@Plato - Never seen the appeal of miserable tunes. Leonard Cohen??? ]]
Or Morrissey – every time I hear him I think ‘stop whining about it you miserable git and jump’
Leonard Cohen is marvellous. If you think all his work is miserable, you haven't been listening to it closely enough. He's also a rare example of an artist who has generally got better the longer he's gone on.
Suzanne is pure poetry.
Well Cohen was/is a poet first and a (mediocre) vocalist second
Don't know your vintage, but a long time ago the BBC had a great series called The Rock & Roll Years - a compilation of news events with tunes of the day.
RCS, neither will Oasis. Songs from Morning Glory are played in student unions across the country. John Lewis' Christmas advert used one of their songs and most of the country didn't even realise.
I am surprised that they have never renewed or re-made that.
"Sir Thomas, have you conducted any Stockhausen?" "No, but I once trod in some."
who was it who said that the words most likely to strike fear into anyone were: "And now for the premier of a piece of work by a young British composer?"
On topic, I'm not sure about NPXMPX2's 5-10% Lab voters voting out to get rid of Cam. A moment's contemplation of the waiting candidates might deter them. As for Cam's successor, ideally I would like it to be Cam. If not him, then I am stuck a bit. We have gone over the various benefits or otherwise of the contenders, and I will have to hope for a known unknown to emerge.
There was Bowie- and then there was the rest. Bowie joins the British pantheon of Kubrick, Hitchcock, Lennon, Alec Guiness, David Lean- that magical few of truly great postwar Brits that have transcended their art form...
BTW Manhattan born Kubrick wasn't a Brit.
He didn't choose where he was born.
He did choose where he lived
He lived in the UK for professional as much as cultural reasons, and didn't take citizenship unlike the inferior Gilliam.
It's interesting how personally committed many people are to musical taste, to the point of insisting that the ones they like are the only decent ones and everyone's else taste is CRAP. You don't get it to the same extent for many other forms of media, even quite visceral things like opera (nobody says "Wagner is fantastic and if you like Puccini you're an idiot") or books. A lot of us simply like the music we grew up with (hormones and all that) plus maybe some classical music, and we see music from a different youth generation as a subtle challenge to our identities.
It gets tied up with national identity too - people assume that the world loves their music (I once shocked a Korean by not being familiar with the latest gangnam style hits).
All musical forms and genres have something to recommend them, in my experience, if one gives them a chance.
Why things might be considered good is a more interesting question than why they are bad. (Speaking of overall musical types. Of course there are obviously crap individual works and artists.)
"Sir Thomas, have you conducted any Stockhausen?" "No, but I once trod in some."
who was it who said that the words most likely to strike fear into anyone were: "And now for the premier of a piece of work by a young British composer?"
On topic, I'm not sure about NPXMPX2's 5-10% Lab voters voting out to get rid of Cam. A moment's contemplation of the waiting candidates might deter them. As for Cam's successor, ideally I would like it to be Cam. If not him, then I am stuck a bit. We have gone over the various benefits or otherwise of the contenders, and I will have to hope for a known unknown to emerge.
I've got a piece coming up on an known unknown as Dave's replacement.
@Plato - Never seen the appeal of miserable tunes. Leonard Cohen??? ]]
Or Morrissey – every time I hear him I think ‘stop whining about it you miserable git and jump’
Leonard Cohen is marvellous. If you think all his work is miserable, you haven't been listening to it closely enough. He's also a rare example of an artist who has generally got better the longer he's gone on.
Saw Leonard Cohen live a few years back (we have to thank his accountant for running off with his money, so enabling a great many people to have another opportunity see him on tour...). I have never known such pure love emanating for an artist, at anything I have been to before.
The only people who call him miserable are those who miss the wit and humour of his work. He is also a wonderful poet.
I never liked the Beatles as a kid, and always opted for the Stones. Kind of cooler and rockier for us 80's somethings.
So, I had to discover the White Album in my thirties to realise what a foolish, ignorant, immature idiot I had been. The White Album is outstanding on every level- and the synergy between Lennon and McCartney was arguably the single most influential cultural contribution (outside Shakespeare- but maybe in the fullness of time including Shakespeare too) ever made by any Brit in the history of our country. Time will tell. But over fifty years later and the Beatles are still by far and away, head and shoulders, the most influential pop group ever. 5 albums of theirs are included in the the Rolling Stone top ten albums of all time- and that includes the likes of Marvin Gaye, Miles Davis, John Coltrane. Outside Shakespeare, I cannot quite think of any other Brit who has quite had that impact on any art form.
So, Mr Morris- by dismissing John Lennon- the creative dynamo of the Beatles who flourished after the band split, you are simply betraying your own ignorance comrade.
Mr. Tyson, never been fond of Lennon. Didn't he have a side line in domestic violence [but, like George Best, that tends not to get mentioned]?
Not to mention the preaching hypocrisy of singing Imagine There's No Money. Well, if there weren't, he wouldn't be singing that song, playing his piano in his mansion, would he?
Ironically the best Beatles song in my view, Here Comes the Sun, was written by George Harrison.
"Sir Thomas, have you conducted any Stockhausen?" "No, but I once trod in some."
who was it who said that the words most likely to strike fear into anyone were: "And now for the premier of a piece of work by a young British composer?"
On topic, I'm not sure about NPXMPX2's 5-10% Lab voters voting out to get rid of Cam. A moment's contemplation of the waiting candidates might deter them. As for Cam's successor, ideally I would like it to be Cam. If not him, then I am stuck a bit. We have gone over the various benefits or otherwise of the contenders, and I will have to hope for a known unknown to emerge.
I've got a piece coming up on an known unknown as Dave's replacement.
You'll probably have to wait until Sunday for it.
As long as it doesn't get edged out by the AV piece.
