Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!pesnta!amd!amdcad!decwrl!glacier!oliveb!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!drillsys!gatech!akgua!usl!jla
From: jla@usl.UUCP (Joe Arceneaux)
Newsgroups: net.music,net.movies
Subject: Re:  The Wall
Message-ID: <721@usl.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Mar-86 13:31:16 EST
Article-I.D.: usl.721
Posted: Mon Mar 24 13:31:16 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 31-Mar-86 09:33:54 EST
References: <126@itcatl.UUCP> <1271@mit-eddie.MIT.EDU>
Reply-To: jla@usl.UUCP (Joe Arceneaux)
Organization: Center for Advanced Clown Studies
Lines: 33
Xref: lsuc net.music:1243 net.movies:3656

In article <1271@mit-eddie.MIT.EDU> zzz@mit-eddie.MIT.EDU (Mike Konopik) writes:
> 
> By the way, Wall fans, I've listened to a tape of a BBC broadcast with an
> interview of Roger Waters with respect to The Wall.  His explanation of
> what it means is WAY off mark from what most people I've discussed it with
> imagine.  Sorry that I can't remember many of the details, but I do remember
>	...
> Somehow his explanation doesn't seem to completely cover all the subtle
> parts of the album/movie.  Either that, or he was intentionally trying to
> make the audience think there was some obscure meaning beyond the mundanity
> of the real meaning.
> You figure it out!
> -- 
> 
> 				-Mike
> 
> genrad!mit-eddie!zzz  (UUCP)    ZZZ%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC  (ARPA)

Seems to me there have been so many instances of artists claiming that their
work means something completely different than what it seems to obviously
communicate, that I tend to disbelieve the artist in such situations.  I
listened to the albumn A LOT when it first came out, and when I finally saw
the film, it seemed to agree completely with the record in as far as its
"message".  So I find it hard to believe that it was intended to represent
something else altogether.

Of course, I also remember hearing that Roger Waters and Alan Parker disagreed
quite a bit on the film...
-- 
				Joseph Arceneaux
				Lafayette, LA

				{akgua, ut-sally}!usl!jla