|
|
|
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
 Post subject: Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2005 7:16 pm 
Yeah, that seemed out of left field. Didn't see it coming. JD _________________ "Well, hopefully that's our job, to strap rockets onto everything." - Adam Savage, Mythbusters |
|
|
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 | Posts: 3655 | Location: Waterloo, Tejas
|
|
    |
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:08 am
i think it was a follow-up to what bigideas was saying. it's a good question to ask, but somehow i doubt it would make the letters to the editor page. i think the important point here is, likely none of us know eisley's political stance on much at all. to infer any of that based on religion is foolish. and that is what makes that part of his review so irrelevant. _________________ hello. |
|
|
Joined: 23 Aug 2003 | Posts: 5978 | Location: Austin, Texas
|
|
 |
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:54 am
Haven't all of the Eisley crew been careful not to show their political leanings? I mean...since it has little to do with music. Just don't tell the DNC that...   _________________ Scriptozoology, a screenwriting blog .. Facebook |
|
|
Joined: 04 Mar 2004 | Posts: 11753 | Location: Toledo, OR
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:23 am
rolling stone is the aging hipster that stopped knowing what was good in the early 80s. i take nothing they say very seriously. and throwing it back to that woman who reviewed the Marvy Things EP... i still want my frickin unicorn. _________________ knives don't have your back. |
|
|
Joined: 07 Jun 2003 | Posts: 980 | Location: Los Angeles
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 7:29 am
shawn wrote: robbie wrote: p.s. I don't think Rolling Stone has ever claimed to be a magazine for the "little guy"... it's a big magazine for the masses, that group that is larger than us, remember? Don't fault them for not covering someone like the Unicorns, or the Robot Ate Me... it's not in their scope to cover that... that's what the smaller magazines are for. Robbie! Robbie, Robbie, Robbie. Hahahaha! There was no reason for repeating your name. I just thought it sounded good out loud (if not on paper, or, in this case, screen). In regards to the big boys covering the "little guys": haven't you noticed? Modest Mouse? Bright Eyes? Death Cab For Cutie? The Shins? These "little guys" are everywhere now. Indie rock has become the new big thing. Not that that's a bad thing! Heaven forbid should the mass listen to good music. But the bands I have in mind, including The Unicorns, aren't exactly unheard of. They're huge in the indie scene, as were the previously mentioned bands once. They're the "next big thing" (like Eisley!!!!!!!) and you'd think any magazine worth their weight in subscribers would want to be the "first ones there." But, what do I know? I've never run a magazine (nor do I intend to!!). It's true that some of those bands are getting coverage now, but those are the biggest and most popular of the indie bands and the long-time music business formula has been: when the mainstream becomes too saturated with the same sound skim from the top of the underground pool. Remember, good music is subjective... some people believe Kelly Clarkson to be good music and who are we to tell them that they are wrong. You think Bright Eyes is a great artist while I think conor oberst is one of the most overrated songwriters getting hype now (sorry, rant moment over... that guy is awful though ), it's a sound that we can't even agree with here in the "underground" so obviously things are up for much interpretation when it's exposed to the strange world of pop and the less musically active masses. There's a reason that there are more "indie" magazines and they have less distribution... because we aren't as many as the pop crowd, which should say something about society, but it doesn't... at all... are we smarter? no. are they sheep? not necessarily... we all just have different tastes, but we're just more elitist in our attitudes than the pop crowd is usually, there is no "right" kind of music or a way it's "supposed" to be done or talked about. Good, popular, "next big thing" are all relative to the person.
|
|
|
Joined: 17 Jun 2004 | Posts: 2249 | Location: Kansas City, MO
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 9:24 am
another reason indie artists are getting more publicity is because of the internet. if there was no internet i would probably never heard of the Shins or any number of other artists. _________________ I am Torgo. I take care of the place while the Master is away. |
|
|
Joined: 05 Nov 2002 | Posts: 6830 | Location: Gilmer, Tejas
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 9:30 am
pardon me if someone already said something similar...i didn't read every post. 