@Plato - Never seen the appeal of miserable tunes. Leonard Cohen??? ]]
Or Morrissey – every time I hear him I think ‘stop whining about it you miserable git and jump’
Leonard Cohen is marvellous. If you think all his work is miserable, you haven't been listening to it closely enough. He's also a rare example of an artist who has generally got better the longer he's gone on.
Suzanne is pure poetry.
Well Cohen was/is a poet first and a (mediocre) vocalist second
@Plato - Never seen the appeal of miserable tunes. Leonard Cohen??? ]]
Or Morrissey – every time I hear him I think ‘stop whining about it you miserable git and jump’
Leonard Cohen is marvellous. If you think all his work is miserable, you haven't been listening to it closely enough. He's also a rare example of an artist who has generally got better the longer he's gone on.
Saw Leonard Cohen live a few years back (we have to thank his accountant for running off with his money, so enabling a great many people to have another opportunity see him on tour...). I have never known such pure love emanating for an artist, at anything I have been to before.
The only people who call him miserable are those who miss the wit and humour of his work. He is also a wonderful poet.
Clearly you've never been to a Take That gig. Pure and total love for the Fab Five.
I've been saying on here for ages that Cameron has made this all about him, im convinced there's plenty of Labour voters ambivalent about the EU that will give him a kicking.
On the doctors' dispute, I'm surprised that Carlotta and Sandpit think working at 6am or late evening or weekends is the new normal. Sure, restaurants do to some extent (though American friends think it's weird how most shut down at 1030-11 even in London), but that's always been seen as a snag of working in that industry. I'll do it myself for my NGO as required, but I see that as a director's duty rather than something routine. The supposition that the public will back politicians vs doctors and Hunt is a therefore a good bet for Leader seems quite a leap to me.
Nick, in IT it's perfectly normal. My support team work 6am-midnight 7 days, plus scheduled and unscheduled nightshifts, on call nights expected to respond to alerts - to fit around the needs of the business. The only thing we notice at weekends is that there's a few directors not there (but they still phone up!), and the finance and admin teams.
It's normal in IT, in banking, in the law, in lots of professional firms. Most service industries work at the hours the customer demands. This weekend I was working on a Turkish-related matter and had to be up at 6 to deal with the issue, given the time difference and the urgency. I have worked all nighters, sometimes 2 nights in a row. Last week I was working at 1 am all week. I appreciate that there are different considerations when you have tired doctors having to make critical decisions so I would rather my doctor was rested than not.
I don't know enough about the dispute to know who is right/wrong or what the appropriate compromise is.
But working hours long ago ceased being 9 -5 for most people.
You couldn't have written this stuff worse to boost the Neo Nazi Pegada lot. Add in the cover up and you have just handed them load of massive propaganda coup.
The significance here could be the date. If it turns out this "problem" has been around for more than the few months reported so far, then it starts to look like the "Rotheram" problem - with institutional failings over time putting the notion of cultural sensitivity above serious crimes against the person.
In places like Germany with recent history of racist groups causing trouble, it could be very toxic indeed. Remember the Rotherham issue was mentioned a decade ago, but dismissed by everyone because it was Nick Griffin that said it.
I never liked the Beatles as a kid, and always opted for the Stones. Kind of cooler and rockier for us 80's somethings.
So, I had to discover the White Album in my thirties to realise what a foolish, ignorant, immature idiot I had been. The White Album is outstanding on every level- and the synergy between Lennon and McCartney was arguably the single most influential cultural contribution (outside Shakespeare- but maybe in the fullness of time including Shakespeare too) ever made by any Brit in the history of our country. Time will tell. But over fifty years later and the Beatles are still by far and away, head and shoulders, the most influential pop group ever. 5 albums of theirs are included in the the Rolling Stone top ten albums of all time- and that includes the likes of Marvin Gaye, Miles Davis, John Coltrane. Outside Shakespeare, I cannot quite think of any other Brit who has quite had that impact on any art form.
So, Mr Morris- by dismissing John Lennon- the creative dynamo of the Beatles who flourished after the band split, you are simply betraying your own ignorance comrade.
Mr. Tyson, never been fond of Lennon. Didn't he have a side line in domestic violence [but, like George Best, that tends not to get mentioned]?
Not to mention the preaching hypocrisy of singing Imagine There's No Money. Well, if there weren't, he wouldn't be singing that song, playing his piano in his mansion, would he?
I would also note that George Harrison was a much under-rated Beatle. Three of the greatest Beatles tracks - Something, If I Needed Someone, and Here Comes the Sun - are all his.
@Plato - Never seen the appeal of miserable tunes. Leonard Cohen??? ]]
Or Morrissey – every time I hear him I think ‘stop whining about it you miserable git and jump’
Leonard Cohen is marvellous. If you think all his work is miserable, you haven't been listening to it closely enough. He's also a rare example of an artist who has generally got better the longer he's gone on.
Saw Leonard Cohen live a few years back (we have to thank his accountant for running off with his money, so enabling a great many people to have another opportunity see him on tour...). I have never known such pure love emanating for an artist, at anything I have been to before.
The only people who call him miserable are those who miss the wit and humour of his work. He is also a wonderful poet.
Clearly you've never been to a Take That gig. Pure and total love for the Fab Five.
There was Bowie- and then there was the rest. Bowie joins the British pantheon of Kubrick, Hitchcock, Lennon, Alec Guiness, David Lean- that magical few of truly great postwar Brits that have transcended their art form...
I never liked the Beatles as a kid, and always opted for the Stones. Kind of cooler and rockier for us 80's somethings.
So, I had to discover the White Album in my thirties to realise what a foolish, ignorant, immature idiot I had been. The White Album is outstanding on every level- and the synergy between Lennon and McCartney was arguably the single most influential cultural contribution (outside Shakespeare- but maybe in the fullness of time including Shakespeare too) ever made by any Brit in the history of our country. Time will tell. But over fifty years later and the Beatles are still by far and away, head and shoulders, the most influential pop group ever. 5 albums of theirs are included in the the Rolling Stone top ten albums of all time- and that includes the likes of Marvin Gaye, Miles Davis, John Coltrane. Outside Shakespeare, I cannot quite think of any other Brit who has quite had that impact on any art form.
