AN EGO IN PROGRESS
scott
Why is it that when you take a few lines or a title from a poem, shortstory
and book, and put it into a song, it's considered "progressive" or
"intellectual"? Where I come from, that's called plagerism. If I found an
idea of mine entered into a song or short story without my permission AND
the correct citation, you'll be sure I'll commence a legal action.
Clearly, the band owes a lot to *the ideas of others*. It would be
refreshing to see them acknowledge this. And not some vague reference to a
hack 'philosopher' on the back of a CD cover.
I minored in philosophy in university, and can say with qualification that
professional philosophers have never taken Ayn Rand seriously, and that
"Atlas Shrugged" has to be the most pompous, tedious piece of modern
'literature' ever.
Looks like Neil might be what Rand fears the most - a second hander.
debora
Nice try. Simplistic, but at least an attempt. Keep working and you may be
considered a troll with some intelligence. Maybe.
Debora the Drum Rat
James MacLachlan
scott wrote:
>
> Hi, kids! :-)
>
> Why is it that when you take a few lines or a title from a poem, shortstory
> and book, and put it into a song, it's considered "progressive" or
> "intellectual"? Where I come from, that's called plagerism. If I found an
> idea of mine entered into a song or short story without my permission AND
> the correct citation, you'll be sure I'll commence a legal action.
>
> Clearly, the band owes a lot to *the ideas of others*. It would be
> refreshing to see them acknowledge this. And not some vague reference to a
> hack 'philosopher' on the back of a CD cover.
>
> I minored in philosophy in university, and can say with qualification that
> professional philosophers have never taken Ayn Rand seriously, and that
> "Atlas Shrugged" has to be the most pompous, tedious piece of modern
> 'literature' ever.
>
> Looks like Neil might be what Rand fears the most - a second hander.
Oh great...another wind-bag full of shit. The DORK obviously knows
NOTHING of Neil or Rush...so I shouldn't even be wasting bandwith on IT.
If you think that Neil's life has revolved around Rand, you must have
been off fornicating with your relatives for the past..errr..20 years or
so. Now go away.
James MacLachlan
--
"These signs, this space
Takes a path you didn't choose
Stay strong, keep faith
There's a change that's coming through
Hold on, my love
It feels like Heaven's coming down..."
The Tea Party,
"Heaven Coming Down"
William Hall
musical side. Or, you could hop over to rec.music.progressive and ask
them. And it can be considered intellectual. For instance, I regard
Mr. Peart as a higher intellect than say, Steve Tyler, because rather
than write some trite crap about wanting to get in the skins, he took
the high road and made intelligent lyrics. If the idea for them isn't
entirely unoriginal, so be it. It does make a hell of a song though.
Speaking for myself, I couldn't care less what you or anyone thinks
of Ayn Rand. I've never taken her work seriously. She had some great
ideas in her work, but I don't see it as being applicable to everyday
life in our society.
Peart's Rand-influenced stage lasted for three albums (FBN to 2112,
but I'm open to arguments), or 1975 to 1976. He found it interesting,
yes. But if you've read the interviews on the subject, and not just
the liner notes, you'd know that he noticed the similarity to Rand's
Anthem after having written the story to 2112. And even then, he
credited her for the idea. The song is meant to tell a story, not a
life philosophy. He's also said the he grew disenchanted with Rand
long ago. So maybe, you're attacking someone who agrees with you when
you say that Rand is not a serious philosopher.
For a drummer, Neil makes a damn good lyricist. His second best
talent is writing lyrics, and everyone gets their inspiration
somewhere. I don't see you trashing all the bubblegum bands who miss
their ex's. Troll.
scott wrote:
>
> Hi, kids! :-)
>
> Why is it that when you take a few lines or a title from a poem, shortstory
> and book, and put it into a song, it's considered "progressive" or
> "intellectual"? Where I come from, that's called plagerism. If I found an
> idea of mine entered into a song or short story without my permission AND
> the correct citation, you'll be sure I'll commence a legal action.
>
> Clearly, the band owes a lot to *the ideas of others*. It would be
> refreshing to see them acknowledge this. And not some vague reference to a
> hack 'philosopher' on the back of a CD cover.
>
> I minored in philosophy in university, and can say with qualification that
> professional philosophers have never taken Ayn Rand seriously, and that
> "Atlas Shrugged" has to be the most pompous, tedious piece of modern
> 'literature' ever.
>
> Looks like Neil might be what Rand fears the most - a second hander.
--
William Cary Hall
ICQ# 6956498
http://www.unc.edu/~wchall
AIM: UNC Cary
"The point of the journey is not to arrive." -NP
Lerxst
>Hi, kids! :-)
>
>Why is it that when you take a few lines or a title from a poem, shortstory
>and book, and put it into a song, it's considered "progressive" or
>"intellectual"? Where I come from, that's called plagerism. If I found an
>idea of mine entered into a song or short story without my permission AND
>the correct citation, you'll be sure I'll commence a legal action.
>
>Clearly, the band owes a lot to *the ideas of others*. It would be
>refreshing to see them acknowledge this. And not some vague reference to a
>hack 'philosopher' on the back of a CD cover.
>
>I minored in philosophy in university, and can say with qualification that
>professional philosophers have never taken Ayn Rand seriously, and that
>"Atlas Shrugged" has to be the most pompous, tedious piece of modern
>'literature' ever.
Yet, amazingly, she's read and enjoyed. Whereas your post is read and hated.
She got the better deal.
>Looks like Neil might be what Rand fears the most - a second hander.
Hell yeah! You're totally right!
Tell ya what. Let's grab us about 50 lawyers and go after the following
people:
Rush, since they plagerize.
Any other band that uses any other published idea, small as it may be.
Any published author who uses any other published source for inspiration.
Hell, why stop there?! Let's get the bastards who use *unpublished* sources
for inspiration!
George Lucas, for using Kurosawa as inspiration for Star Wars.
That guy who does that song "Millenium" because he ripped off a riff from a
James Bond song.
The same guy, for using James Bond type scenes in his music video.
Puff Daddy.
C'mon. Face it. Very, very, very, very few things in the world are totally
original these days. And I don't have a problem with it. Except Puff Daddy.
And here's a little something for you. These are from the CD booklets.
Verbatim.
Red Barchetta: "Inspired by 'A Nice Morning Drive', by Richard S. Foster.
(By the by, the song and the short story are not too much alike. Except in
concept. Oh, yeah, but that's where you have your problem. I'd hate to think
what the idea of "concurrent development" does to your mind...)
Countdown: Dedicated with thanks to astronauts Young and Crippen and all the
people of NASA for their inspiration and cooperation.
Hey look, they even mention the photo from 2001 they used in Test For Echo!
Spirit of Radio: Inspired by the 'Spirit of Radio' in Toronto, alive and
well (so far). (Hey, can The Spirit of Radio sue Rush for using its name and
concept?)
Off of Presto: "We also offer a tip of the musical hat to....Mike Roberts
for the acorn of Superconductor....."
By-Tor and the Snowdog: By-Tor characters inspired by Herns.
2112: With acknowledgement to the genus (sic) of Ayn Rand.
And, for our bonus round...
Victor: Words by W.H. Auden. Later, it says, "Excerpts from Victor used with
permission from Random House, Inc."
Of course, they didn't seek permission from Hemingway's estate to use a
character maybe slightly seemingly very similar in a few ways to Hemingway
himself. Or the crew of the Enola Gay for using the name in a song. Or, in
fact, everyone who worked on the Manhattan Project. Gotta make sure people
will let you use it you know.
I'm sorry, did you have a point?
mike rall
scott wrote in message <01beab12$b439cb00$dc4bb5cf@capppsrs>...
>
>Vic <n...@vailable.com> wrote in article
>>
>> I didn't know there was such a thing as "professional philosophers."
>
>Philosophers in a university environment dedicating their lives to research
>and education are professional in every sense of the word.
>
Oh yeah people who talk and talk about life but are too lazy to take
action....
Even though i agree that (as philosophers go), Ayn Rand is a hack (and a
half)...HOWEVER...you obviously have no idea what you are talking about when
it comes to the music industry or our terminology. So go talk philosophy all
you want but please dont talk about music....it truly hurts my ears when you
ATTEMPT to speak MY language.
Mike
(before you make a feeble attempt at flaming me, I do have a degree in Music
Theory and Composition, with graduate work in Musicology)
debora
> Think about it; you have a "lyricist" who *takes* from novels, poetry,
> rewrites it into a song lyric and passes it off as his *own*. I have seen
> no single instance where he credits Coleridge, Barth, Passos, T.S. Eliot,
> et al. Lyrics are always by "Peart". Sorry, but it's just not true.
