From: matthew@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (unknown)
Newsgroups: rec.music.industrial
Subject: Re: underground??? CC:
Date: 12 Sep 92 22:42:29 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

In article <AegGRjO00WBOA861tM@andrew.cmu.edu> ep2j+@andrew.cmu.edu (Edward Sokhyon Pak) writes:
>I'm sorry.... I didn't mean to sound "I'm more industrial than thou". 
>It's just that people limit themselves and think that they know so much,
>and I'm just as guilty too... so I geuss no matter how I present the
>question of who listens to what everybody is not listening to... then I
>sound like a "I'm more industrial then you"type ?     and anyway, if
>"IT's" (?) so dead, why are you still reading an "InDUSTRIAL" board?   

Please consult Robert "FinnAgain"[sic] West as to my intentions.

>    I don't know.... maybe because I just left NEW YORK and miss the
>scene a lot.  I've been to CHICAGO, and their club scene is good... but
>I still think that NEW YORK has one of the best INDUSTRIAL/TECHNO
>scenes... I don't know much about LA... excep[t it's goth crazy....  


My problem with "industrial" is that it has become a "scene,"
(which is fine in and of itself) and it has lost the "spirit"
it originally contained.

Industrial music wasn't about noise.  It wasn't about beat.
It was about pranks.  Just listen to _20 Jazz-Funk Greats_ by TG.
There was something on there to piss everyone off.  The noise 
cuts would annoy the standard-pop-fare people, the major-key synth
cuts would annoy the noiseheads [and they do exist... an ex-roommate
of mine used to listen to AM static only, and at ungodly volumes...
he had been doing it since he was about 8, and I can verify that...
not that it makes him "cool", just the opposite, in fact].  NO ONE
could buy a TG album and love the whole thing without understanding
the premise [intellectually, using the term quite loosely] of
deliberate provocation of response.

That mentality is gone.  It has been replaced by "style," and thus
we are left with a pointless, dead shell of a music style.  Sure,
the "shock-tactics" are still there, but they are trite and overused,
and usually indicate a very obvious (not to mention poorly-reasoned
and overly-moralistic) shallow political agenda.{eg:Skinny Puppy's 
vegetableAryanism, Ministry's antiChristian diatribe, et al}

All sense of humor has vanished, and been replaced with a new 
Obnoxiousness... that of PRETENSE.

Admittedly, there are those that still create some interesting
semi-substantial work out there (NWW, for example, although the
amount of substance has continually decreased) but most of the
people I had some small amount of respect for in the field have
moved on to newer tasks (Mr. Sotos getting out of jail, Boyd Rice
"infiltrating" the nazis, etc.).  Those who are left, I would argue,
are pathetically short-sighted and overly stylistically-concerned.


The amount of whining that goes on in this newsgroup, I beleive,
proves my argument.



>( I look pathetic? why? explain it to me?... Do you have an eyelid-ring
>or a lot of tattoos and think that everyone is pathetic and YOU're so
>industrial?  Maybe you are? i don't know?  Are you from NEW YORK also or
>are you from suburbiatown in OHIO?  I don't know?  so I guess I can't
>make any statements about you...so I guess I'll get over it.....  get
>over it..... get over it...  get. ov....i.....


Look, shithead, YOU JUST PROVED MY POINT AGAIN.


Point of interest:
	WHAT I AM WEARING TODAY
	_______________________

	1. Oxford shirt, blue and white stripes.

	2. Khaki pants.

	3. Blue suede Adidas soccer shoes.

	4. Green parka, needs to be washed soon.

	5. St. Louis Cardinals baseball hat.

	6. White socks, with turquoise and navy stripes at top.

	7. White T-shirt.

	8. Green boxers with white polka-dots.


You would never know by looking at me what my interests are,
and it is a very poor habit to assume anything about anyone
by visible information alone, although I feel fairly safe
in assuming that someone who wears a Skinny Puppy t-shirt
and has toothpaste in their hair is not someone I wish to talk
to.  There is a pretty good chance that said "individual" holds
the following beliefs:
	
	1.  The consumtion of meat is immoral.

	2.  People who dress like me (matthew@mentor) are
	    "conformists who don't think for themselves."
	
	3.  People who do not agree with their sociopolitical agenda
	    have obviously "not thought enough" and are therefore
	    unworthy of communication.


I know the type because I've been the type.



>I'm PATHETIC......and I'm GAY......so what?  do you hate me now?


I don't hate you, Eddie.  I pity you.  And why do you feel
the need to tell me that you are gay?  Do you think I care?
Whether I'm gay or not, you are a geek, and I'm not interested.


Sorry, babe.

Matthew Neill Sharp
matthew@mentor.cc.purdue.edu  mnsharp@nyx.cs.du.edu