odradek

Well, Flinstone, you keep dragging me into this, and still with a remarkable dose of style (kudos to you). I see you're now dodging, though with the air of knowing how one ought to behave. Good for you. I still maintain that before writing, it's wise to read and think. You can evidently do without it, since you've stirred up a pointless controversy by twisting things said by others, and then you try to make amends with that sage act of yours. Fine, since, among other nonsense, you also bring up bitter blood with that tone of superiority, I'll let you bask in it. Here, however, it seems you’re the one stuck: I returned because you insisted on dragging me in, dear advisor of mine, while conversing with others in an improper manner, by the way. Another example of inaccuracy, another detail of style. Lucky you, then, that you know what my blood tastes like: should I refrain from such finesse? Well, we’re not on the same page, Flinstone... "In those 14 minutes if I had been him" blah blah blah blah.... I would prefer you stayed in your own place. Does that bother you? Good. Now I'm off to get that ice cream: who knows, maybe life will smile upon me and I'll even end all my posts with some emoticons, just to come across as charming?

I appreciate honesty and practice it without fearing to come off as unpleasant: I've written much longer ones. I'm of the opinion that if you don't have the time or desire to read, you have thousands of shorter reviews at your disposal. With all the hyperbole spent on a myriad of fourth league groups hailed in hundreds of reviews and no page for him, I felt that a few extra words were the least I could do. - The house is the work of an artist I appreciate, Erwin Wurm. Bai bai.

Flinstone, however, you’re a repeat offender. I believe I’ve already told you: what you continue to pass off as my "reasoning" is a delusion of YOURS. You can’t just keep going on as if nothing happened. Look, I’ll try again. If you bring up intellectual honesty, apply it first to yourself. And I’ll repeat for the umpteenth time: where are the writings of the things you attribute to me? I have made precise statements regarding a single user. I acknowledged his comments, his ignorant judgments, and THEN his actions. In fact, if after all the nonsense you find time to reread, you will find: "Here, just someone who has every right to make certain assertions about De Andrè. A true talent. I am honored to read some more thoughtful opinions, so articulated and reliable, expressed by such an example of refined intelligence. Thank you De Baser." Now, do you read what everyone else reads? It’s the exact opposite of what you claim I have stated. So I invite you, dear Flinstone, to stop referring to my supposed "reasoning." - Of course, there’s sarcasm. Certainly, by flipping the sarcasm, one can read an axiom, but it can’t be used instrumentally to stir up a controversy that involves everything and everyone. At least if one advocates for intellectual honesty. But I must be more precise, I fear: when I read what Rivoli has BRAYED in his comment, I already felt disgust: in form, content, tone those lines said a lot about who posted them. Anyone who wrote them had written, IN MY OPINION, vulgar nonsense. Then I also discovered that not only was he capable of such wit, but he was among the many who, absolutely devoid of talent (and a sense of humor), produce the sea of sonic garbage that surrounds us. It is obvious to me that someone who produces trash like that isn’t capable of appreciating the qualities of De Andrè's singing. And so he spews, his pathetic crap. The exact opposite of what you assert. Again; since you insisted on attributing to me "reasoning" that you inferred, I also expressed a very personal opinion: as far as I’m concerned, anyone can say anything: I say, therefore, (as long as freedom of expression is also guaranteed to me, dear Flinstone) that the nonsense of the latest Rivoli is, FOR ME, devoid of any dignity. This doesn’t mean he’s denied the opportunity to continue amusing himself with his little pages and his witty comments. It’s not an edict; it’s just an opinion. It doesn’t seem difficult to understand, unless one insists on misinterpreting. So no one will bar you, dear Flinstone. No one will prevent Valerio Rivoli from leaving hundreds of posts like this one (I’ve read many of his comments that confirm a constant attitude) and the reviews that you so enjoy. I also explained to you that the relationship between what he says and what he does has been established by him by putting the link in the profile. I just observed it: it’s not my fault if someone who writes such nonsense is also a “singer” of dubious quality. So spare me the umpteenth post where you pass off your statements as mine. The connections you establish and the consequences you draw are posted under your name. Also because it seems that the ultimate meaning of what I wrote has been clear to everyone except you. And be kind, leave the soul of Contini in peace; it's really not the case in this context, especially since the paradoxical example you wanted to produce adheres to YOUR reasoning that you pass off as mine. Anyway, as I was saying, Bombolo is a luxury, given the subject of the discussion. And, if I may, I would suggest a more judicious use of terms: artist in the case of Rivoli seems really too much. - No one questions anyone’s freedom of expression, dear Flinstone: but just as this young man can bray his comments, I feel entitled to say that his comments, at least those of the type hosted on this page, are garbage. Now, though, I swear I won’t revisit this: between yesterday and today, I’ve lost over 14 minutes reading and writing about this

For Maryg: some time ago I wrote a little piece about Grant Hart's album: there are, as in all my writings, quite a few samples. If you adore Husker Du, it's worth a listen...