He never credited Webster either, though most of the words he uses are in his
dictionary, that thievin' bastard!!!
> In any other industry, it's either misappropriation of intellectual
> property, stealing or plagerism, all subject to various courses of legal
> action. I know this NG is a blow-fest for you fans, so I don't expect you
> to side with me, although I know many of you do privately. That's fine.
<yawn>
> Once again, it demonstrates my assertion that the band clearly owes a lot,
> since they used someone elses ideas in their songs. Period.
Yeah? So? Name a contemporary band that doesn't. I dare you.
> As for Rand being a "philosopher", ask any respectable university
> philosophy department. They'll think you're not being serious! :-)
I don't talk with philosophers. They have stinky pants.
Debora the Drum Rat
scott
debora <deb...@ix.netcom.com> before taking her medication, said:
>
> Nice try. Simplistic, but at least an attempt. Keep working and you may
be
> considered a troll with some intelligence. Maybe.
Think about it; you have a "lyricist" who *takes* from novels, poetry,
rewrites it into a song lyric and passes it off as his *own*. I have seen
no single instance where he credits Coleridge, Barth, Passos, T.S. Eliot,
et al. Lyrics are always by "Peart". Sorry, but it's just not true.
In any other industry, it's either misappropriation of intellectual
property, stealing or plagerism, all subject to various courses of legal
action. I know this NG is a blow-fest for you fans, so I don't expect you
to side with me, although I know many of you do privately. That's fine.
Once again, it demonstrates my assertion that the band clearly owes a lot,
since they used someone elses ideas in their songs. Period.
As for Rand being a "philosopher", ask any respectable university
pseud...@my-deja.com
"scott" <s...@netcom.ca> wrote:
> Hi, kids! :-)
>
> Why is it that when you take a few lines or a title from a poem,
shortstory
> and book, and put it into a song, it's considered "progressive" or
> "intellectual"? Where I come from, that's called plagerism. If I
found an
> idea of mine entered into a song or short story without my permission
AND
> the correct citation, you'll be sure I'll commence a legal action.
>
> Clearly, the band owes a lot to *the ideas of others*. It would be
> refreshing to see them acknowledge this. And not some vague
reference to a
> hack 'philosopher' on the back of a CD cover.
Do you have any concept about *anything* that has *anything* to do with
reality? We are *all* influenced by the ideas of others. Duh! (Me,
well first I'd like to cite *my parents*! ha, ha ,ha!) Do you know how
many authors, artists, musicians, have modeled themselves after a mentor
(mentors)? Example: Jack Kerouac for many years felt himself in the
shadow of Thomas Woolf, trying desperately to escape it I could go on
and on, about the whole history of ideas, art, economics, psychology,
science, but hopeful you get the idea. Me personally, I need someone
else to set me on intellectual fire. I am most creative after reading
and not just purely from imatation. The act of taking in creative
genius alights the mind.
> I minored in philosophy in university
Ok philosophical question for the day:
Where would Plato be without Socrates?
Plato that dam second hander!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
scott
scott
> Yet, amazingly, she's read and enjoyed.
She *is*? Not at any university I know of.
> Whereas your post is read and hated. She got the better deal.
>
Your opinion.
>
> Rush, since they plagerize. Any other band that uses any other >
published idea, small as it may be. Any published author who > uses any
other published source for inspiration. There's a
Here's where your argument falls down: You assert that Rush plagerizes,
then say that authors use "inspiration". Huge difference between penning
someone elses ideas, and being inspired. Inspiration is the result of
learning empirically about our world. And we learn empirically through our
experience. Therefore, our inspirations - wherever or however we learn
them - are ours.
> Hell, why stop there?! Let's get the bastards who use >*unpublished*
sources for inspiration!
You just said it. Inspiration. Try going to court and claim that the
creation of a new invention or song is actually yours, because you gave
him/her the "inspiration" to do it. However, if you had something more
tangiable, (ie: copyright protection), then you would be in a much stronger
position.
> George Lucas, for using Kurosawa as inspiration for Star Wars.
Don't know about that.
> That guy who does that song "Millenium" because he ripped off > a riff
from a James Bond song.
Do you know that for sure?
> The same guy, for using James Bond type scenes in his music > video. Puff
Daddy.
Do you know that for sure?
>
> C'mon. Face it. Very, very, very, very few things in the world
> are totally original these days.
Wayne Gretzky, gone. Michael Jordan, gone. You're right - very few things
are totally original. When they're gone, they never come back.
And I don't have a problem with it. Except Puff Daddy.
>
> And here's a little something for you. These are from the CD booklets.
Verbatim.
You *actually* got your albums out? Sheesh...
> Red Barchetta: "Inspired by 'A Nice Morning Drive', by Richard > S.
Foster.
You're right. Inspired.
> Countdown: Dedicated with thanks to astronauts Young and >Crippen and all
the people of NASA for their inspiration and >cooperation.
If I was invited to watch the launch of the Space Shuttle, you'd be sure
I'd record my thanks.
> Hey look, they even mention the photo from 2001 they used in > Test For
Echo!
A picture. Whoop-di-do...
>
> Spirit of Radio: Inspired by the 'Spirit of Radio' in Toronto, alive
> and well (so far).
We have that pesky thing called inspiration, originating from our
experience again. Not words or a title from a poem or novel.
> (Hey, can The Spirit of Radio sue Rush for
> using its name and concept?)
The 'Spirit of Radio' is representative of the listenership in Toronto at
the time. Since the listenership is not part of an identifiable group, the
likelihood of a class-action suit against the band is highly unlikely.
> Off of Presto: "We also offer a tip of the musical hat to....Mike
> Roberts for the acorn of Superconductor....."
Now that's proper acknowledgement. You're getting it. Finally.
>
> By-Tor and the Snowdog: By-Tor characters inspired by Herns.
Inspiration, once again.
>
> 2112: With acknowledgement to the genus (sic) of Ayn Rand.
It's "genius". And that's stretching it.
> And, for our bonus round...
>
> Victor: Words by W.H. Auden. Later, it says, "Excerpts from
> Victor used with permission from Random House, Inc."
Bingo! That's proper acknowledgement. Why can't they do that for every
song and title they copy? So far it's only two for you, and seven for me.
>
> Of course, they didn't seek permission from Hemingway's estate > to use a
character maybe slightly seemingly very similar in a
> few ways to Hemingway himself.
The Hemingway estate probably doesn't care. This is small potatoes.
> Or the crew of the Enola Gay for using the name in a song. Or, > in fact,
everyone who worked on the Manhattan Project.
Again, inspiration learned through experience.
> Gotta make sure people will let you use it you know.
As a professional courtesy, you should.
> I'm sorry, did you have a point?
I just made it. The difference between inspiration, an experience learned
through observation, and taking someone elses ideas, which requires no
learning, and calling it your own. Thanks for helping me point it out.
scott
>
> Oh great...another wind-bag full of shit.
Ouch. That hurt.
>The DORK obviously knows NOTHING of Neil or Rush...so I >shouldn't even be
wasting bandwith on IT.
After just only one post, this clown has already concluded that I know
nothing of Neil and Rush.
I know that *anytime* you take a poem, and turn it into a song without the
author's permission, that's called plagerism. It's wrong, intellectually
dishonest and insulting to the person who created it. Samuel T. Coleridge
must be spinning in his grave.
> If you think that Neil's life has revolved around Rand,
Where have I asserted that "Neil's life has revolved around Rand"?
I only said, that as a philosopher, Rand doesn't amount to much.
> you must have been off fornicating with your relatives for the >
past..errr..20
This where you show your stupidity the most. Since you're bereft of any
original arguments, you have to resort to ad homeim attacks. You've failed
to show any substance, shit-for-brains. Why am I wasting bandwidth on
*YOU*?
Finally, in an effort to look 'cool' or 'profound', you end your post with
lyrics *borrowed from someone else*. Sheesh...I think your mommy is
calling you...
Grade: F Stay in school, fool.
EnemyWithn
"scott" vomited:
>Philosophers in a university environment dedicating their lives to research
>and education are professional in every sense of the word.
Bea Arthur: "Name?"
Mel Brooks "Comicus."
Bea Arthur: "Occupation?"
Mel Brooks: "Stand-up philosopher."
Bea Arthur: "Oh...your a BULLSHIT artist!"
==========================================================
"everybody got to elevate from the norm"
Jim Geiger (not Geddy Lee)
remove "x" from address to reply
scott
mike rall weighed in with...
<snippage>
> HOWEVER...you obviously have no idea what you are talking
> about when it comes to the music industry or our terminology.
> So go talk philosophy all you want but please dont talk about >
music....it truly hurts my ears when you
> ATTEMPT to speak MY language.
