Tuesday, August 14, 2007

Well we have 9 contributors...

.. and barely a post!! C'mon people.. let's

Blog on!!!!!

(Sue, you are temporarily excused, glad to hear you are doing so well!!)


ROB said...

Yes, I agree.

C'mon people. Put some stuff up here so I can comment in my own silly, warped, and once in a great while, enlightening way. It's up to you "the contributors" to put the topics on the table. We're counting on you. You knew the job was dangerous when you took it:)

Tink said...

Hi everyone!
Rob ... nice to "see" you back blogging. Sully (John Sullivan) has an interesting blog post up. It's an article discussing opera vs. rock opera and Pete/The Who get a big mention (including Tommy and TBWHM) He refers to Ray High as a rock "geezer." hm. I thought the article was snobbish and the writer more confused than he apparently even realized. It sparked a lot of emotion for me. It's here:


xo Tink

Tink said...

Oh! Also:

Remember to check out the new addition to Lifehouse!

NEWS from Lifehouse Method!

Over the past 3 months, several thousand people have sat for their portraits. I've listened to many of them. We've just opened the Lifehouse Method Gallery so you can here some of them too.

I also recently allowed a talented student of mine, Camilo Tirado, to download the midi files of a Method portrait and he created a fabulous elaboration using Apple GarageBand. Have a listen to it on the gallery page

Keep on sitting!

Lawrence Ball, 2nd August 2007

I've listened to quite a few of the portraits too. I've also been looking at your feedback. What comes through loud and clear as that most people who sit for the Method seem to think that their portrait reflects their mood when they sit.

I announced at the press launch of The Method that we'd be 'going commercial' on July 31st. However, we've just been approached by to do something new and special with the software (very exciting), so for the time being there will continue to be no charge to sit for portraits.

Pete Townshend, 2nd August 2007

(Maria aka the dynamic el wisty) is a featured sitter at the new gallery. Awesome profile music.


ROB said...

Well Tink, I read that article you mentioned above on rock opera/opera and I must agree: the writer does appear snobbish and confused. Pretty much what I would expect though. The whole term "rock opera" has always seemed a bit of a joke to me anyway just like the term "concept album". I'm sure every great album has a concept behind it in one way or another. I get bugged by how people try to categorize everything, but I guess it's just human nature.

In high school I was called a "head-banger" because I liked Iron Maiden etc. In Junior High People assumed I was a "mod" because I wore T-shirts of The Who.
When people ask me what kind of music I like I respond "I like good music" knowing full well I'm pissing them off. Of course they follow up with another question wanting me to be more specific so I'll throw out some names: The Who, Deep Purple, etc. Oh, you're into "classic rock' they'll reply.
Well, It wasn't "classic rock" in 1975 it was just good music then and it's good music now. Dad on the other hand, loved Bing Crosby.
So I guess he loved "crooners"?

Where does it end?

What were we talking about anyway?

Oh yeah, GOOD MUSIC...

Lucy said...

Sorry all -- I'd really love to be more of a contributor (HA! as if I've been any at all!) but I've been scan-challenged. (I did get my new computer last weekend -- yea!! -- but I'm not properly hooked up to our scanner/printer yet... and who KNOWS when that'll happen in this household... ;-)

But AS SOON as I get scan-ready, I promise to post a cool old Who article from the Chicago Sun-Times (dated October 1982)...

(and sorry I've been so lax about visiting other people's blogs. There's just not enough of me to go around! I deeply appreciate the few visits I've had from some of you though... thanks. (big smile))

(hi tink! hi Rob! wishing you both good things this week...)

Tink said...

Hi Lucy ... don't worry your pretty 'lil head. :oD Your posts are worth the wait!

Rob, I was generally out of step with my "peer" group, being a teen in the early seventies. I liked 50s music as well as big bands. Heck, I would even get in the mood to bounce around with Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass. (I played trumpet, tho .. so I had a good excuse. lol) I also loved much of the music of that current time as well. These things did not help my overall "weirdness" factor. :o)

You're right ... there is just this natural urge/obsession to categorize people, places, things. Some is good and needed (like libraries!) Most is not. AS much as cultures and times change but stay the same in some ways .... overall, I'm pretty happy to not have to go out of a cave to spear dinner!
I wonder what kind of music cavemen made?

Lucy said...


The longer I live, the more I realize categorizing people and things just doesn't work. As soon as you do, you're proven wrong.

And this can be frustrating and perplexing!

(even libraries don't have it easy... I know!) (Is this AIDS in Africa book a public health book or a human geography book? Who will need it? What will they look it up under?)