Both Q&A's are in! Both are being edited but I'm still at odds over which one should be released as of yet. There are areas in Kerns Q&A that I'm thinking need to be more polished (not so much on his end, but on mine). Not to take away from Sam's Q&A, but Ken's is kinda like the Chinese Democracy.
For those of you that don't follow Guns 'n Roses, the classic lineup broke up around 1994 (Slash, Duff, & Matt make up 3/4's of Velvet Revolver). Axl Rose remains the sole original member (but that's tricky in Guns history...). In any event, Axl has been promising Geffen Records a new release for over ten years and that release is Chinese Democracy. Axl doesn't want the old glory to top him and now finally on his own, he wants to make more than a record, he wants it to be perfect so I can relate.
Ken Kerns may not be the most popular Q&A and he may not get the most comments, but that's kind of the point. Ken's insights will bridge so many gaps in the history of the contemporary Independent movement and his insights are deeper than those of us used to just brushing the surface-soil aside are used to reading.
And just for ther record - I'm not calling my audience stupid. It's just that so few are really SG Historians. I consider myself a junior in this field, but I give credit Tommy Jardon, James Argento, Nick Capezza, Charles Grapski I consider not only an expert but everything he's written on the matter to be persuasive authority, and so on.
I think the reader that really wants to brush up and be an SG-Expert-In-Training, for the whole 3 of you, will read both Grapski interviews from 2006, Tommy Jardon's interview, the Argento interview of '07, and then read Ken's in '08 to really be on your way.
SG is for students and alums and you can't ever know-it-all...in the Bible you've got the Tower of Babel, in the modern day world you have Gatorpedia - both abysmal failures. I'm not knocking the efforts, those were valid, I'm knocking the arrogance than anyone could think THEY could cover such a vast world, with so many people that gave their time and their hearts, in just one page, one book, one opinion.
4 comments:
Kerns let a lot of people down. He should have run for the presidency.
Get real, this guy couldn't even win tolbert against a virtual no-name candidate.
1) I can't think of anything to say about that - I think very few people would have wanted me to run, and most of my friends picked sides in Spring 2002 before I did, so I doubt it was feasible. I had at several points thought of running for either Pres or Treas, but it didn't happen. I was only at UF for 3 years, so I didn't have many opportunities to do it.
2) I lost Tolbert in a three-way race with a tough, viable Independent who had the backing of the local area government, and was expected even by my fellow SUN people to win (she instead came in third behind me). Had she not run, I very likely would have won that seat in Fall 2000 - but then, not a single SUN candidate won a dorm seat that year (despite winning 13 off-campus). So it's not like I was uniquely bad - IRHA was simply not partisan that year like it had been in previous years for the GDI side.
Come on Ken...what's the REAL reason you didn't run.
Post a Comment