Ok, Mike, if I lifted something you wrote and put it into a song of mine
without your permission and without crediting you properly, what would
*you* call it? I've put it in as plain language as possible.
scott
> Bea Arthur: "Name?"
> Mel Brooks "Comicus."
> Bea Arthur: "Occupation?"
> Mel Brooks: "Stand-up philosopher."
> Bea Arthur: "Oh...your a BULLSHIT artist!"
People always mock that which they cannot understand.
Another moron who uses *someone else's lyrics* in a signature in a futile
effort to appear 'insightful'.
scott
William Hall said,
> Who said that was progressive? Progressive is usually defined > on the
musical side.
That's fair. I'll buy it.
> Or, you could hop over to rec.music.progressive and ask
> them. And it can be considered intellectual. For instance, I
> regard Mr. Peart as a higher intellect than say, Steve Tyler,
> because rather than write some trite crap about wanting to get in > the
skins, he took the high road and made intelligent lyrics. If > the idea
for them isn't entirely unoriginal, so be it. It does make > a hell of a
song though.
Try it from this angle. You have two students. One writes a story,
entirely from his/her own imagination, but it's substandard. Another
writes a story, borrowed from magazine articles, books and periodicals, and
it's a gripping, compelling story. Which one has the greatest intellectual
value? Sure, one is a hell of a story. But it it intellectually honest?
I would give the kid with the substandard story the higher grade.
Basically, would you tell *your* kid to try and come up with an idea all on
their own, or borrow from someone else and call it theirs?
> Speaking for myself, I couldn't care less what you or anyone > thinks of
Ayn Rand. I've never taken her work seriously.
No one really does.
> She had some great ideas in her work, but I don't see it as
> being applicable to everyday life in our society.
Having some great ideas and being a philosopher are two completely
different things.
> Peart's Rand-influenced stage lasted for three albums (FBN to >2112, but
I'm open to arguments), or 1975 to 1976. He found it >interesting, yes.
But if you've read the interviews on the subject, >and not just the liner
notes, you'd know that he noticed the >similarity to Rand's Anthem after
having written the story to 2112. >And even then, he credited her for the
idea.
Crediting her for an 'idea' is a lot different than taking the title of a
book and naming a song after it.
> The song is meant to tell a story, not a life philosophy. He's
Sure it is.
> also said the he grew disenchanted with Rand
> long ago. So maybe, you're attacking someone who agrees
> with you when you say that Rand is not a serious philosopher.
Perhaps NP still considers Rand a serious philosopher, although he's grown
disenchanted with her.
>
> For a drummer, Neil makes a damn good lyricist. His second > best talent
is writing lyrics, and everyone gets their inspiration
> somewhere.
Inspiration is learned empirically through experience. That's the
'somewhere' you just mentioned. Lifting book titles, quotes, and phrases
and putting them into a song just doesn't count as learning through
experience. It's copying. A fancy form of 'cut 'n paste'.
You made a few good points. Grade C+
Mike Pelczarski
scott wrote:
> Vic <n...@vailable.com> wrote in article
> >
> > I didn't know there was such a thing as "professional philosophers."
>
> Philosophers in a university environment dedicating their lives to research
> and education are professional in every sense of the word.
>
Sounds like they need to get a job to me.....
mike P.
--
Subdivisions: http://www.javanet.com/~pella
"Anyone who tells you 80's music was bad
just wasn't listening to the right stuff." - me
Mike Pelczarski
from the computer......
scott wrote:
--
JGordon452
>From: "scott" <s...@netcom.ca>
>Date: 5/30/99 11:33 PM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: <01beab1e$bf144da0$dc4bb5cf@capppsrs>
As opposed to yourself, Scott, who doesn't even know when he _should_ use
someone else's lyrics, to make up for his own complete lack of insight.
Nice try at trolling, Scott, but trying doesn't always make the grade, jones.
However, your own nitpicking brand of stupidity has given me some amusement.
Grade for insightfulness: INCOMPLETE
Grade for idiotic amusement: B+
Got some more lyrics in my own signature file for you to assail me over.
Because at least I'm honest about any lack of creativity which I have. As
opposed to, say, you....
Jim Gordon
The Missing Link (members.aol.com/JGordon452/missinglink1.html); a web page
devoid of all quality. Best viewed in Explorer; better viewed not at all. Now
un-updated!
"Faster- this world is heading straight into a big disaster" -Rage
William Hall
>
> James MacLachlan, in a furious rage, exploded thusly:
> >
> > Oh great...another wind-bag full of shit.
>
> Ouch. That hurt.
>
> >The DORK obviously knows NOTHING of Neil or Rush...so I >shouldn't even be
> wasting bandwith on IT.
>
> After just only one post, this clown has already concluded that I know
> nothing of Neil and Rush.
>
material, or carefully read the lyrics and liner notes. But you've
missed two crucial points. Neil does not pass off this work as
entirely his own. If you have any semblance of education, which you
appear to have, then 95% of his literary references are obvious. The
major ones are documented in the liner notes, with the exception of
Xanadu, which is .
> I know that *anytime* you take a poem, and turn it into a song without the
> author's permission, that's called plagerism. It's wrong, intellectually
> dishonest and insulting to the person who created it. Samuel T. Coleridge
> must be spinning in his grave.
>
I think Coleridge would be pleased. Xanadu remained true to the poem
in every way, and musically it fits the poem very well.
> > If you think that Neil's life has revolved around Rand,
>
> Where have I asserted that "Neil's life has revolved around Rand"?
> I only said, that as a philosopher, Rand doesn't amount to much.
>
And that would be why Neil's fascination with Rand's work was short
lived. It's of little worth to criticize a year of his work for it's
Randian influences when the great body of his work has little or
nothing to do with Rand. Seriously, he was probably around 20 years
old when he wrote that. My hat's off the Neil for such excellent work
at an early age, especially considering that it was secondary to his
drumming.
> > you must have been off fornicating with your relatives for the >
> past..errr..20
>
> This where you show your stupidity the most. Since you're bereft of any
> original arguments, you have to resort to ad homeim attacks. You've failed
> to show any substance, shit-for-brains. Why am I wasting bandwidth on
> *YOU*?
The point that James is making, and very clearly to anyone who knows
the bands history beyond the lyrics and liner notes, is that Peart
dismissed Rand as impractical many years ago, like late 70's / early
80's. You've failed to do anything but insult Rush's lyrical content
on the basis that it borrows from literature. Look around you,
everything borrows. The difference is that Neil is in the music
business, not in literature. He's not seeking your intellectual
approval. He's just looking to make music that he enjoys, and doesn't
really care what you, or I, or anyone else thinks of it, especially
now that the band is established and can afford to take chances
musically and lyrically. He's taken from Coleridge, Rand, Shakespeare
(if you want to count one line in Limelight), and A Nice Morning
Drive. That's four songs, arguably Rush classics. He credits Rand
and A Nice Morning Drive for 2112 and Red Barchetta, both of which are
significantly different than their respective inspirational works.
The Shakespeare reference is only a single line, and not directly
quoted.
You came into this newsgroup with nothing other than the intent to
stir up the hornet's nest. Don't be surprised at the backlash and
lack of civility, as you didn't display any to begin with.
And you're wasting bandwidth because you thought Neil was Rand's
devout follower and had him pegged as an objectivist, when in fact
he's closer to a humanist. Philosophy may have its place, and it's
fine with me if you want a bunch of philosophers to tell you how to
think, but I think I'll think for myself, and I know that's a
philosophy that most Rush fans and the band will subscribe to.
>
> Finally, in an effort to look 'cool' or 'profound', you end your post with
> lyrics *borrowed from someone else*. Sheesh...I think your mommy is
> calling you...
>
> Grade: F Stay in school, fool.
Your original post had two main points - that borrowing from
literature should not be considered progressive. I'll agree on
that. But it does lend to unconventional song structures, and that
in itself is partly progressive.
The second, that Rush owes a great deal of credit to others. I'll
agree on that, and I'm sure the band will too. The only reference
they don't make is to Coleridge. Aside from Xanadu, every song is
referenced to it's inspiration. And chances are that if you're
listening to Rush in this day and age, you've read or at least heard
of Coleridge's work. I'll wager that if you could ask who they think
has inspired them lyrically, Rand, Coleridge, and Pye Dubois would
come up quickly in the conversation. They really don't care what the
public thinks about them.
EnemyWithn
>People always mock that which they cannot understand.
>Another moron who uses *someone else's lyrics* in a signature in a futile
>effort to appear 'insightful'.
Heh heh... that's funny, junior. I remember when I was young and pretentious,
too.
You'll soon come to realize, however that you haven't a clue as to what
you're talking about.
