[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Joe Jackson??



Aaron, re:

>To call his work "candy pop" and to compare him to the Archies means only
one thing: that you obviously have little to no familiarization with the
Joe's body of work. 

Actually, that's not necessarily true. Perhaps he's very familiar with his
work, doesn't like it, thinks it's weak and down there with "the Archies"???
Another person(s) on the list may even like the Archies, but is now "afraid"
to say so (we all know how intimidating this format can be. Words on a
computer screen can be mighty frightening! If I had a choice between reading
something on the list I didn't like and getting punched in the face, I'd
choose the latter! But we all know how weak-minded I can be...)

I can respect Doug's view on Jackson, but I thought he was way too "personal"
with Litgo in his "trashing" of Jackson and Litgo for his opinion...

On the other hand, someone like me can come along (and I have) and trash...
THE BEATLES!!! (or some other over-rated group) And then we can see those
boring sparks fly!!! Hopefully by now, we all realize The Who are the best
and everyone else is <Picard> in comparison. However, to be a "kinder &
gentler list", we can all agree to respect (Boy and I streching this or what?
Can you just picture the look on Lev's face right about now?) each other's
tastes as long as we don't try and push those tastes on others...

On the other hand...

-wf "...I wanna be more popular than the rest, I'll do anything that I think
will impress..."