huh?

Loog responds well to honesty. To be a drunken, needle-loving, brawling sod is no serious offense, but to try and hide it is.

It's not the druggery that gets me, with folk like Oasis, it's the attitude. One can be too big a fan of oneself.

He a shnook, a chump and a buster, while they live the life of debauched aristocracy.

Fuckin' a.

That's what confused me, because I've never known J.O. to be anything but honest. Plus, I was really trying to understand "declasse", and how it applies to Iggy.

I like the attitude, especially on Oasis' first 2 albums.

I try to be pretty careful about what I read now, as Wilco was almost spoiled for me completely after a couple of interviews I read with Jeff Tweady. He seemed like such a pretentious jagoff and his comments and interpretations of music and movies etc are just completely antithetical to my own. It sucks because Wilco have always been one of my favourite bands and finding out that their main creative force is a fucking moron is just heartbreaking. Now I just don't want to hear from him anymore unless he's singing a song.

Be wary of that kind of interview... there's a definite market for quotes / interviews that cast well-liked people in bad light. Not to be blind about it, but I really would be skeptical. I've read / seen a lot about Tweedy, and nothing backs that up. But if a journalist wanted to get a lot of interest (relatively speaking) without having a great idea or a lucky break, the temptation is certainly there to twist a few comments around. It's happened before.

this sort of thing plagues my reasoning when it comes to rappers.

of course, one person's "pretentious jagoff" (wha?) could very well be another person's hero, which is the case with me and tweedy. i am elated that someone takes the time to talk about the creative process/ideas as much as he does in interviews and by all accounts, he's also one of the more down-to-earth pretentious jagoffs in music today, if not a little imperfect.

KPH

Yeah I understand how that happens sometimes, but what I'm talking about is over the last several years in a number of publications. No one gets burned that many times, so I just find the guy annoying as hell. But to give you a 'for instance', In this one blurb the interviewer asks him about what movies he disliked that year and he says 'Signs' was the worst movie of the year because it was this horrible pro-Christian propaganda piece (or words to that effect). Now I appreciate how people don't like this movie for one reason or another, but it just wasn't a 'Pro-Christian'. It's the most idiotic thing I've ever heard. But then he was a fucking pill-head, so maybe that contributed.

Agreed.

Yeah, in this case (tweedy), it's just a normal, introverted guy who happens to have a lot of attention at the moment. Not everybody handles that perfectly, and it probably takes a lot for him to do as many interviews as he does. We're lucky to have the insight, frankly.

I promise I'm not just taking Tweedy's side for the sake of it but... that movie was kinda Christian. Ok, granted, it was no passion of the christ, but with even a passing ability to read between the lines, it was Faith Faith Faith, all the way. Former preacher, falls out of love w/ the Lord, bad times hit, he finally believes again, things work out great. No? Granted, I didn't storm out in protest or anything, but get a few beers in me and turn on a tape recorder and anything's possible. Like there's no way he could've "saved" his family, turned his life around, etc., if he hadn't gone back to preaching? Eh. I didn't make it, M Night Shyamookalucky or whatever did. But at least give the guy his opinion. Is it the criticism of religion that ruffled your feathers most? Because that doesn't really sound like pretension.

do you really equate drug addiction with a lack of ability to reason or intelligently critique something? 'cause i know this guy sigmund...

KPH

Well, perhaps a person's addiction to known opiate might initiate some poor reasoning abilities and thereby affect other cognitive functions. Or perhaps he's just not very intelligent and sees only everything in a concrete fashion. Or maybe he just doesn't like Mel Gibson, I don't know.

I don't mean to necessarily insult someone you're clearly fond of, but the point of this discussion is: do you find that personality factors influence your appreciation of an artist. I do, I love Wilco, but happen to think that Jeff Tweedy, based on a number of interviews and hearing his opinions on music, movies etc, has somewhat affected my enjoyment of their music.

As most know, and Charli can surely attest, I have had a falling out with Wilco, and much of it has to do with Tweedy's personality. granted, i think that his personality and general asshatedness has MUCH to do with their music taking a turn for the worse, but it is still personality based.

Persoanlity is also why Woodie is my favorite Stone...he keeps the band together. And for that I thank him, whereas most of you are now going "That's why thos fucks are still around"

I'm not going to quibble over subjective interpretations of a movie like 'Signs', but the film, in my opinion, was about belief, not faith in God. Calling it a Christian movie because the protagonist happened to have been a minister is ludicrous. He was in existential crisis after his wife is killed, after the movie's events he comes to see the signs, that it was apparantly destined to happen and stops blaming his God and reacquires his belief system again. The Mel Gibson's character very easily could have been exchanged for any number of religious or philosophical bases where order and destiny prominently make up the system. Belief in something, anything, was the main theme of the movie. And correct me if I'm wrong, isn't M. Night Shyamalan a Hindu?! Why would he make a 'pro-Christian' movie anyway?

And if it matters, but I'm not religious nor do I care if anyone else is. If anything ruffles my feathers (and it shouldn't I realize) are statements or interpretations that seem blatantly concrete, ignorant or shallow.

I see what you mean though. Just seems like an odd thing to fix upon, but one man's trash is another man's treasure I suppose. And it does answer my question nicely.

Loogar - Why can Charli surely attest?

Dumpjack - hey that's cool man. Whatever floats your boat.

KPH

Cos she's a huge Wilco fan, and defender, and we once had a big argument about it back in the CMJ days...we have since made up nicely, but whenever I say anything critical about Wilco, I think about what Jen would think

Cap'n Squirrgle and KPH,

Glad you hear me, no offense was intended to you or any other Wilco fans (as I gather Charli is one too).

Oh none taken. The people I (secretly) hate could get me tarred and feathered in this joint.

Shnook, chump, buster? Based on what? Not that I care in the least, I'm just curious and trying to solve some cognitive dissonance.

I knew you felt this way before, btw, which is why there's no Stooges on the Monger mixes.

It's a different kind of sleaze that I just don't go in for much. I don't see how their music is at all groundbreaking or even very good, and I think his attitude is one of "I got so fucked up blah, blah, blah," whereas Keef just did what he did. He's kind of annoying in Please Kill Me, and even though a lot of thebook is centered around them, all I could think about was "Why am I reading this, I don't care," and the sections about them did little to chang emy mind.