Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Say it ain't so, Roy!!! Holy Shit!

66 views
Skip to first unread message

ttuerff

unread,
Feb 23, 2012, 10:43:22 AM2/23/12
to

Frunobulax_also

unread,
Feb 23, 2012, 1:44:19 PM2/23/12
to
that's really sad - more so for the child and family, of course, but
Roy, too.

Makes it really hard to enjoy watching his antics onstage, given
his ... proclivities.

Bil

unread,
Feb 23, 2012, 7:00:36 PM2/23/12
to
Fairly clear that imprisonment and exposure to confinement loaf don't
work

marc rosen

unread,
Feb 24, 2012, 7:50:46 AM2/24/12
to
On Feb 23, 10:43 am, ttuerff <ttue...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/02/22/3754559/former-frank-zappa-ba...
>
> This is the SECOND TIME??? Crapola...
>
> TT

He took the lyrics to Brown Shoes too literally. Damn.

Marc

eelco janzen

unread,
Feb 24, 2012, 9:01:08 AM2/24/12
to
Or from the Illinois Enema Bandit where Frank says:


"And this is for Roy Estrada, wherever he is ...."


Pfffff...


VVV
eelco

J. Roshi

unread,
Feb 24, 2012, 9:53:55 AM2/24/12
to
> This is the SECOND TIME??? Crapola...
>
> TT

His third time, actually. (See http://www.zappa.com/messageboard/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=17704&start=75#p430222
)

marc rosen

unread,
Feb 24, 2012, 10:16:51 AM2/24/12
to
Or how about the lyrics from Motherly Love off of Joe's Corsage;
"Nature's been good to Roy over here, don't think he's really shy...."


Marc (once more)

David Z

unread,
Feb 24, 2012, 11:04:38 AM2/24/12
to
"eelco janzen" <jan...@dds.nl> wrote in message
news:4f479825$0$228$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl...
Wanna-wanna-wannanenema
An enema
Wanna-wanna-wannanenema
An enema


Isaac Baranoff

unread,
Feb 25, 2012, 8:36:15 PM2/25/12
to
> This is the SECOND TIME??? Crapola...
>
> TT

Yeesh.

Stu Mark

unread,
Mar 3, 2012, 5:03:19 PM3/3/12
to
I keep hearing Magdalena in my head. Damn.

Stu
(who is disquieted)

NP: Magdalena 1971 12 04

Bil

unread,
Mar 3, 2012, 9:43:35 PM3/3/12
to
On Sunday, March 4, 2012 8:03:19 AM UTC+10, Stu Mark wrote:

> I keep hearing Magdalena in my head. Damn.
>
> Stu
> (who is disquieted)

Magdalena is a great song!

Apart from hosting an appearance from Stravinsky's violin concerto in D minor, Magdalena:

1. is about a young woman (teenage, but definitely not a kiddie) who is not passive victim (and FZ is supportive of her active response):

But the girl turned around
And said: "Go eat shit!"
And ran on down the hall.
Right on, Magdalena!

2. is clearly about a father who has been alienated from his social context by his economic position (and so is a wonderful bit of socio-economic critique by FZ):

I work so hard,
Don't you understand,
Making maple syrup
For the pancakes of our land.
Do you have any idea?
What that can do to a man?
What that can do to a man?
Do you have any idea?
What that can do to a man?
What that can do to a man?

3. is about a young woman who has allowed herself to be sexualised (and so alienated from her non-sexual childhood) by the economy, aided by her misguided mother:

And a teenage daughter
With a see-thru blouse
Who loved to grunt and ball-
And her name was Magdalena

...

I want you to walk back in your five inch spike heels that you got at Frederick's
same time you and your mommy got that crotchless underwear last year for Christmas

My point is that Magdalena is not about kiddie-fiddling or even a sad case of a person who indulges in repeated cases of kiddle-fiddling.

I think it's about a social disaster perpetuated on humans by their socio-economy. FZ thought it was a social disaster.

