The Ellison Bulletin Board

Shaz
News Update - Monday, August 12, 1996 at 18:04:32 (CDT)

While I was doing a little surfing, I came across an announcement on the Dangerous Visions Bookstore homepage that HE is signing the new trade paperback "City on the Edge of Forever" from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. I guess he'll do so at the Dangerous Visions Bookstore, since a location was left out of the announcement. I'm just happy to know "City" in an affordable form will be out soon! By the way, I still haven't been able to track down HE'S DREAM CORRIDOR QUARTERLY #1, though a contact at DHC online emailed me that it would be shipped out Aug. 3. Has anyone managed to get this comic yet?

WolfMistress <The FarSide of CyberSpace....>
Packer Country!, - Monday, August 12, 1996 at 17:24:02 (CDT)

Before someone nit-picks -- *No* I cannot actually see how my computer works since the energy (electricity) that causes the interchange of information (as ones and zeros) is invisible (under normal circumstances). And the interchanges take place in a Dimensional Rift referred to as CyberSpace, thanks to William Gibson. *I* think it's a Dimensional Rift, personal opinion. However, we *can* see the results of these cyber-interchanges simply by pressing the keys to type in letters, forumulas, macros, whatever. Everybody happy now? Good. Don't make me have to tell you again.... Besides, after Friday, I'll be gone and you'll be *soorrrryy*! So there!

WolfMistress <rwhiteanderson@kraft.com (til Friday, Folks!)>
The Pack is Back! Go, Packers!, - Monday, August 12, 1996 at 16:15:40 (CDT)

Well, Hi, There One & All -- The weekend came and went and I have no idea where the hell I am!! 8>} I see everyone tired of the thread about Art and Technology before I could really get to it with my $.50-worth. Oh, well. I suppose it's for the best, because I see that maybe I was totally misunderstanding the point, which was to comment on HE's statement of using a manual typewriter as opposed to a computer (or even an *electric* typewriter, for that matter!) I guess I was interpreting some of the comments as saying that where computers are concerned, there is no such thing as Art, that the use of the technology totally precludes anything "creative", or that the technology cannot, in itself, be an Artform. If that's what anyone was saying, please don't tell me, because I *WILL* go into *Major Rant* mode (Will Rant - the one they always tell us to "fire" at!). I read, years ago, a little piece of whimsy from our eccentric, altogether loveable (on good days, at least) HE in the old Science Fiction Review. He was talking about that incessant question writers will get to the end of Eternity - "Where do you get your ideas?" HE mentioned having replied to someone that there is this Post Office Box in Poughkeepsie, New York. You send then a few dollars, they send you back a post card with 3 story ideas on it..... Now there are those who will wildly disagree with me on this, and that is their right. But I also know what I feel and how it works on this end: There is as much artistry in what I do with the technology as there is in my writing, maybe more. Where do I get my ideas? Who knows? Where do I get the solutions to the endless stream of software and/or hardware problems? Who knows? I mean that. I started in this field with the first IBM PC - 64k of memory, and all you could load was PC-DOS. You couldn't run anthing else, so we frustrated engineer-types wrote tons of BASIC programs. The advent of the PC was to me personally, an epiphany. I could never get accustomed to working with those old, room-sized mainframes. But give me something that sat right in front of me, that I could take apart and actually *see* what made it work -- this was Manna in the Desert to me. Lightyears later all the accummulated knowledge of those intervening years between then and now make up the wellspring from which I pull my solutions. Just as the accummulation of experience in life is the wellspring that gives birth to my writing. Writers work with pen & paper, typewriters, computers, cassette tapes transcribed by someone else! Painters use brushes, pigments, canvas, wood, whatever surface. I use a keyboard, memory chips, logic circuits, and fiber optic cabling. Where is the difference? When I have to solve a problem establish a new connection, I do not *actively* think about what I'm doing. I draw on all my experience working with these glorious toys since the late 70s/early 80s. Everything I have ever known, experienced, read, heard about the way this stuff works comes into play. If you asked me to explain how I do what I do (which happens way too often from those who demand *documentation*), at the moment, I would not be able to tell you. People have asked me, and I tell them I'll have to think about it a bit. I have to actually sit down and think through the entire process before I can explain how I did it! Usually, such a wide range of bits and pieces comes into play, that I leave half of them out anyway. Is this process any different from the whole stories that sometimes spring full blown to mind just from hearing a fragment of conversation or the words to an old song? I really don't think so. And before someone says it -- no, the technology of networks, PCs, etc. is not all entirely identical in every instance. In fact, it is rarely, if *ever*, identical even when you're running the exact same network (say Novell) and the same software (Windows) because every system is unique. There are differences that no one but me would know are there, but nevertheless, they must be considered when working with the system as a whole. This makes each solution or connection unique. And this is not an Art?? I will argue the point until our second-rate little yellow sun swells into a red giant and fries us all. What I do is Art to me.

Sue Luesse <jaluesse@htonline.com>
- Monday, August 12, 1996 at 14:09:41 (CDT)

Hey, all. It's me again, limp and dragging, and probably leaving a trail of wet yucky behind.. Good News - oldest boy picked up Essential Ellison during a 'dog sit' session, and haven't been able to pry his fingers off it since.. (:-)... Bad News - for anyone who asks "What took him so long".. **Scot** (izzat 't' for people and 'tt' for tissue, or the other way round??) Thanks for that illuminating disection (and is it just me, or did he have an attitude??.. \;-)~... Maybe he should post more often.).. **Billy D** well, that tears it.. How come tech-heads WHO ALREADY KNOW HOW get all the really cool stuff that makes stuff super easy - and all us hopelessly Computer-challenged hand-wringers get stuck with the HARD way?? GEEZ! It ain't fair, I tellya! I'm REALLY jealous here.. ):-(.... Just tagging in, so nobody sends the Sheriff to my house to 'check' on me (I was just nappin', Officer, REALLY, I was.. But I'm AWAKE now!).. Try High - Fly Straight - Drive Safe

Kris(ten) L. Homyk <if72@jove.acs.unt.edu>
Badlands, Nowheresville Texas - Monday, August 12, 1996 at 09:14:00 (CDT)

Hey all -- I'm gonna jump in with Jason on the recent thread, even though I've been gone and haven't investigated all the way back. The only thing I would add to the conversation, though, is the fact that learning to be a writer is sometimes like learning anything else. If you want to learn to assemble bicycles, your first couple or so are probably going to be a bit wobbly, and maybe even have parts in the wrong place. Later, you'll get 'em all together. So it's probably wrong for HE to totally generalize the situation by saying that anyone who gets twenty pages into a story and doesn't get it right shouldn't be a writer. Anyone's who read the Essential Ellison and had a look at HE's early stuff knows he spent the very earliest stories half-plagerizing other people, and rambling a bit. But eventually, he got his bicycles in the right order. I write on a computer -- always have -- for everything from newspaper copy to short stories, and as opposed to the obviously stupid advantages of computing presented to HE (who would want to destroy all that work anyway?) I find the computer convenient for filing, and because I can instantly recall, edit, and hardcopy any and all of my work with a minimum of paper. I also don't have to keep hard copies of every single little story starter or poem I come up with -- thereby eliminating a huge filing system and paper waste. Plus, if I get ONE page into a story, discover I've seriously destroyed the idea, and want to start again -- the only waste was my typing effort. By the way, even Robert Silverburg, old Ellison friend and writer for about as long, has admitted that on the odd occasion, he has rewritten *entire* stories, and no one would want to argue that he's not a professional or a decent writer, even though he got ALL the way through a story before realizing his angle was wrong.

Bill Dennis <wjdennis@earthlink.net>
- Sunday, August 11, 1996 at 23:23:28 (CDT)

Thanks to all who responded on this thread. Though I remain unconvinced, I appreciate the wealth of varying inputs and POV's. You've all given me some good points to think about. By the way, I wrote this message using voice recognition software. No editing or typing at all. Billy D.

keegan
- Sunday, August 11, 1996 at 19:45:25 (CDT)

Waiter! Where's the fly in my soup??? I agree with Sue, It may be apparent that this conversation has sent me clamoring to the ends of my sanity. I think Jason eloquently pulled together a general consensus. Nice work, man!

Sue Luesse
And let that be a lesson to me... - Sunday, August 11, 1996 at 18:43:02 (CDT)

*Jason* - somehow in this muddled, and oft' re-directed through a bewildering variety of 'detailed' channels discussion - that was what I _thought_ *I* WAS saying ..(8-0... I must have been suffering heat-stroke brain damage when I read the HE quote, 'cause I Really Did think it was dissing out 'puter folk... ):-(.... But if you say so (and not knowing where the quote came from to read it in it's full context myself), I'll take your good word for it.. (:-)...**TO ALL** Can we call it quits and say we all agree Art is magic that works when and how it wants to?? Not only am I getting a headache from trying to sort it all out - I think it's gonna give me diarhea if it keeps up.. (;-)~.... OI! So whatza Schicksa ta do?? Eat some hot Chicken Soup.. AAAaaargggh!! It's GOLDBLUM!!....Nu, chusta Common Fly.. Trow it out, and heat da soup already... Try High - Fly Straight - Drive Safe

Jason
- Sunday, August 11, 1996 at 18:03:51 (CDT)

Bill, Sue I think you're missing something, HE doesn't say writers should not use computers for creative work period. He says in the interview "Form follows function. If writing something creative is best served by using a quill pen, standing up at a lectern, then you do it. If it works best using a Pentium, then you do that." He does say that it's not a good idea to use for creative work. He says Be Careful. Bill I don't think your analogy regarding baseball is an acurate one, I think it's more of a baseball player saying 'Hey I've got an exoskeletal suit that will perfect the mechanics of my swing. If i'm doing something wrong, it will tell me and make me swing again in the correct fashion. That player shouldn't be in the major leagues because he hasn't learned the basic mechanics of hitting. Same as a writer who writes ten pages before realising he started the story in the wrong place, he shouldn't be a writer because he hasn't learned the basic mechanics of storytelling. HE's problem with computers making things easier is about the fact that it allows people to rise above the level of their incompetence. {An anecdote to tie this point into what Steve said about calculators in his class} There was a psychology experiment done by a student at my University, there was two versions, one involved calculators another invovled spell checkers. In brief there were three groups who all had to do a series of math problems. One group had to do it by hand, the second group were calculators, and the third group also were given calculators, but they were faulty, instead of multiplying by 2 it would multiply by 20 that sort of thing. She discovered that the group who had the faulty calculators did signifigantly worse than the other two groups, and the answers this group gave weren't just of by one or two digits, if the answer was 547, they'd have answers like 4570 or -452 something like that, answers that if they just thought about for a couple of seconds, they'd know it wasn't right. The spellchecker version was the same, the group that had the faulty spellchecker, had words like pleese or leagal, and that third group didn't catch them because the spell checker let them through, and they didn't read the paragraph on their own. Personally I think the trilogies and tetrologies come more from a marketing standpoint (buy the first one, you have to get the next four) Or a desire to emulate Tolkien than computers themselves, but you do tend to forget just how much it is you've written when don't have the stack of pages out in front of you. Kind of like this post, because I have only a small window to see what I've typed and a lot of it is out of sight, I have no conception as to how long it's going to be. I know it's going to be long simply because I know I have a lot to say on this point, but as to how much scrolling you're going to have to do I don't know. Moving on to art specificaly, I take my defintion of art from Scott McCloud's Understanding Comics. "Art as I see it, is any human activity which doesn't grow out of either of our species two basic instincts: Survival or Reproduction. And the example he gives is a prehistoric man who is searching for a mate when he gets surprised by a tiger. He runs away and finds himself trapped on the edge of a cliff, the tiger lunges, the man dodges and the tiger falls over the cliff. Now instead of going back to looking for a mate or food or anything else he gives the falling tiger a raspberry, Art. Now there's art and Art, Art is to paraphrase HE who was paraphrasing (Des Jardins){sp?} something that ascends to the light. And art being subjective cannot be an either/or proposition. That's my $20 worth.