So, Mr Morris- by dismissing John Lennon- the creative dynamo of the Beatles who flourished after the band split, you are simply betraying your own ignorance comrade.
Mr. Tyson, never been fond of Lennon. Didn't he have a side line in domestic violence [but, like George Best, that tends not to get mentioned]?
Not to mention the preaching hypocrisy of singing Imagine There's No Money. Well, if there weren't, he wouldn't be singing that song, playing his piano in his mansion, would he?
I would also note that George Harrison was a much under-rated Beatle. Three of the greatest Beatles tracks - Something, If I Needed Someone, and Here Comes the Sun - are all his.
I think in the future we will be able to map to brains of geniuses to understand quite what sets them apart from us mere mortals. Culture certainly attracts them- from DeVinci through Mozart to George Lucas, and including the likes of Kubrick or Bowie. I watched Paths of Glory (Kubrick's 1958 Anti War masterpiece) a few weeks ago, and it was just stunning. I was astonished and was so viscerally excited by his elevated film making that I had to watch it again a couple of days later, and was equally mesmerised.
There was Bowie- and then there was the rest. Bowie joins the British pantheon of Kubrick, Hitchcock, Lennon, Alec Guiness, David Lean- that magical few of truly great postwar Brits that have transcended their art form...
"Sir Thomas, have you conducted any Stockhausen?" "No, but I once trod in some."
who was it who said that the words most likely to strike fear into anyone were: "And now for the premier of a piece of work by a young British composer?"
On topic, I'm not sure about NPXMPX2's 5-10% Lab voters voting out to get rid of Cam. A moment's contemplation of the waiting candidates might deter them. As for Cam's successor, ideally I would like it to be Cam. If not him, then I am stuck a bit. We have gone over the various benefits or otherwise of the contenders, and I will have to hope for a known unknown to emerge.
My thought for the morning, for what its worth. If it looks like George might not win the crown, might Dave resile from his two terms promise?
I've been saying on here for ages that Cameron has made this all about him, im convinced there's plenty of Labour voters ambivalent about the EU that will give him a kicking.
On the doctors' dispute, I'm surprised that Carlotta and Sandpit think working at 6am or late evening or weekends is the new normal. Sure, restaurants do to some extent (though American friends think it's weird how most shut down at 1030-11 even in London), but that's always been seen as a snag of working in that industry. I'll do it myself for my NGO as required, but I see that as a director's duty rather than something routine. The supposition that the public will back politicians vs doctors and Hunt is a therefore a good bet for Leader seems quite a leap to me.
Nick, in IT it's perfectly normal. My support team work 6am-midnight 7 days, plus scheduled and unscheduled nightshifts, on call nights expected to respond to alerts - to fit around the needs of the business. The only thing we notice at weekends is that there's a few directors not there (but they still phone up!), and the finance and admin teams.
It's normal in IT, in banking, in the law, in lots of professional firms. Most service industries work at the hours the customer demands. This weekend I was working on a Turkish-related matter and had to be up at 6 to deal with the issue, given the time difference and the urgency. I have worked all nighters, sometimes 2 nights in a row. Last week I was working at 1 am all week. I appreciate that there are different considerations when you have tired doctors having to make critical decisions so I would rather my doctor was rested than not.
I don't know enough about the dispute to know who is right/wrong or what the appropriate compromise is.
But working hours long ago ceased being 9 -5 for most people.
Same in Marketing/Advertising - you worked the hours needed to get the job done - secretaries got overtime - and deserved it - for the rest of us it was just part of 'work'.....the doctors really are clinging to a very old fashioned notion of a 'working week'.....
@Plato - Never seen the appeal of miserable tunes. Leonard Cohen??? ]]
Or Morrissey – every time I hear him I think ‘stop whining about it you miserable git and jump’
Ah yes, but Johnny Marr's guitar playing and composing is awesome - and that's why you listen to the Smiths (well, why I do).
I like both Bowie - RIP - and Bach. Bach wrote some of the sublimest music there is. Playing his piano music (though he wrote for the harpsichord, of course) is one of the great pleasures of life.
Bowie was the soundtrack to my growing up years. I remember seeing Roeg's "The Man who Fell to Earth" at the late night film club in Bristol.... Happy days.
"Sir Thomas, have you conducted any Stockhausen?" "No, but I once trod in some."
who was it who said that the words most likely to strike fear into anyone were: "And now for the premier of a piece of work by a young British composer?"
On topic, I'm not sure about NPXMPX2's 5-10% Lab voters voting out to get rid of Cam. A moment's contemplation of the waiting candidates might deter them. As for Cam's successor, ideally I would like it to be Cam. If not him, then I am stuck a bit. We have gone over the various benefits or otherwise of the contenders, and I will have to hope for a known unknown to emerge.
I'm not talking about people seriously into politics (who will generally have a view on the EU and will vote accordingly), but people who don't always vote, but vote Labour out of habit when they do. Many of them will have barely heard of any of the potential successors except Boris and Osborne, much less given thought to which they prefer. But lots of people are vaguely anti-government and if Cameron said his position was dependent on Remain, a fair sprinkling might vote Leave just for that. So he's sensible not to encourage it.
I never liked the Beatles as a kid, and always opted for the Stones. Kind of cooler and rockier for us 80's somethings.
