there was a way into the race discussion for Washburne. Pure supposition on my part but I think it's interesting.
cheers
-
1 hour ago, martin03345 said:But the thing is, the song isn't about any of that. It's about a drunk loser who wallows in his own self-pity and blames the fact that because he's a Southerner, he's just born to "rebel". It's a great irony that's lost on many. About being a poor misguided white guy in the south clinging onto the bullshit that get's propagated about how "The South Will Rise Again!". It's been over a 150 years and the South still can't get out of their own way.
I don't think the author missed the point of the song. One could argue the Civil War was really about Federal Government over States' Rights but even so the issue of Slavery was still a part of that as well. Which returns to race.
So, no, I could see why Rebels could be an entry point for the discussion, since even using the Civil War/South Will Rise Again! as a self-satisfied excuse for why his life didn't turn out the way it did goes back to race.
cheers
-
7 hours ago, RedfordCowboy said:3. I think the most fascinated aspect about the SA years, as touched upon here, is the total public perception transformation that Tom underwent between 1985 to 1989. Think about it.
I never thought about it before but that's because I really never cared if they're a band from Florida or LA. Why not both? Who cares really? But the point he raised and you emphasized seems valid...interesting even if there was no deliberate attempt on Tom's part, of which, I don't see him caring enough to consciously will such a change in perception, but I could be wrong.
7 hours ago, RedfordCowboy said:Total feel good-laid back California vibes, which seemed to fit him perfectly this time. Maybe the beginning of the mellow, easy-going rocker image that Tom seemed to show from this point forward....
Yeah, maybe it was the video director's call and somehow that image combined with the mellow song are the result. Certainly it was my perception till I heard his radio interview about him not being laid-back at all. Maybe too, some of it was the genuine happiness he was experiencing after the horror of the arson and the tumultuous (?) years of the band around that time.
7 hours ago, RedfordCowboy said:Still so fun to debate whether TPATH are a Florida or LA band, of course. Tom says they're LA, although I'm not fully buying it. I think they are southern at heart... Proof to me is when Mudctrutch reunited in 2008. This is Tom going back to his roots, returning to Florida, showing his true self...IMHO...The Mudcrutch detour just felt so right...
Oh. Well, maybe someone else will be along to pick up that particular gauntlet; though I do like your reasoning as to why you think of them as southern. And I agree, Mudcrutch was an incredibly good call on Tom's part.
cheers
-
5 hours ago, Big Blue Sky said:Most importantly: imo "race" is meaningless from genetic point of view & it's a social construct.
I would think it's the opposite right? Race is biology. A Korean man is different from an Irish woman. Pick whatever examples you like.
I think the more important thing is quality of character, how one exercises their free will. Along with that are matters of the soul, both of which I find more interesting than race as a topic.
While the biological differences exist, that we all share this world and its creatures is what counts and how we treat each other and them, of which, if you haven't gathered, I'm in favor of kindness, generosity, justice tempered with mercy.
cheers
Big Blue Sky reacted to this -
On July 21, 2019 at 2:57 PM, Shelter said:The air vibrating with those certain Tenchy tunes..
There should be some Hobbits there as well, unnoticed of course...
-
On April 30, 2019 at 1:48 PM, peterdimples said:I was also at the last two shows of the 1999 Fillmore run which were filmed for High Grass Dogs. The production company screwed up and did not film more than half the show, I remember there was a lawsuit over it. That's my least favorite live show they put out because it should have been so much longer.
That's too bad. I was disappointed when I first purchased High Grass Dogs and the whole thing did feel rather truncated. I much preferred my bootleg copy I purchased on VHS of the Hamburg show from '99.
cheers
peterdimples reacted to this -
On June 25, 2019 at 5:55 AM, Shelter said:Basically I just wanted to nuance the communicated opinion that this tour, this film, feature the "original band". At least to me, realizing that it's not, makes the whole TPATH enterprise stand out a bit more as "ever-changing", "ever-evolving" and as such less dramatic, is all. If there is one before and one after, I would suggest that there is several befores and several afters too,
Nuance is good and noted about the several befores and afters true and one could say the original band ended when Ron quit; I was more going on about the ethos of the early band in relation to this release and not a direct, literal take.
Perhaps if when Steve joined they continued writing songs in the vein of ITGWO or DTT his arrival may not seem like such a line of demarcation but not only did the drummer change but Tom experienced a change/growth in his songwriting.
Take the Highway, to me, is notable as a last hurrah because it's an official tour document of this version of the band which even with the addition of Howie and Scott has more in common with the band who recorded DTT than what came after.
cheers
-
I liked that clip, sounded a bit of a mix of garage rock and a lost song from ITGWO, that slide (?) guitar. I like that sound. If Mudcrutch later became the country offshoot of TPATH, then maybe the Dirty Knobs will be the garage band offshoot. Not to diminish either outfit by calling them that though.
cheers
-
On July 25, 2019 at 11:22 PM, Big Blue Sky said:Well, guess it's all relative
Indeed. Some think Echo's the bees knees, others a dreary slog, some prefer the Stan years to Steve's turn, there is a definite wide variety of taste beyond the greatest hits here. I think Hypnotic Eye is their best TPATH album and that came nearly 40 years in their career.
cheers
-
https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/soundgarden-to-release-live-from-the-artists-den.841461/
The 29 song-show comprising almost two and a half hours, encompasses the band’s rich musical legacy, spanning their early years with ‘Hunted Down,’ through their monumental albums Badmotorfinger and Superunknown respectively with ‘Outshined’ and ‘Black Hole Sun,’ and to their final record, with nearly every song from King Animal including ‘By Crooked Steps’ and ‘Been Away Too Long.’ Live From The Artists Den features 21 songs never before released on a Soundgarden concert film,
https://www.clashmusic.com/reviews/soundgarden-live-from-the-artists-den
The age-old question when it comes to live albums is wherever to handpick the material best representing a group's stage power or authentically drop the entire set, lags and all. At 29 tracks, including intro and outro numbers, the band's second live album proves an uneven marathon with flashes of brilliance.