Steve Pagano <zazu@spectra.net>
Endicott, NY - Saturday, August 10, 1996 at 23:56:10 (CDT)

Ok, I have a number of small-to-medium comments, and so I'll get to them and try to keep it short: 1) On the plaigarism topic, and parodies. Parodies are accepted as artwork in their own right, and as well parodies of works are not considered copyright breaches of the originals. I'm on a Disney-based MUCK game, and we've become quite aware of what we can and can't legally do in imitation of Disney. 2) Why doesn't HE like Hallmark cards? My *guess* is that it's because it's just plain easy to write the verses and jokes within them. I can crank out card after card if I want to, and they're just as good as the syrup in Hallmark's cards -- but it takes me zero effort. No art in that. This gets into 3) the idea of art and its difficulty. HE of course meant that art is *intellectually* a difficult thing, and not necessarily a physically difficult thing. HE doesn't like computers with their spell-checkers and grammar-correctors and built-in thesauruses because they're *crutches*. People are using them to run before they know how to walk -- people use them as their *primary* tool, not as a secondary tool. Mathematics is an Art as well, and not a science (which is why my Master's degree in Math is an MA), and I don't allow any of my students to use calculators in my classes. Why not? Because if I allow the calculators, among other bad things that happen, people begin to rely solely upon the machine to do their thinking. They learn the rote of machine maths, and don't learn the art, the beauty that's in math. I use a calculator myself, but it's to do the dreadfully boring menial tasks that I know I could do by hand without error. I use spell-checkers because my poor dexterity makes me strike incorrect keys. I use grammar checkers for fun, not for work. And so on. I'm reminded of WolfMistress's comments about the beauty of a good computer program, and its value as Art, and I can only say that I agree with her heartily. 4) It was Freud who said "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar." Once Groucho did say to a woman on You Bet Your Life, after hearing that she had a whopping great number of kids because she "loved her husband", something like "Ma'am, I love my cigar, but I take it out of my mouth once in a while."

Bill Dennis <wjdennis@earthlink.com>
- Saturday, August 10, 1996 at 23:07:40 (CDT)

I think that Sue put her finger on what bothered me most about HE's response. It was the arrogant, prickish manner in which he opined that his level of technology was superior because it promoted less sloppy writing. Humbug. HE is the Ty Cobb of his profession, the Babe Ruth, the Willie Mays. But that doesn't mean that there isn't room out there for the Clay Dalrimples, the Cookie Rojases, the Dick Grotes. They were all fine baseball players; all contributed to the game. Just because they couldn't hit a home run every 20th time at bat like Mays, that doesn't mean that they should have been out "serving the common weal" doing something else for a living. If there were a revolutionary pitching machine around which let Clay Dalrimple learn to improve his hitting in a shorter amount of time with less effort, who would Willie Mays be to say, "If you can't better your hitting by tossing the ball in the air yourself and whacking it the way I do, then you shouldn't be playing this game?" I'm not disagreeing with anyone that artists in any medium should have integrity in their work. I certainly agree with Doc that if HE wants to use a typewriter because it works for him, fine. But HE's response contains this smug self-righteousness that indicates his chosen level of technology somehow leads to a higher plane of Art the way the Amish believe that the horse-and-buggy/oil-lamp/brace-and-bit level of technology leads to a higher plane of godliness. To the contrary, the computer is a marvel in that it allows both the accomplished artist to produce his/her work with less arduous *process,* and lets the upcoming artist get to that same level with less expenditure of wasted energy. That's why I think that HE, on this subject, is still talking out of that same odorous orifice I mentioned earlier. Billy D.

keegan
USA - Saturday, August 10, 1996 at 21:28:59 (CDT)

and -okay- maybe that's a WILD guesstimate. GOOD NIGHT!

again with the keegan!
- Saturday, August 10, 1996 at 21:27:23 (CDT)

oops! that should be 10 correct words/minute. see what i mean???

keegan
- Saturday, August 10, 1996 at 21:25:02 (CDT)

The spinning obloid is simply mahvelous, I keenly miss Goldblum's incongruously large eyes, and I don't think Doc was heavy. I type approximately 10 correct words/second but have been known to sing 500 interesting notes in one chorus of a minor blues (that's a guesstimate, folks). I couldn't put the words in Spock's mouth unless he was explaining the function of the tri-tone sub, yada, yada, yada............. autumn approaches.

Barney Dannelke <dannelke01@enter.net>
And Now For Something Completly Different, - Saturday, August 10, 1996 at 20:47:47 (CDT)

Rick: Oh sure. I take the initiative to name our friend the Giant Animated Fly [Goldblum, to save some people from endless scrolling] and not only is this act of creative input ignored by the lot of you but 48 hours after this sterling contribution Goldblum is GONE! Not missing or off getting retrofitted but rather the pixel[ated] equivalent of vaporized. Oh, we can all see again without using welding helmets to read our comments and I suppose this is indeed an improvement. But at WHAT COST? My God, who will be sacrificed next in your unstoppable march toward World Domination. Sue, Doc, Wolfmistress, watch your backs! His agents are everywhere and they will stop at nothing. Nothing! Let me just say this before I'm added to the list of friendly fire casualties. I worked with Goldblum. Goldblum was a friend of mine. Rick, you're no Goldblum. It is therefore my intention that our winged friend not be forgotten. I am starting a club, nay, a Movement. Friends Of Goldblum. F.O.G. Here is my testimonial. Goldblum never gave me anything I couldn't get shots for and he never once shit in my batter cakes. You may all join me in support of our slain anthropomorphized friend. Membership dues consist of back issues of Adam Bedside Readers with Ellison appearances, the caged lettered ed. of "Mefisto In Onyx" or a $600.00 data processing fee. Sci Fi Buzz - it's all a plot I tell you. Wheels within wheels. The grassy knoll. Help me, help me, help m

Scott the Webmonkey <wirehead@cei.net>
Hell, AR Deliria - Saturday, August 10, 1996 at 19:55:14 (CDT)

Re: the retro text interface: uh, guys, I put it up because the old one got lost. Sheesh, you guys read so much into stuff. The Mommy link was supposed to be to the official site of ClintonGore but apparently it was a spec job by an ad agency and has s ince been pulled. Oh well. As for the rotating pill, *I* like it, how about you? Beats those pulsating "NEW!" things I see all over the web. Anyway this has nothing to do with the approximately 9,000 conversations already in progress, but thought you'd li ke to know...

Sara <SaraSlymkr@aol.com>
West Chester, PA - Saturday, August 10, 1996 at 17:33:34 (CDT)

Hi There. I've been lurking for some time now (41 minutes, I can't wait to see my phone bill), catching up on the comments, and I'd like to join in. I've been reading HE's works for longer than I'll admit to, and I will say that I'd hate to see him switch to a computer when he wrings such magic from a manual typewriter. But...Harlan types more or less flawlessly at something like 120 WPM (with two fingers, yet). I type fairly quickly with two fingers, I'm guessing maybe 60 WPM, but it is far from flawless and the prospect of constantly correcting my work - not to mention trying to produce a clean copy - is truly terrifying. I *need* a computer. I still print out every draft and go over it with a pencil, but I would have given up on writing long ago if I didn't have a computer. For me, it enhances the creative process...but it doesn't make it any easier. It's now 50 minutes. I gotta get oudda here!

Sue Luesse
- Saturday, August 10, 1996 at 16:51:34 (CDT)

Hey, Doc! Lighten up.. I'm not telling *you* (or anyone else) 'how' to do art. HE made a public statement about how *he* thinks Everyone should 'write' (promoting *his* use of a typewriter as superior to using a computer with some attytudinal nasties towa rds those who use computers). That pronouncement was brought up on the Board. I responded to it by applying *his* rationale to his own 'preference', and it came up different than what HE stated as a conclusion. I STILL I think HE was kinda talking outta b oth sides of his mouth, trying to make his personal preference some kind of 'benchmark standard' for everyone else. That's not to say I don't *LOVE* HE's work - cause I do - or that it makes any difference to me if HE is secretly writing in the nude with his tongue on tablets of earwax (what a GREAT image!) or banging away on a typewriter with DeBussey playing in the background dressed in a tux.. It's not even Really saying he should stop doing what works for him.. It's just saying HE should do his thing, and let everyone else do theirs... GEEZ! This joint is so 'edgy', if an Odor of Sanctity wafted straight down from Heaven there'd be at least one twitchy nostril demanding to know who farted.. Toooouchy! I'm gonna go for my 'Desensitisation Treatment' n ow.. If I happen to pass Jim on the way to his Shock Therapy in the hall, I'll growl at him so he knows Webderland said "HI".. Try High - Fly Straight - Drive Safe

keegan
- Saturday, August 10, 1996 at 14:39:34 (CDT)

Yeah! Go, Doc, man! I think that's it: go on and howl your OWN howl however you choose to produce it. No two bodies, no two minds, no two spirits; no two voices are identical. Art will be what it is and where it is. There are many paths to arrive there. Some are more convoluted and challenging than others, but I've heard tell from the oldtimers that they lead to the most breathtaking Views.

Doc
On The Downhill Side, - Saturday, August 10, 1996 at 12:52:21 (CDT)

Okay -- here's what *I* think. I think an artist/Artist should work in whichever medium, and with whichever tools they feel most comfortable; or, in some cases, by which they feel most challenged. Furthermore, I think art/Art is something we should *NO T* be able to crank out like sausages -- if we could scoop diamonds up out of the gutter, they'd still be pretty, but they would also be worthless, lacking in rarity. Harlan Ellison likes to work on a typewriter. *I* like to work on a typewriter; I can't tell you why. I can't tell you why I prefer chocolate ice cream, over banana walnut, or whatever, either -- I JUST DO. What I feel about it, and likewise what HE feels about it, apply srtictly to me (and, in his case, him). If you get the best results fro m sorcery, or cutting your fingertips and writing on shopping bags, then, by all means, kid, go do magic. Art is about doing it on the inside, not how best you get it out for others to see. Don't misunderstand, that's important -- I personally can't featu re any of Van Gogh's work as prose, or any of Rodin's sculpture painted in oil -- but that is solely at the behest of the artist, and who am I or we to decide how they cast their spells? So there. Love, Doc

Sue Luesse
Lightening strikes, and She's *AlIVE*.. - Saturday, August 10, 1996 at 11:05:15 (CDT)

Something about the 'act' of art debate bothered me.. A feeling like when I find myself standing in the middle of the kitchen, and knew I was gonna _do_ sumthin - but can't for the life of me figure out what that was, and my entire life leading up to that moment of sudden awareness, which might have possibly given me a clue to reconstructing the purpose, is mysteriously deleted.. And, Eureka! THAT'S IT! Pity the future 'scholars' of computer art (any form). No stacks of multiple drafts to sift through and see the 'process' taking shape through re-writes. No 'studies' stacked in a closet to document the process that resulted in a gif (do I have that right? gif like in picture??). All vanished in a computer dump, without a trace, leaving a perfect 'gem' of finished work - and not a hint how that gem was crafted. It is often the 'preliminaries' that give insights into the finished work, where it began, how it took shape, what was axed and what was selectively polished. Not a matter of concern for most, I agr ee - but a sad loss, none-the-less for those who like to get a 'feel' for the person behind the 'work'.. Who woulda guessed Emily Dickinson wrote it *that way* first time out - and wrote a whole 'nuther poem with the same topic if she didn't like it (and how's that for Talent - no re-writes needed for that tight, polished work!). Without those reams of 'not yets' left behind, with all their strike-outs, and inserts, and arrowed re-arrangements, we'd have no way of knowing how a work was 'midwifed' from Go od to Art (and nothing to 'help' young artists learn the process, I might add). Now, I'm not saying that better tools should be ignored, here. What I AM saying, is that if HE is suggesting the tools are taking something away from the context of the work - he should give up his typewriter, and do it in his own hand (because the physical 'act' of writing produces a handwriting that's an intimate, unique touchstone with the person - with a LOT more 'hard' work). And if that isn't what he means, HE should buy a computer, PRINT OUT all his drafts (for posterity to ponder and learn from), and get a whole lot more written more easily in less time for the world to enjoy.. I think the 'typewriter clinging' is kinda silly. I always thought artists are good technici ans, who don't stop there, but go beyond that to wrench something of their own esence out of themselves to breathe into the work and give it life. And THAT has Got To Be HARD, no matter how many tools are available to make the act easy (sharper knife don' t make the surgery any less painful).. So whatcha all think (since youse guys is the highbrow creative types, and I ain't)??? Try High - Fly Straight - Drive Safe