So, I had to discover the White Album in my thirties to realise what a foolish, ignorant, immature idiot I had been. The White Album is outstanding on every level- and the synergy between Lennon and McCartney was arguably the single most influential cultural contribution (outside Shakespeare- but maybe in the fullness of time including Shakespeare too) ever made by any Brit in the history of our country. Time will tell. But over fifty years later and the Beatles are still by far and away, head and shoulders, the most influential pop group ever. 5 albums of theirs are included in the the Rolling Stone top ten albums of all time- and that includes the likes of Marvin Gaye, Miles Davis, John Coltrane. Outside Shakespeare, I cannot quite think of any other Brit who has quite had that impact on any art form.
So, Mr Morris- by dismissing John Lennon- the creative dynamo of the Beatles who flourished after the band split, you are simply betraying your own ignorance comrade.
Mr. Tyson, never been fond of Lennon. Didn't he have a side line in domestic violence [but, like George Best, that tends not to get mentioned]?
Not to mention the preaching hypocrisy of singing Imagine There's No Money. Well, if there weren't, he wouldn't be singing that song, playing his piano in his mansion, would he?
I would also note that George Harrison was a much under-rated Beatle. Three of the greatest Beatles tracks - Something, If I Needed Someone, and Here Comes the Sun - are all his.
I'd argue that some things just jangle ones nerves, if you're not into them. I get really irritated by almost all improvised jazz, wince at opera and annoyed by blues bar blue grass.
It happens within a few bars. Can't stand it. I physically want to get away from it.
No amount of telling me that I'm missing something, or a philistine is going to browbeat me into liking it.
It's interesting how personally committed many people are to musical taste, to the point of insisting that the ones they like are the only decent ones and everyone's else taste is CRAP. You don't get it to the same extent for many other forms of media, even quite visceral things like opera (nobody says "Wagner is fantastic and if you like Puccini you're an idiot") or books. A lot of us simply like the music we grew up with (hormones and all that) plus maybe some classical music, and we see music from a different youth generation as a subtle challenge to our identities.
It gets tied up with national identity too - people assume that the world loves their music (I once shocked a Korean by not being familiar with the latest gangnam style hits).
All musical forms and genres have something to recommend them, in my experience, if one gives them a chance.
Why things might be considered good is a more interesting question than why they are bad. (Speaking of overall musical types. Of course there are obviously crap individual works and artists.)
@Plato - Never seen the appeal of miserable tunes. Leonard Cohen??? ]]
Or Morrissey – every time I hear him I think ‘stop whining about it you miserable git and jump’
Ah yes, but Johnny Marr's guitar playing and composing is awesome - and that's why you listen to the Smiths (well, why I do).
I like both Bowie - RIP - and Bach. Bach wrote some of the sublimest music there is. Playing his piano music (though he wrote for the harpsichord, of course) is one of the great pleasures of life.
Bowie was the soundtrack to my growing up years. I remember seeing Roeg's "The Man who Fell to Earth" at the late night film club in Bristol.... Happy days.
And Bohemian Rhapsody is a great song.
I got the Glenn Gould remastered box set for herself for Christmas. Just the 78 CD's.....
I don't think any celebrity death ever touches me, apart from my incredulity at the hype a famous death produces. People die.
They are part of our identity and with their deaths, a little part of us is reminded of both our own lost past and our mortal future.
Well put. Different people will be affected by different people - I recall not getting the Diana grief level - but people we don't know in any way affect us, people who are not real affect us and our identities even, and their ending thus can be significant.
I never liked the Beatles as a kid, and always opted for the Stones. Kind of cooler and rockier for us 80's somethings.
So, I had to discover the White Album in my thirties to realise what a foolish, ignorant, immature idiot I had been. The White Album is outstanding on every level- and the synergy between Lennon and McCartney was arguably the single most influential cultural contribution (outside Shakespeare- but maybe in the fullness of time including Shakespeare too) ever made by any Brit in the history of our country. Time will tell. But over fifty years later and the Beatles are still by far and away, head and shoulders, the most influential pop group ever. 5 albums of theirs are included in the the Rolling Stone top ten albums of all time- and that includes the likes of Marvin Gaye, Miles Davis, John Coltrane. Outside Shakespeare, I cannot quite think of any other Brit who has quite had that impact on any art form.
So, Mr Morris- by dismissing John Lennon- the creative dynamo of the Beatles who flourished after the band split, you are simply betraying your own ignorance comrade.
Mr. Tyson, never been fond of Lennon. Didn't he have a side line in domestic violence [but, like George Best, that tends not to get mentioned]?
Not to mention the preaching hypocrisy of singing Imagine There's No Money. Well, if there weren't, he wouldn't be singing that song, playing his piano in his mansion, would he?
I would also note that George Harrison was a much under-rated Beatle. Three of the greatest Beatles tracks - Something, If I Needed Someone, and Here Comes the Sun - are all his.
Here Comes The Sun is indeed a great song. Very poignant for me. I used to play it over and over in the winter of 1979 in my Bristol flat, in the weeks after my father died. It was a hard winter: cold and snowy and miserable and that song, the opening bars in particular, gave me the glimpse of hope, that eventually this too would pass and I would learn to get, not over it, but past it.
I can't listen to it now without it bringing me straight back to that time.
@MrHarryCole: Most senior resignation so far. Shadow Cabinet level resignation. Last week's were Shadow Junior Ministers. Will have to actually replace...
@DPJHodges: With Catherine McKinnell's resignation Labour's reshuffle has now officially entered its second week.
@Rob_Merrick: Corbyn's Shadow Attorney General quits....for family reasons, but also because of the "direction" of the party https://t.co/VqmnMNUhAs
"As events have unfolded over recent weeks, my concerns about the direction and internal conflict within the Labour Party have only grown, and I fear this is taking us down an increasingly negative path. I feel I would like to challenge my energy constructively, into making positive changes for my constituents."
My own view is that the creativity of Lennon elevated the others- apart from the rather talentless Ringo, poor thing. That's the impact of geniuses, they raise the game of others- and so George Harrison was able to write Something- a sublime song.
