kenny weir

Women arrested for trying to take corpse on to plane Two German women have been arrested at a UK airport trying to smuggle a dead man, propped in a wheelchair and wearing sunglasses, onto an easyJet flight to Germany. The 91-year-old man's widow and stepdaughter drew the attention of security staff at Liverpool's John Lennon Airport when the group asked for help to lift the corpse from a taxi into a wheelchair before entering the departure terminal. "I did my best to help by carefully lifting the man from his seat," airport security worker Andrew Millea told The Telegraph. "To my horror his face fell sideways against mine, it was ice cold. I knew straight away that the man was dead, but they reassured me that he 'always sleeps like that'." Mr Millea said airport staff who tried to check the man's pulse were shepherded away by the man's stepdaughter, who urged children travelling with the group to tell them "that's how your grandad always sleeps". But airport officials soon established the man was dead and alerted local police, despite protests from the family that "eight people" at the airport had seen signs of life in the corpse. "They think that for 24 hours we would carry a dead person? This is ridiculous. He was moving, he was breathing. Eight people saw him," the stepdaughter said, according to The Telegraph. A statement from Greater Manchester Police said the man's 66-year-old widow and 44-year-old stepdaughter, both German nationals living in Oldham, Greater Manchester, were taken into custody on suspicion of failing to notify authorities of the man's death. An easyJet check-in desk worker described the incident as the most "the most shocking thing" she has seen in three years working for the airline, but said the women did a "good job of disguising the truth and the other passengers did not appear to notice that the man was dead". Authorities are investigating whether the women, after buying the tickets two weeks before flying, were trying to avoid the expense and bureaucratic red-tape of returning the body to Germany. It is thought the man died from natural causes on on Good Friday, a full day before his arrival at the airport. The women were released on bail until June 1.

It's not the social hub (i.e. site of rampant guzzling of beer on a once-a-week basis - minimum) it once was, but I always meet someone there to have a yarn with. ********** This all makes me muse about the nature and desirability of train spotting in general. A few weeks' back, my son's mum said to me - referring not to my music interest, but instead to my zeal to sample the wares of every single cheap ethnic noshery in Melbourne (a neverending task!) - "At least you really know what you're into, what you love, Kenny - most people are not so lucky". I've often thought how lucky I am in that regard, and simply can't imagine life without music food books and (not so deep or fervent) sport. I know stacks of people who have no such singular focus in their lives, except maybe their kids. They tolerate their jobs, love their footy team within limits, love going to flicks - but there isn't that single overwhelming passion that defies logic and explanation. I'm VERY wary of pitying such folks, as that way lies the sort of misplaced snobbery already discussed on this thread. I just don't understand them, that's all. I can't imagine a greater gulf between human beings. For my dad it was motorcycles and fishing. For his brother, my uncle, it's definitely fishing - tying his own flies, stalking the fish and then throwing them back into the river. He's caught so many, he can't be bothered taking them anymore. Obviously, for assorted of our fellow forum members, it can variously be beer, wine, sports, politics, books - and, oh yeah, music! Whatever it may be, I recognise and acknowledge the spirit involoved.

I'm sure that happens often in all sorts of ways. But when I make the effort I allus try to put spin on it - "if you like that maybe, maybe this will do it for you". We've all done time in that style, but I count myself incredibly blessed to have enjoyed also many weighty, intense and gratifying musical adventures across a range of styles in a face-to-face way, making lifelong friendships. And as time has gone on, those stylistic barriers seem to be becoming less and less substantial. A blues buddy met 20+ years ago is these days likely to enthuse about all my interests with me - simultaneously. These relationships have been focussed on cities (London, Melbourne, New Orleans), a radio station (RIP PBS) and a record shop (Hound Dog's Bop Shop). Denys at Melbourne's Hound Dog's Bop in Melbourne has noticed the change after 30+ years in business. When he first opened, he had blues customers and rockabilly fans and soul nuts and '60s poppers and so on - and never the twain shall meet. Nowdays, almost all of 'em - me included - are notorious sluts. Although I still get a chuckle when I buy a sunshine pop disc from him and he mutters: "Geez, you get around a bit, don't you, Curly?" Forums such as this have smoothed out the bumps in the social side of our musical lives, too, maybe not always for the better - but mostly so!

Rarely? Really? I beg to differ, although of course it all depends on context. Again, I don't have any probs with such as yourself, or even those who prefer only the newer goodies. But I do get cranky when those newer goodies are loudly promoted as brand new, and any evidence to the contrary is dismissed with varying degrees of brusqueness and even spite. It happens ... the wheel was invented a long time ago. I don't claim superiority of old or new or anything in between, but I reckon those who do - on both teams - should know WTF they're talking bout. Based on my experience, there are also plenty of music train spotters totally into the new - and who triumphantly brandish their heroes based on often very little foundation. Train spotting and loving current day sounds are NOT musically exclusive. IMHO Did you check out the CW Stoneking stuff? Pretty good, I reckon! AND he's still alive and kicking!