Phillip Cairns <cairns@athena.nwafc.nf.ca>
St. John's, Newfoundland Canada - Saturday, August 10, 1996 at 07:54:57 (CDT)

JOKES WITHOUT PUNCHLINES - Rick has a little ditty about it somewhere around here if you can find it. Otherwise: I have it right here in front me. I sent HE a book he was looking for, and I gave him a list of everything I was willing to trade for it . Thinking that JWP was an actual COLLECTION of short stories (a.k.a. a BOOK), I put it on my list. JWP is a chapbook. What a jip. It contains "The Cheese Stands Alone," "How to Make Life Interesting" from AN EDGE IN MY VOICE, and a no-big-deal short story called "Sensible City" (all of which are available in other HE books, or soon will be; I've read them all before), plus an "original introduction only available in this limited edition chapbook!" Believe me, you're not missing out on anything great. The chapbook was published (more like PHOTOCOPIED) by White Wolf Publishing, and was "NOT FOR RESALE." So I guess that makes it extremely rare. I think it's a joke that HE has it listed along with his other collections. He should have it listed as a c hapbook, not as a collection.

Jason
- Saturday, August 10, 1996 at 00:19:45 (CDT)

Bill I get to you tomorrow after I get some sleep, I just want to get a question out to any late night surfers. Does anyone know about a book that's listed in edgeworks called Jokes Without Punchlines? it's got a 1996 date to it, does anyone know wha t this is?

Sue Luesse
- Friday, August 09, 1996 at 15:57:01 (CDT)

*BILLY D* Thanks for the clarification. I was confused by the use of 'act' and 'process', I guess. I would have to give your last post a nod of agreement. Though, I still think Jason and Keegan are right about mastery of basic skills being required for an understanding of underlying forms being necessary to create art. And your example "Jesus wept" seems to affirm that view - since only an understanding of what's required could 'edit out' the extraneous words, carving art from verbiage... **WOLFMISTRESS** .. We're not so far apart as you seem to think. Read the tail end of my post again.. I am quite willing to stand in awe of the art of programming.. Anything that follows the creative process (mastery of available skills and techniques applied in innovativ e and origonal ways to create unique 'new' works) is art in my book. But 'Art', that is something time must prove. No way for me to know which computer programs, or languages will be crowned with that title before time sorts them out. Ditto for Every form of art..

WolfMistress
Running out the door as I type..., - Friday, August 09, 1996 at 15:21:17 (CDT)

*Major, MAJOR Disagreement, Sue* -- Haven't the time now, unfortunately, but will try to log-in tomorrow with well-polished reasoning. I have seen, a few programs that are the *highest form of the Art of Programming in whatever language (usually C or C++); saw a few in Cobol, tho. Do you know the kind of technical creativity it takes to make systems running on 5 or 6 *different* platforms to communicate with each other, and form a cohesive, functional network??? If that's not Art, I don't know what i s. Gotta run. Hope to finish Sat. Take care.

Bill Dennis
- Friday, August 09, 1996 at 15:18:46 (CDT)

Purple rhetoric? I guess I'm not sure what that means. I came, WolfMistress, because I respect Harlan Ellison, because his fiction has affected me deeply, and because I wanted to keep up on news about him and to hear what others had to say regarding his work and life. I'm sorry if my append struck you as unintelligent--as I said, I'm not much at polemics. I apologize if I offended in some way. Now, about this "process" vs. "act" business. If I'm confusing the two, it's because HE confused them in his response, IMHO. People were telling him that the computer made the *process* of writing easier, because it facilitated a quicker method of correcting/re-writing manuscripts. The *act* was simply sitting down and writing in the first place. HE seem s to think that there is something inherently more art-worthy in *physically* doing corrections than in accomplishing them electronically--read the final paragraph is of response. He also claims that the computer promotes longer, more slovenly works (his words). Whose fault is that, the writers or the publishing industry which accepts such things? I can tell you that in my case, and in the case of all the writers and aspiring writers I know, the computer has resulted in shorter and more elegant prose. As you can read in most any issue of *Writer's Digest,* most folks a good re-writers, not good writers. I'm likely to write in a first draft, "A tear came to Christ's eye when he beheld the situation before Him." When I realize what crap that sentence is, I can easily shorten it to the much more potent: "Jesus wept." The next time around, because of what I've learned, I'm more likely to write the better sentence the first time around--and I didn't have to expend foot-pounds of energy to do it. Whoops, I didn't mean to ramble this long. Bottom line is: as far as I'm concerned, HE *is* saying the process shoudln't be easier. All dissenting opinions welcome. Billy D.

keegan
- Friday, August 09, 1996 at 15:18:26 (CDT)

Hey, Sue! We were typing at the same time!! Yes, skills. That's what I was talking about as you can see below....

keegan
- Friday, August 09, 1996 at 15:15:20 (CDT)

Whoa, hold on WM!!! I didn't say that I thought the technology automatically turns out thoughtless, lame work! That isn't what I said at all. I *personally* MUCH prefer the computer over a typewriter because it IS easier and I *do* have features lik e spell and grammar checker. I also don't rely on those features and have taken the time to learn how to write reasonably well. I make a lot of mistakes, though, and it's nice to have the editing features peeking over my shoulder to CHECK my work. Let me use an analogy from what I know and see if I can make my point more clearly: As a pianist, I need to know how to transpose a piece from one key to another. I can learn that skill or I can say, "Well, Yamaha makes an electric keyboard that will transp ose to any key with the push of a button." I choose not to put the time into learning about how harmony functions, buy the keyboard, and happily push the button to change the key. This is all well and good, but then I lack a basic skill. What if I deci de to play an acoustic piano and the need for transposition arises? Well, then, I'm stuck. I think what HE is trying to get at in his diatribe against the computer is that people no longer need to KNOW the same sorts of things about the basic constructi on of language in order to write. They don't need it to be well-formed in the mind before they cut it in stone at the typewriter. They can spew it forth in all it's embryonic miasma and then "edit" it. If they edit solely based on the machine's intelli gence rather than their own, the work becomes sterile. A writer must know how to write, and not let the machine "own" that process. Using the machine to do your work efficiently and relying on it to think for you are two different things. Schools have lightened up on grammar and spelling in a similar way to how calculators have lightened the need to be immediately adept in mathematical calculations. NOW-as I said above and tried to say below, I think HE has a point, but I do not necessarily AGREE wit h his conclusion that computers destroy writing. I believe that the computer is a tool and that it comes down to how the human wielding said tool uses it. HE (and anybody else for that matter) is free to disagree with me.

Sue Luesse
Charter Member of the Hindenberg Survivors Club, Ben Dover, President - Friday, August 09, 1996 at 15:08:21 (CDT)

Yes, there was a *real* Ben Dover (a vaudvillian contortionist), who did survive the Hindenburg Disaster. And _I_ thought that yellow spinner was a *suppository*.. But being aware of the delicate sensibilities of this Board, deferred comment... Gotta agre e with *JASON* on the 'hard' thing. I read it the same way. And while I somewhat agree with *JIM* about art being subjective, I gotta go with HE that Art is not. (Drawing a distinction with the use of the cap A). There's a whole lotta difference between a universal beauty based on timeless truth (a thing of beauty to people in all times and places), and a topical work. That's why most Art isn't really confirmed as such until decades (if not centuries) after it is produced - takes a lot of time for 'natura l selection' to do it's thing culling the herds of contenders.. Which isn't to say art has no value - it certainly does within it's context. And I have to agree with *KEEGAN* that the artistic process requires the complete mastery of all aspects of a form (technical skills) as a pallette for creativity to even begin art. Sorry, *WOLFMISTRESS*, but most folks ARE lazy, and most folks DO think "I could do that..", and most folks really CAN'T. Not saying it can't ever happen, since innovation is a 'standard ' for creativity, but technology can't _replace_ skill mastery in an art form as a basic ingrediant for making art. I think of the "Disco" years of R&R - Corporate Mongo's using technology to 'break down' music into standardized rhythyms and chords, 'prov en' to be 'what makes it go' (and makes money) - and darn near killing off every other form of music in the process.. Eliminating expensive live musicians for computer generated sounds.. Eliminating innovation and creativity and synergy.. Based on what tu rned out to be a rather sound notion that most people don't care as long as it facilitates what they want to do (dance, look cool, and make 'pick-ups').. And the huge backlash in the creative community.. Which correctly perceived the threat to mucical art - but did not perceive that art and artists have never been the majority of the population (no matter what "Everyone" says).. And Stevie Wonder taking the bull by the horns, and bending that technology back into the service of R&R by imposing His prodigi ous talent and complete mastery of the basics.. And Bruce Springsteen going right back to the bare basics of R&R, it's backbone of live performance.. And the threat passed.. So what's that got to do with computers? Everything. Computers are the great equa llizers. Brilliant programs now allow Anyone to have the appearance of polish. But no one has written that IQ/checker yet, or that Creative/checker.. And they can't. What the technology allows for is substance to be 'polished' quicker and easier - but it can't provide the substance. Not to say that art and technology are mutually exclusive...just that the same old rules of art apply. Look at a random selection of HomePages - those that have mastered the basic skills are clearly superior to those who haven 't (wink, wink, nudge, nudge, Rick).. And while I am happy to lend the title art to almost any undertaking (even basketweaving) that displays innovation, the title Art is for time to decide... Whew! I'm gonna take some time off.. I don't think I have an u nspent synapse left! And for what it's worth - MY perspective is, as always, as the one pressing nose to glass, drooling over what others create.. Try High - Fly Straight - Drive Safe

Jason <hoping someone can now help me>
- Friday, August 09, 1996 at 15:00:01 (CDT)

WM you're welcome, part of my post was cut You should be able to order 'Those Who Can' through bookstores and is in print. BTW Biomechanics is at Amazon. My question what day were the books in the edgeworks posted or what are they? thanks jason

WolMistress <rwhiteanderson@kraft.com>
On my face...., - Friday, August 09, 1996 at 14:42:09 (CDT)

*JASON* -- Consider me prostrated!! I am forever and everafter in your debt! Seriously, thank you, thank you, thank you! I will do my best not to disagree with you ever again -- unless you really push your luck! 8>). Much, much gratitude. *Jim* - it was a joke. Now if you really want to be bitten... (smile already!) Again, Jason, you are absolutely wonderful!

