You write so many words, and I seldom have even the slightest clue what you're 
trying to say. But, it sounds like you're taking issue with the harshness of 
the second sentence of my two sentence critique, and I would say that is the 
result of my having forced myself to listen all the way through RD's link 
instead of clicking away after a few seconds. For me, it's simply a matter of 
resonance, and if I don't resonate with a piece of music, it is excruciating to 
listen to it. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> Note, Alex, the difference between the quality of your first person ontology 
> in making the judgment you made—I deem it to be innocent and almost 
> mechanical—and the quality of the first person ontology which expresses 
> itself here—prejudice. There is something stingy and ungenerous and 
> unattractive in the very form of what gets said here—I am speaking of 
> something other than mere content. The context out of which you made your 
> judgment is radically different than the context out of which this opinion is 
> making itself known to us. Even though, presumably, these two opinions are 
> converging upon the same judgment. 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley" <j_alexander_stanley@> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > O.K. One last try. I uploaded Lady Gaga to my Picasa account. 
> > > > Let me know if it works. 
> > > > https://picasaweb.google.com/106545400900838340106/LadyGaga?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCNHTqfHlr6SD9QE&feat=directlink
> > > > http://tinyurl.com/cq2h2sp
> > > 
> > > Link works, but I remain completely baffled by the whole 
> > > Lady Gaga phenomenon. To me, that was just a half-naked 
> > > woman screaming into a microphone while other musicians 
> > > play random noises.
> > 
> > Thank you for this, Alex. I was beginning to fear
> > that standards here had reached a new low. People 
> > are such suckers for a little cheap flash.
> >
>


Reply via email to