Paul Simon: Genius or Wanker?

Backslapping time. Well done us. We are fantastic.

Paul Simon: Genius or Wanker?

Genius.
35
63%
Wanker.
21
38%
 
Total votes: 56

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23900
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 03 Jul 2007, 17:35

Sneelock wrote:I know he's not the only guy who feels that way. I had a co-worker who, eyeing my Paul Simon tapes, starting laying into me for liking him. it wasn't enough for him to say "I don't like him" he had to tell me how "vile" Simon was and how "vile" I was for liking him.

we got along pretty great but I never played the Paul Simon when he was around.


Back in my musician days, whenever the stiff, punker-than-thou, airless musician types got together, knocking Paul Simon was a national passtime for these folks. His main crime appeared to be the fact that Dylan was better and and Iggy Pop was cooler.

I knew immediately I couldn't stand any of these people. Not one of them had a "The Boxer" in them.
“Remember I have said good things about benevolent despots before.” - Jimbo

Image

User avatar
Velvis
Mellowed down easy
Posts: 15806
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 23:21
Location: on Grand Street, where the neon madmen climb

Postby Velvis » 03 Jul 2007, 17:37

davey the frat boy wrote:
Sneelock wrote:I know he's not the only guy who feels that way. I had a co-worker who, eyeing my Paul Simon tapes, starting laying into me for liking him. it wasn't enough for him to say "I don't like him" he had to tell me how "vile" Simon was and how "vile" I was for liking him.

we got along pretty great but I never played the Paul Simon when he was around.


Back in my musician days, whenever the stiff, punker-than-thou, airless musician types got together, knocking Paul Simon was a national passtime for these folks. His main crime appeared to be the fact that Dylan was better and and Iggy Pop was cooler.

I knew immediately I couldn't stand any of these people. Not one of them had a "The Boxer" in them.


Preach it! Paul Simon, the very litmus test of the poseur!

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 39342
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: HAIL, ATLANTA!

Postby Count Machuki » 03 Jul 2007, 17:38

Buddha-B. Rex wrote:Count, what I'm suggesting is that to slag Paul Simon as a 'cultural imperialist' is bordering on hysterics....blah bliggety blah...You're still my friend though, you silly cunt.


buddha, you daft cunt. if you don't know, i can't tell you.

8-)
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

User avatar
Zeke
Posts: 2969
Joined: 17 Mar 2006, 00:37
Location: A dead in the eyes, soulless robot

Postby Zeke » 03 Jul 2007, 17:41

count machuki wrote:
Peasant of BCB wrote:
Cultural imperialism is the practice of promoting, distinguishing, separating, or artificially injecting the culture or language of one nation into another. It is usually the case that the former is a large, economically or militarily powerful nation and the latter is a smaller, less affluent one. Cultural imperialism can take the form of an active, formal policy or a general attitude. The term is usually used in a pejorative sense, usually in conjunction with a call to reject foreign influence.



While it doesn't fit the definition in a strictly literal sense isn't Rock and Roll in general a form of cultural imperialism? Taking from the blues, gospel and early R&B which all derive from a markedly different (sub) culture than the one they were 'artificially injected into'? Particularly if you look at the adoption of these musics in the UK during the 60s?


Just a thought.


on page 2, i wrote:to address your secondary point, organic trading of influences (elvis, the beatles, yr country example) is NOT cultural imperialism. i object to the unnatural, zombie-like grafting of an indigenous music onto a more dominant musical form.

don't force it, feel it.





Aha. So why is one an "organic trading of influences" and the other an "unnatural, zombie-like grafting"? Is it merely geographical displacement? Or just the fact that you like one and not the other?

:D

Remember, it's a small world these days with political boundaries meaning less and less. Why should a musician who's been exposed to some indigenous music or other not attempt to incorporate what he's heard into his own music? Calling it artificial seems a bit arbitrary. Maybe it works and maybe it doesn't on a case by case basis but just tossing out the label 'cultural imperialism' without actually taking a look at the result seems unfair.


BTW - I could do without Graceland myself. But that's more because it strikes me as dull than anything else.