Jason
- Friday, August 09, 1996 at 14:16:28 (CDT)

Wolfmistress I have the info. You should be able to order it from any comics store it's being offered again the cost is 69.50 a bit beyond my price range as for those who can it's sin print so you should be able to order it through bookstores. I have n't checked yet but if you cant wait for a comic store to get it in, have you tried amazon.com (can't believe I missed an Ellison reference in my catalog I'm slipping) ;-) other books offered in the catalog are H.R. Giger's Film Design, H.R. Giger's Alien , H.R. Giger's Necronomicon I and II and H.R. Giger's Species Design your humble servant Jason

James C. Hess <104656,765@CompuServe.Com>
- Friday, August 09, 1996 at 14:07:39 (CDT)

Bite me? Uh...okay. Dunno where that particular lob came from, but okay. And I was joking. Geez. But in a strange sort of way brings us back to the subject of Art and Ar-teests. The problem with Art, which includes Writing, is that it is so darn subjec tive. Which means there is a constant conflict afoot because very few people--if any--see exactly the same thing having been exposed to whatever it is that is to be Art. I have met people in a variety of situations and inevitably the subject turns to lite rature. Ah, I say. And what do you think of Harlan Ellison? A pause almost always follows. And usually, as Michael Crichton so perfectly pointed out in his introduction to one of HE's book, the longer you have known HE--or, as in this context, the more yo u have read his writings--the longer the pause. Then you realize you are pausing and the pause becomes even longer. Which makes you pause even more. And then, if you are not bothered by what people think when it comes to reading material, you say somethin g to effect of 'Oh, I love Harlan." Which, on more than one occassion has resulted in moi being expelled from the blue-blood gatherings of sorts in which attendence I be. Now, having wander waaaaaay off the major point here, I'll side-step back to the mat ter at hand: Art. What is Art? What is not Art? Oh, like *I'd* know? In short, I say HE is Art. Now I know that will bring a few naysayers in response, but, well...? Jim

WolfMistress <rwhiteanderson@kraft.com>
Racing with the Red Queen..., - Friday, August 09, 1996 at 13:52:09 (CDT)

*RED ALERT* - *RED ALERT* Yo, People -- I have found something I would very nearly almost *kill* to own! Please take the time to web over to *http://catt.ncsu.edu/~squirrel/giger/gigers_biomechanics.gif* It is an 800x600 .gif image, so it may take a w hile to load on slower machines. Since I am directly connected to our AlphaServer, it takes maybe 5 seconds; others will not be so fortunate. I stumbled onto it while looking for different H.R. Giger pictures to feature on my Page. As far as I worship any thing made by the hands of Man, I worship H.R. Giger's art. It is of endless fascination to me, and I even converted a picture of his original Alien to a .bmp-file to use as Windows wallpaper on my screen here at work. Others may find the work distasteful , horrifying, downright scary -- they are entitled to their opinions. Mine is that Mr. Giger is possibly the greatest Surrealist Artist of our Time. He sees what's *really* there - and it scares us. Good. I love it. What I want to know if if anyone at all out there knows anything about this Book, and when HE wrote the Intro for it! And can it be found, anywhere in the world? I'm dead serious. Probably the two living artists I respect and admire the absolute most in the world together *in the same b ook*?!?! I want one! *Jim* - The newly discovered Martian microbes and this one is thriving on Earth's atmosphere! Hope it gets loose and bites you! ;-). *Jason* - I got the info about the Wilson book and am on the look-out for it even as we speak. *Keeg an* - you and I are going to have a private discussion about your opinion of "laziness, shoddiness, and inconsequential babble because the technology allows it to happen" statement. This technology is my lifes-work and I am just as much an artists in what I do as you are making music. Saying the "technology allows it" is like saying "the guns allow people to shoot each other". I don't think so. We will continue elsewhere. *Bill* - did you come here to try and shock us with your purple rhetoric or to ma ke an intelligent statement? There is a difference between one's art and the *tools* of ones art. I more or less agree with Jason's response. Gotta run, and please, please try to find the Book for me!!! While I look all over this town half-million bookst ores (new and/or used)! Later, folks.

Jason
- Friday, August 09, 1996 at 12:49:50 (CDT)

Bill to start out, I can't find where HE says it's the most comfortable for him. He says that a typewriter best serves his purpose. When HE says Art should be tough, he doesn't mean it should be a Herculean labour, but it isn't an R.L. Stine sort of thing where he puts out a new book every month, with 32 averaging three pages in length. HE writes with a process that best serves him, while it still requires foot pounds of energy. In Those Who Can edited by Robin Wilson (that's the book I mentioned a while ago WM I don't recall if I gave you the 411) HE relates the story of the creation of Pretty Maggie Moneyeyes, HE wrote it in Vegas after he ran into the woman who Maggie was born out of, but who was not Maggie. HE later goes on to say that he oft en writes in the nude as a matter of convenience, that doesn't mean he's making the creation of art easier, it means he's making other things easier so that he can put more effort in to the story, every foot pound of energy you spend on the process, becau se it's something you're not comfortable with, or the lack of energy you put into it because you know your computer will fix it, takes away from the energy you put into the story. That's what HE was talking about. I think you're confusing the process of creating art with actuall act of creating art. The process should be comfortable, the act should be hard. By all means though post again, just because I think you're wrong doesn't mean you should shut up. Hope to 'see' you on the board again Jason

keegan
- Friday, August 09, 1996 at 12:25:49 (CDT)

Well, Bill, you've got the cojones to ask an unpopular question and I respect that. Here's what I think, for what it's worth. I'm an artist. Art *is* hard. It is also easy. The struggle is is to make it seem easy, which is a hard thing to do. The struggle is an internal one. As for HE insisting that the only way to do it properly is on a typewriter, well....he can think what he likes and I can do what I want. I prefer the computer, but HE has a point that it can make people lazy. Instead of RE ALLY knowing how to write, I can use a grammar checker. Now, it isn't wrong to use a grammar checker (in fact, I often wish I had one while posting to this board) but it IS wrong to RELY on it and not take the time to learn. I think HE believes that peo ple give in to a natural tendency to laziness, shoddiness, or inconsequential babble because the technology allows that to happen more easily than a typewriter which produces immediate hard copy. I believe that technology is only as good as the people wh o use it. Yes, the unwashed masses are out there buying computers and we're likely to see some poor works being generated on those computers (hell, it's already happening! Look at me!), but I also think that there are things of great value that will be produced (and indeed, there are. Look at Webderland!). I think it comes down to the integrity of the writer, not the technology. But I think HE has a point, too, that the typewriter keeps ya honest. My $.02 (maybe $.03 or $.04).

James C. Hess <104656,765@CompuServe.Com>
Facedown in Gloria Swanson's Swimming Pool, - Friday, August 09, 1996 at 12:16:54 (CDT)

Wow!!! I wander off into reality for a couple of days having made a remark or two and lookit what I find waiting for me when I gets back. Huh. Whattayaknow? *DOC* Meeting Harlan Ellison? Been there, done it (as you may know, having read my guest rant-- which may or may not be still about herein). As far as another encounter goes, uh, no. Don't think so. *WOLFMISTRESS* (or whoever it was who started the thing with the turning icon). Like Groucho Marx once said, 'Some times a cigar is just a cigar'. Maybe that isn't Prozac. Maybe it's a form of cyber birthcontrol. Anyway...having said that, I can be assured of nasties to follow, I suppose. Jim

Bill Dennis <wjdennis@earthlink.net>
Salt Lake City, UT USA - Friday, August 09, 1996 at 10:28:37 (CDT)

Okay, folks, I'm far from the most eristic of people, was never on the debate team at school, and can rarely see beyond the first level of a discussion--hence I've won precious few arguments in my life; so most of you can probably chew holes in what I' m about to say bigger than E-bola virus on steroids. (And before I begin, let me say that I *love* HE and his works, have built a whole new bookcase in my house just to hold the amassed collection of his tomes--HE's the person whose writing I aspire most to emulate.) But I just read the interview with him here in Webderland where he discusses why he doesn't use a computer. And, frankly, it sounds to me like he's talking out of both sides of his ass. First off, he says that "art should be hard." Then, as a rationale for still using a typewriter, he claims that "it's the most comfortable for him." What?! For everyone else HE wants writing to be difficult, but for himself he chooses the most comfortable mode? If he really believed that "art should be hard," he'd be writing in transliterated Mandarin; he'd be painting his words on a planetarium ceiling with chew-spitted owl dung; he'd be tongue-pressing his prose into cuneiform tablets made of his own ear wax. Would anyone like to address this (possi bly misguided) observation? Or should I go back to my status of "lurkers shouldn't be seen, let alone heard?" -- Billy D.

WolfMistress <rwhiteanderson@kraft.com>
Rolling the Prozac in the Bushes...., - Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 17:37:34 (CDT)

All Right, People -- Notice how the majority (?) of us agree that the Rotating Yellow Thing is a *PROZAC* pill!!?? What does this say about *US*, huh??? Now that's out of the way -- just wanted to say that for some dumb reason, I have burst out laughi ng everytime I either saw it or thought about it today. My co-workers, who were still wondering, are now dead-certain that I may be in need of these things.... Anyway, *Sue* - I think the reference was to the collaboration in *writing* with Wilder & Pryo r, now that you mention it. Suppose I could back up and read it, but not right now. I have a suspicion about the "Retro Text Interface", but I won't say anything just yet. "Mommy" takes you back to the "parent directory" which holds the Archives, I think . The thing is -- "Webmonkey" is playing with us until Rick gets the *real* page done the way he wants it. *DOC* said it was like staring down a large bee after awhile, and I am inclined to agree. On my monitor (17" HP UltraSVGA 1280) I had to change the resolution a bit because it was just *too* bright! Talk about fried eyeballs -- my optometrist is always on my case about the very low level microwaves monitors give off -- she swears I'm frying my eyeballs unless I buy some plain lens (I wear contacts) special shielding glasses to wear. I've been wearing contacts (started with the hard ones) for well over 20 years for 1 reason -- I had glasses from age 8; why would I want to wear *glasses* all day now??? Sunglasses, yeah. I've got about a dozen pair - a couple pair for whatever mood, and a few left over. Of course, my prescirption has changed so that now I have to wear half-frame reading glasses anyway because I really need bifocals and absolutely refuse to deal with them. My Mom wore bifocals. If I make it to 85, I'll consider it. *Keegan* - That business about the song -- What really ticked me off is that the court said the threats were **irrelevant** because they only started after 1989 or something???? Excuse me? Threats of personal bodily harm , as in *murder*, are irrelevant?? I certainly hope that gets thrown out or something. That doesn't make any sense at all. Yeah, we know our justice system is really screwed up sometimes, but Gee, whiz, already! Anyway, 'bye, all!

