Only one thing in this whole thread making me laugh (thanks bigstacks).
Being inside writing a brief on a gorgeous early spring day in the showme state.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
So have you actually read the Louis Armstrong book or are you just being a bitch?
I've read it. I saw your post last night, grabbed my copy off of the shelf, opened it to a random page, and immediately found an awesome nugget of information...which I transcribed for your myopic, always-missing-the-boat azz.
my wife just lost her engagement ring....which is also bullshit...and i have a feeling this will be the case.
I insured mine separately because I only carried 25K on my policy, but it might be covered by your basic homeowners/renters insurance.
I feel for you buddy, special item and one of my biggest fears.
the adjuster hasn't called me yet but there is one hurdle that has me up at night. when i bought it, i didn't have renters insurance (still don't), so i asked my parents if they could add it to their homeowner's policy (at the suggestion of my jeweler). they did, and its on a separate rider with an annual payment of about $200. however....i don't live at home. theoretically, since we made the payments, i think i should be cool. but, i could see them raising the fact that insurance in the 'burbs is cheaper than in the city (where i live).
So have you actually read the Louis Armstrong book or are you just being a bitch?
I've read it. I saw your post last night, grabbed my copy off of the shelf, opened it to a random page, and immediately found an awesome nugget of information...which I transcribed for your myopic, always-missing-the-boat azz.
Sure there is great information in there, but then there is this:
"Fleeting coversations between a street musician and a street child leave few traces" and even better "Although it may seem futile, one is bound to ask What did Armstrong learn?" and then he goes into a WHOLE CHAPTER doing what he just said was futile.
This is directly from the book: "In an obscure passage from one of his many autobiographical writings, Armstrong remembered hanging out as a child with three different street musicians, known to him as Larenzo, Santiago, and the "Waffle Man." Larenzo collected old clothing, rags, bones, and bottle for reslae. Louis admired how he drew poeople to him with music. He played "an old, tin, long horn, which he used to blow withouth the mouthpiece and he would actually play atune on the darn thing," Armstrong wrote. "That knocked me out to hear him do that. He had a soul, too." Larenzo took an interest in the child and spent time talking with him- "the things he said, pertaining to music, had me spellbound."
Well, that's interesting. What's not interesting is the next few pages where the author explains how easy it must have been for other biographers to ignore those few sentences, despite how OBVIOUSLY IMPORTANT they are, and luckily for the reader the author had the great insight to DEDICATE A WHOLE CHAPTER to his thoughts on those few sentences and how important they are. Its like Dude, get over yourself. Its that sometimes arrogant know-it-all tones that hampers an otherwise good book. Don't congratulate yourselft for paying attention to something, just write about it. And honeslty, I'm not interested in reading an entire chapter of some dude's speculations, especially when its written with the tone of "I'm pretty sure this is how it was, because, uh, I'm a music professor for Duke, so I'm pretty smart about this stuff." Instead it should be "This is how is may[/b] have gone down based one what was happening at the time, for example blah blah and we have evidence[/b] of this from etc etc".
This guy might be a great professor, but he's not a very good writer. Because its easy to see when he's bullshitting and making shit up.
But I'm glad you enjoyed the book and have NO CRITICISM of it all. It must all be true, otherwise why would it be in a book right? (NO ICKE).
This guy might be a great professor, but he's not a very good writer.
I haven't read the book, but my response to this sentence is: welcome to the world of books about music.
People who know a lot about a subject, are often not the best to write about it...
And people who are really good writers are often experts at fluffing a story out to be better than it actually is.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
So have you actually read the Louis Armstrong book or are you just being a bitch?
I've read it. I saw your post last night, grabbed my copy off of the shelf, opened it to a random page, and immediately found an awesome nugget of information...which I transcribed for your myopic, always-missing-the-boat azz.
Sure there is great information in there, but then there is this:
"Fleeting coversations between a street musician and a street child leave few traces" and even better "Although it may seem futile, one is bound to ask What did Armstrong learn?" and then he goes into a WHOLE CHAPTER doing what he just said was futile.
This is directly from the book: "In an obscure passage from one of his many autobiographical writings, Armstrong remembered hanging out as a child with three different street musicians, known to him as Larenzo, Santiago, and the "Waffle Man." Larenzo collected old clothing, rags, bones, and bottle for reslae. Louis admired how he drew poeople to him with music. He played "an old, tin, long horn, which he used to blow withouth the mouthpiece and he would actually play atune on the darn thing," Armstrong wrote. "That knocked me out to hear him do that. He had a soul, too." Larenzo took an interest in the child and spent time talking with him- "the things he said, pertaining to music, had me spellbound."
