ILM IN THE VOICE

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Anyone else see it?

In the music section.

This is hype.

I'm also still alive, but without internet.

*sigh*

JM, Saturday, 22 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

And our own Mark Sinker in the column along with Frank. Were the situation sunnier, I'd merrily proclaim that ILx was beginning its rightful takeover of the world.

The Blueprint still debuted at number one, I note.

Ned Raggett, Saturday, 22 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

(note how voice fact-checkers picked up the silly mistake i made on ilm, when i posted the precursor to what vv ultimately got...)

mark s, Saturday, 22 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I don't see it on the online edition. Anyone want to type up the excerpt?

Ian, Saturday, 22 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

A link to it.

bnw, Saturday, 22 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Unfortunately, my Voice piece contains two untruths, which is what happens when you have only half an hour to write a piece and so rely on record company press releases. First untruth: I say that the Coup are changing the record cover: in fact, the Coup wanted to keep the cover as is, and Warner Brothers told them they had no choice, it was changing. Second untruth: In my paragraph I quote the record company saying "The Coup advocates change through peaceful means, never through violence." Well, this is somewhat true, in that the record company did say this, but unfortunately what they said isn't itself the truth. Boots Riley explained on the Davey D radio show out in the East Bay that though he doesn't advocate anything like the attack on the WTC - i.e. doesn't advocate a few people just going around blowing things up (and he says he lost a friend on one of those planes) - he does advocate a mass movement for social change that he thinks might well indeed end as a violent revolution. Which doesn't explain WHY THE HELL HE WANTED TO KEEP THAT COVER. I can't imagine how intelligent people can take him seriously now as either promising or threatening social change if he doesn't know enough to get rid of that cover. Whom does he think he's going to attract with it - other than some kids who like the idea of blowing things up? And what message does he think it will deliver? "I wanted to keep the cover so that I'd have a platform." Come on, the cover (which shows him and Pam - the other Coupist - dancing in front of the exploding World Trade Center with Boots holding the detonator) outshouts anything reasonable he could possibly say.

So I feel like a dope and a dupe. Nonetheless (at least on the basis of "Me and Jesus the Pimp") I think that Boots is probably a good guy. He's just another activist who gets dumber as his ideas get bigger.

Frank Kogan, Sunday, 23 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.