Sue Luesse
- Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 15:11:42 (CDT)

Hey, Keegan! Checked it out.. What a mess! Thanks for the URL. Gives a me 'little more' to know.. (:-)..... And....Ummmmmm... **WolfMistress** I thought Doc said Mel Brooks collaborated in the writing of movie scripts with Richard Pryor and Gene Wilder (a s per the credits).. But you are correct that only Gene Wilder acted in one of the collaborations.. (8-}....

keegan
caught in the web, - Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 13:48:05 (CDT)

Hey-as an aside about copyrights and the music publishing biz, go check this Reuter's article about the composers of the song "Why Do Fools Fall in Love". The article shows exactly the "business as usual" we've been discussing. Watch out-here's comes the URL! http://www.yahoo.com/headlines/960807/entertainment/stories/music_fools_1.htm

Sue Luesse
- Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 12:54:37 (CDT)

The front FINALLY blew through, and _dropped_ temps into the 80-90's.. Which has done wonders for my disposition. (:-) .....**KRIS(TEN)**... I think *I* get the 'credit' for kicking off the plaguerism fiasco. A bugaboo of mine, from a decidedly 'audience' POV (as discussion proves).. See, I'm just one a da goils what pays for da stuff to enjoy. So when I run into sumthin I LIKE, I want MORE.. Sose I do the 'smart' thing, and look for the source listed on the labelling.. And when that labelling is deceptiv e, I get pissed on two counts - 1) I *know* there IS 'more', and I can't find it, because some jerk is too busy counting royalties to even let a finger drift in a generically helpful direction. 2) I feel 'had' and betrayed when I cite a source in good fai th, only to be laughed at as ignorant (or worse) when the source is misleading. ..>:-(.... Emotional re-action to the frustration of NOT being 'in the know', and NOT being given a chance to enlighten myself either... As far as I'm concerned Public Domain should stay that way. I like the free exchange of ideas, and creative interactiveness. If the work of a creative person is a *gift*, it should stay that way. My objection is to gifts given to all becoming 'personal' property with the stroke of a selfish p en.. Kinda like when the whole family gets baked goodies for Christmas, and One Person hides the box and pigs out.. I don't care who eats how many of what - so long as everyone has a shot at it, and knows where the box is... **JASON**.. Know how ya feel. Happens a lot to me. I 'kinda know' a little bit 'bout a lot of things - and not really enough to feel *competant* in any of them.. I'm the bottom feeder of a lotta 'ecosystems' it seems.. Know what I like. Sometimes know why.. Life is tough when you're t he 'audience' (the 'market' to the business types). But it doesn't seem to keep my 'opinions' in check.. Hhhmmmm... ):-|..... Must be a flaw in the system... (:-)..... **KEEGAN** Gotta agree with ya on Mel Brooks. I find the "flash" of brilliance (that ke eps me coming back) too often is buried in the simmering black gook of a Large Pan.. I keep thinking there should be a "Greatest Scenes" type video (like the Greatest Hits compilations they do in music)... **BILLY D** I'm glad you asked.. Been wondering m yself (curiousity killed the cat and all - appologies to Toonces - I'll click on ANYTHING that's underlined).. I'll accept the yellow pill - but what's with Mommy?? I thought it was aimed 'right at me'.. (Wrong again)... And **WOLFMISTRESS** As She who ha s the divination of an oracle with regard to things 'puterish, HELP! What does that stuff after the 'pill' (about Retro-text) mean?? Has Rick the Wunderkind devised a program that 'covers' for oopsies?? That doesn't work on *my* posts?? OI!! Always sumtin .. **BARNEY** I think you drowned the fly christening it... Try High - Fly Straight - Drive Safe

WolfMistress <rwhiteanderson@kraft.com>
Lying in wait in the bushes...., - Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 12:50:01 (CDT)

Aha, Doc! Finally caught you! 8>}. Richard Pryor was not in "Blazing Saddles". It was the now late-Cleavon Little. I don't think Pryor teamed with Wilder until the one where they ended up in jail in chicken suits -- Stir Crazy, that's it! I can rare ly remember the name of that movie although I remember the action like I'm still looking at the screen! Weird. Also -- *ANYONE* -- Back when Harlan was scaring us all with the heart attack, someone said something to the effect of, "...especially no Hallm ark cards, because we know how he feels about Hallmark!" Well, OK, I'm pretty knowledgeable about all kinds of esoteric stuff, and I figure I know all I need to know about HE, but *what* is this business with Hallmark!!! I guess I missed it somewhere al ong the line and it's bugging the daylights out of me! Being a "card-sender" all my life, and a collector of some of the Hallmark Christmas ornaments, and being a member of the Gold Club sorta makes me sound like some kind of traitor to the cause here, b ut I would appreciate knowing what it is HE doesn't like about them! *Keegan* - one of the best parts of "Young Frankenstein" is Madelyn Kahn's beautiful high note near the end of the movie.....!

keegan
- Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 12:14:59 (CDT)

Good points all, Doc! "Young Frankenstein" is my favorite of all of 'em. I'll sing that schmaltzy violin theme for hours after catching it on the tube on lazy sunday afternoons. Howl on, brother!

Doc
Where the sun don't shine, Yet the HEAT keeps beamin' through,... - Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 12:10:01 (CDT)

I thinks Brooks' parodies work best when they take you by surprize. "The Inquisition" number caught me flat-footed, and I howled ("I have seen the greatest minds of my generation, starving, hysterical, naked,..."). The "Psycho" bit, I think, everyone s aw coming from miles hence, A.) because it was Brooks' Hitchcock send-up, and B.) he broadcast it with high histrionics. I really kind of miss the days when Brooks was writing with Gene Wilder, among others (like, Richard Pryor, on "Blazing Saddles"). The y seem to balance out an apparently-fundamental need of Mel's to get by on lockerroom humor. His most recent flic, the "Dracula" piece (!) seemed to be a quickie, and kind of cheap. It didn't seem to have the same level of production values as "Young Fran kenstein," or even "Spaceballs." I laughed hardest at the "Yes, we have _Nosferatu_!" gag. **Bill** about the Dole and Clinton '96 links: why do you think we have the rotating Prozac? Maybe we should rename the comments board, "As the Pill Turns?" I think I'm kidding. Love you all, Doc

Billy D. again <wjdennis@earthlink.net>
- Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 10:50:28 (CDT)

And while I'm at it, exactly why is there now a link to the Dole '96 campaign from this page?

Bill Dennis <wjdennis@earthlink.net>
Salt Lake City, UT USA - Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 10:47:02 (CDT)

I know that John Williams is not the apex of composerdom, but I can't listen to the soundtrack of Schindler's List without getting all teary-eyed. And besides, who could not like a guy who wrote the music for "Lost in Space?" Molly Ivins, by the way, currently appears on "60 Minutes" if anyone is interested in seeing/hearing her.

keegan
- Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 10:13:33 (CDT)

Yeah, Mel Brooks makes light of the heavy. It's parody. "The Inquisition" from _History of the World Part 1_ comes to mind. It goes for a belly-laugh at the taboo to lighten the weight of the horror. Yes, it's in poor taste and is not high Art, but I have to admit, I laugh. What gets the loudest laugh is a joke that somehow skewers my darkest fears. I think one has to have a "lighten up already!" kind of attitude to enjoy a Mel Brooks movie. A steady diet of Mel Brooks is as unhealthy as a stead y diet of Sturm und Drang. Once in a while I just gotta see a Brooks movie, though. (I'm ducking. I expect the digital debris to begin flying any minute now. Oh, PUH-leese take the Prozac that's been provided.......). Just kidding. You can think and say what you like. I never claimed to be a genius. Guess the lowbrow just pokes her ugly face up sometimes. (sigh)

WolfMistress <rwhiteanderson@kraft.com>
The Mad One, USA, - Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 09:14:55 (CDT)

I'm in a silly mood this morning, so please bear with me! The yellow thingie is "The Rolling Prozac", okay? It's to keep us all in line so that we can continue the illusion of something approximating sanity is going on here. Stare at it long enough, and you, too, will remember an Alien Encounter.... Yo, Kris(ten) and Jason -- missed you guys. Been very busy. The only thing I have to say about the "plagarism" problem, is the following copied from an email I sent someone else: "I am aware of Trevor Jones' cribbing of the music, it was just that at the time of seeing the movie, I couldn't place it, although The Ring Cycle is one of my favorite works. He rearranged it, then dismembered it entirely, then reassembled it with his own glue, is the way I would put it! But as I read years ago, "There are no new ideas , just new treatments of *old* ideas." I guess that's what goes on in the music field as well as the printed media. Personally, I'm not sure I can outright accuse people of plagarism of something that is in the public domain. It's a stickly subject that I have never honestly considered before because I see it being done all the time!" And that's all I have to say about that! *KRIS(TEN)* - Yes, there may have been life on Mars millions of years ago, albeit of the microbe variety. So much for my fantasies about John Carter.... *JIM* - Point taken. Mel Brooks is unfortunately one of the major offenders when it comes to totally screwing with what are great works of cinematic art. The main trouble with that is that he has been consistently successful at it for so long.... More later.

Kris(ten) L. Homyk <if72@jove.acs.unt.edu>
Habdulah, Mars - Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 08:41:38 (CDT)

So, is there life on Mars? Anybody? Anybody? I mean, they've got germs and a stone face and everthing! -- Pretty conclusive, huh? *grin* Anyway, I'm kinda like Jason in that I can't throw too much into the composers conversation. I'd rather not, while I'm at it (used to date a musician -- real ugly scene). Gimme my Billy Joel any day. But apparently I got something started on plagerism some how -- at least it's been a slight theme. I just wanted to say, Jason, that people *do* accidentally rew rite other people's work all the time. But they don't usually copy word for word, or at least rewrite paragraphs sentence for sentence and then publish it, hence the reason Molly Ivins had to publicly apologize. But I'm not a big believer in the "25 plo ts" theme -- if you can't think of more than that...*sigh* where's your imagination?

Doc
- Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 00:54:04 (CDT)

P.S. Anybody know what that rotating yellow thing-ee is? Maybe a big Prozac? Can't wait to see what THIS ellicits!

Doc <Here 'Tis,...>
- Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 00:51:24 (CDT)

Wow -- hardly did I dare to dream that such an inspired, thoughtful series of comments would result from a topic like movie scores! *Keegan* Here, here! There, there! What you said, 100%. All I can add is an anecdote about Fats Waller (inspired by your remarks about Duke & Billy): he used to get bullied by white music publishers into selling his music for a pitance -- $20, $30 -- and not even get his name on alot of 'em. So, needing the money, he'd take the crumbs they offered,...then go down the stree t, to publisher after publisher, doing the same thing with the same song(s)! Go get 'em, Fats! I believe there's just a TOUCH of larceny in the heart of all real artists; sometimes, it's trouble, sometimes it ain't, but it always makes a good story. *Jim* HE has commented in the past that he usually writes to music; what he listens to depends on what he's writing. Reportedly, HE writes to the tunes of everyone, from Bix Beiderbeck, to DeBussy. And what was that you were yanking? Good luck in El Lay, frien d. You might even call HE while you're there; he's in the book, and I'm sure that it would be an, um, INTERESTING experience. *Jason* thought we'd scared you off, for a minute. Tim Rice, I like lots. You are, I'm sure, familiar with his work on "Chess?" I f not, run-don't-walk to your local emporium. And BE CERTAIN that you get the original concept album. The London cast album is a let-down, and the Broadway cast -- hoo, hoo, hoo-whee! Ecch! Feh! Ca-ca! For some reason, they have a terrible time getting a decent book to go with the music&lyrics. Gotta go, kids. Love you all. Stay tuned for a coming mini-rant on What's Wrong With Movies Today, Chapter Zillion, in which Our Hero (actually, just me) looks at the Horror Film. Sloppy wet-ones,...Doc

Jason <never really gone just watching and waiting>
- Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 00:12:12 (CDT)