User avatar
Buddha B-Rex
Posts: 3353
Joined: 01 Mar 2007, 14:57
Location: Down by the river...
Contact:

Postby Buddha B-Rex » 03 Jul 2007, 17:42

Cunt Machuki?
Freak out. Far out.

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 39342
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: HAIL, ATLANTA!

Postby Count Machuki » 03 Jul 2007, 17:42

Buddha-B. Rex wrote:Cunt Machuki?


steady on there, buddha.
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

User avatar
Buddha B-Rex
Posts: 3353
Joined: 01 Mar 2007, 14:57
Location: Down by the river...
Contact:

Postby Buddha B-Rex » 03 Jul 2007, 17:43

Still crazy...after...all...these...years....
Freak out. Far out.

User avatar
Velvis
Mellowed down easy
Posts: 15806
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 23:21
Location: on Grand Street, where the neon madmen climb

Postby Velvis » 03 Jul 2007, 17:43

Peasant of BCB wrote:
count machuki wrote:
Peasant of BCB wrote:
Cultural imperialism is the practice of promoting, distinguishing, separating, or artificially injecting the culture or language of one nation into another. It is usually the case that the former is a large, economically or militarily powerful nation and the latter is a smaller, less affluent one. Cultural imperialism can take the form of an active, formal policy or a general attitude. The term is usually used in a pejorative sense, usually in conjunction with a call to reject foreign influence.



While it doesn't fit the definition in a strictly literal sense isn't Rock and Roll in general a form of cultural imperialism? Taking from the blues, gospel and early R&B which all derive from a markedly different (sub) culture than the one they were 'artificially injected into'? Particularly if you look at the adoption of these musics in the UK during the 60s?


Just a thought.


on page 2, i wrote:to address your secondary point, organic trading of influences (elvis, the beatles, yr country example) is NOT cultural imperialism. i object to the unnatural, zombie-like grafting of an indigenous music onto a more dominant musical form.

don't force it, feel it.





Aha. So why is one an "organic trading of influences" and the other an "unnatural, zombie-like grafting"? Is it merely geographical displacement? Or just the fact that you like one and not the other?

:D

Remember, it's a small world these days with political boundaries meaning less and less. Why should a musician who's been exposed to some indigenous music or other not attempt to incorporate what he's heard into his own music? Calling it artificial seems a bit arbitrary. Maybe it works and maybe it doesn't on a case by case basis but just tossing out the label 'cultural imperialism' without actually taking a look at the result seems unfair.


BTW - I could do without Graceland myself. But that's more because it strikes me as dull than anything else.



That's right! Simon is Jewish, and so is Dylan. We must force them to record only klezmer music, otherwise it's "cultural imperialism".

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23900
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 03 Jul 2007, 17:44

count machuki wrote:
Buddha-B. Rex wrote:Count, what I'm suggesting is that to slag Paul Simon as a 'cultural imperialist' is bordering on hysterics....blah bliggety blah...You're still my friend though, you silly cunt.


buddha, you daft cunt. if you don't know, i can't tell you.

8-)


Quick question...

Would you say that the use of the word "daft" by a guy who lives in Atlanta would be a good example of cultural imperialism? :P

Unless of course the guy is English...in which case - oops!
“Remember I have said good things about benevolent despots before.” - Jimbo

Image

Sneelock

Postby Sneelock » 03 Jul 2007, 17:44

Paul Zollo wrote that great book "songwriters on songwriting" and Simon comes off exceedingly well. I've seen interviews where I really couldn't stand the guy but since Zollo only asks about writing tunes - obviously Simon knows a little something about that.

even on a recent Charlie Rose, when the conversation steered towards process, the guy lit up. when the conversation returned to other things, his pilot light seemed to go out.

the guy has a lot of craft and that's how he approaches it. like a carpenter would approach making a coffee table. I have a lot of respect for carpenters.

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 39342
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: HAIL, ATLANTA!

Postby Count Machuki » 03 Jul 2007, 17:45

davey the frat boy wrote:
count machuki wrote:
Buddha-B. Rex wrote:Count, what I'm suggesting is that to slag Paul Simon as a 'cultural imperialist' is bordering on hysterics....blah bliggety blah...You're still my friend though, you silly cunt.


buddha, you daft cunt. if you don't know, i can't tell you.

