Sweet Papa Crimbo Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 Let's knock off all the baiting and personal attacks, folks. Maybe re-read the VC Rules and Regulations, which specifically prohibit both of these behaviors. I'd hate to have to start slinging suspensions around. Can we manage civilty and basic respect for other opinions? This alpha-dog one-upmanship gets so tiresome... and it's so damned childish besides! Please stop being so insultingly dismissive of each other. That doesn't exactly make VC a fun place, y'know? Love, kidsmoke I still don't know what it means to be 'arsed'? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mountain bed Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 Covers should be special occassions...if they happen every show, inevitably there will be unhappiness with that.I agree with this. I do believe that more often than not when a band starts doing a lot of covers they've found themselves in a rut regarding creating new material. Lord knows I saw enough of that with some of my favorite bands. That said, can someone find JP so we can hear a "Ziggy Stardust"? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 I still don't know what it means to be 'arsed'? you can't "BE ARSED" - you can only ever "NOT BE ARSED". does that help in any way? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sweet Papa Crimbo Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 you can't "BE ARSED" - you can only ever "NOT BE ARSED". does that help in any way? ...do I need the babelfish translator for this? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
W(TF) Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 I agree with this. I do believe that more often than not when a band starts doing a lot of covers they've found themselves in a rut regarding creating new material. Lord knows I saw enough of that with some of my favorite bands. That said, can someone find JP so we can hear a "Ziggy Stardust"? Funny, as I was scanning the last couple pages of this thread I thought, I'd love to hear the band do Diamond Dogs or Suffragette City. Would also love to hear Jeff and John harmonize on a song like In The Street. But as long as they're playing what they're into playing, I'm content to listen. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
M. (hristine Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 That said, can someone find JP so we can hear a "Ziggy Stardust"? After hearing Edie's boot of Wilco doing Ziggy, I actually asked Jeff to do it before the Springfield show. He said, "No, no, no." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 ...do I need the babelfish translator for this? arsed = bothered Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 arsed = bothered correct. although, like i said, you can only be it in a negative sense - so you can't use it in exactly the same way as "Bothered". because, you can say - "yes, i am bothered". but, if you replaced bothered for arsed, it wouldn't make sense. "yes, i am arsed" is wrong. very wrong. is there a term for this type of word? anyone? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sweet Papa Crimbo Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 correct. although, like i said, you can only be it in a negative sense - so you can't use it in exactly the same way as "Bothered". because, you can say - "yes, i am bothered". but, if you replaced bothered for arsed, it wouldn't make sense. "yes, i am arsed" is wrong. very wrong. is there a term for this type of word? anyone? Annoyingly pretentious? Kind of like frat boys saying 'bloody'? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 correct. although, like i said, you can only be it in a negative sense - so you can't use it in exactly the same way as "Bothered". because, you can say - "yes, i am bothered". but, if you replaced bothered for arsed, it wouldn't make sense. "yes, i am arsed" is wrong. very wrong. is there a term for this type of word? anyone?"transitive verb" comes to mind, but this isn't the typical usage of one. Annoyingly pretentious? Kind of like frat boys saying 'bloody'?In the U.K. this is everyday speech. I suppose it might be pretentious in the U.S., but not there. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Party @ the Moontower Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 Annoyingly pretentious? Annoying & pretentious. Now that would have been a better thing to call... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 Annoyingly pretentious? Kind of like frat boys saying 'bloody'? it's definately not used by pretentious types. i'm pretty sure i rarely use it, for example. i guess it's just another example of being seperated by a common language. anyway, now you know! see if you can slip it into a conversation some time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Edie Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 Annoyingly pretentious? Kind of like frat boys saying 'bloody'? I believe both arsed and bloody are kind of low class in the UK. And I for one LOVE seeing the queen's English here on the Internets. I can almost hear the accents when I read the words Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 "transitive verb" comes to mind, but this isn't the typical usage of one. hmmm. i don't think so. i looked transitive verb up on wikipedia and it and it doesn't seem to fit into that. it must be something! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 I thought of transitive verb because it requires a subject and doesn't stand on its own. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 I believe both arsed and bloody are kind of low class in the UK. And I for one LOVE seeing the queen's English here on the Internets. I can almost hear the accents when I read the words bloody seems to cut across all the classes. it's how you say it which differs from class to class. "bloody hell!" is working class. "those bloody neighbours kids are making a bloody racket again!" is middle class. "you can't get the bloody staff these days" is upper class. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 I thought of transitive verb because it requires a subject and doesn't stand on its own. you could be right. i'm no expert on that sort of thing. another phrase which is quite weird is "My arse!" - which is used by the working class, and basically means "nonsense!" here is it being used properly: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
nodep5 Posted October 15, 2009 Author Share Posted October 15, 2009 I think we have all decided Wilco's touring will end after terrible reviews complaining of the band's singing in faux British accents and swapping bizarre phrases such as "arse and bloody" instead of the normal lyrics. It is a sad story. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 I think we have all decided Wilco's touring will end after terrible reviews complaining of the band's singing in faux British accents and swapping bizarre phrases such as "arse and bloody" instead of the normal lyrics. It is a sad story. the end. ....now, "where does jeff buy those lovely shoes of his?" Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 ....now, "where does jeff buy those lovely shoes of his?" Across the mall from where Glenn got his braces. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 It's a past participle (or passive construction) of a transitive verb that doesn't exist in the present tense/active voice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Livin' in New Orleans Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 No matter what, WIlco is simply kicking ass live.. they are so inventive, adding muscle and nuance to already great songs. I love it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SGL Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 No matter what, WIlco is simply kicking ass live.. they are so inventive, adding muscle and nuance to already great songs. I love it. True. But I'd also like to see them do more covers. Maybe I Wanna Be Your Dog like they used to cover in UT. And when you think of all the musical talent that is in the group, the sky's the limit as far as covers go. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 True. But I'd also like to see them do more covers. Maybe I Wanna Be Your Dog like they used to cover in UT. And when you think of all the musical talent that is in the group, the sky's the limit as far as covers go.covers suck Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I agree wholeheartedly, but I still would have loved to be at the 2004 Halloween shows where they busted out Don't Fear the Reaper. Or the 12-31-2004 show with Love Will Keep Us Together. Covers as abberrations is a pleasant surprise. Covers as standards is not a Wilco show. It's a cover-band with Nels, Jeff, John, Glenn, Pat and Mike. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.