Bowie was equally a talismanic figure. Apparently U2 wrote their great anthem One Love at Bowie's studio in Berlin, under the influence of Bowie. Transformer- Lou Read's great album was a collaboration with Bowie. Under Pressure- the collaboration with Queen was superb.
That is why people like Bowie and Lennon are so utterly unique- and why they are set apart from the rest.
I never liked the Beatles as a kid, and always opted for the Stones. Kind of cooler and rockier for us 80's somethings.
So, I had to discover the White Album in my thirties to realise what a foolish, ignorant, immature idiot I had been. The White Album is outstanding on every level- and the synergy between Lennon and McCartney was arguably the single most influential cultural contribution (outside Shakespeare- but maybe in the fullness of time including Shakespeare too) ever made by any Brit in the history of our country. Time will tell. But over fifty years later and the Beatles are still by far and away, head and shoulders, the most influential pop group ever. 5 albums of theirs are included in the the Rolling Stone top ten albums of all time- and that includes the likes of Marvin Gaye, Miles Davis, John Coltrane. Outside Shakespeare, I cannot quite think of any other Brit who has quite had that impact on any art form.
So, Mr Morris- by dismissing John Lennon- the creative dynamo of the Beatles who flourished after the band split, you are simply betraying your own ignorance comrade.
Mr. Tyson, never been fond of Lennon. Didn't he have a side line in domestic violence [but, like George Best, that tends not to get mentioned]?
Not to mention the preaching hypocrisy of singing Imagine There's No Money. Well, if there weren't, he wouldn't be singing that song, playing his piano in his mansion, would he?
I would also note that George Harrison was a much under-rated Beatle. Three of the greatest Beatles tracks - Something, If I Needed Someone, and Here Comes the Sun - are all his.
Almost unbelievable but the rats are deserting their sinking ship already. You'd think the SLABber would at least have had the decency to wait till May before jumping ship. But then morality and ethics are hardly SLABs domain.
The greatest Beatles song is Eleanor Rigby. It reminds that that for everybody outside of a gilded few the 1960s was dull, drab and hard. Austerity on steroids.
@MrHarryCole: Most senior resignation so far. Shadow Cabinet level resignation. Last week's were Shadow Junior Ministers. Will have to actually replace...
@DPJHodges: With Catherine McKinnell's resignation Labour's reshuffle has now officially entered its second week.
The words "Here we.. here we.. here we fucking go" spring to mind.
It's interesting how personally committed many people are to musical taste, to the point of insisting that the ones they like are the only decent ones and everyone's else taste is CRAP. You don't get it to the same extent for many other forms of media, even quite visceral things like opera (nobody says "Wagner is fantastic and if you like Puccini you're an idiot") or books. A lot of us simply like the music we grew up with (hormones and all that) plus maybe some classical music, and we see music from a different youth generation as a subtle challenge to our identities.
It gets tied up with national identity too - people assume that the world loves their music (I once shocked a Korean by not being familiar with the latest gangnam style hits).
All musical forms and genres have something to recommend them, in my experience, if one gives them a chance.
Why things might be considered good is a more interesting question than why they are bad. (Speaking of overall musical types. Of course there are obviously crap individual works and artists.)
I think it comes down to authenticity and sincerity, not to mention the profundity of their creations.
Let's face it, almost all pop icons have an army of real musicians and technical wizards behind them to take their paltry tinkerings, and make something slightly more tuneful of them, while the "artist" gets on with the real business of prancing round the stage in outlandish gear. The noise is really just an accompaniment to this vulgar display...
Whereas Bach, virtually unknown beyond a 30-mile radius in his own lifetime, gazed upon the wonder of Nature, committed his thoughts to paper, and simply offered it all up to his God... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1nyzGR3tUE
That basically puts it all down to what young Barack's approval is in a right narrow range, ranging from no chance at 44% to probably at 54%. Given those ratings are all plausible for a president at 45% what is leaving office, that model don't tell us much!!
I don't think any celebrity death ever touches me, apart from my incredulity at the hype a famous death produces. People die.
They are part of our identity and with their deaths, a little part of us is reminded of both our own lost past and our mortal future.
Well put. Different people will be affected by different people - I recall not getting the Diana grief level - but people we don't know in any way affect us, people who are not real affect us and our identities even, and their ending thus can be significant.
Both Diana and Michael Jackson were completely order of the OTT.
At the risk of finding myself in a minority of one, I can't understand all this fuss about a dead pop singer.
I haven't heard much of his stuff (I own none), it didn't strike me as anything special. I have seen a lot of pictures of David Bowie looking frankly extraordinarily weird and even creepy, that's about all I can think of to say about him.
Radio 5 this morning was more or less entirely devoted to him, even though there would appear to be any number of far more important issues they should have been reporting on. I can only assume the entire editorial and production team are 50-somethings like Nicky Campbell, who was practically crying on air, the whole thing was borderline embarrassing to be honest.
Meanwhile the Shadow attorney general resigns. I imagine she was really "a Tory" or something so it's actually A Good Thing for Corbyn...
I don't think any celebrity death ever touches me, apart from my incredulity at the hype a famous death produces. People die.
They are part of our identity and with their deaths, a little part of us is reminded of both our own lost past and our mortal future.
Well put. Different people will be affected by different people - I recall not getting the Diana grief level - but people we don't know in any way affect us, people who are not real affect us and our identities even, and their ending thus can be significant.
Both Diana and Michael Jackson were completely order of the OTT.
It depended where you lived with Diana. In Scotland, the whole English hysteria was viewed with amusement. The vox pops were the funniest part, in England they did random interviews with people in the street for the news channels, while in Scotland only pre-selected people were allowed to air their views.
I love Jazz- Miles Davis and John Coltrane. A book, an open fire, a nice comfy chair a malt or two and Mile's Kind of Blue to wind away a winter's evening. Bliss.