Co-opting of ideas musical and lyrical, is the rule of thumb in music...and
especially rock n roll. The art of making origianl music is taking all these
myriad influences you accumulate on your musical journey through life, and
tailoring them to fit your own personality.
Your music may contain elements of the familiar to people's ears. That is not
a bad thing. Your lyrics may be inspired by the writings of another. But unless
you copied them verbatim and didn't credit the author, that's not a bad thing.
Use of a familiar musical and lyrical vernacular is what makes popular music
"popular"!!! Go figure!
Wasn't Plato a follower of Socrates? Didn't Plato include co-opt much of his
teacher's writings into his own? If he did, then by your own defintion, he
plagarized Socrates.
But seeing how most people I know who took philosophy in college are either
socially retarded loners or pseudo-intellectual pompous windbags (methinks you
fall into the latter category) I can totally sympathize from where you THINK
you are coming from.
What it boils down to is this...
You think you'll get a rise out of the newsgroup with your "educated" musings
on what a hack Neil Peart is.
But what have you accomplished?
Have you initiated a groundswell of anti-Peart sentiment. Are people gonna
start burning Rush cd's, tapes and albums?
...of course not.
Are the estates of Ayn Rand, John Dos Passos, Samuel Tylor Coleridge, or even
good old rhymin' Paul Simon going to sue Neil Peart for plagarism?
...of course not!
All you have accomplished here is proved to everybody that you're a
pretentious, megalomaniacal fuckstick, who due to his philosophical
"un-education", doesn't know his anus from a hole in the ground.
William Hall
scott wrote:
> > Whereas your post is read and hated. She got the better deal.
> >
> Your opinion.
Survey says? I think we win this vote.
> I just made it. The difference between inspiration, an experience learned
> through observation, and taking someone elses ideas, which requires no
> learning, and calling it your own. Thanks for helping me point it out.
So you're saying Neil could have written Xanadu without plagiarism
had he actually visited said paradise? Or written 2112 had he lived
out the story? Well when you put that way, yeah I guess you have made
your point. You've said that even though a lyricist or songwriter may
be genuinely moved by a work, he or she may not borrow from it in any
way because the original author may not approve of it. This is
pointless. The band is putting music to something that they consider
to be a work of art. It fuels their creative fires, and the
soundtrack is added to an already great work. Mankind didn't get to
where it is now by having each person start from scratch, and
musicians don't grow through isolation.
Just for kicks, tell us what bands you listen to. I'm genuinely
interested to know what you consider intelligent music.
--
William Cary Hall
ICQ# 6956498
http://www.unc.edu/~wchall
AIM: UNC Cary
"So much style without substance, so much stuff without style" -NP
Edgecenter
are ideas that 'ol neil "lifted" to fit in his song...
"tribute"...?...possibly...passing off as his own...?...certainly not...basis
for a credible lawsuit(esp., a line here or there, far in
between)...?...absolutely not...which seemed to be the basis for your original
point...
& my friend, dont "sheesh" a guy for breaking out his records & credits(liner
notes)...& yet u respond to every single post on here(within your
subject)within a 6 hour period...
& how many philosophers are great, or at least damn good
novelists...?...hmmm...how many philosophies have been respected in your sacred
universities---as saying u cant prove reality exists...?...far too many...yet,
one person who stood up against a tremendous backlash(funny enough, from the
limp-wristed intellectuals, who take tax money, contribute nothing to society,
& yet teach my kids that "the will of the people" is to worshiped & obeyed...&
yet, common, thinking, working intellectuals stand by her work enough to rate
"atlas shrugged" as the second most influential book ever, behind the
sycophantic blatherings of the bible supporters at #1)...i'll grant u, ayn
wasnt a philosopher in the strict sense...but in terms of saying "it is natural
to use your reason to further your cause, as long as it does not negatively
impact others"...surprisingly enough, not a lot of our grand "leaders" have
taught us this...& we have the history of this world to prove it...
& why exactly, do u insist on saying college philosophy departments are the
beacon & hallmark of human intelligence...or at least of human philosophy...?
scotty, u strike me as a reasonably intelligent guy...& it slightly bugs me
that neil doesnt 100% quote himself...but what exactly is your
agenda...?...pointing out this semi-unfortunate trait as something truly
serious, when i read it as mostly a tribute to something that moved neil...&
with the amount of both neil & rush worship thats always gone on, people would
learn these "quotings" are from other sources, & they'd pick up on their
work...plus, how many lyricists have had such a huge impact on the world of
their musical instrument, yet still write credible, solid, sometimes moving
lyrics...
again, to point out your uncomfort with the fact neil does this is one
thing...but to obsessively point this out to rush fans, over & over...& to
seemingly be on a mission to discredit any good writing neil has done, by proxy
of maybe 7 lines on 16 albums where neil was INSPIRED enough to use the actual
line...wreaks of maybe some insecurity on your part, or...i mean, go after the
puff daddy's of the world, for chrise sakes :o)
William Hall
scott wrote:
>
> William Hall said,
>
> > Who said that was progressive? Progressive is usually defined > on the
> musical side.
>
> That's fair. I'll buy it.
>
> > Or, you could hop over to rec.music.progressive and ask
> > them. And it can be considered intellectual. For instance, I
> > regard Mr. Peart as a higher intellect than say, Steve Tyler,
> > because rather than write some trite crap about wanting to get in > the
> skins, he took the high road and made intelligent lyrics. If > the idea
> for them isn't entirely unoriginal, so be it. It does make > a hell of a
> song though.
>
> Try it from this angle. You have two students. One writes a story,
> entirely from his/her own imagination, but it's substandard. Another
> writes a story, borrowed from magazine articles, books and periodicals, and
> it's a gripping, compelling story. Which one has the greatest intellectual
> value? Sure, one is a hell of a story. But it it intellectually honest?
> I would give the kid with the substandard story the higher grade.
>
> Basically, would you tell *your* kid to try and come up with an idea all on
> their own, or borrow from someone else and call it theirs?
Lets look at it from this angle. Which story do you want to read?
It's not as if Neil is saying "Look at this song that I wrote all by
myself without the aid of anyone else." The end result is what I look
at, and as long as the writer is honest about what has been borrowed
from others, I respect the work. And if you want to talk about
original work, lets look at the other hundred or so songs that Neil
owns lyrical credit for that are entirely original. You're picking
out a handful of borrows from a multitude of works. You're also
ignoring the fact that lyrics are only half of the song, and the
musical creativity in the band benefits greatly from the song
structures dictated by such lyrical arrangements.
>Crediting her for an 'idea' is a lot different than taking the title of a
>book and naming a song after it.
Now hold on here. The song "Anthem," while lending itself to
objectivism, is primarily an individualist call to arms, an anthem, if
you will. It bears no semblance to the book "Anthem." You're
treading on thin ice with that one.
> You made a few good points. Grade C+
Here's one more. Since no one on this group is defending Rand at
all, why bother mentioning that she's not considered a serious
philosopher in every post you make? It appears, at least to me, that
you just want one more thing to fluff up your arguments. We've
conceded that point, but you still insist on using it as we give a
rat's ass.
William Hall
> Someone called 'Enemy Within' tried the following funny...
> >
> > Bea Arthur: "Name?"
> > Mel Brooks "Comicus."
> > Bea Arthur: "Occupation?"
> > Mel Brooks: "Stand-up philosopher."
> > Bea Arthur: "Oh...your a BULLSHIT artist!"
>
>
> Another moron who uses *someone else's lyrics* in a signature in a futile
> effort to appear 'insightful'.
Case in point: Scott here. This group is about music, not lyrical
achievement. Understand, or do we need to say it a fourth time?
And you still haven't told us what you consider intelligent music.
I'm still interested to hear that one.
TapeHead4
Uh-oh...troll alert...
>Why is it that when you take a few lines or a title from a poem, shortstory
>and book, and put it into a song, it's considered "progressive" or
>"intellectual"?
I assume you're talking about (or should I say trashing) Rush. You mean like
Xanadu? Well, I definitely consider that more "progressive" or "intellectual"
than "Hit me baby one more time", but that's just me.
>Where I come from, that's called plagerism. If I found an
>idea of mine entered into a song or short story without my permission AND
>the correct citation, you'll be sure I'll commence a legal action.
You can be sure NASA, Tai Shan, Enola Gay, and others will soon be taking legal
action against Rush.
>Clearly, the band owes a lot to *the ideas of others*.
Those bastards.
>It would be
>refreshing to see them acknowledge this. And not some vague reference to a
>hack 'philosopher' on the back of a CD cover.
Today, in a rare press conference, members of Rush claim to actually have been
influenced by other great thinkers, philosophers, and musicians! And so, boys
and girls, they are only human after all.
