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

Something Trivial-but interesting



>From: "Schrade, Scott"
>Subject: Re: Something Trivial-but interesting
>
>Lord, help us.

Oh sure, *now* you turn to the Lord.

>But I don't think he's "busting on himself now."

You've made that clear.

>He's saying at 16 he was
>a troublemaker.  But he eventually turned out alright.  And his corrected
>ways began with that "new chapter" when he turned 21.

Yes, but he's also saying he was a sight for sore eyes at that age, compared
to how he is now.

>Aaaaaargh!! (the sound of office furniture being upended)

Go Scott, Go!
YaaaaaaaaHOOOOOOOOO!
Break a chair!

>This isn't about how attractive Daltrey was
to girls at age 16.

No, but it starts by emphasizing how much time has passed since then.

>It's about what kind of a person he was in society
>at that age.

*AND*, how much he's changed since being that young "sight for sore eyes"
kid.

>He's lamenting that he probably looked a fright to *adults*
>at that time.

He didn't look a fright.  Show me one photo where he "looks a fright".  He's
always smartly dressed, with hair just so.
He's a smooth talker, smooth walker, toker and fire stoker.
Wait, that's Pete.
You know what I mean!

>A hoodlum.  And again, his point being, that he turned
>out OK.

That is the point, but that doesn't dismiss the emphasis on past vs.
present.  Youth vs. old.
His first point has to be that he was so young.
*THEN* he can make the point that he fought on the streets.

>> He was their little angel.  :-)
>
>Who was beating up neighborhood kids.  ;-(

Ok, a little devil.  :-D

>But this only came *after* he had his revelation - when The Who kicked him
>out of the band & he decided to change his ways (Peaceful Perce).

Nope.  He was a stud prior to The Who.  Pete was already jealous of Rog
prior to being approached by him.

>You've sidetracked yourself.

No I haven't.  Its relevant!

>He wasn't ugly as a youth.

Right!

>He was dangerous.
>Threatening.  That's what he's trying (apparently unsuccessfully) to say.

Says you.

>> He's saying, I was so young, full of life!
>
>No, he's not.  He's saying he was dangerous & directionless.

Na Uh.

>> I can just hear his mum saying to him after a long day at work and
>> cleaning the house..."what a site for sore eyes you are me lad".
>
>I see him getting knocked down the stairs like Jimmy in QUAD.

Odd, we really know very little about Roger's childhood.
Hmmmmmmmm.

>He just improperly conveyed his meaning, that's all.  Everybody does that.

That, *I* don't buy.
Everyone in the free world uses the clichi "sight for sore eyes" to convey
something to the effect of "great to see you" or "I'm so glad to see you",
or "you are pleasing to see", or "what a relief it is to see you"....
Yet you are arguing that Roger got it 100% backwards and used it to
imply/convey the opposite?

>It doesn't mean he's a complete dolt.

It *would* be a *big* whooooops.
One that I can't imagine Pete, the editor, would let slide.

<He just fucked up.

And so have you by taking this unyielding stand.  ;-) (just in case)

>Hell, I must be a dolt then, too

If you must,....you must.

>We're all dolts.

I'm not part of your dolt-club.

>Oh, I won alright, buddy-boy.  I won.

Not even close, chum.

>Oooo....you're gonna be a sight for sore eyes after I get through with you!

I already am.
;-)

Kevin in VT