Okay I think I've got a handle on what I want to talk about, first let's cover soundtracks. I admit that my collection is somewhat slim, having no musical talent in anyway shape or form, music has never been a strong influence in my life. (the only r eason I have a CD player is because my sister got a new state of the art system and I got her old portable. I have about six movie soundtracks; The Disney movies minus Pocahantus which didn't impress me, I was skeptical about Hunchback, but was pleasantl y surprised, the songs were much better (I'd still welcome Tim Rice back though) The sixth soundtrack is A Clockwork Orange. My favourite CD's have to be either my Animaniacs soundtrack which is a great example of lyrical brilliance. (you try writing a song listing the presidents in order to the tune of the William Tell Overture) Or my Barenaked Ladies CD's (it's not what you think, it's four goofy looking guys from Scarborough who write songs with titles like Be my Yoko Ono Check 'em out!) As to seeing or hearing stuff that get's ripped off. I'm of two minds, If it's done right it works very well, The parodies that the Simpsons have done of the Psycho shower scene and the Apocalypse Now/Wagner's Flight of the Valkeries scene were priceles s. Sort of on topic which should segue nicely into my plagerisim points. For a theatre class we put on a production of Büchner's Woyzeck, which has over 20 scene changes. To cover the noise and time we needed musical interludes and so the director and seve ral cast members went away and chose some music. What they came back with was some thing that probably covered 90% of the musical spectrum from Frank Zappa, to Miles Davis, to Gorecki to the alternative Jane's Addiction, to Queen, to the William Tell Ove rture, to Ren and Stimpy title song and more. And the audience loved the music, one audience member said it was like the Pulp Fiction of theatre, whatever that means. In fact the cast enjoyed it so much that we put the music together as our own personal soundtrack. Borrow a little here a little there, and we have something that's more then the sum of it's parts. Using someone else's words is alright as long as you don't claim that their yours. HE quotes people all the time, so do I HE can remember who they are, I'm usually stuck with 'As a wise person once said' As for 'spit in in their ear' I remember hearing variations of it using face and nose, it's probably one of those quotes that are widely attributed. In Dangerous Visions HE talks about creative feedback, and he mentions a story where a tv writer for outer limits or something unknowingly writes an alm ost word for word script of one of HE's stories. A producer noticed and went to HE to buy the rights and HE sold it, he calls it Creative Feedback, which HE has no problem with it, it's a form of flattery, it sticks in your mind and affects you months m aybe years later, there's a story I wrote called A Rough Whimper of Insanity. It was only on the second proof-reading that I noticed that the elemental basic plotline was almost identical to Enter the Fanatic Stage Center. A man comes into a group of pe ople, exposes their secrets and destroys them. The stories individually are quite different and 'Fanatic' never entered my mind when I was writing it, but the creative feedback is there. In discussing the Terminator suit HE said if Cameron had come to h im and said I've got a different take on Soldier, and I like to do a movie about it. HE said he would have my blessing and for free as long as when the producers are thanking coke for free cokes on the set, they had, 'the producers would like to thank Ha rlan Ellison.' That's all he wants and if it's unintentional it's okay. (Cameron had been caught in in a starlog interview saying he ripped off a couple of Ellison's short stories.) and that's kind of my take on it. Enjoy Jason

Sue Luesse
Heavy on the backbeat, - Thursday, August 08, 1996 at 00:01:30 (CDT)

KEEGAN - I hear ya loud and clear. So I'll be more specific, and a little less 'upset'.. I was not referring to performance art, or artists who lend their own unique abilities to 'bring to life' a work. That is a required synergy of artistry and creativit y of many forms of art (I'm thinking especially symphonies, musicals, movies, choreography, and plays here - since no one expects a single person to create and perform all the different instruments/roles all at once themselves) and a 'bonus' in others (li ke music performance). I'm talking specifically about people who did not create what they 'claim'.. Don't perform the work.. Didn't do variations on a theme (ala Copeland, or Jazz), didn't even put a mark on the work by reworking it in a 'unique' way (wha t creative types call 'being influenced').. The example I used (daughters choir music) was Three Separate Books. Didn't even bother to change the 'real' arrangers name - just the composers!?! On the assumption the 'audience' and 'performers' would be too ignorant or stupid to know the diference is all I can figure.. I was aware that many songs attributed to "Big Names" were written by other people. First heard of that when Carole King sued over it in the mid-60's (so how ya gonna make a name for yourself, when all your 'good' stuff gets credited to someone who already has the name??). She won the case. I still cheer her courage and commitment for that. Don't know that HE ever mentioned Carole King's case - but HE has mentioned more than once in his essays that film requires creativity and artistry on BOTH the conception and perfomance end to make it Art (capital A per his distinctions).. And HE etablished quite a reputation (and record) on his anti-plaguerism feelings. There! Now I've gone and done it.. I feel like an ointment.. I'm topical.. AAAaarrggghhh! All my pet Cooties are dying.. (;-)~ .... Try High - Fly Straight - Drive Safe

keegan again
- Wednesday, August 07, 1996 at 23:05:04 (CDT)

Just wanna add something. Sue was upset to find the name of an arranger listed as the composer on what sounds to me like a choral medley arrangement of several songs. This is wrong and there are many examples of this in the world of music publication . It drives me nuts, too. There is a big difference between "by so-and-so" and "arr. so-and-so". In my experience, this is usually not a case of the arranger trying to cop more credit than is due them, but rather, a case of know-nothings in positions f or which they aren't fit in the publishing world. Here's another bit of trivia: Billy Strayhorn wrote many of the tunes credited to Duke Ellington. They were credited to Ellington, in part, because Duke was a household word and would sell more sheet mus ic. This is the way the entertainment *industry* works (sounds like Jim knows what I'm talking about. Best to ya, man!). I can't tell you how it pains me to hear a certain children's choir I know bash their way through a bland and senseless version of "Tune Up". The stifled swing isn't such an issue. They're kids. They have to try. It's part of their process. But it burns me that the director and arranger introduce the song as being by Miles Davis, when in truth it was written by Eddie "Cleanhead" Vinson. The "Real Book" says Davis, but the "Real Book" is nicknamed "the Wrong Book" by the players I hang with. I reiterate that the entire situation calls for care and respect. Sorta like HE did with Asimov's stories in the script to "I Robot" (ther e. now I'm topical). Sorry to rant. This issue grabs me because I live it as composer, arranger and performer (though until my kids are civilized, not as deeply as I'd like). Love to all!

keegan
Interpretive Artist, - Wednesday, August 07, 1996 at 18:59:56 (CDT)

Whoa! PLEASE let me interject this. I believe Helen Keller once stood accused of plagarism for something she wrote and when Mark Twain heard of it, he said that we all plagarize at one time or another. I found that an honest admission (and my memor y may fail me greatly in the details because I am taking this from a fuzzy third-grade memory. I'm sorry. It's the best I can do). Then you have the famous Picasso quote (though I've heard it ascribed to other artists, too) "Great artists don't borrow, they steal". I made a remark earlier about how the music for _Star Wars_ and Holst's "The Planets" bear resemblance to each other. I even playfully implied that Williams "stole" Holst's ideas. But Williams' music is NOT Holst's. It is Holst-influenced and there is a major difference. The art I pursue, jazz in the classic mainstream sense of the word, has always been an interpretive AND original form. Jazz musicians from the beginning have ragged, syncopated, changed the harmonies to, improvised upon and rewritten material from many n on-jazz sources. This is what the playing of "standards" is about. In the Billy Strayhorn tune "Prelude to a Kiss", the the love song is described as "a Schubert tune with a Gershwin touch". I might choose to sing a Gershwin tune with a Louis Armstron g touch. I feel all those great jazz musicians, all the great composers hovering over my shoulder as I sing. They're checking, not to make sure that I do it "just like they did", but that I do it just like myself, with great respect for the work that we nt before. They call me to be honest. That's why clubs and radio stations have to pay BMI and ASCAP--to make sure that the originators get their due. Yes, a bad arranger or interpreter can mar the most beautiful of work, but if the interpretive artist "handles with care", they are able to shine up facets of the work we missed in our first pass at it. It is a process that must be approached with respec t and love, or the shining work will shatter. I'm only trying to say that "borrowing" or even "stealing" if you want to see it that way, is not always a black/white, right/wrong, this/that proposition in the creative process. We all riff on various themes. And again, it's just my $.02.

Jim <104656,765@CompuServe.com>
Los Angeles, CA We are led to believe this is still the United States - Wednesday, August 07, 1996 at 18:23:28 (CDT)

Steve...interesting remarks. And I believe you are correct on Wagner. Ever read what Mark Twain (whom HE has been compared to on occassion) had to say about Wagner? Until next time... Jim

Steve Pagano <zazu@spectra.net>
Endicott, NY USA - Wednesday, August 07, 1996 at 18:19:27 (CDT)

At the risk of starting adding comments of my own before spending a few weeks getting fully acquainted with this board: The Excalibur soundtrack was indeed all-stolen, mostly from Wagner. If you aren't already familiar with him, and you want to find some of the Excalibur stuff without having to buy that soundtrack (which IMO is a poor recording, but anyway), check out Wagner compilations including Ring Highlights (Siegfried's funeral march especially), and/or Tristan and Isolde. That and Carl Orff's 'Carmina Burana'. Sidestepping the issue of plagiarism for the moment (noting only that all authors steal snippets of what they like just to keep in in their mind, eventually integrating it into what they do on their own), I'll just say that I'm a fan o f Hans Zimmer, and to a lesser extent John Williams, and that I also really enjoyed Michael Kamen's work on "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves". (Dreadful movie, but nice music.) I'm an Ashman/Menken fan too, but I think that falls more into the realm of mu sicals than soundtracks as you've been discussing.

James C. Hess <104656,765@CompuServe.Com>
Los Angeles, California USA - Wednesday, August 07, 1996 at 17:33:32 (CDT)

Well, I see *somebody* is paying attention to the hyperbolic minute. Yes, I am in Los Angeles. (Thanks for asking, the shock therapy to follow will be costly but well worth it.) I am here, as always, on business. Can't sit down for a second and the age nty-type person is on the horn telling me to haul myself to La-La land on account of that fact that a certain somebody who has been dragging their feet these many months has now decided to make a deal on my stuff but with the condition I be present for th e legal screwing that will no doubt follow. (This, I am told, is called business. Yeah. right.) Anyway, valid point Wolfmistress on the deprivation gig. But I can't watch PSYCHO and take Herrmann's music seriously since watching HIGH ANXIETY and that scene where Barry Levinson assaults Mel Brooks with the rolled-up newspaper and the shower scene mus ic--albeit bastardized--plays on. See what I mean here? Music is good and brings up a good point: What type of music and which musicians does HE listen to when writing? Jim

Sue Luesse
The Hessians are Coming, And that Bowie knife looks a bit dull - Wednesday, August 07, 1996 at 16:54:11 (CDT)

AAaah, Yes.. The sweet sounds of stropping and honing..... **WolfMistress**... While I defer to your collection of reference CD's in the main on movie scores - I must (ahem..) point that I also adored the music of Excalibur...most of which was written bef ore I was born (by a century or more) ...all of which was already in *our* collection of CD's, under the origonal composers names... One of *my* buggaboo's is people who take full credit for work they DID NOT create.. It is pretty 'Ballsy' to take a work already crowned as a masterpiece, change a few details, and claim it as YOUR OWN.. 'Addapting' music, or art, or language for re-use in a specific application IS NOT being creative.. It's hard for me to accept 'improvements' on the brilliance of origonal work done by acknoweleged Masters of their creative craft - especially when the "Improvers" can't come up to those standards all on their own, and usually can't even do a decent knock-off wannabe immitation either. 'Addapters' and 'Arrangers' slap their n ame all over everything these days, as if their effort to whittle the One True Cross into a toothpick was as great an achievement as what the guy had to do to 'make' it the One True Cross... (snort)... True happening - in third grade my oldest girl was thrilled to make the 'honors choir', and brought home the music to practice for competiton. She was 'confused' about the composers of pieces she knew well from home listening - I was STUNNED (to say the l east) to discover Jerome Baldwin had composed Ode To Joy, Shenandoah, and Simple Gifts (said so on the covers, and in the credits under the titles - "By Jerome Baldwin" - who turned out to be the brother of the choir director, and a 'self-promoted' Arrang er of Choir Music). And you bet I made a HUGE stink over that. But how many do? And how many people realise the "Classical Music crap" they never listen to is one and the same as the movie scores they buy and love?? And what happens to all the beautiful w ork before and after the "cut and pasted" segment used by the Arranger, that they DON'T hear - and probably never will??..... OK - I'm done now.. It's safe to come up for air..... **KRIS(TEN)**... Never heard of Molly Ivins, but I can get behind you 100% on the issue of "borrowing"... I don't believe in plaguerism, in the sense that I see no point to creating if so many restrict ions are slapped on the 'use' of the creation through licensing and regulating it can't be enjoyed by everyone.. However, 'enjoying' and 'claiming' are two different things.. One thing to sing a song you like, another thing to claim you composed it.... ** JIM**... I thought it was a bit crowded between the 'black covers'.. So wouldja mind keeping your _whatever that was_ outa *my* Harlan Ellison Is Watching?? You're leaving wet streaks on the part I haven't read yet.. At least wait until I'm through.. GEEZ ! I was only reading it, since I have an excellent memory for odd things - and you were wanting discussion on it..how many months ago?? ..];-)..... **JASON** ...Tell 'em we'll pay the ransom.. C'mon Back! We miss ya. And I can't for the life of me figure out what you felt 'responsible' for (re: a few posts back) - but if it helps get you back posting here's an official 'Mom' Anime Domino.. All's forgiven.. You're still part of the 'family'... And your first 'chore' is... (8-)..... **ALL**.. Gonna go 'hos e down' the dogs (this heat is getting them down, poor babies), and I spose I could use the 'hosing', too... Try High - Fly Straight - Drive Safe

Webmonkey
- Wednesday, August 07, 1996 at 16:49:44 (CDT)

OK, OK, OK, I fixed it. You may now cease thy bitching.

