Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums
Sign in to follow this  
cookieman15061

Rush Concert

Recommended Posts

"Sex On Fire" is like audio nausea.

Pink is lost on me.

Prince did some okay stuff twenty years ago.

 

Must be my age...

 

[flapper]

 

Wow I just realized Prince is the music version of that Degree of Kevin Bacon game.

 

 

Every thread works its way back to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife and kids gave me tickets to the Rush concert tonight in Bristow, VA for a birthday present. They're even going to the concert with me...nice! Saw them a couple of years ago on Snakes and Arrows tour and liked most of the concert. Definitely preferred the older stuff over the newer stuff.

 

Looking forward to a great show tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...literacy is a virtue.

Have you read War and Peace?

 

[blink]

 

I read all of Tolkien's stuff when I was in Jr. High.

It was good stuff, and timeless.

 

But if that defines the extent of your literary endeavor...

 

 

I tell people all the time that I don't read fiction - it's hard enough to believe the reality of our world.

 

[thumbup]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you read War and Peace?

 

[blink]

 

I read all of Tolkien's stuff when I was in Jr. High.

It was good stuff, and timeless.

 

But if that defines the extent of your literary endeavor...

 

 

I tell people all the time that I don't read fiction - it's hard enough to believe the reality of our world.

 

[thumbup]

 

The extent of my literary endeavor? It certainly does not--although I can't speak for others. I'm working my way through The Nichomachean Ethics presently. How about yourself?

 

Neo, I wasn't claiming that The Hobbit was the pinnacle of anything. I was just a little miffed at how dismissive Cookie's comment was. There's more value to Tolkien's works than of them just being good stories. And there's no inherent shame in reading fiction, either--it's just as valid as "non-fiction", although I'll concede that it's often valid in an entirely different way. And to that end, I would question where exactly one draws the line between fiction and non-fiction; would one be compelled to classify works of broad and idealist philosophy (Thoreau may come to mind) as one or the other? And how would one place a work like War and Peace, whose setting and series of events in general are essentially factual (and I use the term in a very general sense), although it is peopled throughout with fictional characters and other constructs of the author? Is something of this nature a fictional representation of reality, or is it a non-fictional work with fictional embellishment?

 

For the record: I would say that, to me, War and Peace, held more value in terms of historicity and real-world impact than it really did in terms of narrative value or craftsmanship--although the fact that I read it in translation probably colored my opinion a good deal, and I feel that if I had been able to read in in the original Russian and French, I would likely have developed a different opinion of it. I greatly respect it as a work of literature, and I have a lot of reverence for Tolstoy as far as his innovations, his capabilities, and his ambition--all of which were boundless in the man--but as far as simple-but-important values such as characterization and pacing are concerned, I felt as though he lacked focus in War and Peace (which I attribute mostly to the scale in which the piece worked), which is an opinion that I do not hold of his other masterpiece, Anna Karenina. His capability to produce descriptive language which was as vivid and visceral as it was, though, still astounds me. It remains, despite my mixed opinions of it, a classic and an undisputed milestone in the realist literary tradition.

 

Sorry for the thread derailment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No inherent shame in reading fiction?

That's all well and good as a transitional study on the road of life.

If you get out of high school with the ability to diagram a sentence and balance a checkbook, that's just the start.

 

But if escapism and fantasy lands are all one pursues (those people are all around us - and they breed) I don't talk to them.

 

When I speak to a college-age young man who can't change oil or a tire, and can't name a single Supreme Court Justice...

When I speak with college-age woman who's never held a job, can't name the Vice Prez, and is waiting for a husband to take over her care...

 

 

Everybody should pursue whatever intellectual exercise stimulates their fancy, as long as it's legal.

But they should be able to support themselves financially and interact face to face in society, not just via Mafia Wars on FaceBook.

 

 

40 years old and dependant upon others for survival is nothing short of handicapped/disabled, especially disgusting if it's willful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XDK I was just funnin wit ya. Didn't mean to cause a scene lol. I was just remembering in H.S. all the guys into Rush also loved Tolkien.