I really appreciate the quality of your pages, always well-crafted and argued. What I cannot share, as I've already told you, is this devotion to Mould and his solo career. I confess that back in the day I followed him for a few albums, but the increasingly static, predictable, and monochord nature of his production made me abandon him. Here I read that he has also tried other directions that you yourself define as mediocre. Contrary to what Lariana claims, for me, the one who is by far the most talented of the three is definitely Grant Hart. Even if he burned his chances... His Intolerance, with all its flaws, is worth more to me in its worst moments than anything by Mould I've ever heard. Of course, it's a matter of tastes and, to use an overused term, background. But your perseverance will surely yield some results with me: I'll end up dusting off some Mould vinyl and give him another chance...

Since I'm really fed up, I won't revisit the topic. I don't want to waste any more time discussing this nonsense. I could throw a ton of detailed arguments your way as a corollary to what I've said, but it's not worth it and the essence doesn't change: the more they lack sense, talent, and things to say, the bigger the lies they tell and the more they try to attract attention. Usually achieving results (like this little guy) in "squares" like this one. I'm quite disgusted; if you enjoy the show, good for you. Goodnight (to the players).

My reasoning? I repeat, it's about YOUR reasoning. Tell me where I would have stated what you say. Are you eager to prove yourself libertarian and politically correct? Well, I'm not. And I don't care much whether my reasoning is liked or not (especially if they are, in fact, yours and not mine). Now let’s try to understand each other: I've been in DeB long enough to see it in various shades, and I've endured many fools, most of the time without giving them any weight or even considering their existence. Even when they proved to be annoying, offensive, petty, vulgar, idiots. That doesn’t mean I want to keep doing it, nor that I intend to tolerate some kid who doesn't even have a sense of irony (if he allows himself to leave a link where you can listen to the crap he makes, I imagine he wants people to listen to it: which leads me to suspect that he doesn't realize the abysmal quality of those awful pre-adolescent songs completely devoid of talent) coming to spit out his disgusting assertions without even being challenged, perhaps to appear "democratic" and understanding. He talks nonsense that makes no sense, does it in a vulgar and offensive way, and I can't even afford to say it? Since it’s evident that the taste for the horrific that drives his "production" is the same as what you read in his statements (I've looked at the reviews and comments about the guy), the connection between the two is a fact, not "my reasoning." I'm fed up with this story that everyone has the right to say anything: sure, that's obvious. And I can take the right to say that those who produce such sonic garbage shouldn't even dare mention someone like De André? Well, even if I can't, I'll still claim that right. As far as I'm concerned, most of this dude's interventions are garbage too, which you praise for some supposed courage. It’s braggadocio from a petty bully, arrogance and a desire to show off, the worst kind of barbaric and demagogic subculture trash. Congratulations, excellent elements to spend your sharp observations on, Flinstone. And don’t bring Voltaire into this; to compare him to Petrarca already speaks volumes. For a character like that, you might as well cite Bombolo (and you'd be doing a great disservice to Bombolo).

Well, of course you're mistaken. All these deductions are of your own making. I pointed out the qualities that I noticed in the work of this young man. Since he expresses absolute judgments on the talents of others, I wanted to verify what someone who permits such statements has produced. The verification turned out to be a source of indescribable pain. Now, if you want to draw conclusions, go ahead. But don't attribute them to me. If I say that such a wonder of taste and intelligence has every right to express judgments of that nature, and if in sarcasm YOU want to trace logics that I haven't expressed at all, you're free to do so. But, I repeat, do not attribute them to me. As for possible alternatives, I offer another one: if you swear to not reprint them, I promise to buy all the copies of the stuff recorded by Rivoli and destroy them one by one. It's a form of environmental protection. At least of the acoustic kind.

Ah, I almost forgot the aesthetic qualities of the site: the homepage manages to be almost amusing in how terrible it is. In short, it’s a concentrated mix of wisdom and insight: I dare say anyone can afford such comments... Rivoli, thank you for existing.

Well, I didn't know this gentleman who reads Petrarch at night and dispenses these pearls of wisdom during the day. Since I think that, among other things, De André's voice has become increasingly better over the years (and a couple of concerts have confirmed it for me) and the quality of his singing is absolutely superior to the vast majority of Italian singers from the last 20 years, Valerio Rivoli's judgment has piqued my curiosity. Then I discovered, by clicking on the link to his profile, that the young man has also released some records. Interesting... I listened to a few samples on the site... chilling. Let's skip over the pieces themselves; it’s really too easy to criticize that stuff. I especially recommend a close listening of the vocal qualities. There you go, just the kind of person who has every right to make such claims about De André. A true talent. I am honored to be able to read some other thoughtful judgments, so articulate and reliable, expressed by such an example of refined intelligence. Thank you, De Baser.