From: Kevin.J.Feury@dartmouth.edu (Kevin J. Feury)
Newsgroups: alt.rock-n-roll.metal,alt.rock-n-roll.metal.heavy,alt.thrash
Subject: Re: lies, lies, liars
Date: 8 Apr 92 04:07:39 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <1992Apr7.005051.1@pomona.claremont.edu>
cblanc@pomona.claremont.edu writes:

> 
> 
> To save us another lengthy trading off of quotes:
> 
> 
> I recognize that Metallica do not have that much influence over the marketing
> of their records.  However, they do have control of the sound, and now they
> definitely have more control (even before Metallica), having made a number
> six-selling album.
> 
> Of course, everything is subjective.
> 
> Their new album is simpler and not as innovative.  However, it is catchier to
> the ear, much as was "Harvester of Sorrow" off of AJFA.

again, that simple sound was what they were after, given the long,
twisting patterns of AJFA. read an article or two about it. hell, i
think i even wrote one about ten minutes ago. and i think 'harvester'
is by far the worst song on AJFA. i didn't find it catchy at all. as
for METALLICA, other than 'sandman', i don't find it catchy at all. 

> The choice of Bob Rock is important because he produces pop albums, which have
> different production values than metal albums.  Flemming's production wasn't
> great, but he did a respectable job on the first three.  They could have
> picked, say, Alex Perialis or Rick Rubin.

they picked him for the sound they could get, not for what else he
produces. don't you ever listen to what the band say? although alex
would have given the band better sound than flemming, rick rubin would
certainly not have, and neither of them would have given the quality
that bob rock does. say what you want about the other groups he
produces, but the man gives a good sound. regardless of this, the band
wrote the songs, not the producer.
 
> The lyrics I heard by Guns and Roses sound racist to me and many others.  I am
> not a PC freak, but racism and homphobia seem to be great injustices to me that
> merit constant combat.  It is in our nature to fear and then hate that which is
> different from ourselves.  My point is that if Axl wants the people out there
> listening to his lyrics who happen to be awake to agree that he's not racist,
> then he should yank the song.

and my point is that he doesn't care what everyone else thinks.
besides, anyone with even part of a working brain should look at the
big picture, not a single song. a normal person should be able to look
past what a song says and try to see what the group is actually saying.
for example, i like the insight suaron (and if you read this thread,
you know how much he likes g'n'r) gave me in a post he made about the
lyrics. he thinks they were written with axl's idea what the thoughts
of a racist person look like. step back and examine that for a second.
i like this idea. it's new to me, and very interesting. of course,
giving that explanation, they still should not pull the song, because
it demonstrates that the band is not racist...

> I never made an argument that these lyrics somehow twist people, no matter how
> hard you tried to portray my arguments as such.  You seem to be a formula
> debater.

very good interpretaion on your part about the debate. i have been for
nearly seven years.however, what i wrote was that it was silly for
people to consider g'n'r racist because of one song they wrote and the
lyrics in that song. if you say that the lyrics alter the way people
think about axl and g'n'r, then in effect, they do twist people. you
said it, not me.
 
> Now I have left you a message saying "We Agree to Disagree."  There seems to be
> no point in fighting a circular argument, no?  When it all comes down to
> subjectivity, why should I sit around and listen to you try to insult me?

no, but it would impress me if you could put up some facts instead of
opinions without backing.
 
> I've been in far worse on BBS's and fought it to the conclusion, but there
> never is a conclusion.  All involved just leave pissed off.

true, especially when one party doesn't actively engage. and your
'worse fights' don't scare or impress me. what you're saying is that
you'll fight solely to fight, regardless of whether you're right or
wrong. that's moronic. and you don't piss me off. you rather make me
laugh.

> So leave me now, little man.

wouldn't you just love that.

as if...

-kev.