>I minored in philosophy in university, and can say with qualification that
>professional philosophers have never taken Ayn Rand seriously, and that
>"Atlas Shrugged" has to be the most pompous, tedious piece of modern
>'literature' ever.
>Looks like Neil might be what Rand fears the most - a second hander.
I'm no expert on Rand, and I don;t have to be - but I still see no problem with
a (great) band incorporating ideas from other sources into their music....!??
So why are you whining??
Paul
TapeHead4
"We break the surface tension with our wild kinetic dreams..."
"And NO SPRINKLES! For every sprinkle I find, I shall kill you."
"Last time aboard the train that goes around the world..."
debora
> As opposed to yourself, Scott, who doesn't even know when he _should_ use
> someone else's lyrics, to make up for his own complete lack of insight.
>
> Nice try at trolling, Scott, but trying doesn't always make the grade, jones.
> However, your own nitpicking brand of stupidity has given me some amusement.
>
> Grade for insightfulness: INCOMPLETE
> Grade for idiotic amusement: B+
>
> Got some more lyrics in my own signature file for you to assail me over.
> Because at least I'm honest about any lack of creativity which I have. As
> opposed to, say, you....
I dunno. This guy is a pretty damn good troll. Spelling and punctuation are
perfect (leaving him with an out if anyone criticizes that) and seems to know
about the band and has a decent grasp of books and reading. Cool.
Welcome aboard. Looking forward to further input. Take it easy on the asshole
aspect, though.
Debora the Drum Rat (cut your losses......the buck stops here)
Matthew D. Sullivan
catch phrase that some author wrote in the liner notes. But who
cares? He's been very up front about the origins of some of his
ideas. He's not stealing from everybody.
I wonder if Neil is such an egghead that he assumes everybody would
know where some of his phrases come from (i.e., assuming everybody is
as well-read as he).
-Matt S.
Kathryn Silures
>
> scott wrote:
> >
> > Hi, kids! :-)
> >
> > and book, and put it into a song, it's considered "progressive" or
> > idea of mine entered into a song or short story without my permission AND
> > the correct citation, you'll be sure I'll commence a legal action.
> >
> > refreshing to see them acknowledge this. And not some vague reference to a
> > hack 'philosopher' on the back of a CD cover.
> >
> > professional philosophers have never taken Ayn Rand seriously, and that
> > "Atlas Shrugged" has to be the most pompous, tedious piece of modern
> > 'literature' ever.
> >
> > Looks like Neil might be what Rand fears the most - a second hander.
>
> NOTHING of Neil or Rush...so I shouldn't even be wasting bandwith on IT.
> been off fornicating with your relatives for the past..errr..20 years or
> so. Now go away.
James! Fancy meeting you here! Commonalities among handicapped geniuses. ;-)
This scott creature... One wonders why he picks on a rock band when he may
be better satisfied facing his peers in alt.literature or some such elitist
group. Perhaps they booted him.
Neil Peart and Ayn Rand, both great writers in their -own- right.
Cheers!
Kathryn
Sghorwitz
First of all, lay off professional philosophers. They teach, they research and
write, they do the grunt work of being an educator. Us academics, in any
discipline, work as hard as anyone does. It does no good against a troll like
this to play into his hands.
Second, Scott, our newfound semi-literate troll, could learn how to spell
"plagiarize". Unless spelling the same as someone else constitutes an
intellectual property right violation. :)
Third, Rand IS read at universities across the world. You can start with mine,
since I've taught her work several times. But I'll gladly provide Scott with a
list of a few dozen academics ("professional philosophers" no less) who write
and teach Rand's work. Care to play Scott?
Last, and finally relevant: Yes, Neil borrows ideas and snippets from other
thinkers and artists, but, as others have pointed out, that hardly makes him
unique. EVERYONE does it. EVERYONE. If you borrow a total idea, or a whole
set of words (like 2112 and Xanadu) then you should acknowledge it, and Neil
does. But to borrow a line here, or a broad idea there, and to put it in a
unique context is NOT plagiarism and does not need a citation. When I write a
professional article, I will often use a phrase that I've seen others use.
Unless it's referring to something crucial or specific, I don't have to
acknowledge it. I've even snuck a Neil phrase or two in there. :) That's
hardly the same as borrow a complete idea or a whole sentence or two.
So, dear Scott, go outside and get some fresh air and come back and try a bit
harder to play with the big boys.
I won't condescend to offer you a grade on YOUR post.
The Professor (Grillmaster Man)
David Smith
scott wrote in message <01beab1e$bf144da0$dc4bb5cf@capppsrs>...
>People always mock that which they cannot understand.
That's one hell of a sweeping generalisation, sonny boy.
Cheers !
Boof
1874 & 2112 - if you have to ask, you're not worth telling.
Geezer Butler
it!
--
Geezer
Dig me but don't...
bury me.
Sghorwitz <sgho...@aol.comrade> wrote in message
news:19990531113513...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
>
> The Professor (Grillmaster Man)
G7HKD
I know this is way off topic, but did you know that Silure is a French
word for Catfish!!??
Ian
Lamneth
Sweet Pea
>> I'm sorry, did you have a point?
>
> I just made it. The difference between inspiration, an experience learned
> through observation, and taking someone elses ideas, which requires no
> learning, and calling it your own. Thanks for helping me point it out.
*laugh* What are you trying to pull here? What are you trying to prove? I
see you want to defend your opinion, but for whom? Everyone thinks you're
wrong, honestly, so please just go away. Or atleast get some good arguments,
the post I'm answering to was just pathetic, really.
And as for quoting someone elses lyrics in one's signature... Noone does
this and claims it to be their own writing. They do it to share what quote
they like best. Kinda. And you know this, don't you?
---
SweetPea
pseud...@my-deja.com
One theory, that I agree with, holds that creativity is the
rearrangement of existing knowledge, ideas, patterns, etc. into novel
combinations. Drawing connections that are not usually drawn.
By the way Neil *does* give credit, ever read one of Neils concert
booklets?
"Chance favors the prepared mind"
I forget who said this
"Sun dogs fire on the horizon
Meteor rains stars across the night
This moment may be brief
But it can be so bright
Reflected in another source of light ......
Respond
Vibrate
Feedback
And Resonate"
Rush
Oh bad bad me, I quote other people!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Sghorwitz
>Hey! I thought I was the Grillmaster Man! I have the singed hair to prove
>it!
You have hair? :)
The Professor (gonna go fire it up right now...)
ghost2112
scott wrote:
> Hi, kids! :-)
>
> Why is it that when you take a few lines or a title from a poem, shortstory
> and book, and put it into a song, it's considered "progressive" or
> "intellectual"? Where I come from, that's called plagerism. If I found an
> idea of mine entered into a song or short story without my permission AND
> the correct citation, you'll be sure I'll commence a legal action.
>
> Clearly, the band owes a lot to *the ideas of others*. It would be
> refreshing to see them acknowledge this. And not some vague reference to a
> hack 'philosopher' on the back of a CD cover.
>
> I minored in philosophy in university, and can say with qualification that
> professional philosophers have never taken Ayn Rand seriously, and that
> "Atlas Shrugged" has to be the most pompous, tedious piece of modern
> 'literature' ever.
>
> Looks like Neil might be what Rand fears the most - a second hander.
Well, Scott, if you studied philosophy, maybe you've read Ted Honderich. Name
a single action we take in our lives that is not caused by a previous event.
In that way we all plagiarize every day. I would call turning prose into
poetry, subsequently into lyrics and acknowledging the person that wrote the
original story not plagiarism, but an influence. Ayn Rand is not Nietzsche or
Camus but she had some good ideas.
In order to really answer your question you must define the lines between
inspiration, influence, permutation, plagiarism and outright copying, all of
which are really degrees of the same thing. I highly doubt you can because you
are going to run into Sorites Paradox.
For example:
I'm a composition student, I also sing in a fairly upscale choir. We do Bach B
Minor Mass really well one night. I go home and I am inspired to write a
choral piece of music by our performance. Let's say I write a religious one.
