Post pictures of random stuff you've bought recently

[Kwick1]

4 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

I've always always always wanted cowboy boots but to be honest you'd look an absolute cunt walking about the south east of England in em (and by you I mean me, birds can actually pull em off).  Fuckin' cowboy hats too, they look so cool. 

Get you Cowboy boots! Who cares what people think? It takes a bit to break them in but they're comfortable and I think look cool. I've even worn them court. But this is Texas. Cowboy hats are sexy. 

[soon]

I can rock a cowboy hat. And I have a serious weakness for ladies in those mini cowboy boots, full size too. Boots are far more common that the hats round here. Hootenanny attire is trucker hats for men and cowboy hats for women.

Day to day, I usually wear steel toed sneakers so there isnt as much options and flash. Currently I also have a pair of mail order walmart sneakers with no branding. They have the structural integrity of a sweaty sock thats dried into a crusty stick. And they're velcro. Oddly, I get compliments!

 

Edited February 15, 2019 by soon

[Len Cnut]

16 minutes ago, Kwick1 said:

Get you Cowboy boots! Who cares what people think? It takes a bit to break them in but they're comfortable and I think look cool. I've even worn them court. But this is Texas. Cowboy hats are sexy. 

In Texas I'd wear em.  In fact anywhere in America I'd wear em...but trust me, a lad, over here, someone whoose not famous, you look proper divvy. 

[soon]

1 minute ago, lukepowell1988 said:

We might not share the same views politically but we can both agree now that is odd 

Hahaha! It really is. My hunch is that shoe people assume they are rare since they dont recognize them. So they compliment them in hopes of getting info. They do have a certain charm to em though

[Kwick1]

2 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

In Texas I'd wear em.  In fact anywhere in America I'd wear em...but trust me, a lad, over here, someone whoose not famous, you look proper divvy. 

You might start a new fashion trend. 😉

[Len Cnut]

13 minutes ago, soon said:

Hahaha! It really is. My hunch is that shoe people assume they are rare since they dont recognize them. So they compliment them in hopes of getting info. They do have a certain charm to em though

Just go 'they're Balmain, d'ya like em?'

[soon]

2 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

Just go 'they're Balmain, d'ya like em?'

I figure thats a fancy brand?

Will do, great tip! 

[Len Cnut]

10 minutes ago, soon said:

I figure thats a fancy brand?

Will do, great tip! 

Yes, Pierre Balmain was a famous french designer and of late it has become to go to brand for the new money rich, a lot of your rappers and shit love all that.  And they're often quite plain and unbranded looking so you could probably pull it off, unless you bump into Alexander McQueens youngest or something.  Actually, he was a bender, wasn't he? 

[soon]

4 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

Yes, Pierre Balmain was a famous french designer and of late it has become to go to brand for the new money rich, a lot of your rappers and shit love all that.  And they're often quite plain and unbranded looking so you could probably pull it off, unless you bump into Alexander McQueens youngest or something.  Actually, he was a bender, wasn't he? 

Oh right on. Thats the perfect way to go! Im try it out 

I dont know who McQueen is either  But along that line, whenever I wear my cowboy hat the fellas offer to buy me drinks 

[Len Cnut]

10 minutes ago, soon said:

Oh right on. Thats the perfect way to go! Im try it out 

I dont know who McQueen is either  But along that line, whenever I wear my cowboy hat the fellas offer to buy me drinks 

Alexander McQueen is, or was, a VERY famous designer who died recently I believe.  I bet you've heard of Vivienne Westwood though!

[soon]

9 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

Alexander McQueen is, or was, a VERY famous designer who died recently I believe.  I bet you've heard of Vivienne Westwood though!

I think Ive heard of Westwood from that Skin head doc you turned me onto! Name was familiar prior but that was the most info Ive had. 

[Len Cnut]

10 minutes ago, soon said:

I think Ive heard of Westwood from that Skin head doc you turned me onto! Name was familiar prior but that was the most info Ive had. 

Vivienne Westwood was the girlfriend of Malcolm McLaren and was the co-owner of the famous Sex shop on The Kings Road where Malcolm found The Sex Pistols.  All the early punk clothes that you see the lads kitted out in where Westwood and McLaren creations, she got her start from the punk movement...and from there has gone on to be one of the biggest and most respected designers in the world.  You see a lot of her in old Pistols footage and interviews and documentaries.  Rotten hated her, thought she was a ridiculous old bag.  But all those famous designs they wore, the Destroy shirt, the two cowboys with their cocks out, the bondage trousers, the whole look of punk had a lot to do with her designs.  Stole a fair few ideas from Rotten and of course the prescedents set in NYC.

