Smashing Pumpkins Vs Pearl Jam

[V]

 

Originally Posted by AngryGoldfish

My favourite artists are those who don't just write hot {censored}, but also are hot {censored} themselves. Corgan is not hot {censored}. In the same vein, I prefer knowing a little about the author before reading a book. It just makes it more fulfilling.

 

The text is the text. However there is no outside the text.

[Sad Darwin]

 

Originally Posted by Dr.Picklebottom

if you spell each backwards you would get 'snikpmup gnihsams and maj lraep'. these letters transposed would allow one to spell

'Spasms Humping Kin' > 'Maple Jar'.

which is best- who the F wants a maple jar? not me. smashing pumpkins takes this one.

 

I mean, it's obvious that this just about settles it, right guys?

Why 7 pages. Eh, tldr. I vote Kin Humpers.

[AngryGoldfish]

 

Originally Posted by V

The text is the text. However there is no outside the text.

 

What do you mean? Does knowing the names and history of a band not make listening to their music that much more personal? I know it does for me.

[vulcaniza P]

answer is stil MESHUGGAH!!

[AngryGoldfish]

Helmet are awesome.

[V]

 

Originally Posted by AngryGoldfish

What do you mean? Does knowing the names and history of a band not make listening to their music that much more personal? I know it does for me.

 

I mean that using the author as evidence to interpret the book is really not an interpretation of the text most people would accept in my field (literary theory) because it can seriously hinder an objective look at what the book/music/whatever actually does itself by substituting part of his or her proclaimed thoughts on life/the book/whatever for things that might not really be present in the work. However, we do also say that there's no outside the text (meaning that there's a whole body of other stuff that you can't really say is separate from the work because it is on a continuum of linkage to it), so as long as you consider the author's media about him or herself as part of the book/text/song/whatever, you know...sure. Obviously you can do whatever you want. Your interpretation is yours. Just sort of brought up an ambiguity in literary analysis for me I hadn't specifically thought of by combining a couple of semi-contradictory theories.

[AngryGoldfish]

 

Originally Posted by V

I mean that using the author as evidence to interpret the book is really not an interpretation of the text most people would accept in my field (literary theory) because it can seriously hinder an objective look at what the book/music/whatever actually does itself by substituting part of his or her proclaimed thoughts on life/the book/whatever for things that might not really be present in the work. However, we do also say that there's no outside the text (meaning that there's a whole body of other stuff that you can't really say is separate from the work because it is on a continuum of linkage to it), so as long as you consider the author's media about him or herself as part of the book/text/song/whatever, you know...sure. Obviously you can do whatever you want. Your interpretation is yours. Just sort of brought up an ambiguity in literary analysis for me I hadn't specifically thought of by combining a couple of semi-contradictory theories.

 

That makes sense. I guess I'm just not one to make up my own mind, because I like to collect a variety of them and create a mixture. I love hearing people comment on my poetry when it's widely different than my original intention because it's like having a really creative conversation with someone. Each point is countered and questioned. I like that. You can only really find that with an array of ideas. I just don't have the intelligence (maybe intelligence is not the right word. How about confidence??) to develop my own philosophy and stand by it 100%.

[JamesSGBrown]

SP's have Siamese Dream, Mellon Collie, and Adore in their catalogue. I think their sonic diversity is waaaay above and beyond PJ's relatively conventional approach. Way more interesting band.