But I take your point- I have a visceral loathing of opera and musicals. The noise is akin to someone scratching a blackboard. I was dragged around musicals as a kid- Camelot, the King and I, West Side Story. Torture. I am hoping that operation Yew Tree opens up its definition of child abuse because I would certainly report my mother for extreme child cruelty and abuse for inflicting those horrendous experiences on me. I am still scarred and suffer from musical PTSD.
I'd argue that some things just jangle ones nerves, if you're not into them. I get really irritated by almost all improvised jazz, wince at opera and annoyed by blues bar blue grass.
It happens within a few bars. Can't stand it. I physically want to get away from it.
No amount of telling me that I'm missing something, or a philistine is going to browbeat me into liking it.
It's interesting how personally committed many people are to musical taste, to the point of insisting that the ones they like are the only decent ones and everyone's else taste is CRAP. You don't get it to the same extent for many other forms of media, even quite visceral things like opera (nobody says "Wagner is fantastic and if you like Puccini you're an idiot") or books. A lot of us simply like the music we grew up with (hormones and all that) plus maybe some classical music, and we see music from a different youth generation as a subtle challenge to our identities.
It gets tied up with national identity too - people assume that the world loves their music (I once shocked a Korean by not being familiar with the latest gangnam style hits).
All musical forms and genres have something to recommend them, in my experience, if one gives them a chance.
Why things might be considered good is a more interesting question than why they are bad. (Speaking of overall musical types. Of course there are obviously crap individual works and artists.)
I quite like Bowie: I saw him play live more than one (Brixton Academy comes to mind) and when he hit the peaks, he was very good. The Berlin-era work for example. But there was an awful lot, perhaps disproportionate amount, of meh. On any rational judgement, the rush to put him in the Pantheon is premature: time changes views and allows distance (look at all the great Victorian novelists who were applauded in their time...). I do think that this acclamation at least partially reflects our own views of youth and mortality.
So I am as one with Richard Nabavi, ignoring his judiciary-eque, "tell me about Paul Gascoigne..." moment.
At the risk of finding myself in a minority of one, I can't understand all this fuss about a dead pop singer.
I haven't heard much of his stuff (I own none), it didn't strike me as anything special. I have seen a lot of pictures of David Bowie looking frankly extraordinarily weird and even creepy, that's about all I can think of to say about him.
Radio 5 this morning was more or less entirely devoted to him, even though there would appear to be any number of far more important issues they should have been reporting on. I can only assume the entire editorial and production team are 50-somethings like Nicky Campbell, who was practically crying on air, the whole thing was borderline embarrassing to be honest.
Meanwhile the Shadow attorney general resigns. I imagine she was really "a Tory" or something so it's actually A Good Thing for Corbyn...
Both Sky and the BBC have had no other news covered today. None.
It is frankly ridiculous at this stage. I would suspect you're right about the demographic of those in charge being the dominating factor. This was pretty clear when he got all that coverage for a boring song releasae a couple of years back and it ended up plastered over the rolling news. Most people are likely to have a very vague knowledge about who he even is, if they recognise the name at all.
Just catching up: on the composers issue there is a story about Bach which I would like to believe is true.
Some years ago NASA were preparing a very long distance space probe and, in case it was picked up by alien life forms, included in it various items which were designed to show what human civilisation was about and what it had achieved. There was much discussion as to what should be included and one of the team suggested digital recordings of some of Bach's best works. The old team leader vetoed the idea saying, "We don't want to show off."
On the EU discussion, it is a shame that a very valid point was lost amongst personal insults and whether Turkey will ever join the EU. A vote to remain is not a vote for the status quo. As anyone who even vaguely follows what is going on will have realised is that the EU is going to change in the near future. How it will change and whether such changes will be in the UK's interest we cannot know. At least we cannot know with anymore certainty that what leaving would mean.
Remain and Leave both involve taking a leap into the unknown.
Queen are the only four-man band in British history in which every member wrote a number one hit single.
Compare the best tracks. What do The Beatles have that can match Bohemian Rhapsody? We Will Rock You and We Are The Champions are sporting anthems.
I'm not saying The Beatles are bad, I rather like their music. But it's not in the same league as Queen.
I also prefer Got My Mind Set On You by George Harrison to Imagine.
All a matter of opinion!
I think Bohemian Rhapsody is a work of genius and the rest of their stuff is total rubbish! I quite liked 10cc at that time though they sound dated now, one group that turned out classy, clever tunes that stand the test of time are Steely Dan.
Just listened to Tom Waits' song Jersey Girl, a perfect love song, saw him described as a pint of Guinness in a Bud Lite world.
Queen are the only four-man band in British history in which every member wrote a number one hit single.
Compare the best tracks. What do The Beatles have that can match Bohemian Rhapsody? We Will Rock You and We Are The Champions are sporting anthems.
I'm not saying The Beatles are bad, I rather like their music. But it's not in the same league as Queen.
I also prefer Got My Mind Set On You by George Harrison to Imagine.
All a matter of opinion!
I think Bohemian Rhapsody is a work of genius and the rest of their stuff is total rubbish! I quite liked 10cc at that time though they sound dated now, one group that turned out classy, clever tunes that stand the test of time are Steely Dan.
Just listened to Tom Waits' song Jersey Girl, a perfect love song, saw him described as a pint of Guinness in a Bud Lite world.
What I don't get about old Corbyn is why he spends his limited political capital on UND. At the end of the day, we won't have a nuclear war any time soon, so scrapping it makes sod all difference to the creation of a new socialist dawn in Britain. He be better putting his efforts into climate change or renationalisation or something like that.
I grew up with Bowie, and Ziggy, he was a part of my university days,and will be sadly missed. RIP
In 2012 I was a volunteer Gamesmaker at the Olympics and was stationed in a control room overlooking the Podium, The Bowie classic, Heroes was played at every medal presentation, after watching about 100 presentations, this classic lost some of its appeal.
