sherburne on underworld

[Eikman]

bla bla bla

[dubman]

Originally Posted by BeautifulBurnout

So what you are effectively saying is that the people who cannot argue with the same intellectual capacities as you have no voice here, without risking ridicule from the elite few who happen to have an excellent education and above-average argument skills? Jesus, this is a music forum, not the College debating union. It is not about form, it is about substance. If one constantly ignores the substance to criticise the form from ones elitist ivory tower... stopped reading

substance, what?
where?

[BeautifulBurnout]

Originally Posted by dubman

substance, what?
where?

Show me the substance in Kid Cue's first two posts, then we have the substance of a discussion.

Q.E.D

[kid cue]

Originally Posted by BeautifulBurnout

Self-styled, snug intellectuals with their "holier than thou", self-mastubatory rhetoric and critique of those less etc etc etc.

this is such a straw-man argument it's actually (just mildly) depressing. 'Ivory Tower'? i am talking about being willing to accept a given piece of writing as intelligent and worth engaging on its own terms, without bashing its use of vocabulary, or cringing at the possibility of overanalysis. this is hardly Derrida or Zizek (neither of whom i have even read). this is the basis of a discussion!

the great irony of your (self-styled, snug, holier-than-thou) rant is that it's as much a knee-jerk reaction against fictional people ("me", Philip Sherburne), whose one goal in life is to look & feel smart, as are the lamest knee-jerk reactions against an article like Sherburne's. you are embodying exactly what i am criticizing! this is the #1 thing preventing people from having a real discussion on this forum! and then you tell me i'm not capable of having one, as if it's only a valid serious discussion in your eyes if i'm some kind of mild-mannered, pandering, colloquial girl-next-door!

it says a lot about how the tone of the forum has shifted, when 3/4 of the most interesting & popular threads on dirty.org (before you were here) used to be based on hotheaded arguments (serious ones, but ones that you would no doubt frown upon), and now it's always "duckie is a big bad troll, up to his usual antics again". come aahhhn!

there was no ha-ha-ing, either. you like to think you're good at seeing what's really going on, don't you? that what's really happening is that duckie is thinking "ha ha what a bunch of morans!!!!!!!!!" to himself instead of thinking "god wtf !@!$@$!$!!!!" and yet i've clearly never expressed any sentiment but the latter (that being, frustration).

i wouldn't be frustrated if this forum actually were populated solely by people who work in McDonalds (in which case i suppose i'd understand any lack of, i dunno, stimulation--but isn't that itself elitist? and yet it's the basis of your rant), but i'm fairly certain that everyone here is capable--if not willing--to have a discussion "of substance".

(i'm going to skip the confusing treatment of "form" vs. "substance".)

Originally Posted by dubman

what you're doing, is by forcibly accepting all and trying to understand and adapt to everyone character, is encouraging stultifying, non-critical conversation that repress things like heatedness and your interpretation of "negative vibes" simply for what? someone's ego? because dirty is such a safe haven that peoples bad argument skills shouldnt be pointed out and their ignorance ignored? this forum isnt going to shit because a few people viciously argue about something. it goes to shit when no one here has a reason past unfocused anger or bleeding positivity. the glue you're talking about is a fairly loose one and it implies that just because you like underworld that you're a voice worth hearing around here. i cant think of many members that contradict that (well, i can, but this isnt the place) but the logic is flawed, not to mention self-insulating.

[BrotherLovesDub]

can we just get into a heated discussion please? i layed out my issues with the article. tell me how i'm wrong. or agree with me. let's discuss UW's shift from Festival Headliners to artsy autuers. anything. something. please.

[kid cue]

Originally Posted by BrotherLovesDub

P.S. says Karl's statement on RA wasn't convincing. How well does he know Karl? Why wasn't it convincing? I was convinced. I don't think Karl Hyde is in the game of deceiving interviewers to sound more respectable. The RA interview was great, but it didn't help with Sherburne's preplanned thesis on his UW piece, so he said he didn't believe the quote. Lazy and self serving.

i think he was saying that Karl was probably trying to preserve the image of the band, avoiding an image of 'falling from grace' or whatever. i don't agree or disagree, but it's true that Karl is almost always the spokesperson for the group, and he definitely does tend spin things in a very PR-friendly way (i hope he's not reading this!).

[kid cue]

Originally Posted by BrotherLovesDub

can we just get into a heated discussion please? i layed out my issues with the article. tell me how i'm wrong. or agree with me. let's discuss UW's shift from Festival Headliners to artsy autuers. anything. something. please.

i still disagree w/ you about AHDO. what about it makes it quintessential UW? how come Sherburne is suddenly an UW fan who 'gets' UW just because he likes that album?

to me AHDO is much more a case of UW self-consciously consolidating what defines their sound, rather than channeling anything fundamental about them.

his praise of AHDO also seems to be based on how much it resembles the minimal he's into, not how Underworld it is.

[BeautifulBurnout]

I have no desire for you to be either mild-mannered, pandering or girl-next-door. What bugs me about, in particular, your second post here is that instead of adding anything intelligent to the discussion, as Dubman did, you chose instead to criticise the other posters. You seem to be gifted in bringing a discussion down to personal attack with amazing ease.

As I said hours ago, if you want to sneer at people it is up to you. Just don't expect me to sit here and be a "pandering girl-next-door" and not call you out on it.

Or are you the only one who has the right to criticise other posters here?

Live by the sword...

[kid cue]

god you just go in circles. is that a personal attack? oh god, i'm sorry.

[BeautifulBurnout]

Originally Posted by kid cue

god you just go in circles. is that a personal attack? oh god, i'm sorry.

... whereas you just go off at a tangent when someone calls you out, in an attempt to justify why it was you mocked people for not responding in the manner you consider to be a correct treatment of the subject matter (although you knew very well, as you have said yourself, that you would provoke precisely the kind of response you did from a number of the members here by posting the article in the first place).

Backpedal all you like, mate.