[Len Cnut]

Thats her with Rotten and Jordan

 

[soon]

6 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

Vivienne Westwood was the girlfriend of Malcolm McLaren and was the co-owner of the famous Sex shop on The Kings Road where Malcolm found The Sex Pistols.  All the early punk clothes that you see the lads kitted out in where Westwood and McLaren creations, she got her start from the punk movement...and from there has gone on to be one of the biggest and most respected designers in the world.  You see a lot of her in old Pistols footage and interviews and documentaries.  Rotten hated her, thought she was a ridiculous old bag.  But all those famous designs they wore, the Destroy shirt, the two cowboys with their cocks out, the bondage trousers, the whole look of punk had a lot to do with her designs.  Stole a fair few ideas from Rotten and of course the prescedents set in NYC.

Right, right, right! This and the pics are jogging my memory! I know a fan of hers who arrived 20 years late to the Riot Grrrl movement. She talks all about Westwood. I used to leaf through some sort of coffee table book with her pieces at her place. Really great stuff! It seems that Westwoods been ripped off and not really given her dues over time here. All the fashion is here but not so much the history. But this chick even had hair and clothes like Westwood in these pics.

Thats McLaren in the bottom one? He look so innocent.

[Len Cnut]

21 minutes ago, soon said:

Right, right, right! This and the pics are jogging my memory! I know a fan of hers who arrived 20 years late to the Riot Grrrl movement. She talks all about Westwood. I used to leaf through some sort of coffee table book with her pieces at her place. Really great stuff! It seems that Westwoods been ripped off and not really given her dues over time here. All the fashion is here but not so much the history. But this chick even had hair and clothes like Westwood in these pics.

Thats McLaren in the bottom one? He look so innocent.

Loads of whats worn today can be traced back to punk.  The adventurous hairstyles that are just normal now, who had that shit before punk?  Severe shaved backs and sides, mohawks, spiky messes, punk dragged this shit into the mainstream.  Boy London, thats a brand thats had a bit of resurgence as of late, that was the second punk shop on the Kings Road, run by Andrew Czechowski.  Torn jeans/trousers, where did you ever see torn clothes before punk?  Its effects on fashion and society are visible today.  Even hip hop, there was a point there early doors where the two genres kinda overlapped and punk helped propel hip hop.  A lot of the aesthetic was similar too, the DIY aspect of it, the rejection of mainstream culture, the subversive fashion (hip hoppers openly wore fake or deliberately bastardized versions of high end designers, as created by people like Dapper Dan of Harlem, as a form of kinda ridiculing such designers and the yuppie culture that embraced them so...ironic now that hip hop is embracing that very same shit), it was like a renegade thing.  People like Debbie Harry drafting in Grandmaster Flash and Fab Five Freddy, The Beasties and Rick Rubin, Johnny Rottens work with Afrika Bambaataa, The Clash arriving in New York and embracing the graph' artists and even doing their own gammy legged take on rap music, its kind of a forgotten part of hip hop culture. 

[DieselDaisy]

Wouldn't be seen dead in a pair of trainers outside fitness/sports. Very chavvy and uncouth.

[soon]

23 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

Loads of whats worn today can be traced back to punk.  The adventurous hairstyles that are just normal now, who had that shit before punk?  Severe shaved backs and sides, mohawks, spiky messes, punk dragged this shit into the mainstream.  Boy London, thats a brand thats had a bit of resurgence as of late, that was the second punk shop on the Kings Road, run by Andrew Czechowski.  Torn jeans/trousers, where did you ever see torn clothes before punk?  Its effects on fashion and society are visible today.  Even hip hop, there was a point there early doors where the two genres kinda overlapped and punk helped propel hip hop.  A lot of the aesthetic was similar too, the DIY aspect of it, the rejection of mainstream culture, the subversive fashion (hip hoppers openly wore fake or deliberately bastardized versions of high end designers, as created by people like Dapper Dan of Harlem, as a form of kinda ridiculing such designers and the yuppie culture that embraced them so...ironic now that hip hop is embracing that very same shit), it was like a renegade thing.  People like Debbie Harry drafting in Grandmaster Flash and Fab Five Freddy, The Beasties and Rick Rubin, Johnny Rottens work with Afrika Bambaataa, The Clash arriving in New York and embracing the graph' artists and even doing their own gammy legged take on rap music, its kind of a forgotten part of hip hop culture. 