Ahhh, I'm sure you're right. But still, when I recall specifically several of my former workmates and some of the Melbourne GD family that gathers for a chinwag occasionally ... these people are not what you could call casual music fans, yet sometimes display outright hostility to any mention or discussions of what went before. I understand it on some level, so I know it pays to tread lightly. I guess I took it as taken that folks for whom music is just a casual thing were outside the parameters of this rambling debate or, indeed, this forum in general. I have no interest in them - and for damn sure they have no interest in me! All hail, then, my GD buddy Tony. After saying a year or so ago something along the lines of "There's not much around these days to get excited about, so I may as well go backwards!", in recent times he's bought and heard for the first time Moon Mullican, Merle Travis, The Five Royales, The Delmore Brothers, Little' Willie Littlefield, Wynonie Harris, Jimmy Yancey, Little Willie John and much more. He's also been lurking here a bit. Also at my new workplace there's a reporter with whom I have struck an instant rapport - for the past few weeks he's been digging on the entire That Devilin' Tune series I lent him. It's nowhere near as solid these days, but the revolving cast of loonies that has congregated around Melbourne's Hound Dog's Bop Shop for several decades is about as anorak-central as you can get. Not that disagreements didn't occur - between the doo woppers and the rockabillies and the soul freaks and the '60s garage types and so on and so on. But devoted to The Cause in a Huge Way? You bet ... Which makes me think Bev is playing the devil's advocate at least a little here in speaking up for the common music fan. Coz I know damn well he, too, is a train spotter! Throw in Neil Young, The Stones and a few others and I agree completely. How about The Eagles as paramount influence on contemporary (mainstream) country? As some wit sed a few years back: Modern country is '70s west coast rock with hats! As for the walkman and what has since replaced it: There are perils, indeed. There have been road fatalities here from people lost in their doof doof/whatever and then casually strolling in front of a tram or truck. As well, there's whole generations doing damage to their hearing that makes all our "head-banging" of the (name your decade) '60s, '70s '80s '90s seem pretty tame.

Interesting and valid - even if I'm not sure I agree totally! Those issues were addressed on the Bear Family thread I started. And as someone who owns a whole stack of BF boxes, not to mentions Mosaics, JSP/Proper boxes and much more ... well, all I can say is, as someone who almost always approaches these things in a "spirit of investigation, research or simply as someone who has got the bug" then, for sure, I have no problem with this sort of format. But then again, I've been listening to the music this way as long as I've listened to anything, and I'm sure the same applies to most here. But OTOH, I also admitted there to a preference for various artists comps - the "mix tape" of box sets! On that thread, also, there was a distinction made, to some degree, of a difference between country/blues/old-time reissues of 78s in longer formats, on the one hand, and reissues by Mosaic and others of both vintage and modern jazz. Having thought about it since, I've decided that for me there is no difference between them, either in the level of talent and/or artistry of the musicians or the suitability of the music for such repeated, intense listening. Thus for me, no difference between an hour Charley Patton or Bill Monroe - or Bix or Pops. Or Trane or Duke, for that matter. Bev, no blame/fault with those who simply want an album, a "varied experience for the listener", whatever - except to lament how many people are missing out on music that would thrill them if they'd only give it a chance. Then again, with this sort of debate, we're nearing the whole new ball game of what purpose, for generations younger than most of us, music is. What is its role? iTunes, iPods, downloading of single tracks, music as a background soundtrack to a life (often, presumably with no knowledge or interest in who created it) blah blah and so on. It seems a sure thing that a lot of 'em aren't after the same holy grails and/or shiver factors that are such a BFD for us all!

Oh yeah, playing the Monroe Bros right now - but for the duets I actually prefer the Blue Sky Boys. I, too, dig the pre-Scruggs/Flatt stuff (including Muleskinner Blues). But what I really dig is the Decca stuff from the '50s with Jimmy Martin - that's as good as bluegrass gets IMHO. I actually owned the 4CD Bear Family box of that stuff a long time ago; can't remember quite why it got offloaded - maybe something to do with getting enough money together to attend my old man's funeral! Anyway, it's high on my current wish list. Is anyone doing the sibling duet stuff these days? I saw a young couple from Virginia - the Whitetop Mountaineers - at the Apollo Bay Music Festival a few weeks back. Pretty good, just two voices, mandolin or fiddle, guitar or banjo. Modern but real old-time, too.