the way i see it...the guy OBVIOUSLY didn't spend that much time writing the review, seeing as it is filled with messups...he probably didn't spend much time researching eisley either. He probably came to work, (listening to low quality music, something he's probably into) and his boss or whatever was like...here write a review on this CD, then he spilled coffee on his shirt, putting him in a very bad mood. He aquires a headache, and pops what he thinks is aspirin, but instead is a very mind altering drug, changing his perception of reality. Then he turns on the CD, skips around a little, notices it's pretty, lots of vocals, looks up some lyrics, notices there are a few shall's, looks at the CD, finds out they are all Christian, and decides to end his research there. He's like"...hmmm, they are Christian, the President is supposedly Christian too...hmmm, i see the connection,..." you see where Im going...the moral is...don't write reviews while you are high. |
|
|
Joined: 31 May 2004 | Posts: 2018 | Location: Sacramento, CA
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 3:42 pm
Hey ya'll. The reviewer's name is Christian Hoard. He used to write for The Michigan Daily at the University of Michigan. I happen to know him, because we also used to work for the same law firm. Here's his email address if you want to give him a piece of your mind: cdhoard@umich.edu The W. reference is an obvious slight. He's a rabid Democrat, and totally stereotyped the band because they're Christians from Texas. Damn shame, because he's an alright guy. |
|
|
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 | Posts: 17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 3:58 pm
It doesn't take a democrat to dislike W. JD _________________ "Well, hopefully that's our job, to strap rockets onto everything." - Adam Savage, Mythbusters |
|
|
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 | Posts: 3655 | Location: Waterloo, Tejas
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:47 pm
I didn't know so many of you knew the president personally. And is shall really that archaic of a word to even need mentioning? _________________ Scriptozoology, a screenwriting blog .. Facebook |
|
|
Joined: 04 Mar 2004 | Posts: 11753 | Location: Toledo, OR
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:52 pm
boone wrote: I didn't know so many of you knew the president personally. Sadly, that doesn't quite seem necessary in determining his character... (Oops, end of political discussion!  )
|
|
|
Joined: 21 Nov 2003 | Posts: 2290 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:53 pm
It's a nice time to end it, yes. _________________ Scriptozoology, a screenwriting blog .. Facebook |
|
|
Joined: 04 Mar 2004 | Posts: 11753 | Location: Toledo, OR
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:57 pm
(Not at all trying to get in the last word, but just to clarify a bit, boone--I come from a very conservative Christian background, so I'm not just a liberal Bush-basher making a comment like that, heh.) |
|
|
Joined: 21 Nov 2003 | Posts: 2290 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 7:00 pm
I guess I'm not sure what you meant. I think everybody's trying to be subtle and invoke the wrath of gregorium, so I don't really know what some of them mean. _________________ Scriptozoology, a screenwriting blog .. Facebook |
|
|
Joined: 04 Mar 2004 | Posts: 11753 | Location: Toledo, OR
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 7:09 pm
I was actually trying to be subtle in order not to get myself in trouble. To be blunt, just to clear up what I believe, Dubya has proven to be little more than a greedy, incompetent leader who has contributed to the decline of our country's economic well-being, the stripping of many of the freedoms he claims to be defending, and the senseless deaths of many young Americans, as well as foreigners, all for the benefit of himself and his cronies. Sorry if that's a bit too straight-forward of a statement for this forum, gRegor... Feel free to censor me, really. And sorry, boone--I'm finished now. I just thought I'd try to clear it up. 
|
|
|
Joined: 21 Nov 2003 | Posts: 2290 |
Last edited by bgburroughs on Sun Feb 13, 2005 7:10 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Laughing City Forum Index -> eisleyBlog -> Rollingstone review...
Page 6 of 7 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
|
|
All times are GMT - 12 Hours
|
|
