The Times' Skewering

[jeff davis <jdworks@execpc.com>]

   Ouch.
   i must admit, i expected some backlash when i heard that Pete had
muttered words to the effect that he had predicted the internet, but...
   Ouch.
   Taking into account the difference of opinion on the quality of the
material, as that is just opinion, i hate to say this, but... the writer
isn't as far from the truth as we would like to believe.
   Admit it guys: he seems to know Townshend's body of work, is fairly keen
of wit, and cleanly cuts poor Pete down to size.
   Ouch.
   i love Pete's work and i think he deserves to be in the same class as
Zappa (although Randy Newman's soundtracks and "rock" albums bore me to
tears) and any other modern composer. But the writer seems to have no time
for any composer still standing. i dare say if Igor Stravinsky wasn't dead
he'd be saying what a terrible racket of dissonance the guy wrote. Hell,
the only living "classical" composers are either doing soundtracks (John
Williams, Phillip Glass, etc.) or starving in obscurity (me, and deservedly
so).
   Pete did, more or less, predict something like the internet developing.
But he also predicted alot of other stuff that didn't happen (yet). He
comes across sounding as hollow as Al Gore did, who claimed he "helped to
invent" the internet (in fact he co-authored a bill, with several others,
that resulted in, among other things, funding for the development of a
military network of computers---Arpanet, i believe it was called---that
eventually led to the internet as we know it. Okay, he played a small role
in funding for an early version; no, he was in no way an "inventor"). Pete
would've done better to just let the work speak for itself.
   While i disagree with the Times' author about a few important points
(mainly the quality and integrity of Pete's work) i hate to admit... it was
a pretty viciously accurate article. Once again, ouch.

       peace&anarchy, jeffree