Teenage Wildlife

IMPORTANT: Use your registry nickname as your username when logging in to Conversation Piece!


BowieTalk
   >> Views and Questions
Thread views: 3335 *Threaded Mode

Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | (show all)
diamondogz74
(acolyte)
08/18/04 06:36 AM
Wagner. new [re: JonnyManic]  

In reply to:

worrying. I mean, Wagner's music or Reifenstahl's films shouldn't be linked to their fascism because they have their own intrinsic merit


Well said Mr Manic, but your words although true, do not hold water from you, you have called me a fascist many times, because of my Love of Wagners music.

Make your mind up

You cannot have it both ways.

Post 1

Remember me
I've already forgotten you.


Rheingold

London Bye Ta-Ta...

RabbitFighter
(acolyte)
08/18/04 06:50 AM
Re: Wagner. new [re: diamondogz74]  

Yuo see Dogz, the fact that you love Wagner is just a plus. We drew the conclusions about your political beliefs and dodgt state of mind when you cherished this board with your rants about British superiority and eugenics.
By the way, i'm starting to see why you prefer to spend holidays outside Europe. I bet it reminds you of the good ol' days of colonialism when lesser races bowed down before the might of British empire.
Who know's, maybe you could find your very own manservant so you could explore your repressed homosexuality togther.

Note to self: The last sentence was a low blow even by my standards. Do not mock others' sexual orientations, even though it's so damn easy...

You're gonna make me feel so cold

diamondogz74
(acolyte)
08/18/04 07:52 AM
Standards. new [re: RabbitFighter]  

In reply to:

even by my standards.


Firstly you could have PM me on this matter, but you prefer to show off, as per usual

You have Standards!, that does amaze me, as far as I can see, all your standards are rock bottom.

Thank the Lord my standards actually mean something, and I stand by them thru thick and thin , I do not like you, swim with the tide.

Your conclusions on me, really are very funny

As I've said, I would only leave Bowie if ? I found out he was a faker, as for any crimes he may commit ? that bothers me not, the music is the music, whatever may become of him in the future.

Post 3

Remember me
I've already forgotten you.


Rheingold

London Bye Ta-Ta...

RabbitFighter
(acolyte)
08/18/04 09:01 AM
Re: Standards. new [re: diamondogz74]  

Make up your mind already? First you accuse me of hating Earthling just because I wanted to stir up things and disagree with others and now i'm going with the tide.
Besides, even if I was doing that I can honestly say that I am the tide! I realized what a pitiful excuse for a human being you are much earlier than most of the good folks here. You see, all these people hate you just because Strawie, White Prism and myself tell them to do so.

As for my standards: Yes, I've got a few and more than handful of people here know that i'm really quite a sweet and nice fellow under right circumstances, atleast when i'm sober (it's a miracele that Sugarplumfairy hasn't started to avoid me even though i've passed out on her apartment floor twice).
I'm rambling as usual but the point is, we are a bunch of pretty nice people but prizetwats such as yourself bring out the bad sides lurking in us.

Oh thanks for wasting one of your precious posts on replying here. My job here is done!

You're gonna make me feel so cold

JonnyManic
(stardust savant)
08/18/04 12:03 PM
dolty new [re: RabbitFighter]  

In reply to:

We drew the conclusions about your political beliefs and dodgt state of mind when you cherished this board with your rants about British superiority and eugenics.


That and his rampant racism and islamophobia. I mean, the cunt said this:

"...im i,ve of the mind of simply wiping the entire middle east out,its a shithole on the world and has always been trouble,religion has long since been dismissed as the reasons for their EVIL ways,i say nuke the LOT of them and begone trash of society,i would have no second thoughts at all about wiping them off the face of the earth,wrong is wrong and evil is evil...". Ahem, (sic)!

Bejesus!

Jay, you are a capital ess, another ess I see...

White Prism
(crash course raver)
08/18/04 01:17 PM
Lemme guess, you fucked my mom too new [re: JonnyManic]  

Now for some much needed clarification and convenient compartmentalising of arguments:

In reply to:

Lost Highway/ Rock and Roll part 2


I’m okay with these examples despite the failings of the people behind them. Though I’m not overly familiar with either Blake or Glitter, I’ll assume that their later crimes do not inform an interpretation of their performances. The only difficulty I would have here is openly being a fan – not necessarily because I cannot draw the line between person/artwork, but because other people do have difficulty and the persecution that would entail means I probably wouldn’t have many opportunities to discuss them properly.