Well, that's interesting. What's not interesting is the next few pages where the author explains how easy it must have been for other biographers to ignore those few sentences, despite how OBVIOUSLY IMPORTANT they are, and luckily for the reader the author had the great insight to DEDICATE A WHOLE CHAPTER to his thoughts on those few sentences and how important they are. Its like Dude, get over yourself. Its that sometimes arrogant know-it-all tones that hampers an otherwise good book. Don't congratulate yourselft for paying attention to something, just write about it. And honeslty, I'm not interested in reading an entire chapter of some dude's speculations, especially when its written with the tone of "I'm pretty sure this is how it was, because, uh, I'm a music professor for Duke, so I'm pretty smart about this stuff." Instead it should be "This is how is may[/b] have gone down based one what was happening at the time, for example blah blah and we have evidence[/b] of this from etc etc".
This guy might be a great professor, but he's not a very good writer. Because its easy to see when he's bullshitting and making shit up.
But I'm glad you enjoyed the book and have NO CRITICISM of it all. It must all be true, otherwise why would it be in a book right? (NO ICKE).
You already said all of this. I dunno, I don't typically read books to get mad at them. I find what's good to me and that's what I retain. My memory of this particular book is that it provided all sorts of great anectdotal and historical info about old school New Orleans...like what I highlighted about Armstrong actually "chasing down and flailing[/b] hecklers". See, that's the kind of stuff that sticks with me...not how much smarter than the author I think I am.
...and then there are the rare books like that motley crue one, where...where...where I don't know what happened: the authors' skills were as lacking as their subject matter. Incredible.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Then you should stop reading my posts to get mad at them, and instead find what's good to you and retain that.
Your posts aren't books that I buy and read by choice.
Although I do retain from them that you are a non-funny, insecure nincumpoop.
Me and my girl leaving the house yesterday to go do some retail therapy and finding a six inch dead rat (not including tail) wedged under our car's windscreen wiper.
It's pretty obvious that it didn't manage to do that to itself and considering where we live the chances of a rat that size just happening to die and then some drunk putting it on our car are slim to none.
This leads me to believe that it was our asshole neighbours who, despite being in their mid twenties and therefore supposedly enjoying life, have managed to build up an extreme hatred of us for occasionally playing music a tad loud late on a friday night. It's so far reached a pitch with the girl banging on my door at 2am and asking me where I thought I was (I replied "in my own house, enjoying myself") but the fact that they never ever go out means that their channeled anger has obviously reached a new pitch.
I don't know what kind of scum pulls off a stunt like this but, after months of attempting diplomacy out of a desire for a quiet life, I feel it's now approaching the stage where I'm going to have to start resorting to childish antics.
Notwithstanding the fact that if you're playing music at 2:00 a.m. loud enough to disturb your neigbors you are kind of a dick, the rat on the windshield must not go unchallenged!
Notwithstanding the fact that if you're playing music at 2:00 a.m. loud enough to disturb your neigbors you are kind of a dick, the rat on the windshield must not go unchallenged!
Saying. While I hold my hands up and agree that we're not in the right and music levels have been occasionally higher than acceptable on a Friday night whatever happened to the knock round and a polite word? It's also worth mentioning that we're on a busy street where drunk people wander past singing to about 4 in the morning anyway so it's not like we're in a quiet little close.
On the other hand I've never seen a rat that big in our area so I'm kind of in awe at the effort that's gone into this. They're very quiet people apart from his occasional shouting and I'm beginning to wonder if this was actually some kind of gang related coded message. I wonder if we do it again whether we'll get a dog thrown through our window.
Comments
I'm going to assume that that was meant as a joke and you wrote it that way on purpose.
my wife just lost her engagement ring....which is also bullshit...and i have a feeling this will be the case.
Being inside writing a brief on a gorgeous early spring day in the showme state.
I've read it. I saw your post last night, grabbed my copy off of the shelf, opened it to a random page, and immediately found an awesome nugget of information...which I transcribed for your myopic, always-missing-the-boat azz.
I insured mine separately because I only carried 25K on my policy, but it might be covered by your basic homeowners/renters insurance.