Right, that all makes sense. I know Boy London for sure. Seems like its always been popular here, actually. 

Similar to the irony in hip hop fashion around yuppie culture, is that a sort of conflicting thing for punk? Did it seek to mainstream itself? Did it disrupt fashion irreversibly or was it simply coopted and appropriated by big business?

Rolling Stone Now just had a great interview with an author who just wrote a book about the early Beastie Boys. Talked a lot about how they were at the very first NYC punk shows and says that experience prepared them to really jump in with the birth of Hip Hop. And I think they talked about how Rappers Delight was basically disco and not representative of hip hop on the streets and in the clubs. That Rubin and the Beasties punk attitudes helped save early hip hop from a pop bastardization. I have no idea if thats him overstating it, but its interesting how they cross pollenate.

 

[Len Cnut]

Quote

Very chavvy and uncouth.

You rang?  

Quote

Similar to the irony in hip hop fashion around yuppie culture, is that a sort of conflicting thing for punk? Did it seek to mainstream itself? Did it disrupt fashion irreversibly or was it simply coopted and appropriated by big business?

I think with every new thing it begins in the minds of a chosen few, who are often pilloried for it...before it filters down into the mainstream.  I think it disrupted fashion and...I dunno, these things always reflect their times don't they?  It was all very severe.  There comes a time when the same old just becomes remote from the reality of peoples lives.  I mean walking around mid 70s London, half the country on strike, civil and political unrest, riots and all manner of strife...and then there's all these people walking around in flares with long but neatly ordered hair talking about peace, love and macrame, it just becomes remote from the reality of peoples lives and people find themselves living a parody.

Quote

Rolling Stone Now just had a great interview with an author who just wrote a book about the early Beastie Boys. Talked a lot about how they were at the very first NYC punk shows and says that experience prepared them to really jump in with the birth of Hip Hop. And I think they talked about how Rappers Delight was basically disco and not representative of hip hop on the streets and in the clubs. That Rubin and the Beasties punk attitudes helped save early hip hop from a pop bastardization. I have no idea if thats him overstating it, but its interesting how they cross pollenate.

Perhaps a slight overstatement but a really valid point nonetheless.  I think the key difference between punk and hip hop is that hip hop kinda embraced capitalism, hip hop wanted the big flash cars and status and all that comes with it, whereas punk seemed sort of embarrassed by riches.  I've heard it argued before now that it was like a black and white thing, like hip hop was art form of black guys that came from some pretty dire poverty and as such made no bones about wanting to be rich as fuck whereas punk was more a case of like...they just wanted another way, their way, their thing, the end game wasn't really money (not that thats a bad thing entirely), it was more like...creating an identity to where you can be something because so far you're nothing.  I've often thought that maybe its like an English vs American thing, where Americans are all well up for getting rich over here people are suspicious of the rich.  America appears to be going that way too in certain aspects.  

All in all I think there's a lot to that anti-materialistic shit.  I mean money is good, its OK but to me its kinda like...just a whim thing, something that can facilitate a laugh (and keep the rain off your back, which is always good) but I think there's good reason to be concerned about a generation such as mine that was kinda raised with this idea that money is everything, from growing up in the 80s in the yuppie era to hip hop culture becoming the foremost pop culture that kinda has this thing where money is like...God.  I think that anti-materialism has a really important function in the sphere of art, I think its a catalyst.  The flipside of that is people who have tasted true poverty don't give a shit for all this theorizing, when you come from the shit you wanna get out of it, its that simple.  

A bit of puritanism is good too, as long as its kept in check.  Its really interesting that poor American black people response to poverty was, initially at least, party music and poor white English working class peoples response to poverty (this is labouring under the presumption that punk was an entirely working class concern which is a falsehood) is angry resentful music.  They have a great deal in common though, hip hop eventually became like, y'know, what The Clash called 'news giving music', like we're talking about whats happening now, here, in our lives, its sociological, political, with a capital as well as a lower case P.  

The worrying thing about hip hop is that, in embracing riches as it has done, it has become to value riches, the modern hip hop artist is an astute businessman, they talk about investments, marketing, maximising revenue etc etc etc  What began as wanting to rise above ones circumstances and get riches and rising above oppressive circumstances has sort of turned into like...The Apprentice.  Punk, for all its cynicism, at its heart was very idealistic.  The Clash, in moaning about their circumstances were calling for a better way, The Sex Pistols in bellowing about 'your future dream is a shopping scheme' were kind of highlighting something they felt was fucked up.  There's ideas of integrity and a sort of morality behind it all.  Whereas hip hop is really deeply cynical, it kinda wants to be the head dick in charge for its own sake and I think eventually the culture suffers because it turns the art form into something you use to become, I dunno, a mogul or something.  