Sure, but maybe for different reasons. Putting aside any distinctions of artistry or merit, bluegrass is something I've been listening to since a very early age so I can automatically click into it. Not so with ECM. Also I suspect there'd be a bigger proportion of bluegrass nuts who'd have no problem conceding there is a strong element of the formulaic about their music, as opposed to ECM devotees. Just guesswork, mind you ...

Yes, all true. But as a bluegrass fan - not obsessive, and not big on modern stuff (surprise, surprise), but happy to listen bluegrass any time - it strikes me that bluegrass has these sorts of comments tossed its way more often than, say, ECM (which I generally let pass me by), be bop or Condon-style dixieland. Moreover, while most bluegrass players - past and present - may fall into the journeyman category, at their very best I've no doubt they stack up as equals to the jazz giants. And then there's the singing - Jimmy Martin and Monroe are giants in this regard, as are the Stanleys. Formulaic, for sure, but sometimes nothing else works.

Regarding the "finessed" sub-title for his thread ... Huh? Did anyone say that? Really? I must have missed it!

Not from where I've seen it, either. In fact it seems quite limited in its scope. I remember owning and liking that project many years ago - but never quite thought it lived up to its legend. And, yup, part of a long and venereal ... ahem, venerable tradition.

Yes, all great players. Harking back to previous comments: Like BB Steve I had access to some western swing (those Old Timey comps, the double LP on Bob Wills that really had a big impact) when I was digging these guys, but WS was just part of what they were about. Haha - Mama Hated Diesels! Were they for real? Was it a joke? Does it matter? Nope! ************ I've had limited encounters with the extended family of the Holy Modal Rounders gang. Fascinating one of a kind collective madness, but can be necessarily sloppy on record. However, there is one famed outing that is not just a bona fide Americana masterpiece but in my minds stands right up there with the Blanton-Webster band, Charley Patton, Kind Of Blue, Elvis on Sun, Hot 5/7s, whatever else you care to mention: Simply amazing. The fact that someone somewhere once upon a time took the time to record tracks such as Midnight In Paris, Jackknife, Sweet Lucy, Weep Weep Weep and Hoodoo Bash makes the world seem a better place whenever I think of it! Have you heard this album, Bev? If not, I'd certainly recommend that you check out some samples first. Most of the people I've lent this to over several decades have either: a) Not got it at all and hated it. or b) Got it and STILL hated it. The Michael Hurley catalogue, quite substantial these days, I have no handle on at all. Anyone got any tips in that regard? *********** Great stories and info on these cats here: http://www.jeffreyfrederick.com/text/menu.htm

Oh, absolutely. I'm not the sort to push stuff down people's throats. Yet, ironically, being known as a major music head means I often have stuff literally forced on me.

So from your point of view (which I do understand and share to an extent) I guess the same applies to this AUSSIE band too? http://www.goofinrecords.com/shop/index.php?topic=46&offset=300&tuote_ID=13973 Though in the end I always get back to the "sources" I really enjoy a lot of that music - just "for goood times' sake". Their version of "Jumpin' At The Woodside" is an example of what I mentioned above about "adding a new twist" to the music from way back .. (though I admit I am a bit biased in this case because "Woodside" is one of my all-time favorite tunes anyway). As for Commander Cody (and Asleep At The Wheel too); I understand how you got into them and why you appreciated them, though - over here at least - I did manage to get hold of a lot of the "sources" (thanks, Arhoolie/Old Timey!) before I got into Commander Cody. I've always listened to them as an example of what the music would likely sound like if I wanted to listen to LIVE Western Swing at that time (late 70s and 80s). A lot of their "modernization" I like, other ingedients (especially on their later discs) I find a bit ... well ... out of place and out of style. But then again you have since got lots of "contemporary" bands in that vein that dug far deeper into the source material and added some variety that went in a different, "older"-sounding direction. And that shifts all your points of reference. The Dancehall Racketeers mentioned above would be one of those latter bands. Ahhh, the Racketeers - a Melbourne band I've seen many times. In some ways they have long played a similar role to Cody in bringing this music to people's attention here. And, yes, I really dig the way they've made western swing their own by covering and reworking stuff beyond the Wills songbook. Their Rocket 88 is my favourite. They still seem to manage a gig every year or so. Speaking of Cody, I wonder what has become of Bobby Black? Terrific player! Yes, shifting points of reference: In the case of the Racketeers, I'm happy to admit my attitude is coloured by proximity. Those guys, either as a band or as parts of numerous other bands, have been mainstays of the Melbourne scene for as long as I've lived here: Some of the others - Andy Baylor's Cajun Combo, Zydeco Jump, Blues Meltdown. I've downed a million beers at their gigs over the years and even seen them play at house parties, as well as numerous festivals.