 

It's all good sorry again if my meaning was misconstrued.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cookieman,

You observed and commented on a valid stereotype.

It's not YOUR fault those people are out there...

 

How many of those zealot air drummer/guitarists have you met who can name every Rush song in order on every Rush album?

How many of them could play an instrument - at all?

 

I appreciate fervent fans, but the nerds and goobers are out there.

Rush attracted more than their share.

I went to high school and worked with dozens of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw them back in 91 for the "Roll the Bones" tour. I couldn't believe the amount of music, and the size of the stage show. Peart actually had Three drum sets around him, instead of his usual two. They had Huge Rabbits come out of Huge Hats for some of the Presto stuff. The Stage opened up into one big Lighted Platform during Xanadu.

 

But it was their music that was most memorable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I do agree completely, that an individual should be capable of functioning beyond the simple fulfillment of simple desires. Learning what needs to be learned isn't always fun--Plato expressed pretty outright, and was wise in his intimations that knowledge is often hard-won, and the process of learning can be painful--but there's payoff at the end of the hardship that makes it more than worth the effort. The young have a tendency to complain about the struggles involved in compulsory education, but we both agree that it's far more beneficial to an individual to work through it and come out more capable of rational and effective conduct. It's less painful in the long term to go through thirteen-or-so years of compulsory education and come out of it knowing how to use arithmetic operations without a calculator than it is to come out of a misappropriated youth and to not know how to give change out of eleven dollars for an item that cost $10.75. I still believe that there's no harm in the occasional foray into escapism that literary fiction can provide--especially with some of the heavier stuff along the lines of Melville or Dostoevsky, for instance. As far as practical concerns go, for instance, a familiarity with the written word can sharpen one's communicative abilities--in other words, a familiarity with well-constructed language can influence the reader towards imitation. But yeah, I'm willing to concede that fiction doesn't have all of the answers--far from it, in fact, which is why I've been known to read the news during breakfast. [cool]

 

XDK I was just funnin wit ya. Didn't mean to cause a scene lol. I was just remembering in H.S. all the guys into Rush also loved Tolkien.

 

It's all good sorry again if my meaning was misconstrued.

 

We both know by now that sarcasm doesn't always transfer over the internet--and because of it, I see no need for you to apologize to me. Rather, I feel the need to apologize to you. I'm sorry for flying off the handle yet again. Slowly but surely, I'm learning how to conduct myself with more grace and tact. I hope we're cool now, and I want you to know that I presently harbor no frustration or resentment towards you.

 

I was, however, one of those guys in H.S. who loved Rush and Tolkien. I hope it doesn't make you think any less of me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do agree completely, that an individual should be capable of functioning beyond the simple fulfillment of simple desires. Learning what needs to be learned isn't always fun--Plato expressed pretty outright, and was wise in his intimations that knowledge is often hard-won, and the process of learning can be painful--but there's payoff at the end of the hardship that makes it more than worth the effort. The young have a tendency to complain about the struggles involved in compulsory education, but we both agree that it's far more beneficial to an individual to work through it and come out more capable of rational and effective conduct. It's less painful in the long term to go through thirteen-or-so years of compulsory education and come out of it knowing how to use arithmetic operations without a calculator than it is to come out of a misappropriated youth and to not know how to give change out of eleven dollars for an item that cost $10.75. I still believe that there's no harm in the occasional foray into escapism that literary fiction can provide--especially with some of the heavier stuff along the lines of Melville or Dostoevsky, for instance. As far as practical concerns go, for instance, a familiarity with the written word can sharpen one's communicative abilities--in other words, a familiarity with well-constructed language can influence the reader towards imitation. But yeah, I'm willing to concede that fiction doesn't have all of the answers--far from it, in fact, which is why I've been known to read the news during breakfast. [cool]

 

 

 

We both know by now that sarcasm doesn't always transfer over the internet--and because of it, I see no need for you to apologize to me. Rather, I feel the need to apologize to you. I'm sorry for flying off the handle yet again. Slowly but surely, I'm learning how to conduct myself with more grace and tact. I hope we're cool now, and I want you to know that I presently harbor no frustration or resentment towards you.