My Daughter always loved the Bowie film Labyrinth, and knew every word of it. I recently played the film for my Grand daughters, and they were equally entranced.
@Markfergusonuk: 1 - There are no NE MPs in th shad cab now 2 - Labour doesn’t have many lawyer MPs left 3 - This means the reshuffle has started again
I quite like Bowie: I saw him play live more than one (Brixton Academy comes to mind) and when he hit the peaks, he was very good. The Berlin-era work for example. But there was an awful lot, perhaps disproportionate amount, of meh. On any rational judgement, the rush to put him in the Pantheon is premature: time changes views and allows distance (look at all the great Victorian novelists who were applauded in their time...). I do think that this acclamation at least partially reflects our own views of youth and mortality.
So I am as one with Richard Nabavi, ignoring his judiciary-eque, "tell me about Paul Gascoigne..." moment.
'How it [the EU] will change and whether such changes will be in the UK's interest we cannot know'
On the contrary we have a very good idea of the likely direction of change, which has been laid out in numerous remarks, speeches and also publications by various people within and connected to the EU centre.
And such changes can only be considered 'in the UK's interest' if you take the view that those interests are well served by the UK shedding more and more control over its economy, legal, judicial, social and even defence systems to a supranational authority. That is a perfectly respectable opinion, but not one which most British voters would share I think.
Wonder if anti-JC team has "grid" of resignations like Damian McBride talked about in PB/Polling Matters Podcast www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/arch…
Welcome to PB. One thing very noticeable from that era is the number of covers, and very close to each other. The same songs pop up again and again, it takes a bit of digging to see who wrote / charted first.
What I don't get about old Corbyn is why he spends his limited political capital on UND. At the end of the day, we won't have a nuclear war any time soon, so scrapping it makes sod all difference to the creation of a new socialist dawn in Britain. He be better putting his efforts into climate change or renationalisation or something like that.
A curious choice indeed. I'm left to conclude either he doesn't think political capital is finite, or it is just something he cares so much about, as a symbol or in itself, that he will go for it even though it has limited appeal as a core issue.
Just catching up: on the composers issue there is a story about Bach which I would like to believe is true.
Some years ago NASA were preparing a very long distance space probe and, in case it was picked up by alien life forms, included in it various items which were designed to show what human civilisation was about and what it had achieved. There was much discussion as to what should be included and one of the team suggested digital recordings of some of Bach's best works. The old team leader vetoed the idea saying, "We don't want to show off."
On the EU discussion, it is a shame that a very valid point was lost amongst personal insults and whether Turkey will ever join the EU. A vote to remain is not a vote for the status quo. As anyone who even vaguely follows what is going on will have realised is that the EU is going to change in the near future. How it will change and whether such changes will be in the UK's interest we cannot know. At least we cannot know with anymore certainty that what leaving would mean.
Remain and Leave both involve taking a leap into the unknown.
Absolutely right. But unless Leave make that point clearly - that Remain is not a vote for the status quo but a vote for further integration in an institution where we are regularly - and will continue to be - outvoted, even on matters of vital national interest - it will look as if Leave is the step into the dark and Remain the vote for things as they are now.
And if that is how the referendum is perceived, Remain will win, probably comfortably.
@JoeChurcher: Breaking: Jeremy Corbyn to avoid confrontation with MPs by not addressing tonight's Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) meetng.
He isn't interested in the PLP - he only represents (and leads) the membership who gave him his massive swinging mandate.
I do wonder whether Frank Field was onto something when he suggested letting Corbyn be leader of the wider party and for MPs to elect someone to actually lead them as a parliamentary force.
Corbyn could then swan around all his hard left groups feeling smug - and the rest of us could get on with the real world
Comments
On topic, I'm not sure about NPXMPX2's 5-10% Lab voters voting out to get rid of Cam. A moment's contemplation of the waiting candidates might deter them. As for Cam's successor, ideally I would like it to be Cam. If not him, then I am stuck a bit. We have gone over the various benefits or otherwise of the contenders, and I will have to hope for a known unknown to emerge.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/david-bowie-dead-radio-presenter-7155270
Why things might be considered good is a more interesting question than why they are bad. (Speaking of overall musical types. Of course there are obviously crap individual works and artists.)
You'll probably have to wait until Sunday for it.
The only people who call him miserable are those who miss the wit and humour of his work. He is also a wonderful poet.
No overtime, just part of the job.
In places like Germany with recent history of racist groups causing trouble, it could be very toxic indeed. Remember the Rotherham issue was mentioned a decade ago, but dismissed by everyone because it was Nick Griffin that said it.
https://youtu.be/cQCQRLA05AA
Very sensible if he was. And he sold his back catalogue to a fund IIRC. No standard bearer for some trying to make a political point.
Queen are the only four-man band in British history in which every member wrote a number one hit single.
Compare the best tracks. What do The Beatles have that can match Bohemian Rhapsody? We Will Rock You and We Are The Champions are sporting anthems.
I'm not saying The Beatles are bad, I rather like their music. But it's not in the same league as Queen.
I also prefer Got My Mind Set On You by George Harrison to Imagine.
I like both Bowie - RIP - and Bach. Bach wrote some of the sublimest music there is. Playing his piano music (though he wrote for the harpsichord, of course) is one of the great pleasures of life.
Bowie was the soundtrack to my growing up years. I remember seeing Roeg's "The Man who Fell to Earth" at the late night film club in Bristol.... Happy days.
And Bohemian Rhapsody is a great song.
P.S. Mawkish: an emotionally sad song that doesn't personally click with you!!
Maybe he'll announce next week that David Bowie is going to the EU summit!
"laugh we nearly shat"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZEEgIti8sM
It happens within a few bars. Can't stand it. I physically want to get away from it.