[Len Cnut]

11 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

I must say deliberately torn clothes is fucking dumb.

Its all thoroughly ridiculous really.  Thats why I think it mustn't be taken too seriously.  i mean what began with covering our big hairy arses from the elements evolved into the peacock principle and eventually gets to a point where certain people won't leave the house without, I dunno, 2 hours of fuckeries in front of a mirror.  Or not at all if they don't have what they want.

Ripped jeans began with Link Wray I think but his used to rip during performance and everyone loved it.  It was actually Iggy Pop who was the first to just come out on stage with jeans already ripped due to pre-show fuckeries.  In the punk context Richard Hell from New York in the mid 70s was the first one to wear ripped clothes held together by safety pins because his bird threw him out of the house one night and hacked up his clothes with a pair of sisscors, since he had a show to go to he put them back together with safety pins and went to work.  Later Johnny Rottens clothes were torn cuz he was poor and squatting. 

[DieselDaisy]

Worse again are designer ripped jeans that somebody (cough, Rose) has paid $10,000 for.

PS

Just arrived through the door today. Fiver on Amazon right now,

Edited February 16, 2019 by DieselDaisy

[EvanG]

1 hour ago, Oldest Goat said:

But I dunno, deliberately ripped jeans is just lame imo. 

Why? If you like that certain look, then that's all that matters, right?

[Len Cnut]

35 minutes ago, EvanG said:

Why? If you like that certain look, then that's all that matters, right?

Thats a fair point as well.  I mean I think its a bit naff but at the same time, its a look innit end of the day, is someone asthetically appreciates torn clothes then knock yourself out. 

[EvanG]

14 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

I think its a bit naff 

I liked the 90s look with just the ripped knees.

But I don't care for the way some people have it nowadays. 

[Len Cnut]

2 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

Worse again are designer ripped jeans that somebody (cough, Rose) has paid $10,000 for.

PS

Just arrived through the door today. Fiver on Amazon right now,

You know what I don’t get about classical music?  It ain’t a band is it?  So like, what constitutes the ‘proper’ version as such?  Cuz its gotta be different people performing it right?  And they’d be of differing quality I imagine?  So whats the real mccoy?  Or don’t it work like that?

[DieselDaisy]

20 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

You know what I don’t get about classical music?  It ain’t a band is it?  So like, what constitutes the ‘proper’ version as such?  Cuz its gotta be different people performing it right?  And they’d be of differing quality I imagine?  So whats the real mccoy?  Or don’t it work like that?

For some of the latter (early-mid 20th century) ''famous'' composers, Elgar, Stravinsky, Shostakovitch, etc., there are actually some early recordings of them conducting their own works. Many conductors are famous themselves, Toscanini, Karajan, and there is a bit of an overlap between composer and conductor. Richard Strauss for example did a lot of conducting. Movies having arrived, some of them branched-out into film work. Leonard Bernstein, who you'll know from film, did three symphonies. 

But for your 18th-19th century ''biggies'', Mozart, Beethoven, their work exists solely in notation and you rely on recordings of conductors/ensemble - for symphonies those ensembles are orchestras. Sometimes it is simply a case of recording a live performance (there are a lot of historic recordings with poor audio quality, but they are treasured because they are by somebody like Furtwängler in the '30s). More often, especially these days, conductor and orchestra put on a work specifically for recording with pristine audio quality. 

For a classical music fan - and this is where it differs from rock - you have, to select an ubiquitous work, '10 or 20 9ths'' (that is 10-20 versions of Beethoven's 9th). Because despite the notation there is a lot of variation between different recordings based on,

- tempo (quite subjective an interpretation despite being written down)

- dynamics (id)

- instrumentation (the instruments in Mozart's time were rather different than today)

- historic fidelity (some conductors believe works are capturing more a ''spirit'' of the work if they do not scientifically stick to the notation, whereas others seek to reproduce the work as much as possible)

- age and fashion (it was fashionable during the Wagnerian age and into the 20th century to do big ''Romantic'' orchestral versions of Mozart which were not very historic. Now the practice is on smaller more authentic ensembles.)

- audio quality (just the same as in rock music)

And of course the subjectivity of the listener. One man might love Karajan's 9th. One man might hate it. 

But some recordings do get a seminal ''definitive'' quality such as the Tristan und Isolde I am always raving about.