WolfMistress <rwhiteanderson@kraft.com>
Bashful Quacking any day...., - Wednesday, August 07, 1996 at 16:33:39 (CDT)

Jim -- your *ARE* a colorful metaphoric phrase! Yesterday you were in Boulder; today you're in LA??? Anyway, I can agree with your reasoning for not wanting to hear Herrmann's stuff, but isn't that like bashing the messenger? Our own 'Immortal Belove d', HE, has even said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Yeah, I've heard (and seen) the same stuff, and it makes me want to do nasties to small animals, but we can't deprive ourselves of some really great movies (or great music) just becau se some airhead decided it would make a nice hook into the Sounds of Axel Rose's Nightmares, Part IV! You are only making yourself suffer, no one else. And you do not appear to be *that* masochistic! ;-} BTW - Very Glad To Have You Back Among Us. Have bee n super-busy lately, is all. ALSO - Many Heartfelt Thanks to Rick-The-Wonder-Wyatt for resurrecting us in such grand form. I'm still trying to figure out why we do this Web Page thing... Speaking of, yes, I know I haven't changed the commentary in longe r than a week, but trying to maintain a Page and the rest of one's life can get a little tangled. Will change the commentary before the end of the week! *DOC* - On my CD, it says 'Vince' Mizzy! Really. On the little printed booklet thingie, and goes on to give some of his credits, (including Green Acres). Never paid it much attention, although I know who he is. Misprint? Two different people? same person, different names? Whatever. Will make a couple phone calls and start the search for Excalibur sound track; it there's a loose one out there somewhere, I'll find it! *Everyone Else* -- Hi, and hope everythings OK. Just busy. Will email as time permits. Bye, All.

Grumpy, Dopey, Sneezy, Bashful, and Quack <104656,765@CompuServe.Com>
Los Angeles, CA USA - Wednesday, August 07, 1996 at 15:24:11 (CDT)

Doc, Doc, Doc. Lighten up. Yes, "Jim" is my name. But you can call me what so many others do--oh, wait...can we use colorful metaphoric phrases here? Well, never mind. I was just yanking the chain around your neck called "reality". Anyway...to start a major fight here: *Wolfmistress*--While I do think Herrmann ranks as one of the all time great film and movie composers, I can't stand his music any more. Especially the score from PSYCHO. Why? Because of all the really bad and vicious imitations that try horribly to emulate his sui generis. It's like Terry Gilliam's BRAZIL (which has a great score, incidentally). I can no longer watch that film or any of his films or movies because so many people have ripped him off so much it sickens me to watch his wor k and know there is absolute garbage Out There that makes a gazillion grubnicks a minute while his works go nearly unnoticed by what HE calls "The Great Unwashed Masses". Well...I'll stop seeing how the stoning and crucifixtion will begin shortly.Jim

Doc <Ask a simple question,...>
- Wednesday, August 07, 1996 at 14:50:43 (CDT)

*WM* my dear Madamoiselle de Lupes! Sneaky? Trip you up? Why, I never. I radiate innocence from every pore. At least I THINK it's innocence,...):} BTW, that's VIC Mizzy, King of the TeeVee Scores, the man who made "Green Acres" sing. For Some reason, I 'd thought the "Excalibur" score was a compilation of classical motifs. Nice to know it's Out There Somewhere; I'd LOVE a copy. Interesting note on Herrmann, but War of the Worlds was '38, lover. Did YOU know that Hitchcock fought with Universal to let He rrmann score "Frenzy?" Hitch made it very clear what he wanted musically, something rather light (!) that didn't telegraph sinister expectations -- then Herrmann let him down, gave him a score dripping with menace, just exactly what Hitch didn't want. Hit ch walked out in the middle of the recording of the second track, and never worked with Herrmann again. I'd sure like to hear that music, though,...I think there might just be a story in that (great, another idea, and no time to write. Drat.). Gotta go ge t ready for work -- big, wet cybersmackers! Love, Doc

WolfMistress <rwhiteanderson@kraft.com>
Beating The Paingod At His Own Game...., - Wednesday, August 07, 1996 at 13:58:28 (CDT)

*DOC* -- Thought you could trip me up, didn't you! Sly, sneaky, -- Yup, I *did* go through a major portion of my CDs just to check a few things myself. And my mind is as sharp as ever. Careful, don't cut yourself.... Anyway, the music from Bram Stoker 's Dracula appeared in my collection the same night I saw the movie! The main score was written by Wojciech Kilar, a Romanian composer of note in his own country; also, the goose-bumb-raising "Love Song for a Vampire" was written and performed by the rema rkable Annie Lennox (formerly of the Eurythmics), and the "Exeloume" was written and performed by Diamanda Galas, another of European note, but vertually *un*known in the States. Marc Shaiman and Vince Mizzy did the music for The Addams Family, Vince Miz zy did it alone for Addams Family Values. Now I know why I like you so much -- You like the music from Excalibur! (;>)I have not been able to find too many to actually think it is a great score! That's another one that was hunted down and bought right af ter the movie was seen.... Written by Trevor Jones, who also did the music for Last of the Mohicans along with Randy Edelman. He also did the music for Arachnaphobia Another memorable Danny Elfman work is the music for The Nightmare Before Christmas (he a lso did Mission: Impossible which wasn't that great a movie, but the music is pretty good). The Excalibur soundtrack sort of came and went. It was originally done on LP, which didn't get too much distribution, then it appeared briefly as a CD and faded o ff into limbo. However, Madison is a CD mecca, just as it is with bookstores. I think there are a couple thousand stores in a 2 mile radius selling New and/or Used CDs. College kid population, remember? I can usually find or have ordered any CD that has ever been made anywhere in the world. B-Side Records up here found a CD release of John Cale's "Guts" album (old '70s stuff) that had been done in France and was again out of print. They found a couple in a warehouse and it cost me $20, but I got the CD! So if you really want the Excalibur soundtrack, I can find it for you! Did you know Bernard Herrmann had done the music for Citizen Kane and *also* the background music for Orson Welles' War of the Worlds radio broadcast that scared the poopie out of e veryone in 1939? If ever classical music sounds totally ethereal, I agree with the Romeo and Juliet, and also the all-Beethoven soundtrack from Immortal Beloved. Maybe it's just because I like Gary Oldman so much, but between him as Beethoven and the mu sic -- WOWIE! Anyway, more later.

Doc
Denison, TX - Wednesday, August 07, 1996 at 00:56:00 (CDT)

*Jim* (if that is, indeed, your name), I'll have you know that, much as I'd like to, I do not even own a copy of HARLAN ELLISON'S WATCHING. Natch, I never missed the column when it was in F&SF,...I'm just plain ol' nutty about movies. I read credits; I 've been known to holler at projectionists to "Turn 'em back on!", after the crowd has filtered out. *Keegan* glad I got yer head cookin', kiddo! BTW, I'm an old jazz junkie myself. First chance you get, track down the CD of the soundtrack for "Naked Lunc h," and tell me what you think; Howard Shore and Ornette Coleman really went to work on that one! I don't think "Would You Do It,..." can honestly be credited with misogeny on HE's part. As HE has often stated in the past, "Writers take tours of other peo ple's lives." If the character is misogenistic, that doesn't mean the whole story or the guy/gal who wrote it is, too. Furthermore, it's possible for a writer to feel a particular way when writing a story, and feel differently later. I've written stories of a rather hateful bent, read them later, and wondered what the hell I was so angry about. *WolfMistress* and how many of our CDs did we drag out after we got home from work, hmmmm? Tell me, my memory isn't working: who did the scores for "Bram Stoker's Dracula," and for the first "Addams Family" movie? I liked 'em both lots. Also, did they release a soundtrack albumn for "Excalibur?" Great stuff, there. And, anyone who hasn't, go find a copy of Prokofiev's "Romeo and Juliet." Do it NOW! Quite possibly m y favorite classical work. Oh, and *Sue* Molly Ivins is an extremely liberal political-commentary journalist, writes for the Ft. Worth Sta-Telegram, lives in Austin, TX, and has a couple of great books out. If anyone's interested, I borrowed a turn of phr ase from her, I didn't assiduously quote her, in brief, or at length. So, lighten up, grow up, or both. Love ya, later, 'bye. Doc

Sue Luesse
- Tuesday, August 06, 1996 at 22:55:11 (CDT)

Killing time waiting for our local Primary Election results to hit the Net - which kinda sucks, since the Presidential Primary was in March, so we have to foot the bill and hotfoot to vote TWICE just to make Gov. Engler happy and bolster his bid to be Vice-President with a bit of tax-funded buttkissing during the 'early' Primaries.. Watch out New Hampshire, Engler wants to be Number Two... **BARNEY** After much personal mental and emotional suffering, and some in-depth (if hurried) research, I am prepa red to state my intention of suing the deodorant manufacturer. GEEZ! Smelled it all the way in ALLENTOWN?? And I thought the sweat streaks down the bike leaving a record of my passing on the pavement was 'bad'... ((8-0 ... As to the mysogenist tribes - I can shed little light.. I'm still looking for that 'lost' tribe of Israel, rumoured to be one and the same as the Children of Cain (recognized by the Mark VIII's they drive), that several 'experts' have 'proven' emigrated to the New World and 'passed' as indigenous - in the belief that since 'raising Cain' comes naturally to me, and so many people 'swear' I'm Jewish, I am obviously a 'changeling', and one of that 'lost tribe' cleverly placed by an invisible golem with an unsuspecting host family.. Who st ill think the stork left me in a cabbage patch (the Fools!).... ];-)~ ..... **JIM**... About time! And I promise not to *think* if you do..... **ANYBODY**.. Who is the I-already-forgot-her-name Journalist in question? Seems like I should know the name - b ut I keep getting a blank. Just a hint - to place her.... **KEEGAN** I tend to think "Would You Do It For A Penny" IS mysogenist - and so what? It's a real headspace real people inhabit, and fair game for a writer. If HE is somewhat embarrassed by the tal e these days, I put my money on the quality of the work being the cause rather than the topic.....I'm off to check for online results (and see if they are "HOLY SH@T!" or just "sheee-it.."). TRY HIGH - FLY STRAIGHT - DRIVE SAFE

Barney Dannelke <dannelke01@enter.net>
Allentown, PA. - Tuesday, August 06, 1996 at 21:34:16 (CDT)

In what I presume are now archived comments somebody asked if the Ellison/Barkin collaberation "Would You Do It For A Penny?" was mysoginistic. So I said to myself, "hell, as long as those pictures from from alt.binaries.blondes.nurses.bondage.erotica are still downloading I might as well address this question. Now Sue (something fishey going on here) lives in Michigan so she might know more about the mysoginists Indian tribes then me [as I recall they used to "borrow" women from the Menominee indians in non-election years.] {you see there is this penny in the story and so the joke is.... never mind} No, I don't think so. The story does not advocate this as a pick-up technique, it simply illustrates a way that this one character looks at the world of dating and mating. This is not to imply that Uncle Harlan is pure as the driven snow despite his "feminist" stance in later years. One has to look no further then "Sex Gang" or some of his contributions to Adam Bedside Reader if one wants to point fingers . "The girl With the Horizontal Mind","Bayou Sex Cat","Wanted: Two Trollops". Indeed. Go nuts. "Jeffty" and "Paladin of the Lost Hour" will still be there after all this is forgotten.Doc: soundtracks- Morricone. Also Joe Jackson's "Tucker" and various stu ff by Ry Cooder. Tom Waites is God. Clapton is just a technician. Wolfmistress: John Tesh.... glad that pod person thing is working out for you. I still have my Monkees albums so that was a joke you see. [insert Sueemoticon]Well, my Alt.binaries.erotica .hamster.duct.tape.ouch files are done so I gotta go. No, I gotta go now.Abused in Allentown. Bubba.

