McGoo's miserable failure

["Mark R. Leaman" <mleaman@sccoast.net>]

> No, I'm not actually able to tell the difference between some of them,

McGoo:

Ah, so we see that it's not the facts that are the problem, but instead
your ability to recognize them. That explains much.

> No, Twain was still first.

Excuse me, but how can you admit that Dickens was the first and then say
Twain was still first?????

> No, I just figured that the chances of you being a muscian are so slim,

You lost that bet. I'm not professional, but I've been known to pick a
string now and then. I've also written a few songs which gained some
notice.

> insistence that rock n'roll is great music also tends to put me off.

"I calls them as I sees them." And I make no apologies for it.

> No
> musician I have ever met think rock is any good, but that might just be
> my friends.

Right...it's an intelligence test, and your friends failed.

> It was a failure to type the right name.  I meant to say Joni Mitchell;

Joni MITCHELL???? Ohmigod, that's TOO funny! She's a pathetic
songwriter, chum. Why not try Kate Bush, if you insist on a female? Oh,
no WONDER you think Dickinson is a genius! "Don't it always seem to
go/That you don't know what you've got till it's gone..." What a DEEP
thought!

> You first said it was unified, then you said society as a whole was
> fractured.

And what should that have told you? That we were unified and the others
were not, therefore we were ahead of the game, yes?

> I was talking about society as a whole.  You seemed to have
> changed the scope at least once.

OK, historian...name one single solitary period when "society as a
whole" was unified.

> Mine, yes, and also the opinion of every scholar you will meet.

Too late; I've met some that differ with your opinion.

> This was probably the greatest scientific achievment of all time, but
> the Cuban Missile Crisis is the most signifigant moment of the decade.

You're showing that your area of expertise has influenced your
perception.

> No, they in the right decade.  If there is anything I do well in this
> world, it is knowing my history.

Apparently not. BTW, Rock history is MY area of expertise and you've
miscalled this one.

> Sure rock did start in the 50's, but
> it came into its own in the 60's.

Rock N Roll, which was transformed into Rock by a certain British Rock
band whose name you may be familiar with, came into its own in 1956 when
it became the dominant form of popular music. It went through a weak
phase in the early `60's, mainly because it was a limited medium and had
pretty much played itself out. It was at this point the Beach Boys and
(on their heels) The Beatles entered the picture and envigorated it. It
has NOTHING to do with the Cuban Missle Crisis. It's self inclusive.

> Jazz began sometime before the 20's

"Sometime?" I've already told you it was around in the 1800's; most
definitely in 1880. That's 40 years. Look up when it became the dominant
form of popular music, and then you'll know something.

> Maybe in the pathetic world of rock, but not in the world of art.  Last
> time I checked Mr. Van Gogh didn't sell a painting in his life.

Thanks; you made my point.

> Yes, but The Who's music does not move forward.

Oh, but it did. I guess you're technically correct in that since there's
currently no new Who music, it doesn't NOW...but it did from the time
the band started until they broke up. Townshend's solo stuff still does.
In the begining it was basic three or four chord music; later on it
incoporated Pop, Classical, and Jazz at times, apart from inventing
completely NEW forms.
Obviously you are unable to see this. "It all sounds alike to me." Good
thing you're not talking about a group of people, huh? But it's still a
form of prejudice.
Your statement here proves beyond any argument by you that you are
utterly unqualified to say a thing about music other than what you might
enjoy listening to. Your "musician friends" shoulda toldya.

> No, not OK.  I am affected by all sorts of things that aren't art.

It's simply that you have yet to recognize them as Art. Maybe you will,
in time. I have hopes. If you got a PhD, you have the ability to learn.
Let's see you use it.

> I get a great feeling when watching baseball

We all have our little problems. What am I, your therapist?

> I have only one word for this.  It is eight letters long and rhymes with
> tullbit.

Fine...I'm not going to list the large number of authors, books, movies,
and television shows which came from the influence but instead merely
point out to you that the current Epic fantasy cycle started with Lord
Of The Rings. And has manifested itself all over the damned place, from
the mediums I mentioned to computer, video, and role-playing games like
D&D (and the novels and films that have come from THAT).
I know you have a narrow view of what Art and influence are, but if you
have an ounce of honesty I think you'll have to admit that Tolkein has
affected our society more than Emily Dickinson has or ever will. You may
think this is a "pity," but even so it IS true. And you are 100% dead
wrong.

> I told this one to the guys in the English departement, I
> think they are still laughing.

They can laugh, but by doing so they prove themselves rather ignorant.
And these guys are professors? No WONDER the state of the US education
is in trouble!

> In fact they asked me to thank you for
> making their weekends.  That is definately a good one.

Please tell them I said they're welcome and it for the good of the
nation's youth they need to come down from their ivory towers. Dude, I
quit High School and I have a better grasp of things than you (a PhD
supposedly) and your pals. You guys better get it together! I get a
chuckle or two myself, considering how out of touch you guys are with
society and reality. The scary part is that you're given credibility by
some people, who quite OBVIOUSLY don't know what you're thinking...I've
always been an advocate for organized education, but you force me to
reconsider.

> suggested were just dead wrong.

You failed to prove that, with your "blitz."

> Poetry lovers,
> look to find out all about the influences of their favorite poets and
> what they changed.

Except it seems they are unable to accept any fact they're uncomfortable
with. As for me, I try not to limit myself so.

> Rock lovers tend to ignore all suggestions that
> there is anything better than what they like.

Not so. No one ever said poetry wasn't Art, while you make the case that
Rock music isn't. I haven't seen anyone say one was better than the
other, either, as you have. I'd say you've (unsucessfully) ATTEMPTED to
turn the tables, but what you describe above refers to yourself rather
than us.
You must be a Republican, because you think if you say something enough
times it will become so. Hate to tell you...

> Rock lovers are just people who can't love poetry.

This statement has no basis in reality. Why did you write it?

> Perhaps rock deserves its audience, and
> its audience deserves rock.  Sorry for being harsh, I was just telling
> the truth.

You're not being harsh, you are proving yourself to be an elitest.

> That's all I have,

And it ain't much. You failed on all counts, 'O PhD. It makes me wonder
where you got your degree...then again, you've made me question the
ability of college professors in general. Maybe I'll have to do what
Garp's mother did and sit in on the classes to make sure they aren't
teaching my daughter a bunch of bullshit like your "Rock isn't Art"
argument.

-- 

 "You take the guns...I'll keep the women."
             what David Koresh should have said

                      Cheers                ML