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

=



Let me suck up a bit here for just a moment.  Scott Schrade is a class act.
Smart. Good-hearted.  Generous.  Funny.  Level-headed.  I'm not bullshitting
here.
I am amazed that the man is unattached.  He's a catch.  If I were single and
lived in the midwest......I almost went too far with that ;-)

Schrade said:  "It's just that sometimes there's an air of snideness in your
tone when you refer to others' opinions on The Who's legacy, or their
criticisms of the 2002 tour, or when dreaded comparisons are made."

Absolutely true.
Snideness is a rhetorical device.  It is an integral part of my personality
and character.  It is me.  It is how I deflate opposing points of view.
Isn't snideness a first cousin to sarcasm?  I thought I was pretty handy
with sarcasm until I'll met you ;-)

Have you noticed that pompous people don't like sarcasm or snideness?

"Your tone suggests we're idiots for even considering such matters.  Like
we're foolishly waisting our time when all we really have to do is sit back,
enjoy, & accept the music we're given."

I haven't said anyone is an idiot for at least a few months ;-)

 Speaking of name-calling, I've been meaning to compliment The Coach on his
level-headedness and humor lately.  I am completely serious about that.  No
snideness or sarcasm intended.

"It's as if you're shocked when I start worrying about how The Who are being
perceived by the "general public."  You're shocked that Mark doesn't
particularly like the sound of the New Who.  You're shocked when someone
compares the current Who with the old Who."

 I can see how you would think that.  An expression of shock is a good
attention grabber.  I do overstate my emotional reactions sometimes to get
attention.  It is easy to do that in writing and it seems to work.

"You sometimes seem to indicate that we're doing something wrong.  That
we're not approaching the matter in the correct way."

Yup, that's the desired effect when I'm trying to persuade people to my way
of thinking.   Part of trying to be persuasive involves making people feel
uncomfortable. It is sometimes done with humor, aggressiveness, expressions
of hurt, or pure bullshit.  It is sometimes done with sarcasm and snideness.

"That the ultimate goal is to just enjoy the music & somehow we're fucking
that up for ourselves."

I firmly believe this is true.  It is MY truth about music.  I believe it
passionately.  I am trying to convert people to my way of thinking.  I feel
that if you aren't enjoying the music, you should do something else that
will give you enjoyment.  I want people to feel the buzz.  I love the buzz.
I love sharing it with others.

"But, I understand that that is your opinion & I respect it.  I'll argue
against it but I respect it."

Excellent!
I guess we all have a different idea of the definition of respect.  You
might say it is subjective ;-)

I think that the discussion of legacy, categories, rankings, standards, etc.
are cutting into the pure joy of experiencing the music.  I really believe
that.  Honestly.

BTW, in my line of work a legacy is a legal term that refers to property
that is handed down from a deceased person to their designee.  It is a
clause in a will that is executed when someone dies.  I really don't like
the usage here because The Who is not dead - not to me.  I don't want them
to die.  I love what they are doing.  I don't want to discuss their legacy
just like I don't want to divide up the possessions of my loved ones or
discuss it while they are on the earth.  It is an offensive idea to me.

You have noticed that I use techniques that are extremely annoying
sometimes.  I realize that.  Some people think I'm a major league asshole
because I've said things in ways that they don't like.  That's cool.  It is
part of who I am, it is part of my truth.  If you (individually or
collectively) think I'm an asshole, that is your truth.  Each to their own
truth.

Jeff