Xref: utzoo alt.rock-n-roll:2785 rec.music.misc:38992 news.groups:16250 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!wuarchive!psuvax1!psuvm!cunyvm!maine.bitnet!tar From: TAR@MAINE.BITNET (Thom Rounds) Newsgroups: alt.rock-n-roll,rec.music.misc,news.groups Subject: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION: rec.music.pfloyd Message-ID: Date: 9 Jan 90 02:15:25 GMT References: <9504@hoptoad.uucp> <9529@hoptoad.uucp> Lines: 72 In article <9529@hoptoad.uucp>, tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney) says: > >In article TAR@MAINE.BITNET (Thom Rounds) : >writes >> Okay, point taken. Now then, do you suggest we remove rec.music.gdead, >and >>rec.music.gaffa? They are the same kinds of newgroup that I've been g >campaignin >>for. And if you read through them, there is plenty of criticism, constructive >>and otherwise. > >Baloney. I also very much like Kate Bush's music. I eventually >dropped out of rec.music.gaffa beacuse it was dominated by worshipful >pinheads who took any criticism of any aspect of her performances as a >personal affront deserving of multi-hundred-line personal flames. In >the end, there was nothing of criticism in it at all, only reams of >trivia and minutiae of interest only to the quasi-religious. > We are Pink Floyd fans, not Kate Bush fans. Extended listening to Pink Floyd tends to broaden the mind. I'm not saying *only* Pink Floyd has the mind- opening effect, in case anyone wishes to flame me. I would like to suggest that you go through any Pink Floyd discussions in other groups. There is alot of open opinions, none of them all positive or all negative. The only thing that would be lost in rec.music.pfloyd is discussions about other bands. However, I am quite sure that other bands *would* be brought up as cross-references. Very few 'pin-heads' listen to Pink Floyd because they can't comprehend it. Almost all of the Pink Floyd listeners that I know on this planet have their reserv- ations about Floyd or any of it's performers. I see no 'worship'. >>Why would rec.music.pfloyd be different? > >I very much doubt that it would be any different. It would be a fan >club, and would be dominated by the same all-supportive social dynamic. > I disagree, for the reasons I stated above. >>>I would, however, support the creation of a "rec.music.psychedelic". I >>>imagine that Pink Floyd would be one of the most enduring subjects in >>>such a group, but its charter would be appropriately broad-based. >>> >> I would say that Pink Floyd ended it's psychedelisism the minute Syd t >Barre >>sent his brain off into the land of permanent acid trips. Floyd is no longer >a >>psychedelic band, and I'd say they stopped that beginning in Meddle, and to a >>screeching halt in Dark Side of the Moon, so I think it's safe to say Pink >>Floyd stopped being a band of psychedelics very early in their collective >>carreers. > >No, they became *mature* psychedelics rather than the doodlers of >occasional interest that they had been before Meddle. I certainly see >a psychedelic aesthetic in works like DARK SIDE OF THE MOON, WISH YOU >WERE HERE, and THE WALL. But for purposes of discusion of >rec.music.pfloyd, that's really neither here nor there, so I won't >develop the idea at length. > Agreed. That argument can wait for rec.music.pfloyd's creation. If it isn't created, the argument can manifest itself in alt.rock-n-roll or rec.music.misc. >And by the way, Barrett is generally believed to have fried his brain >on mandies (Mandrax, a CNS depressant known in the USA as "quaaludes") >rather than on LSD. I couldn't tell you. I wasn't a complete human at the time. >-- >Tim Maroney, Mac Software Consultant, sun!hoptoad!tim, tim@toad.com > >These are not my opinions, those of my ex-employers, my old schools, my >relatives, my friends, or really any rational person whatsoever. --Thom Rounds