Can't Get No

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
I asked this on another thread, but it was kind of off-topic there so I'll give it's own spot:

who makes better music, sexually frustrated people or sexually fulfilled people?

did free love destroy sixties rock n roll? (the midsixties speed n' frustration era soundtracked by fantastic proto-punk and r&b-derived mayhem, the love-in late sixties and early seventies pot n' fulfillment era soundtracked by noodly psychedelic experiments and languid funk)

fritz, Saturday, 26 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Not sure about the answer to your question but the song 'Never Had no One Ever' is beautiful and moving.

Daniel, Sunday, 27 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Well, MY stuff is fantastic. Make of that what you will.

dave q, Sunday, 27 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I think that if I wrote a song called "I wanna fuck!" and I hadn't fucked in a year or so, the song would probably come off much more intense than a sexually fulfilled person.

Gage-o, Monday, 28 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I think both states of being can produce good music, but if forced to choose I'd go with frustrated. It's just produced more good rock'n'roll.

Sean, Monday, 28 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

If you believe Tom & his Green Gartside hypotheses, gettin' regular lovin' is sure to provide some creative breakthroughs.

My favorite type of music (that is, the jittery, caustic funk that typifies the post-punk boom) seems to epitomize the sound of undersexed music - frantic, bursting with energy, always on the move, so agitated, can't get no satisfaction. Some folks grafted the same sexless vibe on the strum-happy confections offered by the Wedding Present. (A memorable, semi-snarky review offered that folks couldn't strum their guitar that fast unless they jerked off A LOT; guess that means the ladies are SOL when it comes to breaking the guitar pick sound barrier - yeah, sure.)

Isn't there some sort of all-encompassing theory about great "art" striving towards something the artist inherently lacks? You could transfer this to a desire for happiness, or a desire for knowledge, or a desire to sate the voices in your head. I guess rock & roll is primarily about sex (that is how the term came about, and what it was about before all those dang intellectuals & folk activists came along), so the most gripping & visceral rock music is (on some level) about not gettin' none.

Hey, wait - did BRAINS destroy rock & roll?

David Raposa, Monday, 28 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

If you believe Tom & his Green Gartside hypotheses, gettin' regular lovin' is sure to provide some creative breakthroughs.

surely this applies only to zee pop muzik of the fresh and clean variety, no?

60s garage punk bettah than prog because of dirty reprobates out hunting cooze while hopped up on speed,

BUT

90s breakbeat hardcore bettah because the dirty reprobates did away with the groin altogether becuz they were cheezy quavers hopped up on E, huzzah.

jess, Monday, 28 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Is E not the groin-tastic luv drug?

fritz, Monday, 28 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

e makes you wuv everyone but it also shrinks yr willy (if its pure),and besides the wuvly feelings are "amorphous" (fancy egghead word for undirected...the object of yr desire is desire = you fancy a shag with the cosmos or whatever. god i'm bored.)

jess, Monday, 28 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

in other words, hopped up on e and listening to 'ardkore you WUVED THE MUSIC MAAAN, with no middleman.

jess, Monday, 28 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I've heard it said that boxers are told not to have sex (or wank) for a week before a fight, in order to preserve their edge.

Tracer Hand, Monday, 28 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm told it's been heard said they inform the ones that ask them thus and so "I didn't, just like you ordered" even tho they did, just like they didn't.

the error of this thread is as follows: LOTS & LOTS OF SEX = SATISIFACTION not necessarily

mark s, Monday, 28 January 2002 01:00 (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.