Am I plagiarizing? How about I write a Roman Catholic Mass, they all use
pretty much the same texts. Plagiarism yet? Maybe I'll use the same
instrumentation as well. Perhaps now? Well, what if I love the B Minor Mass
so much that I want to use a motif from that piece, but I'll mutate it beyond
any recognition (appropriate). How about now? Maybe I won't mutate it at all,
leave it as is, point it out in the score, credit Bach with writing it and
dedicate my piece to Bach? Is this plagiarism? What if I don't credit Bach
with writing it, but hope that my clever listeners pick up on my trick? This
happens right and left in modern classical music. We have riddles that are
composed of entirely pre-existent material but sound original. On the other
hand, we have pieces that borrow not a single note but are so influenced by a
composer or a movement that you could swear it was written by the source of the
influence. I, for example, made an electroacoustic piece that was composed
entirely of samples from Pink Floyd. Not a single one of my friends or
teachers recognized where it came from. On the large scale, the smaples were
so mutated, they didn't sound anything like Dark Side (where they came from),
yet after careful listening on the 1/10 second scale one could tell that some
of the samples were not altered. Did I plagiarize? I think not - neither do
my professors. You may think otherwise.
With regards to progressive, it's not the fact that Neil is influenced by Rand
that makes Rush progressive. To me it's the fact that they manage to keep all
of the aspects of their art out of the cliche land. The music, especially the
2112/Farewell/Hemispheres era, borrowed little from mainstream rock. The
lyrics were never mainstream. The "rock" part of the "progressive rock" term
comes from the fact that the music still has sensory impact unlike much of the
20th century avant-garde classical. In a nutshell, it's the thought/emotion
ratio that makes Rush "progressive" and still "rock".
If you really studied philosophy in school, you should know that jumping to
conclusions such as "Neil is a second hander" is a fallacy. To make that valid
your sample has to be representative of their work, yet you speak only of 2112
- about 1/25th of their work - which is FAR from representative. And waving
your credentials in people's faces before you're asked to provide them is poor
ethics.
--Vasily
Nyarla...@hotmail.com
debora <deb...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> I dunno. This guy is a pretty damn good troll. Spelling and
punctuation are
> perfect
That's news to me. I wish I had a dollar for every misspelling of
"plagiarize" he's responsible for. And he's committed various factual
errors. Peart _did_, for example, give Barth credit for the relevant
lines in "Bravado" (see the Roll the Bones tourbook).
I agree with Scott that Ayn Rand isn't a real philosopher. I just
don't think that this has dire implications for Rush.
Maxx2112
>Vic <n...@vailable.com> wrote in article
>>
>> I didn't know there was such a thing as "professional philosophers."
>
>Philosophers in a university environment dedicating their lives to research
>and education are professional in every sense of the word.
Except their pay scale.
Yes, I would like fries with that, Scott.
- Max -
========================================
Max said to them, "Come and have breakfast."
None of them ventured to question him, "Who are
you?" knowing that it was Max. -- Max 21:12
Maxx2112
>Clearly, the band owes a lot to *the ideas of others*. It would be
>refreshing to see them acknowledge this. And not some vague reference to a
>hack 'philosopher' on the back of a CD cover.
>
>I minored in philosophy in university, and can say with qualification that
>professional philosophers have never taken Ayn Rand seriously, and that
>"Atlas Shrugged" has to be the most pompous, tedious piece of modern
>'literature' ever.
And what would that qualification be? You've rendered a qualified opinion, but
you haven't stated the qualifications . . . you'd never make it as an
accountant, I and I highly doubt you'd make it as a philosopher . . . and
that's my unqualified opinion.
scott
> >
> >Philosophers in a university environment dedicating their lives > >to
research and education are professional in every sense of > >the word.
>
> Except their pay scale.
>
> Yes, I would like fries with that, Scott.
>
Here's what philosophers in the modern era do: They advise on doctors and
medical boards on life and death issues, work with police departments and
businesses as ethics advisers, record and research history, and in many
cases they cross-over into different disciplines. Logic and mathematics go
hand-in-hand, and philosophers routinely work with psychiatrists and
psychologists in an effort to understand the human mind.
Working on the side as consultants and advisors, coupled with university
income, makes a pretty tidy living. Not bad for somebody with a 'perfectly
trained mind' who knows jack.
I would like to reply to each and everyone of your posts, but since I have
a real *life*, I regret to advise I won't be available until sometime next
week. Until then, get over yourselves.
I can't believe how many of you actually *looked up information* in
album/CD jackets and think you're cool or insightful because you quote
someone elses comments in a signature file.
William Hall
>
>
> I would like to reply to each and everyone of your posts, but since I have
> a real *life*, I regret to advise I won't be available until sometime next
> week. Until then, get over yourselves.
So you have a life, yet you subscribe to a newsgroup which you don't
normally read for the sole purpose of picking a fight? Yeah, you have
a life.
And you STILL haven't told us what you consider intelligent music.
--
William Cary Hall
ICQ# 6956498
http://www.unc.edu/~wchall
AIM: UNC Cary
"The point of the journey is not to arrive." -NP
Lerxst
>Lerxst got up on her hind legs and blathered,
Last time I checked, the plumbing was on the outside....
>> Yet, amazingly, she's read and enjoyed.
>
>She *is*? Not at any university I know of.
Uh, right, because people in universities make up the vast majority of
readers in the whole wide world right? And you've been to every university
to make an educated statement that Rand isn't enjoyed by any university. No,
sorry, wrong. Hell, just the other day I saw a guy buying three of her
books. And one on audio.
>> Whereas your post is read and hated. She got the better deal.
>>
>Your opinion.
Hey, you're entire post is your opinion....
>Here's where your argument falls down: You assert that Rush plagerizes,
>then say that authors use "inspiration". Huge difference between penning
>someone elses ideas, and being inspired. Inspiration is the result of
>learning empirically about our world. And we learn empirically through our
>experience. Therefore, our inspirations - wherever or however we learn
>them - are ours.
Apparently sarcasm 101 wasn't taught at Chuck's Diploma-o-rama.
>You just said it. Inspiration. Try going to court and claim that the
>creation of a new invention or song is actually yours, because you gave
>him/her the "inspiration" to do it. However, if you had something more
>tangiable, (ie: copyright protection), then you would be in a much stronger
>position.
Ok. Tell me where Rush has ever taken an entire song from someone else
verbatim? Except Victor, you won't find one.
>Do you know that for sure?
Yes. It's playing straight through the song.
>Do you know that for sure?
What? Puff Daddy? Hell, the guy just changed half a dozen words to a Sting
song...
>Wayne Gretzky, gone. Michael Jordan, gone. You're right - very few things
>are totally original. When they're gone, they never come back.
What the hell do sports players have to do with being original? Hell, they
play sports that have been played for decades. The only thing original in
sports in Rodman's latest hairstyle.
>You *actually* got your albums out? Sheesh...
Yes, because I believe that I'm right, and you're wrong...
>A picture. Whoop-di-do...
Well, don't you think the movie house behind 2001 could have sued Rush for
using a still from their film?
>We have that pesky thing called inspiration, originating from our
>experience again. Not words or a title from a poem or novel.
Oh, wait, I think I see where your problem is. You think that "Xanadu" is a
copyrighted word, right? I doubt it. Also, the song and the poem are pretty
different, from what I remember. There's similarities, sure, but they didn't
copy it like Alex did for Victor.
>The 'Spirit of Radio' is representative of the listenership in Toronto at
>the time. Since the listenership is not part of an identifiable group, the
>likelihood of a class-action suit against the band is highly unlikely.
Good God. <Dr. Evil>Scott, you just...don't get it, do you?</Dr. Evil>
>Now that's proper acknowledgement. You're getting it. Finally.
So would Rush have to thank Webster's dictionary for giving them a reference
for words which they put in their songs? Or the thesaurus?
>It's "genius". And that's stretching it.
Blake's Blood, you're annoying. Go back and study High School English. (sic)
indicates that a passage or phrase was reproduced as it was in the original;
to show that grammatical or spelling errors aren't the current author's.
Oh, hey, better thank Webster's for that, I used them to double check the
meaning....
>Bingo! That's proper acknowledgement. Why can't they do that for every
>song and title they copy? So far it's only two for you, and seven for me.
Try 0 for you. And you get negative points for being a clueless, dense,
silly individual.
Give me a list of songs or titles that Rush has copied. Seriously. Prove me
wrong.
You can't copyright a word. Not as far as I know anyway. "Xanadu" is a word,
and you can't sue someone for using a word that once appeared in a poem, and
has since appeared in many other works. I've heard it used here and there.
>As a professional courtesy, you should.
Oh, you've got to be kidding me. Hey, I've got a short story with a
character named "Sarah". I suppose I should go back to Biblical times and
ask the original if I can use the name, eh? Or maybe just ask all the
"Sarah"s in the world?
mtb...@bellsouth.net
I thought that was George Foreman.
The best troll in a good while and I missed it! Damn.
pseud...@my-deja.com
"scott" <s...@netcom.ca> wrote:
>
> Vic <n...@vailable.com> wrote in article
> >
> > I didn't know there was such a thing as "professional philosophers."
>
research
> and education are professional in every sense of the word.