I feel for you buddy, special item and one of my biggest fears.
the adjuster hasn't called me yet but there is one hurdle that has me up at night. when i bought it, i didn't have renters insurance (still don't), so i asked my parents if they could add it to their homeowner's policy (at the suggestion of my jeweler). they did, and its on a separate rider with an annual payment of about $200. however....i don't live at home. theoretically, since we made the payments, i think i should be cool. but, i could see them raising the fact that insurance in the 'burbs is cheaper than in the city (where i live).
we shall see...
Sure there is great information in there, but then there is this:
"Fleeting coversations between a street musician and a street child leave few traces" and even better "Although it may seem futile, one is bound to ask What did Armstrong learn?" and then he goes into a WHOLE CHAPTER doing what he just said was futile.
This is directly from the book:
"In an obscure passage from one of his many autobiographical writings, Armstrong remembered hanging out as a child with three different street musicians, known to him as Larenzo, Santiago, and the "Waffle Man." Larenzo collected old clothing, rags, bones, and bottle for reslae. Louis admired how he drew poeople to him with music. He played "an old, tin, long horn, which he used to blow withouth the mouthpiece and he would actually play atune on the darn thing," Armstrong wrote. "That knocked me out to hear him do that. He had a soul, too." Larenzo took an interest in the child and spent time talking with him- "the things he said, pertaining to music, had me spellbound."
Well, that's interesting. What's not interesting is the next few pages where the author explains how easy it must have been for other biographers to ignore those few sentences, despite how OBVIOUSLY IMPORTANT they are, and luckily for the reader the author had the great insight to DEDICATE A WHOLE CHAPTER to his thoughts on those few sentences and how important they are. Its like Dude, get over yourself. Its that sometimes arrogant know-it-all tones that hampers an otherwise good book. Don't congratulate yourselft for paying attention to something, just write about it. And honeslty, I'm not interested in reading an entire chapter of some dude's speculations, especially when its written with the tone of "I'm pretty sure this is how it was, because, uh, I'm a music professor for Duke, so I'm pretty smart about this stuff." Instead it should be "This is how is may[/b] have gone down based one what was happening at the time, for example blah blah and we have evidence[/b] of this from etc etc".
This guy might be a great professor, but he's not a very good writer. Because its easy to see when he's bullshitting and making shit up.
But I'm glad you enjoyed the book and have NO CRITICISM of it all. It must all be true, otherwise why would it be in a book right? (NO ICKE).
I haven't read the book, but my response to this sentence is: welcome to the world of books about music.
People who know a lot about a subject, are often not the best to write about it...
And people who are really good writers are often experts at fluffing a story out to be better than it actually is.
You already said all of this. I dunno, I don't typically read books to get mad at them. I find what's good to me and that's what I retain. My memory of this particular book is that it provided all sorts of great anectdotal and historical info about old school New Orleans...like what I highlighted about Armstrong actually "chasing down and flailing[/b] hecklers". See, that's the kind of stuff that sticks with me...not how much smarter than the author I think I am.
Again, I don't think you know how to read right.
Your posts aren't books that I buy and read by choice.
Although I do retain from them that you are a non-funny, insecure nincumpoop.
ehhhhhhhhhh.
It's pretty obvious that it didn't manage to do that to itself and considering where we live the chances of a rat that size just happening to die and then some drunk putting it on our car are slim to none.
This leads me to believe that it was our asshole neighbours who, despite being in their mid twenties and therefore supposedly enjoying life, have managed to build up an extreme hatred of us for occasionally playing music a tad loud late on a friday night. It's so far reached a pitch with the girl banging on my door at 2am and asking me where I thought I was (I replied "in my own house, enjoying myself") but the fact that they never ever go out means that their channeled anger has obviously reached a new pitch.
I don't know what kind of scum pulls off a stunt like this but, after months of attempting diplomacy out of a desire for a quiet life, I feel it's now approaching the stage where I'm going to have to start resorting to childish antics.
Saying. While I hold my hands up and agree that we're not in the right and music levels have been occasionally higher than acceptable on a Friday night whatever happened to the knock round and a polite word? It's also worth mentioning that we're on a busy street where drunk people wander past singing to about 4 in the morning anyway so it's not like we're in a quiet little close.
On the other hand I've never seen a rat that big in our area so I'm kind of in awe at the effort that's gone into this. They're very quiet people apart from his occasional shouting and I'm beginning to wonder if this was actually some kind of gang related coded message. I wonder if we do it again whether we'll get a dog thrown through our window.