SUN CITY GIRLS: FOLK SONGS OF THE RICH & EVIL AND IT’S TIE IN TO SOREN KIERKEGAARD’S “EITHE/OR”

 (Where are they now under random slapdash psych groove - demanding of the audience, “Don’t you see how short the distance is?  The nothing.  It’s not that the ruler isn’t there, or that it doesn’t correspond to a fact, or that this knowledge can’t have parcitcal and useful applications.  It’s just that we must admit”…”You think I’m kidding?”)…not to mention sick feeling’n'dehydrated and yes I guess I’m a pack through it today ’cause only bought that pack when Patrick [whose a 40-something ex-engineer of many years who goes to underground freak shows]…wait, why’d it break to some schizophrenic elf singing about gypsies,’n'what?  “I will give you daggers bright/And I will give you swords.”  “I will turn you onto death” => also references to little people’n'leprechauns, so maybe the elf concept makes sense. “Let’s make you happy/I have a happy song for you/We know how to please.”  “This is not funny by any means/I mean this/I want to hear you scream.”  “I don’t want to see a happy face again/No longer a smile.”  Jesus no => he’s just had all the ruling oppressors sacrifice their enemies to ospreys and leprechauns all with some swinging cocktail jazz and songs about some folks who are both splendid hosts (free telephone rights, can take a shower, etc.) and ravaged cannibals: “I want to kill you!/I want to kill you!/I want to let you know how happy I am.”  Then some alteration character comes in comparing leftover eyeballs to toast and poached eggs.  All with the cocktail jazz!!! => “Try to get your voice over this volume/We heard your story already.” =>now they’re serving martinis and asking for credit cards, and singing “emotional songs.” => some bad jazz swing song ’bout nothing like it…I think when the drummer just starts madly shouting => what is it?  What is it?  Singing ’bout fine music, dissing the crowd….”I don’t care if you’re a lover of fine music.”  Low-fi Morricone keyboards hit with angry man ranting ’bout a chickenshack and hello darling.  “Dream the inevitable dream” => but now the voices R just in mad joy (and I think…later) “To die the impeccable death.”  Alan even picks up on th cheesy drunk country Gocher was singing => but he’s just discussing shit.  Talking ’bout cards => drum fill skronk response.  (Is this the presentation…?)  But then all  there in fuming glory groove ’till the overmixed vocals hit…no this, ain’t no country number.  “Play a little guitar that supports mass murder alright?”…theatening to slaugher the entire crowd.  Specifically your dance partner => now it’s just blatant anger, equating commercial appeal with the deservance of death => the whole time Rich & Charlie are flying into some space….of what?  Crocodiles?  Sugar in your intestines?  Sick-o, super world of-holy groove [and the rules of a critic…]…hey fellas, let’s take a chance.  “I’m Captain Cook/I’m a crook!”  Randomly singing songs => “I’m Captain Cook and I’m gonna eat your ass!”  “I’m a barbarian/Not a vegetarian!”  Still with the threats that the dancers are those who should go first?  Fake Can groove => no way ’round the Damo shot on vocals, w/ Holgar/Jaki groove ‘neath SRB doing whatever he pleases.  And so whay and what is the point to unleash upon to to the world decades of unintelligible, sloppy, antagonistic, cultural, poetic, schizophrenic music?!  Why was it a rock band?  It seems to be a medium chosen simply…no, why such a…for there were definite highly bizarre visual aspects as well [every image highly designed, chosen] […for lasting impact] [then the idea of a rock & roll band as a free-jazz outfit?! ]   Random splays (and what were the ‘influences’)…I will need to drink some water.  Sick again…now high vocal background [no knowledge preceeding the explanation…but even then, I think the secret is darkly presented to some nice guitar that sounds like Belew on “Graceland”s warming up with a hangover (or at times something else which I can not remember.)  The whole time => threats to the audience.  You would’ve had to see it a couple of times…the Kierkegaardian aspect of criticism => or the Kierkegaard approach.  For A’s paper (A being the author of the first half of Either/Or) are possibly not meant to be a PHILOSOPHY of the young aesthetic (no systemization whatsoeverf.  But instead through the combination of criticism of music and plays, rhetorical phamplets, journal entries, etc… (i.e. a variety of approaches), Soren is attempting to demonstrate the existential…wait, or maybe he does express the EXI? conundrum [either/or] [afterall] => A is represented only by his love of his own experience.  A is the representation of a concept that a man is what he says: there is no dialogue.  Everything in the first half (w/ the exception of the Diary…anyways, each piece is supposed to represend one aspect of the subject’s thought, and his mediums are meant to demonstrate that this type of character finds edification in the externailization of his inward tastes.  The Diary (The Seducer’s Diary - final section of the first half of Either/Or) simply reveals that even to himself he is an egoist.  Contrasted with the direct aesthetic preening and love of momentary actions: pleasure in the moment, self-importance: Kierkegaard’s aesthetic is run up against Judge William (the complier makes it known that the Young Aestheticc and Judge William were friends in correspondence althought they shared vastly different worldviews. All essays except the Diary are published/submitted precompositions of the aesthete.  The Diary, only the compiler knew of. Judge William surely would have been terrified with such a calloused, manipulative depiction of seduction, in which the goal is apparently not even carnal lust.  But only manipulations of certain ideals.  Judge William is meant to represent something higher [or so say the critical mass, the intellectual “they” which has created the detritus of study around Kierekegaard].  Let’s simply say Judge William (B) is meant to represent something different.  A literary polar opposite to A’s shallow extro- and intro- version.  B is a priest who submits to the beliefrs in marriage, church, sermons, etc.  His communicative styhle is conversational (as opposed to A’s quasi-academic forwardness.  Even The Seducer’s Diary is composed with a plot which unfolds at the subject’s will…)  Judge William simply seems up for Socratic discussion.)  And his message is one of faith.  No intuitions, rhetoric, disrespect for hegel…a worldview where who are way and why one way has been shrouded in mystery.  Undefinable.  To attempt to publicly herald a “truth” is depicted as idealistic, shallow and imitative.  To submit to some wondrous other fate and mystery is to achieve a higher plain of consciousness.  (The 3rd sphere actually abolishing the religious bliss of faith to abandon all for subjective introspection => acceptance, as the highest level of being).

Popularity: 24%