However, I apply a different rule when the, say, fascist views of an artist relates directly to the subject matter of their work. For example, if a work is autobiographical, or if it contains material obviously belonging to the views of the author that he/she is intending to disseminate, I believe it becomes very difficult to separate the person from the work, and that in such instances it would definitely be worthwhile looking at some background information of the person to disentangle the messages in the work. If such background can elucidate how to read a passage, then exactly how I evaluate the background determines whether I find the passage agreeable or not. I think all the examples of authorial biography I’ve provided (with the exception of Wagner who I know nothing about and was more of a Dogz dig) have been linked directly to aid a reading of their work. And that’s why I’ve picked the useful religious snippets from Joyce’s bio and dumped the irrelevant parasitic elements of his personality.

In reply to:

Manic quoting me on ‘artists having a role outside work’, or whatever I said


When I said ‘outside’, I didn’t mean on a completely different plane, just simply not a straightforward restating of whatever they make art about. Many artists, in interviews, refuse flatly to engage in analysis of their own work, though it’s still possible to work out some things by who they reference and where they’re coming from. And assuming most people have access to above a single viewpoint of a single artist, it’s just another method of getting loads of ideas flying around.

Also, I do find it amusing that our resident Welsh outspoken leftie’s favourite band (the Manic Street, uh, Preachers) have used many interviews for such means, making them one of the most outspoken leftie bands. Are we to believe this connection is coincidental?

In reply to:

Dara, sports and abstract emotion


Now I said I liked some sports, but still not a bad theory.
No never, no never no more
will I trust the elves of Dunsimore


Claude
(big brother)
08/18/04 03:37 PM
Re: Leaving Bowie new [re: hangontoyourself]  

I was leaving BOWIE during Let's Dance era.


___________________
Claude




Starlite
(stardust savant)
08/18/04 05:32 PM
Re: Admission new [re: poorsoul]  

Okay, I know you said you based your argument on hyperbole and half-baked facts, but I looked it up, and turns out the average age of menarche in the Victorian era was 15. That seems about right.

According to one source, it was 17 in 1780. That I do find surprising, since I'd thought people married pretty early then. But I guess in those times, a girl's first period really did count as the onset of her womanhood, and she'd get married almost straightaway after that.

In reply to:

At any rate, just because people could marry 13-year-olds doesn't mean that the majority necessarily did.


I'm not sure it was allowed to marry 13 year olds, actually. Just that you wouldn't be prosecuted if you had sex with one.

Maybe if I write this now, while drunk, you'll all understand.

SysiyoModerator
(thunder ocean)
08/19/04 04:48 AM
Re: Admission [re: Starlite]  

What is often neglected in history books is that the average age of marriage differed hugely between the lower and upper classes from the late middle ages onwards. The nobility would generally marry at an earlier age than the commoners did. I'd dig the facts and figures up for you, but it's a quite big job since I'm not sure which book they were from.

KArt | Project Michelangelo | LiveJournal

Starlite
(stardust savant)
08/19/04 11:22 AM
Re: Admission [re: Sysiyo]  

True, though as a girl's "purity" became more and more prized as a character trait (ie, from the 1800's on), the lower classes also tended to have sex earlier.

I really only know what I'm talking about in Victorian times, but while the girls of upper standing tended to marry in their very late teens-early twenties and treated sex as the Ultimate Big Deal, the common working women would often lose their virginity far earlier and engage in casual sex in a way more on par with what we consider "normal" behavior today.

So basically, when people rail about the loss of morals and the dissolution of society vis-a-vis sexual behavior, what they're really railing against is the fact that we have recently rejected aristocratic social structures, and are more and more adopting those of lower classes in the past.

Maybe if I write this now, while drunk, you'll all understand.


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | (show all)
*Threaded Mode
Jump to

Teenage Wildlife Davie Bowie | Email Us! Forums powered by WWWThreads v5.1.5perl

Teenage Wildlife Home Page Bowie's music Info on Bowie Other Media Have your say! Search the Site Help me!


Toolbar (Interact)

Etete Systems