Further, I read FZ as suggesting that there are solutions:

1. parents/society can teach kiddies to be aware of the risk of kiddie fiddling by relatives and encourage kiddies to be active in rejecting kiddie fiddling attempts.

2. the socio-economy needs to be changed. Sexualisation of kiddies, for the benefit of advertisers and manufacturers, can be rejected. Exploitative employment, bastardising the mind of employees, can be rejected - but probably only by restructuring the socio-economy.

Cheers

Bil

Stu Mark

unread,
Mar 4, 2012, 2:10:48 PM3/4/12
to
It's the "Cheers" that gets me. :¬)

As for "3. is about a young woman who has allowed herself to be
sexualised" -- I have an issue with that. The human brain does not
stop forming until about age 25. Given that, is it reasonable to
suggest that while she is somewhat post-puberty, but that she is not
too advanced, as this lyric states: "I wanna take off your little
training bra?" If you'd concede this, I would take issue with the
suggestion that this girl is intellectually mature enough to allow
herself to be sexualized. You are, in a way, blaming the victim.

Stu
(who is glad to get that off his chest)

NP: Stravinsky's Violin Concerto in D by Jennifer Frautschi

Bil

unread,
Mar 6, 2012, 2:03:30 AM3/6/12
to
On Monday, March 5, 2012 5:10:48 AM UTC+10, Stu Mark wrote:
> It's the "Cheers" that gets me. :¬)

How cheerless of you.

Which of the following four lines do you not understand?

And a teenage daughter
With a see-thru blouse
Who loved to grunt and ball
And her name was Magdalena

Do you perhaps imagine that 'grunt and ball' refers to Maria Sharapova's style on the tennis court (for which see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nSehJDh8F4)?

> As for "3. is about a young woman who has allowed herself to be
> sexualised" -- I have an issue with that. The human brain does not
> stop forming until about age 25. Given that, is it reasonable to

And similar research suggests that neural plasticity exists for much of a human's lifetime. But what part of that research could be read as suggesting diminished responsibility other than to the extent that human societies have tolerated diminished responsibility for infants?

A Magdalena who loved to grunt and ball and who, in collaboration with her mother, chose to purchase crotchless underware, and who chose to wear a see-through blouse and maroon hot pants doesn't sound much like an infant. There is some sort of choice there.

Note, in your own jurisdiction, the restrictions on the doctrine of doli incapax in the case of the Crown v Venables & Thompson (the case following the 1993 murder of James Bulger).

> too advanced, as this lyric states: "I wanna take off your little
> training bra?" If you'd concede this, I would take issue with the

I take issue with someone who would judge a woman based on the size of her mammalian protruberances! Shocking size-based discrimination! What do you have against those who wear an A-cup on their titties?

Cheers

Bil

Martin Gregorie

unread,
Mar 6, 2012, 7:31:46 PM3/6/12
to
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 23:03:30 -0800, Bil wrote:

> A Magdalena who loved to grunt and ball and who, in collaboration with
> her mother, chose to purchase crotchless underware, and who chose to
> wear a see-through blouse and maroon hot pants doesn't sound much like
> an infant. There is some sort of choice there.
>
Actually, feminine collaboration had nothing to do with it: in that
spoken section her father says he bought the underwear for both of them.

> Note, in your own jurisdiction, the restrictions on the doctrine of doli
> incapax in the case of the Crown v Venables & Thompson (the case
> following the 1993 murder of James Bulger).
>
>> too advanced, as this lyric states: "I wanna take off your little
>> training bra?" If you'd concede this, I would take issue with the
>
This ain't so much kiddie fiddling as attempted under-age INCEST.

> I take issue with someone who would judge a woman based on the size of
> her mammalian protruberances! Shocking size-based discrimination! What
> do you have against those who wear an A-cup on their titties?
>
+1 for A-cups here!

"give me a girl who looks as if she'd been built for fun and games, not
dairy products" - Fritz Lieber - "The Silver Eggheads".


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |
0 new messages