>
benefited anybody? Come on now.... Is it that hard? It would be easy
to come up with an example for a scientist or an engineer or a doctor
or a musician (enjoyment). These people are real professionals.
So, Scott can you name a single useful thing a philospher has done?
"Philosophy, Who Needs It?"
title of book by Ayn Rand
Nyarla...@hotmail.com
It's unfortunate that some people are responding to "Scott" by
attacking philosophers & philosophy students. These attacks avoid
what's really at issue here; moreover, Scott's messages are a travesty
of philosophical discourse.
For example, he attacks the view that "taking a few lines" from
stories, poems, etc., is "progressive or intellectual" when nobody has
made any such claim. Scott's attacking a straw man.
Scott provides numerous instances in which Peart allegedly failed
to cite his sources. Some contributors to this NG have shown that Peart
_did_, in fact cite his sources in the relevant instances. Scott's not
man enough to admit to being wrong, however; he changes the subject, and
says, "I can't believe that you actually looked up information," etc.,
-- as though, suddenly, it is disreputable to cite one's sources!
In short, Scott displays no philosophical prowess. The quality of
his posts here suggest that, instead of criticizing Rush (& their fans),
he'd be better off watching TV -- preferably a vacuous sitcom like
Melrose Place.
James and/or Karen Clay
There are more non-credited quotes in Neil's lyrics.What about "I can learn to
resist anything but temptation" ? This is Oscar Wilde's.
It certainly makes Neil seem more clever than he is. It's almost as if Neil is
throwing out all these different
literary references because he's sure some people will "get it" and say "Ahh,
that's Oscar Wilde...".
As for Rand, I always thought the album "Roll The Bones" (and some of
"Counterparts") was based on
objectivism's teaching of the inherent randomness of the universe. "Freewill" is
like attending a seminar on
objectivism!
Just my two cents...
Jim
Kathryn Silures
> I know this is way off topic, but did you know that Silure is a French
> word for Catfish!!??
>
> Ian
Well, Ian, that may be. Certainly there are words that mean different
things in different languages. However, in my case, Silures is Welsh.
Original meaning of the name lost but the Silures were one of the first
Celtic tribes to inhabit Wales. Silurian refers to an archaeological time
period in that region.
Kathryn
Edgecenter
credit...u really dont cite too many examples...& now youre getting on people
because they actually bothered to back up their posts with facts...?
accuse away, nimrod...but have a clue when u do---& then dont show your real
colors by attacking people who look up facts...character assasination is ugly,
yet u do it with shallow glee...
sta...@xmission.xmission.com
: "scott" <s...@netcom.ca> puked:
: >Vic <n...@vailable.com> wrote in article
: >>
: >> I didn't know there was such a thing as "professional philosophers."
: >
: >Philosophers in a university environment dedicating their lives to research
: >and education are professional in every sense of the word.
: Except their pay scale.
: Yes, I would like fries with that, Scott.
"Philosophers argue that they are very concerned about the problems
posed by real life. Such as, What do we mean by 'real', and how can
we arrive at an absolute definition of 'life'" ?
-Douglas Adams
...oh, damn. I didn't come up with that quote myself. Looks like it's
back to jail for me...
-------
stabbim
James
your liberal professors would love us to believe.
scott <s...@netcom.ca> wrote in message
news:01beaaed$2041b220$984bb5cf@capppsrs...
> Hi, kids! :-)
>
> Why is it that when you take a few lines or a title from a poem,
shortstory
> and book, and put it into a song, it's considered "progressive" or
> "intellectual"? Where I come from, that's called plagerism. If I found
an
> idea of mine entered into a song or short story without my permission AND
> the correct citation, you'll be sure I'll commence a legal action.
>
> refreshing to see them acknowledge this. And not some vague reference to
a
> hack 'philosopher' on the back of a CD cover.
>
> I minored in philosophy in university, and can say with qualification that
> professional philosophers have never taken Ayn Rand seriously, and that
> "Atlas Shrugged" has to be the most pompous, tedious piece of modern
> 'literature' ever.
>
Dan Iwerks
>Hi, kids! :-)
>
>Why is it that when you take a few lines or a title from a poem, shortstory
>and book, and put it into a song, it's considered "progressive" or
>"intellectual"? Where I come from, that's called plagerism. If I found an
>idea of mine entered into a song or short story without my permission AND
>the correct citation, you'll be sure I'll commence a legal action.
Yeah, people always talk about how T. S. Eliot's "The Waste Land" is a
complete piece of crap because he references dozens of different works in
it. And Joyce's _Ulysses_--complete garbage. I mean, he couldn't think of
a real plot line, so he just up and stole the structure of The Odyssey. And
that complete hack Milton, stealing from the Bible to get an idea for
_Paradise Lost_.
Would this be a good time to point out the fact that Shakespeare never came
up with an original plot, and just rewrote old stories?
Was a darn good troll, though. Lots of responses.
--
**********************************************************************
"Everything is funny, it just depends to whom."
Dan Iwerks <*> dan_i...@ncs.com
**********************************************************************
Dan Iwerks
>On Sun, 30 May 1999 22:38:24 GMT, "scott" <s...@netcom.ca> wrote:
>
>>
>>I minored in philosophy in university, and can say with qualification that
>>professional philosophers
>
>
>
League play opens in September. Buy your season tickets now.
Limbo
>
> I minored in philosophy in university, and can say with qualification that
> professional philosophers have never taken Ayn Rand seriously, and that
> "Atlas Shrugged" has to be the most pompous, tedious piece of modern
> 'literature' ever.
>
....so exactly whose ego is in progress?
Be good,
Limbo
OOPSULOST
enough to flex that muscle between your ears and try to bully Rush and the
members of this newsgroup???
I don't think they'll take any of your vacuous excrement. Furthermore, you're
outgunned.
You would have been better off picking a fight (or matching wits) with the
members of alt.ignoramus.BeavisAndButthead.
Its unfortunate that your minor in philosophy didn't produce any of the wisdom
that normally germinates in an indepth study of the subject. You obviously
know just enough to be dangerous, but not enough to know how little you really
know.
I can only assume from the raucous tone of your wonderfully acerbic post, that
you majored in Alcohol Abuse. Please, this is not a vomitorium.
Kevin Munro
Lamneth
Justin Coffey
>
> Hi, kids! :-)
>
> Why is it that when you take a few lines or a title from a poem, shortstory
> and book, and put it into a song, it's considered "progressive" or
> "intellectual"? Where I come from, that's called plagerism. If I found an
> idea of mine entered into a song or short story without my permission AND
> the correct citation, you'll be sure I'll commence a legal action.
The word is "plagiarize." And titles of works, anyway, cannot be
copyrighted. Besides, all writing is based on something else, chiefly
because no writer lives in a vacuum. It's called assimilating one's
influences.
> Clearly, the band owes a lot to *the ideas of others*. It would be
> refreshing to see them acknowledge this. And not some vague reference to a
> hack 'philosopher' on the back of a CD cover.
I don't see your explicit citation to whomever it was who told you Ayn
Rand was a "hack." Are you therefore plagiarizing someone's idea? If
not, why not?
> I minored in philosophy in university, and can say with qualification that
> professional philosophers have never taken Ayn Rand seriously, and that
> "Atlas Shrugged" has to be the most pompous, tedious piece of modern
> 'literature' ever.
>
> Looks like Neil might be what Rand fears the most - a second hander.
Knowing the opinions of a handful of philosophy professors doesn't make
you "qualified" to say anything. By the same token, I know some people
who were members of a group that followed Rand's teachings very closely
during the late 60's-early 70's. I would guess that these people knew
Rand's work as well as, if not better than, you and your associates who
have passed judgment on it. So, as a philosophy minor, maybe you can
tell us about the logical fallacy involving an appeal to authority.
You appear to be trying to come off as "intellectual" by mentioning
both Ayn Rand and your having "minored in philosophy in [sic]
university." Also, what you have written is "pompous" and "tedious."
Lastly, your regurgitation of what your professors spoon-fed you, a
common symptom of a product of higher education, makes you, sir, a
"second-hander." I guess you and Neil have more in common than you
thought.
Justin
Justin
Matthew D. Sullivan
>Vic wrote in message <3752faf6...@news.teleport.com>...
>>On Sun, 30 May 1999 22:38:24 GMT, "scott" <s...@netcom.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>I minored in philosophy in university, and can say with qualification that
>>>professional philosophers
>>
>>I didn't know there was such a thing as "professional philosophers."
>>
>
>League play opens in September. Buy your season tickets now.
You must have seen the Monty Python bit with the philosophers playing
soccer, eh? :)
-Matt S.