8-)


Quick question...

Would you say that the use of the word "daft" by a guy who lives in Atlanta would be a good example of cultural imperialism? :P

Unless of course the guy is English...in which case - oops!


quick answer. no, you mad nutter.
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

Sneelock

Postby Sneelock » 03 Jul 2007, 17:46

Velvis wrote:That's right! Simon is Jewish, and so is Dylan. We must force them to record only klezmer music, otherwise it's "cultural imperialism".


well, Bob got the memo!

User avatar
Buddha B-Rex
Posts: 3353
Joined: 01 Mar 2007, 14:57
Location: Down by the river...
Contact:

Postby Buddha B-Rex » 03 Jul 2007, 17:47

Velvis wrote:That's right! Simon is Jewish, and so is Dylan. We must force them to record only klezmer music, otherwise it's "cultural imperialism".


That's right! An album of Moesha Oishe songs, sung as duets by Dylan and Simon, immediately!

davey the frat boy wrote:Quick question...

Would you say that the use of the word "daft" by a guy who lives in Atlanta would be a good example of cultural imperialism? :P

Unless of course the guy is English...in which case - oops!


Hoyooohhhh! But hey, he speaks that way, and I've requisitioned the word 'wanker' so I can't say anything.
Freak out. Far out.

Sneelock

Postby Sneelock » 03 Jul 2007, 17:48

you're right about 'wanker'. it belongs to the world. I saw Nick Lowe say it of Mike Love. "the wanker in the hat" and have been using it ever since.

sometimes only "wanker" will do.
Last edited by Sneelock on 03 Jul 2007, 17:51, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 39342
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: HAIL, ATLANTA!

Postby Count Machuki » 03 Jul 2007, 17:49

Buddha-B. Rex wrote:
Velvis wrote:That's right! Simon is Jewish, and so is Dylan. We must force them to record only klezmer music, otherwise it's "cultural imperialism".


That's right! An album of Moesha Oishe songs, sung as duets by Dylan and Simon, immediately!

.


great, now i'm being taken out of context, exaggerated AND used as 'humo(u)r' fodder. i got business to handle. peace.
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

User avatar
Andrew Lou Goldman
Footy gives me a boner
Posts: 5389
Joined: 28 Feb 2004, 01:32
Location: Titty City

Postby Andrew Lou Goldman » 03 Jul 2007, 17:52

I LOVE Paul Simon and my bet is that those who slam him here, probably own all his records too.

Even if they don't, it's their loss.

Such consistently great albums, I think I'll play one now!

:D
Image

User avatar
Buddha B-Rex
Posts: 3353
Joined: 01 Mar 2007, 14:57
Location: Down by the river...
Contact:

Postby Buddha B-Rex » 03 Jul 2007, 17:53

Gosh...for a hipster, you're coming off as stodgy on this one, Count! Lighten up, Francis!

You know I loves ya', yer just off on this one by a little bit. I just think your anger over 'cultural imperialism', while legitimate, is misplaced on Paul Simon.
Freak out. Far out.

User avatar
Ray K.
Posts: 5610
Joined: 17 Jul 2003, 21:06
Location: Philadelphia PA

Postby Ray K. » 03 Jul 2007, 17:56

Going back to his Graceland tour I recall about half the show being Ladysmith Black Mambazo holding forth on the stage sans Simon. It was quite a bit of fun and opened some musical doors for me.

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 39342
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: HAIL, ATLANTA!

Postby Count Machuki » 03 Jul 2007, 17:57

Buddha-B. Rex wrote:Gosh...for a hipster, you're coming off as stodgy on this one, Count! Lighten up, Francis!

You know I loves ya', yer just off on this one by a little bit. I just think your anger over 'cultural imperialism', while legitimate, is misplaced on Paul Simon.


whatever. i ain't trippin'. and thanks for warming up the brain...i'm here dodging thesis work, but now i think i'm good to go.

oh, and lighten up deez nutz.
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

User avatar
Buddha B-Rex
Posts: 3353
Joined: 01 Mar 2007, 14:57
Location: Down by the river...
Contact:

Postby Buddha B-Rex » 03 Jul 2007, 18:02

:lol:
Freak out. Far out.