Posts by Simon Grigg
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Everyone else around me seems to have great disdain for his music
I'm not a fan, but I really appreciate the fairly large cheques he's put in the pockets of people who I am a fan of. His taste is often impeccable.
-
I'd heard that techno-meister Derrick May was a bit up himself too. Then he pulled off one of the most masterful gigs I've ever experienced and I thought "fair enough".
I've spent a fair amount of time with Derrick and, yep, he can be a handful, but mostly it's a bit of a front. Once you get past that he's kinda ok. Some unbelievable stories. Those first generation Detroit techno wizards are, when one considers that parts of the planet tag them as deities, all pretty cool.
The only DJ I've ever dealt with who was a complete dork was Paul Oakenfold.
-
Jackie, lemme swing a little to Hucknall's defence. Whilst I'm no fan of his band - that Valentine Bros track was a huge club hit in NZ in the early 1980s (I still have my 12") and I hated the remake - he was responsible for this mighty fine record label, now sadly defunct.
Also, in 1990 when they toured NZ, his management aproached us and asked if Mick could DJ in The Box. We agreed, reluctantly, and we booked him on a Sunday.
He was incredible - an absolutely stonking DJ set of soul, funk, reggae, ska and dub the likes of which I've never heard bettered. He played for about 4 hours.
Sadly, he was an absolute dick to deal with, before, after and during - arrogant, demanding and utterly full of his own self worth.
-
Tony also played music – most notably in the Newtones, with my old schoolmate Mark Brooks, formerly of the Vauxhalls.
Mark has a comment on the thread now which, like others, is full of happy but misty memories of Tony. a man who, for want of a better phrase, changed so many lives, and the musical conversation in New Zealand.
Much of what was being played and listened to beyond Christchurch back then came from people returning from the southern city, box of records in hand.
I've added a quick comment to the original post too:
When I was first told of Tony’s passing (by Jim Wilson and Paul Mcneil – I woke to PMs on Facebook from both) we all made comment that we hoped that something would be written to remember an extraordinary man, but we worried that it would, as is New Zealand’s way with so much of its left of mainstream culture, simply pass into history without record. The comments on this page and the various Facebook threads have proved us wrong.
-
There must have been an incredible amount of research involved in this latest effort.
Several years worth. Chris spent hundreds of hours researching, interviewing and collating. What you see is just the very tip of what he has recorded.
Incredible.
-----
And on a much sadder note, it's worth recording the passing of the legendary Tony Peake, one of the key, if not the key, figures in the late 70s, early 1980s Christchurch scene.
I had a few emails when I woke today telling he'd died near Adelaide.
Without Tony large parts of the what exists in Stranded in Paradise post 1980 would read very differently.
I released one of his earlier recordings, with his band The Newtones, on my Class of 81 album and counted him as a good friend.
Hopefully someone in the Christchurch press corps can find a moment to write an appropriate obit for someone was was a major influence on many and hugely respected.
-
Nice John Lennon birthday animation on the google search page today
Oddly, it appeared on the Thai google page on the 8th and was gone by the 9th....
Maybe we were beta..
-
With the sellouts, bands rarely seem to upgrade to larger venues.
Various reasons..a signed contract; bigger venues incur more in way of costs and it's often safer for the promoter in a risky business to gratefully bank the cheque; and the venue sometimes underwrites the gig and/or the venues booze suppliers.
Yes, especially when you consider that most of the countries in between get very few.
Which mostly comes down to the fact that most audiences, especailly in Asia, are reluctant to pay the sort of money to see an act that an Australian (which is the main reason acts come south) or NZ audience will.
In Bangkok NZ$15-20 will get you into a venue for an international act with the first two drinks free. Few will pay more which cuts out acts that are not label supported.
-
Summertime, various artists, Ella Fitzgerald being my favourite.
Try the version on the newish Brian Wilson album if you've not heard it. I grimaced when I read of the forthcoming Reimagines Gershwin album a few months lack but he actually pulls it off, with a couple of bumps.
-
But can we agree he has the personal right to do so? Many of us express essentially magical beliefs for one reason or another, and often as a means to an end.
Of course. The starting point on this wasn't a criticism of faith and belief per-se, even if HORansome seemed to read it that way.
Science still can't properly explain why I love Wilson Pickett singing Hey Jude but can't deal with Andy Williams doing the same song.
One makes me stutter with joy. The other makes me stammer with pain. The magic is irrational and indefinable but I'll fight you (well maybe not) if you tell me I'm wrong.
I do enjoy the poetry of religion.
Some of the buildings are pretty too...
-
people do, it seems, rationally choose to believe in the existence of a personal god (or gods)).
It contradicts. To do so they must by-pass rationality. I'm sorry but I think Islander summed it perfectly:
ALL of it based on an irrationality/unproveable scientifically initial posture - gods are/ is-
That is the core of the matter. God / Gods are an irrational premise. Happy to see evidence otherwise, that doesn't rely on words supposedly written by God or others under his direction. Until it's provided it remains the core statement.
Also, Darwin was not the first evolutionist
Uhhhh, yes I'm well aware of that but Darwin, and his book, if you will, gave the theory legs and took it on a path to accepted scientific truth..
Creationism is, statistically, a minority view within Christianity
but this condescending "Theists are irrational"
I'm happy to believe they're rational in their belief, or faith once I can find a reason to justify such belief. Thousands of years of searching have yet to do so. Science, whether we all understand the fine detail or not (which really is somewhat irrelevant and a straw man) has, instead, taken us further and further away from finding such supporting evidence.
As I said, I'm comfortable in people believing what they want, as long as it does no harm to me or others, but I've yet to find a believer who can rationally justify their belief in a diety. Indeed most people of faith I've known over the years would likely happily agree with the descriptor "irrational" when tagged onto their faith. It's not about rationale..it's about faith. Perhaps they're "condescending" as well?
rational argument when we mischaracterise the other side as irrational hillbilly locals who are committed to views that most of them don't hold, are we?
If I'd said that I'd agree but I don't think I did. Please don't put words in my mouth.
This is vague and I'm sorry (it comes from a lecture which I have on my hard drive but am unsure where): I'm not sure who it was but a Christian Scientist said, and I paraphrase 'It doesn't matter if all the evidence in the world disproved my beliefs I would, in the face of it, still believe' (I'm pretty sure I got the nub of the statement). That is irrational. It comes from a perfectly rational person, who has boxed off a part of his mind to that logic which tells him to trust his mind and evidence and instead that part of his psyche relies on and is justified by something altogether different.
most theists believe in some kind of evolutionary story with either a god-thesis for abiogenesis or god-guided evolution (ala the thesis of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin).
Once again, irrationally. It comes down to faith. God Guided evolution, or a god-thesis abiogenesis is simply a dishonest way to sidestep creationism. They are the same thing in different cloaks. There is no rational evidence to support such theories. You can only accept such if you, subject to faith, accept the existence of a god or gods. Evidence of such?
not every theist is out to confirm their hypotheses
In other words: they are reliant on faith. Which rather underlines the point made that started this sub-thread. Thank you.