Dan Iwerks
"Kant is saying scoring is an a priori falsehood, Socrates is arguing that
none of us can be really sure if the ball went into the goal, and Marx is
saying he was offsides."
Robert & Christine
YYYESSS!!! BWA HA HA HA HA HA !!! I have been WAITING for the witty
participants of this thread to remember this! HAHHAHAHA! what a
PERFECT way to end a thread! (wishful "philosophizing")... <:-D
:) Robert
Lopolop
pseud...@my-deja.com on
: Mon, 31 May 1999 04:58 PM
wrote>>>>
>"Chance favors the prepared mind"
>I forget who said this
Louis Pasteur
Prime Mover
David Smith <david...@maywick.zetnet.co.uk> wrote in article
<3752c791$0$10...@news.zetnet.co.uk>...
> 1874 & 2112 - if you have to ask, you're not worth telling.
...But perhaps you could make an exception in my case. What's the
significance of 1874?
Geezer Butler
anatomically correct) to actually ask. I ain't worth it, either, but I was
waiting for somebody else to jump in. How about it, David? This is
definitely more intriguing than Reani's name origins.
--
Geezer
Dig me but don't...
bury me.
Prime Mover <y...@peganet.net> wrote in message
news:01beae02$e104ac20$40d1a8d0@oemcomputer...
JasonB
Lerxst wrote:
> scott wrote in message <01beaaed$2041b220$984bb5cf@capppsrs>...
> >Hi, kids! :-)
> >
> >Why is it that when you take a few lines or a title from a poem, shortstory
> >and book, and put it into a song, it's considered "progressive" or
> >"intellectual"? Where I come from, that's called plagerism. If I found an
> >idea of mine entered into a song or short story without my permission AND
> >the correct citation, you'll be sure I'll commence a legal action.
> >
> >Clearly, the band owes a lot to *the ideas of others*. It would be
> >refreshing to see them acknowledge this. And not some vague reference to a
> >hack 'philosopher' on the back of a CD cover.
> >
> >I minored in philosophy in university, and can say with qualification that
> >professional philosophers have never taken Ayn Rand seriously, and that
> >"Atlas Shrugged" has to be the most pompous, tedious piece of modern
> >'literature' ever.
>
> Yet, amazingly, she's read and enjoyed. Whereas your post is read and hated.
> She got the better deal.
>
> >Looks like Neil might be what Rand fears the most - a second hander.
>
> Hell yeah! You're totally right!
>
> Tell ya what. Let's grab us about 50 lawyers and go after the following
> people:
>
> Rush, since they plagerize.
> Any other band that uses any other published idea, small as it may be.
> Any published author who uses any other published source for inspiration.
> Hell, why stop there?! Let's get the bastards who use *unpublished* sources
> for inspiration!
> George Lucas, for using Kurosawa as inspiration for Star Wars.
> That guy who does that song "Millenium" because he ripped off a riff from a
> James Bond song.
> The same guy, for using James Bond type scenes in his music video.
> Puff Daddy.
>
> C'mon. Face it. Very, very, very, very few things in the world are totally
> original these days. And I don't have a problem with it. Except Puff Daddy.
>
> And here's a little something for you. These are from the CD booklets.
> Verbatim.
>
> Red Barchetta: "Inspired by 'A Nice Morning Drive', by Richard S. Foster.
> (By the by, the song and the short story are not too much alike. Except in
> concept. Oh, yeah, but that's where you have your problem. I'd hate to think
> what the idea of "concurrent development" does to your mind...)
>
> Countdown: Dedicated with thanks to astronauts Young and Crippen and all the
> people of NASA for their inspiration and cooperation.
>
> Hey look, they even mention the photo from 2001 they used in Test For Echo!
>
> Spirit of Radio: Inspired by the 'Spirit of Radio' in Toronto, alive and
> well (so far). (Hey, can The Spirit of Radio sue Rush for using its name and
> concept?)
>
Hey just to point this out here Lerxst and I totally agree with what you're
saying but the name of the station is (pretty sure) CFNY, the Spirit of Radio's
just their slogan.
>
> Off of Presto: "We also offer a tip of the musical hat to....Mike Roberts
> for the acorn of Superconductor....."
>
> By-Tor and the Snowdog: By-Tor characters inspired by Herns.
>
> 2112: With acknowledgement to the genus (sic) of Ayn Rand.
>
> And, for our bonus round...
>
> Victor: Words by W.H. Auden. Later, it says, "Excerpts from Victor used with
> permission from Random House, Inc."
>
> Of course, they didn't seek permission from Hemingway's estate to use a
> character maybe slightly seemingly very similar in a few ways to Hemingway
> himself. Or the crew of the Enola Gay for using the name in a song. Or, in
> fact, everyone who worked on the Manhattan Project. Gotta make sure people
> will let you use it you know.
>
> I'm sorry, did you have a point?
Mike Smith
news:01beae02$e104ac20$40d1a8d0@oemcomputer...
>
> David Smith <david...@maywick.zetnet.co.uk> wrote in article
> <3752c791$0$10...@news.zetnet.co.uk>...
>
> > 1874 & 2112 - if you have to ask, you're not worth telling.
>
> ...But perhaps you could make an exception in my case. What's the
> significance of 1874?
A quick sampling from AltaVista indicates:
- Gustav Holst's birth
- Harry Houdini's birth
- Henry Ernest Shackleton's birth
- The founding of the Women's Christian Temperance Union
- The First Impressionist Exhibition
- Winston Churchill's birth
- Anders Angstrom's death
- Robert Frost's birth
- The invention of the ice cream soda
- The construction of the Star of Russia (a sailing ship)
- Western Treaty #4, leading to the creation of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and
Alberta
- The founding of the Princeton University Glee Club
- The birth of G. K. Chesterton
- The founding of Gamma Phi Beta sorority
- The founding of Pipedreams of Shanklin, a tobacconist on the Isle of Wight
- The birth of A. A. Brill, the first psychoanalyst to practice in the U.S.
- Queen's Park beat Clydesdale in the Scottish Cup
- The Schutzengesellschaft Leimen (apparently some sort of gun club) was
founded
Whew! It was a pretty busy year. Guess you're going to have to give us
another hint, Smitty. Only a Brit could be such an outright fucking *snob*
as to have a sig like yours, without giving us a single snippet of an
indication as to being worthy of such snobbishness.
--
Mike Smith. No, the other one.
roo...@my-deja.com
>
I think I've sussed it: You spent a lot of money on college at some
point in your life and therefore think you're intelligent (education <>
intelligence), weren't good enough to major in philosophy but still
consider yourself an expert (enough so, anyway, to speak for every
university you "know of"), and are extremely bitter about the fact that
there are people in this world (like myself) who never went to college
but make more money than you can ever hope to. Tell me, am I close? If
not, I'm not too concerned. After all, I only based my assumption on
the fact that you've cited your education in almost every post you've
made. That's a mere handful of observations that I'm using to profile
you completely. Hang on . . . that's what you did with Neil, so I must
be right!!
And for the record, quotation is considered to be a tribute to another
work. Neil knows that the quoted source (or nearest living relative)
would approve, otherwise he wouldn't do it. He also knows that anyone
listening to . . . oh, say Losing It for example, would know that "the
bell tolls for thee" was from Hemingway. If you'll actually do your
homework, you'll notice that every quotation he's ever made that wasn't
immediately obvious (see above) was sourced or put in quotation marks in
either the liner notes or song book. The line from Resist was sourced
on a nationally syndicated radio program. Therefore, once and for all,
your argument is thoroughly debunked. Any attempt you make to further
your point or "grade" me on my response will now be seen for what it
truly is: a pathetic attempt from an intellectual wannabe to get
attention. And yet, somehow I know you'll try. It's sad really . . .
Rook
Mike Smith
news:19990531165638...@ng-cg1.aol.com...
> Geezer wrote:
>
> >Hey! I thought I was the Grillmaster Man! I have the singed hair to
prove
> >it!
>
> You have hair? :)
Oh, I see where the confusion is coming from. You though he was talking
about his head. I think he was referring to the hair that's closer to the
level of the grill.
Geezer Butler
--
Geezer
Dig me but don't...
bury me.
Mike Smith <smi...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:qI163.684$09.17...@news.optonline.net...
H.V.C. is D E D
<Vwl63.9752$437...@news2.atl>...
> Please don't make me post a pic. Frans will get pissed.
Post the link. Now.
--
High Voltage Cable, not Alex Lifeson
AIM: JoshCable --- ICQ#: 19494247
Lewis Black: http://www.tir.com/~jtcable/lewispage.html
I hit my head on a turnbuckle. Now I am dead.
Some people live apart;
They break your heart so damn easy
And then one night in sunny victory
She decides and you agree, she's leaving