Bev, here's an Aussie artist worth checking out. Haven't seen him live myself, but have seen a few clips and liked thm alot. His last album was called jungle Blues and was a Jelly Roll Morton trip. C.W. Stoneking Myspace: http://www.myspace.com/cwstoneking

Yup, I saw him at the Cambridge Folk Festival in England in the late '80s. Great show! But I wuz already deep into what he's into by then anyhow. Same thing: I owe a big debt to Comander Cody and His Crew, and they'll always have a special place in my heart. I got into them at a time and place when their sources were NOT available to me in any significant way - as opposed to, say, those of Bromberg. But these days, access to their source material is so easy, I couldn't imagine myself spending too much time listening to the Airmen 'cept for nostalgia's sake.

Not aimed at any one group - or groups of groups! More a general comment about the old vs new debate. Great for both if both flourish. But too often there is mutual hostility - and not all of it comes from cranks/snobs like me! Here's another one: I often have said to me that I should "broaden" my musical interests. Mostly what the person telling me this means is that I should listen to more mainstream, modern, contemporary rock, country, blues. But to me, they often seem narrow in their interests from my perspective - which is that of a fan of pop, rock, country, blues, jazz and much else spread over more than a century. In each of these cases: a. I am familiar with the music they wish me to pursue. b. They have no idea of the music I dig. My decision not to spend precious hours listening to their mainstays is an informed one. A few months back, a very good buddy said to me: "I don't like old-timey!" Yet this same guy is a Huge David Bromberg Fan. He lent me a bunch of Bromberg stuff. I played it all, liked a lot of it and couldn't help but laugh. I mean, WTF is it with that? How can you be a David Bromberg fan and NOT like old-timey? More funny stuff: For the same guy, listening to my Hag records is like fingernails on a blackboard - "I can't handle that catch in his voice", he says. Yet he's also a major league Neil young fan. Go figure!

Denial of the past? It's not that people enjoy music without knowledge of its sources. I have no problem with that. But I do find it dismaying that when presented with the opportunity, they find such knowledge threatening and often actively shun such enlightenment. To their own detriment, I might add. You and I, and Bev, and just about every O member I'd guess - for us all, a big part of our musical journey has been following our ears. Sorry, but the lack of that sort of curiosity simply gives me the shits!

Ha ha - good try, Bev. But you the know the same drill we all do - start a thread and the, immediately and forever, give up any hope of influencing the content or tone that develops! Agreed! Consider the source? In many ways I'm with Allen in all of this - and I do find it interesting to discuss. Seeline, Bev, I've know you both long enough to know you happily do both. However ... I'm pretty much over having friends, colleagues, acquaintances forcefully thrusting new releases in my face, demanding that I listen, that this CD is simply amazing, that I'm sure to love it. Any ambivalance on my part is often met with accusations of snobbery that can be quite angry and even hostile. Yet when I gently - I try, really I do! - point out that this tune is a cover version, that band is using this sound as its foundation, this album uses this vintage artist's catalogue ... the response is often equally hostile. Like I'm a party pooper or something ... I guess this maybe has something to with succeeding generations needing to feel they're re-inventing the wheel or something. But I can't help feel that this denial of the past is frequently not as passive as is being suggested here. It often seems wilful and deliberate. Finally, IMHO, listeners of contemporary music of all sorts can only have their listening enhanced by familiarity with the sources.

These days I'm pretty much a cranky old "consider the source" guy, but I'm not sure any of the above means anything 'cept for personal preference. At some point, guys like the Band have to be acknowledged as part of the tradition or whatever, same for Stringbean. But that sure doesn't mean their many imitators inspire in me anything more than yawns. Same for my beloved Grateful Dead - utterly American originals! The Jam band Nation they largely inspired? Yech! IMHO.

Yes, oh, yes! A few years back, a colleague came up to me asking if I could secure him a review/promo copy of a Tim Buckley tribute album - you know the sort of thing, contemporary artists doing their interpretations of tunes penned/originally-recorded by one of their seminal influences. My buddy was/is a big Jeff Buckley fan, so was at least a little interested in checking out Jeff's dad. I replied something along the lines: "Why bother with that? You can pick up Tim Buckley CDs all over town, mostly at a pretty good price, too!" He looked at m with a blank stare, as if what I was suggesting was, like, from another planet or something. I'm sure no more came of it ...

Dammit, I want - nay, DEMAND - a "Keith Loses It" ECM box set!

Well, unless you specify an example it's rather moot point, ain't it?