The Who's reputation

Marcus Surrealius bushchoked at
Sat Jul 24 15:55:11 CDT 2004

> I agree with this.  How many people camp out,


That's fine with me. Too many means no good places

> Then why are you proposing that communing with
nature is more spiritual than 
sitting in Church?

Nothing gets you closer to a creator than his/her/its
creation. Yes?

> I'm trying to defend your position here.

You needn't, no matter how slippery you think I am. I
think I'm being pretty clear and concrete here.
> If I 
understood Jim correctly, he was just saying that
spirituality has to relate 
to the divine or the supernatural.

Well, that's how he sees it. Nothing wrong with that.
By that standard, the workings of nature are pretty
divine. The interaction, the processes, all of it.

> I agree, but comments about them can have spiritual

Anything can have anything. The question is (as Yoda
would say): Does it, or does it not.

> You can't 
make an interpretation black and white like this. 
Pete's work is full of shades.

I CAN. I might not always be right, but I CAN.

But I'm not at the moment.

> white.  However, the two do often occur together.

And it's true that it's a lot easier to explain
morality to people who aren't too bright when you can
say: "If you do this, you'll burn forever in a lake of

> If I identify subtle clues, then I conclude it's

OK, identify away.

> about Pete's songs.  He leaves them open enough that
people can supply their 
own understanding.

Some things, yeah, but Quad is a pretty definite work.
IMHO. I think it's Pete's most down-to-earth work to
that date. WBN was even more so, however.

> The problem is to identify the allusion.

I see none in Quad.

> Tell me again why you don't think 
RGLB is spiritual?  ;)

I'm not going to repeat myself. Check the archives.

"Brie and cheese."
   George "Mr. Culture" Bush

Cheers         ML

Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! 

More information about the TheWho mailing list