-
Here's the audio from the livepetty site:
Big Blue Sky reacted to this -
16 hours ago, Big Blue Sky said:Noticed a similarity with "Melinda" in the way they are controlling the tempo and sound so they create a space within the song where the wave goes out to sea... all the noise falls away until the melody is being carried by one or two instruments. Which is always pretty special when you're in the audience, especially a large & enthusiast crowd, and you can feel the musicians having this very direct influence on you & on the mood of the rest of the crowd. You know, when sometimes it's almost like you can hear a pin drop?
The technical term is AQZ which stands for advanced quiet zone. This is when the bandleader gives a cue and the band brings down the volume, often times the tempo for some soloing and/or to get the crowd involved or to create the dynamic tension and power of building back to a musical climax. Go back and watch any live video and you can see Tom often signaling with subtle eyebrow and hand gestures, forming AQZ. I jest. Actually I don't know if there is a technical term for it; I've heard it as a band "breaking it down" or "bringing it down." TPATH did it frequently. But not to disillusion you but it's fairly easy, I've done it with other amateur musicians in a bar, or outside in a park, usually with a head gesture or even saying, "let's bring it down." So I figure if a bunch of amateurs pounding out some chords and jamming and soloing for the fun of it can do it, any professional band can do it quite easily; in fact, that level of rehearsal before they even perform gave them enough of a connection to act as one as it were.
My point is, playing a bit of music you get a feel for when you can "bring it down", so a pro band of TPATH's caliber could do it easily and quickly, even on their first tour.
As for effectiveness, I think it's very powerful in concert, and you can tell how much Tom enjoying hearing Benmont (or Mike) take the spotlight in those moments.
cheers
-
4 hours ago, TomFest said:that song is in the "not one of my favorites" group.
Ha ha, yeah I'm in the minority on that one.
4 hours ago, TomFest said:but the entire time frame for me kicks off a big dormant period of Tom's career. He takes off with Bob for a couple of years, and then comes the "Let Me Up" album - which is also NOT highly ranked in Tom's body of work. Somewhere in there, some asshole tried to kill him by burning his house down. Again, just my $.02, but I'll call that whole run Tom's "lost weekend". The Wilbury's experience snapped him out of it, and arguably his best work was still to come.
I think with some exception this is a pretty common take. While those albums have some bright spots (and I do prefer LMU to SA) I agree that some of his best work was yet to come. For me, and this again could be a minority opinion, I think a mix of Wildflowers and Echo thru Last DJ was another glum period, picking up again with Mudcrutch and peaking with Hypnotic Eye which I have to say, for a last album it's a definite high to go out on.
Someone should write a "...and the Heartbreakers" book, and get their perception of what it was like being in the band. Just title it that..."...AND THE HEARTBREAKERS." I think it would be a good companion to CONVERSATIONS and PETTY: The Biography.
cheers
-
-
1 hour ago, Big Blue Sky said:Yeah... Seems a missed opportunity.
2 hours ago, TomFest said:I'm skipping it just based on some reviews and I'm not really too interested in reading about the Rebel flag controversy again.
I think he really needed to get a few things off his chest about the flag/south/racism and in relation to his experiences growing up in the South, which would've been all right if it had been counterbalanced with more writing on the album and more of the interviews with Benmont and Mike. Especially the former in my opinion. The writer was clearly a fan of the band and as such, it's a bit disappointing he went down the avenues he did when others would've been (in my opinion) more interesting. Oh well. I'd give his take on a different TPATH album another go were he to write one.
cheers
-
-
-
On July 17, 2019 at 3:39 PM, nurktwin said:il I leave for Cleveland. IF everything goes well I could be home in 8 days,
Good luck Nurk! I hope this goes well...the whole 'Farm is pullin' for ya!
-
-
4 hours ago, Big Blue Sky said:Best of both worlds!
I pictured something like Breakdown, on album it's just over two minutes I think but live became something else; I think a short but powerful studio version of Melinda would've been a neat contrast to the live version. Moooooot now though.
cheers
-
I'm fine with live only versions. If they did a studio track I'd be all right with a tight version of the song, under three minutes with a brief but memorable solo from Benmont. I could be wrong but the song much like Two Men Talking struck me as a live jamming vehicle. Something like It's Good To Be King turned into a jam song in the live setting but Two Men Talking and Melinda felt like they were written precisely to be jams, if that makes sense.
cheers
Big Blue Sky reacted to this
Did anyone read 33 1/3 Southern Accents? What did you think?
in Great Wide Open
Posted · Report reply
Interestingly enough a regular at a place I frequent was reading a book on the Civil War, even took trips to locales from the war and I happened to run into him this evening; when I asked him about the Federal Gov vs State's Rights interpretation; he instantly got mad; not at me but at the idea itself, likened it to Flat Earth Theory. I told him I'd been raised with the idea it was about slavery but given our govt's history and my cynicism towards politics could see it as a possibility. His vehemence on the issue was plain and he went on to quote the Confederacy's vice president directly referencing the fight over slavery. Anyway, there you go, who knows who one may run into in life.
cheers