> The dub connection was, at least in the early period, tenuous at best.
>
Well, to some extent but check out David Toop's "Rap Attack" for a counter-argument. Besides' Flash's own Caribbean connection, note that a lot of Jamaican hits in the '70's were made from another popular reggae song
being played in the background that a new singer (toaster) would free-associate over- basically, the same thing that rappers were all doing in the beginning (and now).
Best,
Jason
- --
Perfect Sound Forever
online music magazine
perfect-sound@furious.com
http://www.furious.com/perfect
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 16:20:58 -0600
From: William Crump <crumpw@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Record Store (mis)filing systems (was Pierre Henry)
Amoeba's categorizations seem a little more thought out to me, whereas
Rasputin's sound like some A&R guy made them up. I like that Amoeba
takes the time to distinguish between in their SF Japanese section
between J-Pop and Japanese noise (Boredoms, Ruins). Wouldn't want to get
those mixed up.
Speaking of the Bay Area, a pal in Nottingham England of all places
turned me on to the Aquarius Records mailing list and website. Judging
from their biweekly "New Arrivals" e-newsletter, the folks there spend
an incredible amount of time listening carefully and writing
decently-thought-out reviews for the education of their customers, a
true public service. Their selection looks almost as eclectic as
Amoeba's and best of all, they do mail order, which Amoeba doesn't. I've
already started ordering from them since moving back to Missippistan
from Californabad. They're at www.aquariusrecords.org, and highly
recommended.
William Crump
Chris Selvig wrote:
> The worst offender is the Rasputin's chain in the Bay Area, which
> has separate sections for Rock, Indie Rock, Punk Rock, Oldies, Prog
> Rock (that's where they keep Fushitsusha)... quite maddening. Amoeba
> is almost as bad, but it is still a great record store.
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 14:26:16 -0800
From: "Patrice L. Roussel" <proussel@ichips.intel.com>
Subject: Re: Record Store (mis)filing systems (was Pierre Henry)
On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 16:20:58 -0600 William Crump wrote:
>
> Amoeba's categorizations seem a little more thought out to me, whereas
> Rasputin's sound like some A&R guy made them up. I like that Amoeba
> takes the time to distinguish between in their SF Japanese section
> between J-Pop and Japanese noise (Boredoms, Ruins). Wouldn't want to get
> those mixed up.
One (in)famous record store in Paris (Puces, Clignancourt, if I remember well)
used to put records in alphabetical order... by first name first! One of the
few advantages of this system was that if you were looking for MUSIQUE
CONCRETE you could go right away to the "Pierre" section :-).
Patrice.
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 17:46:51 -0600
From: Joseph Zitt <jzitt@metatronpress.com>
Subject: Re: How Come?
On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 12:45:54PM -0800, john schuller wrote:
> I am not complaining about others political correctness.
Well, yes, you were.
> I think it is only
> right to look past things such as Gender/Race.
Stated in the abstract, perhaps, which shows a bug in the
generalization.
> I think this is important in
> all walks of life. Whether it is hiring for a job, who you fall in love
> with, who you hang out with, civil rights - whatever.
The examples you choose are revealing. In each of these cases, it
could be argued that you've chosen situations where somebody might
rule someone out of a position/situation because of that other
person's group identity.
But what could be wrong with someone choosing to opt in to a group of
people of similar backgrounds, influences, and experiences?
> Please tell me where I
> am being insensitive?
See above.
> The only areas I see for use of prejudice is in
> whether that person is qualified for whatever.
Yet you insist that location is a valid parameter for prejudice. Why?
> Of course if the person is
> someone you could not love (incompatible, they are an idiot etc.) you will
> show prejudice against that and therefore not choose them. Would you agree
> that it is important to look past things you are born as?
Would you agree that it helps to consider common backgrounds,
influences, and experiences?
> >Who do you imagine is being "segregated" here? Aggregated, perhaps,
> >though I don't see how you could complain about that.
>
> I think that further division is wrong. Whether Segregated, aggregated,
> whatever. Wouldn't you?
See above.
> >Again, not exactly true. The huge majority of people never change
> >religion from the one that they were born into.
>
> The word "change" is the crucial one. Are you born knowing Jesus? As long as
> you know how to make a decision you can change your mind about something
> like a religion. Of course I know there are circumstances where you cannot
> "announce" that you do not believe a certain way, but that does not make a
> final end all decision in one's mind does it?
Er, what? (I find your quick reference to being "born knowing Jesus"
revealing. As a strongly-identified Jew, I probably would not have
made that reference.)
> >To avoid hitting the Godwin Point of bringing up the Nazis
> >immediately, do you imagine that the conflicts in the Balkan, Ireland,
> >etc, are due to "lifestyle choices"?
> >
> >(One usually sees that phrase used to denigrate gay identity. It is
> >disappointing to see it further misused here.)
>
> How is using "lifestyle choice" misused when talking about a religion?
How is it appropriate?
> I do not believe that Sexual Preference is a lifestyle choice. If it is,
> where is the instruction manual?
And yet you believe that it is so for religion? That belief would
show, at best, a shallow understanding of what religion is and means
for its adherents.
> > > It really doen not matter to me if the person
> > > I am listening to is whatever.
> >
> >So why dost thou protest so much? Does it bother you that the person
> >chooses to identify him/herself as a member of a group?
>
> No, I think if someone wants to identify with a certain group they should.
> But I also think there is something weird/wrong about Malt Liquor
> advertising targeted towards African-Americans.
Well, I find something wrong with most advertising.
> >And, indeed, you are. The situation that you are imagining is one in
> >which you might be *forced* in some unsaid way to buy music based on
> >some aspect of a musician's identity. Can you point to any situation
> >whatsoever in which this is the case? Can you point to any situation
> >in which a musician was forced in any way to identify him/herself in
> >such a way?
>
> Of course not. I don't believe that I am ever forced to buy music. I choose
> to buy music. Do you think that one should buy music because it is made by a
> woman? Or a man? Or because it is good music?
The problem is your use of "should". I enjoy being able to find music
that comes from people of similar backgrounds, influences, and
experience, and find that I tend to enjoy that music. Why does this
bother you?
> >Why does it bother you that some musicians choose to identify
> >themselves as members of groups? What is conceivably lost to anyone by
> >their making that choice?
>
> Well, if further separation by races or gender is something that someone
> wants- nothing. Otherwise, I say lets all be cool and hang at each others
> parties.
And, of course, nothing prevents a man from buying "women's music", or
a Christian from buying anything on the Radical Jewish Culture series.
> > > Otherwise it is just as sad
> > > as "Buy this Jennifer Lopez album! She is HOT!". A bunch of Minstrel
> >show
> > > shit.
> >
> >The jaw simply drops at such a characterization.
>
> Why? To me a beauty show is just as repulsive and sick.
You find the existence of Jewish music repulsive and sick?
> I am born this way
> so let me entertain the masses, because this is my option right now. It is
> all sick.
But I am in no sense obligated to buy music presented in this way, any
more than you are obligated to buy Jewish music.
> > > > > And I will go ahead and go on the record about the Japanese
> >series---It
> > > >is
> > > > > cool with me. Just because it gives a specific location of the
> >planet.
> > > >
> > > >So why the prejudice in favor of location-based organization? Is that
> >in
> > > >any sense more interesting or worthwhile than music by members of a
> > > >culture who happen to be geographically dispersed? If so, why?
> > >
> > > Location is just location.
> >
> >And therefore what?
> >
>
> And therefore a location on the planet. Nothing more, nothing less...
And how does this differ from the aggregations of music that you think