 

I was, however, one of those guys in H.S. who loved Rush and Tolkien. I hope it doesn't make you think any less of me.

 

msp_thumbup.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember a number of people that just "didn't get" Rush or Geddy's voice and never will. Yet, they thought Neil Young or Bob Dylan were king. I can sing better than Neil or Bob. Just can't write amazing lyrics or folk tunes . . . details.

 

It was/is Geddy, Alex, and Neal [with all due respect to John, the original drummer] that made/make Rush. Any piece missing and Rush would not be Rush. I thought Geddy and Alex both put it well in the documentary when Neal was going through personal tragedy and just took off . . . they never even thought about thinking about "the band" during that time. The same would hold true for Geddy or Alex.

 

They've always been bouncing around in my top 5. Though I didn't like their interpretation of Nu-wave in the 80s compared to their other works, I liked it better than Nu-wave in general. A painful time for music. 70s had disco which was painful too but we had such amazing rock to counter. Rush was an integral part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Geddy's voice

thought Neil Young or Bob Dylan were king.

I can sing better than Neil or Bob.

You missed Tom Petty.

Another guy with a pretty impressive body of work in his early years - can't sing for sh!t.

I can sing better than Tom, but I don't think it would work if I did it for him.

 

[flapper]

 

 

Any piece missing and Rush would not be Rush.

Yeah, I don't know of many bands with members who are as elemental to its existence.

 

 

 

70s had disco which was painful too but we had such amazing rock to counter.

Rush was an integral part.

Indeed we did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I don't know of many bands with members who are as elemental to its existence.

 

How about ZZ Top? [thumbup]

 

But yeah, beyond those two I can't think of many others. Zeppelin, too, because they ended when Bonham died, and I'd also perhaps include Motorhead, who despite having gone through a whole long list of drummers and bassists, is wholly dependent on Lemmy's participation.

 

Heck, there are some bands working right now who have, like, some non-essential band member or something carrying the name of the band along. I mean, who's even in the current iteration of Thin Lizzy? Certainly not Phil Lynott (R.I.P.)

 

Frankly, though, one of my favorite Rush albums (their debut) happens to be the only one which does not have Neil Peart. It is, perhaps, less refined or creative than their later output, which was driven very heavily by Neil Peart's writing, but it is certainly a solid selection of very energetic hard rock tunes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to diminish Frank Beard's contribution...

 

But I figure there are many competent drummers who could step behind the kit in his place.

You'd never know the difference.

 

Dusty Hill did some great vocal work as well, but the same applies to his bass playing.

 

It's a Billy Gibbons vehicle for the most part - and a timeless one at that.

 

[thumbup] B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are really very few bands that could stand each other long enough to grow old together. (after they became successful)

My short list

 

Aerosmith

ZZ top

Rush

Cheap Trick ( Petersen left for awhile but came to his senses and returned)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Hobbit is a delightful story, and regardless of what book it was, last I checked literacy is a virtue.

I only read the cliffs notes (Led Zeppelin's lyrics) good story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are really very few bands that could stand each other long enough to grow old together. (after they became successful)

My short list

 

Aerosmith

ZZ top

Rush

Cheap Trick ( Petersen left for awhile but came to his senses and returned)

Stones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No inherent shame in reading fiction?

That's all well and good as a transitional study on the road of life.

If you get out of high school with the ability to diagram a sentence and balance a checkbook, that's just the start.

 

But if escapism and fantasy lands are all one pursues (those people are all around us - and they breed) I don't talk to them.

 

When I speak to a college-age young man who can't change oil or a tire, and can't name a single Supreme Court Justice...

When I speak with college-age woman who's never held a job, can't name the Vice Prez, and is waiting for a husband to take over her care...

 

 

Everybody should pursue whatever intellectual exercise stimulates their fancy, as long as it's legal.

But they should be able to support themselves financially and interact face to face in society, not just via Mafia Wars on FaceBook.

 

 

40 years old and dependant upon others for survival is nothing short of handicapped/disabled, especially disgusting if it's willful.

Dad? Is that you?!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...