Another alias for Cordwainer Bird <104656,765@CompuServe.Com>
Boulder, Colorado USA - Tuesday, August 06, 1996 at 20:58:21 (CDT)

Well, well, well. Aren't we just a clever bunch today, hmmm? Spouting off musical scores and composers for films and movies? And where did we get *that* information, huh? Oh, I know. You've been naughty again, haven't you? Been reading that book HARLAN ELLISON'S WATCHING, haven't you? Don't lie, now! I caught you red-handed, your nose stuck deep into the pages of that black-covered tome. Oh, well. I suppose I should send you to your room without supper for that and no watching FRIENDS. No. No whining o r protesting. I caught you fair and square, expanding your minds like that. What would your unca HE think? Hmmm?Well?Hrump. People these days. Next thing I know you will be thinking for yourselves and having deep, passionate conversations about, about, uh --Oh, for chrissakes...you *ARE*.Until next time...Jim

Barney Dannelke <dannelke01@enter.net>
- Tuesday, August 06, 1996 at 20:46:38 (CDT)

test. sorry.

Kris(ten) L. Homyk <if72@jove.acs.unt.edu>
Dullsville, Flatland - Tuesday, August 06, 1996 at 18:04:50 (CDT)

*DOC* I was skimming the last of the achives when you mentioned "borrowing" from "journalist" Molly Ivins, and I just thought that you should know that there's a not-so-well documented but true case of Molly Ivins "borrowing" from at least one of my f avorite authors (no, not Harlan), Florence King. I just thought that I would warn you that anything that you take from "journalist" Molly Ivins, you should research for the original attribution. (Yes, dammit, I'm angry, when I'm a journalist who writes her own words and makes no money, and she's a "journalist who steals and still has a skyrocketing career.) Sorry, Doc, but if your list is your sore spot(s), Molly Ivins is definitely one of mine.

Sue Luesse <jaluesse@htonline.com>
- Tuesday, August 06, 1996 at 15:46:46 (CDT)

"Iffigeniah in Brooklyn" by PDQ Bach!!.. What??.. Nevermind.. I really liked Tom Waits score for "Night On Earth".. Very moody and playful - made me think of HE at the time.. And Danny Elfman - well, I like everything he's done (including all the pre-m ovie work as Oingo-Boingo).. Yaknow, the trouble I have 'choosing' favorite movie scores, is that so many are not really written for the movie they appear in (Von Suppe single-handedly scored thousands of films and cartoons - and died before the media was invented.. or he got credit..). And there seems to be a growing trend to 'compile' music from many different composers and performers in any given movie.. But I'll put my 2 cents with Tom Waits, and shut up (I'm loining sumtin here)..... **DOC** ...I kno w a lot of Bills and several Dr. Bob's.. So lessee - izzatta Dr. Bob with the lab in the basement next to the morgue, and a federal grant to 'discover' another orafice to 'test'?? Sure hope not! He's not the kind anyone wants to have anything in common wi th.. (;-) .....**RICK**... Love the 'new' Board! (Toonces, give 'em a snuggle in reward..) Well worth the anxiety attack of 'not having nany' for a while, and the small inconvenience posting in the interim. I can hardly wait to see the Finished Version. ( 8-)..... I'd linger (content as a cat on a windowsill, while the dog shivers and barks _outside_), but this heat is getting to me.. Time to do a 'Coo-Coo Sisters' number, and sit in front of the 'fridge with the fan running (pretending to clean). It's so hot, riding the bike didn't even help! Just left sweat streaks to clean up later.. Try High - Fly Straight - Drive Safe

keegan
- Tuesday, August 06, 1996 at 14:49:00 (CDT)

Hey, Wolfmistress, you certainly know some scores!! I hope the discussion isn't over yet, though. Lots more to hear, ya know?Anyway, just as way to show that I *did* manage to learn something in Music History: The music Kubrick decided to use for _2 001_ was "Also Sprach Zarathustra" by Richard Strauss. As I heard the tale, Kubrick was listening to Strauss while working on the film and this piece struck him as perfect for the movie. Just a bit of trivia there. I hope others tag in on this topic be cause I'm learning something from all this. Thanks!

WolfMistress <The Edge of the Known Universe....>
- Tuesday, August 06, 1996 at 14:25:30 (CDT)

*DOC* - Well, darn you, anyway! You started something! I'm trying to eat a very late lunch at my desk here, as usual, and all of a sudden, I'm thinking of all these soundtracks & scores I like! Also, I wasn't paying close attention obviously - Bernard Herrmann is *IT* for the Hitchcock films. Even has a very nice Web Page called "Twilight". Check it out. OK. Let's get really whacked. Tangerine Dream for "Risky Business" and "Legend"; Bryan Ferry for "Is Your Love Strong Enough?" from "Legend" and "Hel p Me" from "The Fly"; Jerry Goldsmith, a mainstay since the early 60s at least, individual movies, tho - sometimes his scoring could get really erractic (and still does)! One of his best tho, is the music for the original "Alien". Mid-60s he did "Lilies o f the Field" and "A Patch of Blue" - both very moving (no pun intended!) scores. Also, a bit of **little-known information** - Stanley Kubrick originally commissioned the score for "2001 - A Space Odyessy" from Alex North, with whom he had done "Spartacus ". The music was completed, but Kubrick never used it! It has subsequently been recorded and released on CD. It is more Victorian in approach, but still some very exciting music that might have worked if Kubrick had gone with it! As you can see, such th ings are a major hobby of mine. I associate most things in my life with music - which is probably why I have a CD collection that's pushing the 400-mark, and consists of every type of music you can name, just about - including John Tesh and Yanni! It's mo od music for my meditations. I like it. Period. End of discussion before it even gets started! So, Doc, are you happy now??????

keegan
- Tuesday, August 06, 1996 at 14:04:14 (CDT)

Hey, Doc! Good question. It's got me questing inside. I use film score music in class, but I was a rather--shall we say, slack--student and so the film composer I know the most about is John Williams (the kids are familiar with him, too, since they' ve seen the movies). The fact about film composers that I most clearly remember from the two times I sat through 20th Century Music History is that John Williams lifted many ideas for his scores from the music of Gustav Holst. This was very important to both professors I studied with, and indeed, they showed many parallels between the music for Star Wars and Holst's "The Planets". Wow! It made sense in a way, that one should influence the other. At the time (and you must remember that in my youth, I Kn ew Everything) it seemed a brazen artistic theft!!! Oh, how I railed! But, ya know, I like Holst and I like John Williams'banner-waving,pomp-driven, gut-grabbin' showstopper scores. So I guess it goes to show that if you're gonna steal material, steal from the best. It's a good way to make money, at least. Anyway, there's a show about Bernard Herrmann's music on Bravo tonight. I love the score to "Psycho" and now my curiosity is piqued. Since I don't get Bravo, it looks like it's the library for me. Joy! (sez Stimpy cat). Thanks for the kick to re-educate myself, Doc!

WolfMistress <rwhiteanderson@kraft.com>
Having Lunch with The Paingod, Harlequin, & The Basilisk...., - Tuesday, August 06, 1996 at 13:30:50 (CDT)

Well, Thank the Maker! Gosh, wow! I was about to have my own particular version of the DTs -- the ETs, maybe? Ellison Tremens (or however the hell you spell it!) Anyway, *DOC* - glad to see you are still among the living. I also see that you totall y ignored commenting on my admonition to you a few days back about your *attitude*! It was just a clarion call, so to speak. I am not losing anyone else this year if I can help it, all right? Thank you. I knew you'd understand.As for composers -- Well, i f I say John Williams or James Horner, I'll get raspberries all over, eventhough I'll stick with John Williams till I'm iceskating in Lucifer's fish pond! But, since I grew up on old movies (30s, 40s, 50s), one of my favorite all time movie score *design ers* is Miklos Rosza(and not *just* because he was Hungarian - altho that helped!), who did the music for more classic films than I can name. Closer to now some that may not be overall picks, but who have done wonderfully on individual pieces - Hans Zimme r for "The Lion King" & "Backdraft" Danny Elfman for "Edward Scissorhands". I own more film score CDs than anyone I know because if I like the movie, like most things in my life, I associate the music with it and can usually run the entire movie in my hea d along with the music. Also, whoever did the score for "Last of the Mohicans" with Daniel Day-Lewis. I know I'm leaving out a major one from years back who scored most of the Hitchcock films, and I can't think of the name. But anyway, there's something to work with!

Doc <sbolerjack@texoma.com>
Denison, And the skies are not cloudy all day - Tuesday, August 06, 1996 at 11:57:46 (CDT)

Thanks, Rick -- guess I was getting a bit spoiled, there. Like the new board, guys; much easier on the eyes. The old board was interesting, but, after awhile (or a particularly long post), it was sort of like staring-down a big bee. TOPIC: useless, but fun. If we allow that film scores are the modern classical music, who is your favorite composer? Personally, I'm a Bernard Herrmann man (wonderful stuff, many scores written for Hitchcock), with Franz Waxman running a close second. How about YOU? Howard Shore? Danny Elfman? Look foreward to plenty of discussion on something other than the Olympics for awhile. Muchas Smooches, Doc

keegan
- Tuesday, August 06, 1996 at 10:39:03 (CDT)

Hey! Check it out! You CAN get there from here (or in the Yankee drawl of "Bert and I", You can get the-ah frum he-ah)! It's easy folks and ya can bookmark it, too. Many thanks to Rick and Scott for feeding the jones......

Rick
- Tuesday, August 06, 1996 at 09:20:11 (CDT)

Until Scott fixes things, you can still add comments by going to: http://www.cei.net/~wirehead/ellison/bulladd.htm

Jason
- Monday, August 05, 1996 at 12:15:08 (CDT)

Wow! hey everybody do check the latest archives whey come up there were several late eving/early morning posts.

Rick Wyatt <webmaster@harlanellison.com>
- Monday, August 05, 1996 at 12:13:13 (CDT)

Okay, thanks to the efforts of cei.net's sterling webmaster, wirehead@cei.net, the comments board has been reset. I will clean up the duplicate postings tonite and put the old comments up on the archive. Until then, I apologize for temporarily interrupting the conversation. I also hope this month to get Peter David's articles on the Friends of Ellison and Rick Cusick's articles on the Enemies of Ellison online, and to have a new update from Harlan on projects and other miscellania...

Sorry, but that's it!

Return to the Harlan Ellison Home Page

Return to the Ellison Webderland entry point

˙