No amount of telling me that I'm missing something, or a philistine is going to browbeat me into liking it.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/01/11/calculating_democrats_chances_of_regaining_the_senate.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/corbyns-reshuffle-shambles-have-made-divisions-in-labour-even-worse-a6804991.html
There's a guy who knows his Bach.
@Maomentum_: Pleased the reshuffle back up and running after well deserved break.
I can't listen to it now without it bringing me straight back to that time.
@DPJHodges: With Catherine McKinnell's resignation Labour's reshuffle has now officially entered its second week.
Bowie was equally a talismanic figure. Apparently U2 wrote their great anthem One Love at Bowie's studio in Berlin, under the influence of Bowie. Transformer- Lou Read's great album was a collaboration with Bowie. Under Pressure- the collaboration with Queen was superb.
That is why people like Bowie and Lennon are so utterly unique- and why they are set apart from the rest.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35281435
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnHmskwqCCQ
Songs that tell stories are my favourite. Josh Ritter https://youtu.be/ZsGXWTJ-r_c
Let's face it, almost all pop icons have an army of real musicians and technical wizards behind them to take their paltry tinkerings, and make something slightly more tuneful of them, while the "artist" gets on with the real business of prancing round the stage in outlandish gear. The noise is really just an accompaniment to this vulgar display...
Whereas Bach, virtually unknown beyond a 30-mile radius in his own lifetime, gazed upon the wonder of Nature, committed his thoughts to paper, and simply offered it all up to his God...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1nyzGR3tUE
I haven't heard much of his stuff (I own none), it didn't strike me as anything special. I have seen a lot of pictures of David Bowie looking frankly extraordinarily weird and even creepy, that's about all I can think of to say about him.
Radio 5 this morning was more or less entirely devoted to him, even though there would appear to be any number of far more important issues they should have been reporting on. I can only assume the entire editorial and production team are 50-somethings like Nicky Campbell, who was practically crying on air, the whole thing was borderline embarrassing to be honest.
Meanwhile the Shadow attorney general resigns. I imagine she was really "a Tory" or something so it's actually A Good Thing for Corbyn...
Late May?
But I take your point- I have a visceral loathing of opera and musicals. The noise is akin to someone scratching a blackboard.
I was dragged around musicals as a kid- Camelot, the King and I, West Side Story. Torture. I am hoping that operation Yew Tree opens up its definition of child abuse because I would certainly report my mother for extreme child cruelty and abuse for inflicting those horrendous experiences on me. I am still scarred and suffer from musical PTSD.
So I am as one with Richard Nabavi, ignoring his judiciary-eque, "tell me about Paul Gascoigne..." moment.
It is frankly ridiculous at this stage. I would suspect you're right about the demographic of those in charge being the dominating factor. This was pretty clear when he got all that coverage for a boring song releasae a couple of years back and it ended up plastered over the rolling news. Most people are likely to have a very vague knowledge about who he even is, if they recognise the name at all.
I like Sugababes during the Hole In The Head phase/Three album. Some great tunes and witty lyrics.
Some years ago NASA were preparing a very long distance space probe and, in case it was picked up by alien life forms, included in it various items which were designed to show what human civilisation was about and what it had achieved. There was much discussion as to what should be included and one of the team suggested digital recordings of some of Bach's best works. The old team leader vetoed the idea saying, "We don't want to show off."
On the EU discussion, it is a shame that a very valid point was lost amongst personal insults and whether Turkey will ever join the EU. A vote to remain is not a vote for the status quo. As anyone who even vaguely follows what is going on will have realised is that the EU is going to change in the near future. How it will change and whether such changes will be in the UK's interest we cannot know. At least we cannot know with anymore certainty that what leaving would mean.
Remain and Leave both involve taking a leap into the unknown.
I think Bohemian Rhapsody is a work of genius and the rest of their stuff is total rubbish! I quite liked 10cc at that time though they sound dated now, one group that turned out classy, clever tunes that stand the test of time are Steely Dan.
Just listened to Tom Waits' song Jersey Girl, a perfect love song, saw him described as a pint of Guinness in a Bud Lite world.
FFS!
RIP
In 2012 I was a volunteer Gamesmaker at the Olympics and was stationed in a control room overlooking the Podium, The Bowie classic, Heroes was played at every medal presentation, after watching about 100 presentations, this classic lost some of its appeal.
My Daughter always loved the Bowie film Labyrinth, and knew every word of it. I recently played the film for my Grand daughters, and they were equally entranced.
2 - Labour doesn’t have many lawyer MPs left
3 - This means the reshuffle has started again
Covers which are better than originals are very rare. I think Always On My Mind by the Pet Shop Boys is the only one that springs to mind.
Mr. England, quite. Just a matter of opinion.
Mr. Llama, I heard the same story, only it was Mozart they didn't want to brag about.
http://youtu.be/aztY_fpjJeQ
On the contrary we have a very good idea of the likely direction of change, which has been laid out in numerous remarks, speeches and also publications by various people within and connected to the EU centre.
And such changes can only be considered 'in the UK's interest' if you take the view that those interests are well served by the UK shedding more and more control over its economy, legal, judicial, social and even defence systems to a supranational authority. That is a perfectly respectable opinion, but not one which most British voters would share I think.
Wonder if anti-JC team has "grid" of resignations like Damian McBride talked about in PB/Polling Matters Podcast www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/arch…
And if that is how the referendum is perceived, Remain will win, probably comfortably.
I do wonder whether Frank Field was onto something when he suggested letting Corbyn be leader of the wider party and for MPs to elect someone to actually lead them as a parliamentary force.
Corbyn could then swan around all his hard left groups feeling smug - and the rest of us could get on with the real world
Could one resignation a week be the new anti-Corbyn strategy?
It is hard to express the contempt I have for that post.
No cover can compare to the original. Hoffs never did better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSoOFn3wQV4
Or were you being ironic and I'm just too thick to get it?