Well, In my humble opinion, ......Aw fuck it, I can't be Arsed!! (I'ts all highly amusing tho... keep it up people!) Rowly >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 06:41:25 EST >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: Sec's in the City > > >I think when Paul says London is most 'conductive' to the Mod lifestyle he >is referring to the old 'clean living under difficult circumstances' thing. >London's water, being a heady combination of Thames effluent and scale, >makes even light bathing extremely difficult. > >And you can't get a decent pie for love nor money either. > >And what's wrong with puffa jackets anyway? > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 12:12:17 +0000 >From: David Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Mod > > >Hello, >Paul wrote.... >"They don't!! Of COURSE they don't!! >But MOD does. Mod is a fantastic phenomenon that brought together these >separateley wonderful things and created a whole way of life with them as >integral parts. >And MOD was born in London. >But then I'm sure you already knew that and were just trying to be funny or >something! :)" > >No, wasn`t trying to be funny, just trying to emphasise the point that the >Mod >scene is far more national and international today. "Spiritual home" means >nothing. That`s like saying that the "spiritual home of football is >Wembley" >as if that means watching football at Wembley means more to someone than >watching it anywhere else in the world. It doesn`t. > >Yes, London was prominent in the rise of the Mod scene in the 60s, but it >has >grown and diversified a lot more since then, and while London might have >the >heritage, I don`t think you can make the statement that London is the place >to >live a Mod lifestyle any more than a whole number of places in this day and >age. > >David W. >Northern Mods Website >http://www.modculture.com > > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 23-Jan-2001 12:39:07 GMT >From: Paul Secular <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Londinium > > >David Walker wrote: > > > > Yes, London was prominent in the rise of the Mod scene in the 60s, but > > it has > > grown and diversified a lot more since then, and while London might have > > the > > heritage, I don`t think you can make the statement that London is the > > place to > > live a Mod lifestyle any more than a whole number of places in this day > > and > > age. > >Well said! You are probably right. Having lived in London all my life I >was talking from a very limited perspective. Or to put it another way - >I was talking bollocks!! :) > >Ta, >Paul > >PS. London's still a great place to live! > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 13:06:31 GMT >From: "Dominic Broadhurst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Sec's in the City > > > > > > > PS. Dominic has got no right to talk about 'mod' because, as >he has > > > himself admitted, he wears a puffa jacket... -ahem- > > And you wear a cape, carry a fan, and sport a mid 60s barnet, yet talk >about > > a 1962 cut-off point. At least Dom walks it like he talks it. >and that was 3 years ago Paul, still got nothing against Puffa >Jackets, but like to update me wardrobe bit more regulalry than >you Paul, just got hold of a lovely Hooch Tan Parka(non fishtail of >course!) > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 23-Jan-2001 14:26:35 GMT >From: Julian Lawton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: Mod > > > > > > Yes, London was prominent in the rise of the Mod scene in the 60s, but > > it has > > grown and diversified a lot more since then, and while London might have > > the > > heritage, I don`t think you can make the statement that London is the > > place to > > live a Mod lifestyle any more than a whole number of places in this day > > and > > age. >Though it does beat Accrington :-) > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 23-Jan-2001 14:50:21 GMT >From: andrew mccullough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Paul Secular > > >Paul, does Jarvis "get it"? Because at one point I recall you saying how >he embodied "mod". > >I hate to shatter your self image...actually that's a lie...but on this >list, you come off as nothing more than a pseudo-intellect, no matter >how many times you use the word "existentialism". > >Andrew McCullough > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 23-Jan-2001 15:23:34 GMT >From: Paul Secular <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: Paul Secular > > >andrew mccullough wrote: > > Paul, does Jarvis "get it"? Because at one point I recall you saying how > > > > he embodied "mod". > >No I don't think so. And obviously neither did *I* back in those dark >days of the past......! :) > >I'm no longer the clueless ticket I used to be however.. > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 09:48:11 -0800 >From: Jason Tinkey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: Mod > > > > They don't!! Of COURSE they don't!! > > But MOD does. Mod is a fantastic phenomenon that brought > > together these > > separateley wonderful things and created a whole way of life > > with them as integral parts. > > > > And MOD was born in London. > >it may have been born in london, but i'm beginning to think that the >"spirituality" of mod died the moment paul secular found out what it was. > >jason. > >np-miles davis, "venus de milo" > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 23-Jan-2001 20:12:55 GMT >From: pussy galore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: blackburn > > >david, blackburn is on this sat night with 2 rooms, have posted message >on northern list but its not up at mo, so if u eventually get it i am >not repeating myself honest and i know i am being thick but what does >moderated mean? > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 23-Jan-2001 20:27:43 GMT >From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: Sec's in the City > > > >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 > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 23-Jan-2001 20:31:34 GMT >From: pussy galore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: Mod > > > >Julian Lawton wrote: > > > > > > > Yes, London was prominent in the rise of the Mod scene in the 60s, but > > > it has > > > grown and diversified a lot more since then, and while London might >have > > > > > > the > > > heritage, I don`t think you can make the statement that London is the > > > place to > > > live a Mod lifestyle any more than a whole number of places in this >day > > > and > > > age. > > Though it does beat Accrington :-) > > >i did a seminar on mods last year at uni for a module on nationalism and >had to argue why i thought modernism was uniquely British in its >original beginnings. I argued rightly or wrongly that Mod could only >have evolved at that time and no other because of the cultural >influences that er influenced it ie, early jamaican ska from immigrants >as well as italian and american influences as well. My lecturer was >actually a mod back in the early sixties and thought i was sort of right >so would be interested to see what anyone else thinks. Couls it have >happened at any other period of time, let me know cos theres a >dissertation coming out of this! > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:47:28 +00 >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Sec's in the city > > >Sure 'being into Weller' is 'being into Weller', but what I was saying was >my younger cousin links his very slight knowledge of what Mod 'is' to his >interest in Weller, The Who, 'Quadrophenia', Small Faces, targets etc. - if >he takes that further and becomes a Mod later on, great.... > >So, if your'e either a Mod or you aint, what do you class someone who >clearly likes the idea of being a Mod, but hasn't the way of thinking, the >amount of clothes, the amount of records, and a regular income, to actually >be classed as a Mod? > >And why is someone who is SO hung-up on early Modernists and pre-'62 >Modernism, so eager to proclaim Jarvis Cocker a some sort of contemporary >Mod icon? The photo I've seen of you reminded me more of a late-70's Jam >fan, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, just different to the way you've >been putting yourself across. > >David. > >---Open Email - Email on your TV--- > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:53:04 -0000 >From: "Helen Barrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Secular culture > > >For it was saith in the fifth book of The Sec that... > >I believe that 'mod' is a philosophy - or rather a 'way of life'. > >Something you can live or NOT live. Like being a Christian or NOT being > >a Christian. You can't be *into* Christianity. Maybe you can be into > >'love thy neighbour' and dig old churches - but it's not the same thing. > >Equally true of mod (In my opinion). > >interesting point. and somewhat ironic. you could say (meaning 'you' in the >case of the rather posh-sounding 'one'), that youth cults are seen as >religion by some of their adherents: with the furvour they enter into it, >the deification of certain people (style 'icons'), the group celebration >and >congregation (all going into a club to dance and pose - rather like sitting >in church to show off your Sunday best), the huge amount of self-belief >that >can be gained by... 'believing' in your subculture, leading to a belief in >the self. >in the case of mod, this is further emphasised by the love of soul music, >music for your soul, evolved partly from church gospel singing, music that >transports you, giving you a sublime (in the 1790's Romantic sense) >experience. >and perhaps it is no surprise that youth cults began to appear after the >(hear comes the irony) 'secularisation' of the western world? >_________________________________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 23:55:53 -0000 >From: "Julian Lawton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Mod > > > >Couls it have > > happened at any other period of time, let me know cos theres >a > > dissertation coming out of this! >Not another Uni dissertation on mod - is there anything left to say? And >unfortunately answer is both yes & no - I mean the debate on whether >various >later movements are 'the mods of today' goes on, with no answer, plus the >fact that mod and the changes of the 60s came along first changed >everything >after. > >I guess it was inevitable that something would have happened in the early >60s, just due to sheer numbers of kids with money for first time ever (in >the UK), but it wasn't neccesarily mod (if you want a comparison for your >essay, you could compare to 50s America where the teen boom came much >earlier). Also, it certainly couldn't have happened much earlier in the >K - the nearest comparison would be the 30s fast set / flappers / etc, but >they were all very rich to start with. > > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 17:15:43 -0800 >From: Jason Tinkey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: Mod > > > > K - the nearest comparison would be the 30s fast set / > > flappers / etc, but they were all very rich to start with. > >the flappers weren't necessarily wealthy...many of the women who were >initially involved in that scene were the daughters of immigrants (or >immigrants themselves). it became associated with independently wealthy >young women later on, but they were just emulating immigrant girls who >would >work in factories all week, then go out all weekend. > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 05:00:37 EST >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: Mod > > >Aw isn't it lovely to see so many of the old guard modlisters back again? >Where are Luther and Poust and Becky though? > >Bring on the Mormons!! > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:26:36 GMT >From: "Dominic Broadhurst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: Mod > > >Tis true Nat, when I saw your name my heart did indeed skip a >beat, what are you and that lovable tosspot Andy bb up to these >days, all the others you mention have absconded to the Bespoke >list eons ago, which I have to say is far more informative though >without the dorks on Modslist, which make for the humour > > > > Aw isn't it lovely to see so many of the old guard modlisters back >again? > Where are Luther and Poust and Becky though? > > > > Bring on the Mormons!! > > > >------------------------------ > >End of [EMAIL PROTECTED] digest, issue 517 > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. ____________________________________________________________ T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less. Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose. http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
