Paul Secular wrote:
>
> I was merely talking history. What I meant, roughly, was that 'mod' was
> a different thing altogether after 1962. I believe pre-1962 'modernists'
>
> are a different thing altogether to the post-1962 'mods'. I happen to
> relate to the former rather than the latter (though I feel most others
> are the opposite).
>
> At least Dom walks it like he talks it.
>
> So do I Julian. So do I.
>
Yes, you sure do. Please explain why '62 is some magical cut-off point
Paul.
Other than the Feld (Bolan) article appearing. It is probably safe to
say that
he was dressing that way in '61 or '60 even....shall we back date even
further?
What happened in '62 Paul? Was there a particularly vicious commercial
Shirelles record released? And as someone else pointed out, you seem to
dress more
'66 than '61....you were very proud of your simulated Marriott
centerpart backcomb
as I recall. By your standards, this would be the epitome of
commercialized sell-out
period mod.
Also, would you give me a brief explanantion of existentialism? And how
does this compare
with your Christianity analogy? When did Steve Sparks become your
Weller (or Pulp?)
Not very existential of you.
Dan
____________________________________________________________
T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
