From: aephel01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Newsgroups: alt.flame
Subject: Bruce and ken, 'Rap-Heads'
Date: 13 Oct 92 16:41:34 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Louisville

In article <!n*vHjp83a@atlantis.psu.edu>, bufalini@gis.psu.edu (Bruce A Bufalini) writes:
> In article <1992Oct12.102506.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu> aephel01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:
>>In article <grendel.718757930@camelot>, grendel@camelot.bradley.edu (Alyosha Bourgea) writes:
>>>>>Okay Mr. Information, if the New Kids On The Block are so terrible,
>>>>>and they are, why do they make so much money?  It's good to see that
>>> 
>>>>Because most of the adolescent population in this country is brainwashed into
>>>>believing that the New Kids' music is quality music.  Their lyrics make no
>>>>sense whatsoever.  It's just random noise, unlike anything Rush has ever
>>>>released.
>>> 
>>> You're right, Rush is not random.  Rush is didactic, simplistic, and
>>> pretentious.  Geddy Lee's wanna-be Zep squeals are embarrassing.  Of
>>> course Rush lyrics make sense...you'd have to be a lobotomized ape not
>>> to get the pseudo-intellectual thrust.  Lee should stay with the guitar
>>> and keep his fool mouth shut.  Then again, Rush seems basically to be
>>> about playing riffs as fast and staccato as possible, so perhaps a better
>>> idea would be to get all three of those self-effacing mannequins off
>>> the stage and into the Taco Bell.
>>
>>     I'd definately say that recent rush is didactic, simplistic, and
>>pretentions, but Rush up until signals was amazing.  Hemispheres is
>>one of the greatest rock albums ever recorded.  And any true rush fan
> 
> I agree; _Hemispheres_ is one of my all-time favorites, also.
> 
>>would see how these pathetic "songs" they pump out today are cheap 
>>rehashes of the old great pieces of music.  All the themes they use
> 
> Maybe they're not as great as they were in the '70s, but can you point to any
> other bands whose members are in their 40's that are as great as they were in
> their early 20's?

     1. Pink Floyd
     2. Rolling Stones (I didn't like 'em then or now, but they are
                        one of the biggest)
     3. Aerosmith (They still use at least one syncopated[sp?] song/album
                   but the riffs are good and vocals are powerful)
     4. The Grateful Dead (Will they ever stop?)
     5. Peter Frampton (Simply because I saw him this summer and he played
                        'Frampton Comes Alive' *fantastic* along w/ new stuff)
     6. Who (They'll be back...)
     7. Steely Dan (There's only two real members anyway)

                            and many more...

>>these days they used in the 70's.  They're dried up and only hang around
>>because there's a group of people who know how good they were and naturally
> 
> Yeah, and that is still a rather large number of fans.

You seem to like to put importance on popularity.  Is this a complex
from not being popular?
 
>>consider them as good now without actually listening and hearing the
>>blatant ripp off.  Hence, someone with the intelligence necessary to 
>>print one word three to four hundred times is a typical rush fan today.
> 
> Not quite.  Individuals who print one word 300-400 times a day would typically
> be classified as 'Rap-Heads'.

Read my statement clearly, 'rap-head'.  Not only did I not write 'a day',
but it describes what you and ken, the mental midget, think is a good
dose of information.  You have aptly named your little clan.

-- no sig necessary --
       Aza