Incomplete Beatles songs

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 29 Jun 10 - 08:07 PM

5 years later...Les.. ' in My Life' is perfect just at it is. In the sixties, a friend of mine, knowing his teacher wouldn't recognise the Plagiarism, presented it as a poem, with the words.'like Dublin' added after 'there are places I remember' and was highly praised!

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 29 Jun 10 - 07:03 PM

I've just come back from an acoustic night where someone sang "In My Life" - once through with a repeat of the last four lines and some exquisite guitar work. Proof for me, if it was needed, that this song is a beautiful song, complete in its own right, with no need for additions.


DC

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 04 Nov 05 - 03:36 PM

OK, I guess this thread has run its course. Thanks for much thought and much wisdom.

Will anybody have any final thoughts as we stumble to 100?

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 03 Nov 05 - 02:57 PM

Forgive the double post.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 03 Nov 05 - 02:56 PM

Dug,

At least for "In My Life" I think you picked the wrong song. Sure it's short and to your point "hollow". But if anyone else shares my experience when listening to the song, the listener fills in all of the missing gaps with their memories of people, places and things. That is why the song has such impact.

As far as folk music, I always thought it was something that told a story, brought people together, or just plain was something that everyone could enjoy singing together (not for one voice and one voice only). A case in point. When I attended Old Dominion University I was a total stranger. Since I was a Navy brat that had moved around the country all my life I knew absolutely no-one there. I was invited to a small party by someone I had just met and at the party one of the girls pulled out the Beatles Anthology book she had just purchased. Since she didn't play well she let me borrow her guitar. I think I played and we all sang every song in the book. Suddenly I was no longer a stranger.

Maybe the songs aren't folk but where else do you find magic like that from just one group?

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 03 Nov 05 - 02:34 PM

Dug,

At least for "In My Life" I think you picked the wrong song. Sure it's short and to your point "hollow". But if anyone else shares my experience when listening to the song, the listener fills in all of the missing gaps with their memories of people, places and things. That is why the song has such impact.

As far as folk music, I always thought it was something that told a story, brought people together, or just plain was something that everyone could enjoy singing together (not for one voice and one voice only). A case in point. When I attended Old Dominion University I was a total stranger. Since I was a Navy brat that had moved around the country all my life I knew absolutely no-one there. I was invited to a small party by someone I had just met and at the party one of the girls pulled out the Beatles Anthology book she had just purchased. Since she didn't play well she let me borrow her guitar. I think I played and we all sang every song in the book. Suddenly I was no longer a stranger.

Maybe the songs aren't folk but where else do you find magic like that from just one group?

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Peter T.
Date: 03 Nov 05 - 07:23 AM

Doing anything to "In My Life" is absurd. As M. Ted says, it is its simplicity that makes it so profound. I find it hard to believe that someone who was, what, in his mid twenties, could write such a song. It is one of only two or three of their songs that I would put on a level with Schubert.

There are some interesting more obscure Beatle songs that work well acoustically -- "Ask Me Why" works nicely because it has a diminished in it that suddenly appears, and delights the ear. I have heard, but not tried, a straightforward version of "She Said She Said" -- this is a really terrifying song done harshly. "I'll Follow the Sun" is a dream to do acoustically.
"You're Going To Lose That Girl" is fun. Something sappy like "Yes It Is" can be done with deep fake seriousness, and it gets across. I could go on.

I agree that the Complete Beatles book is a scam and should be burned in public places. The score collection is a brilliant piece of work -- you get the guitar fingerings and everything.

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 12:33 PM

I think Paul is a great and genuine guy, but many would say he has been incomplete since he parted from John, George and Ringo in that although John and Paul wrote separately the group dynamic created more original music.

Anybody ready to fit a Dylan lyric to Beatles tune?

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Mr Happy
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 11:59 AM

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs


The Incomplete Beatles consist of Ringo & Paul, don't know any of their songs!

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 01 Nov 05 - 01:59 PM

Sounds great to me Kaleea. They wrote some brilliant tunes. Lots of accidentals leading to subtle tunes that are not what they first sound like. All kinds of surprising chord progressions. Never doubted the strength of their tunes. I am sure that is why they will last and good tunes can always be played in another way.

I suppose the paradox, and I don't know why I am saying this, is Dylan. Incredible writer of words but most tunes nothing special. OK go on then....................

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Kaleea
Date: 01 Nov 05 - 12:33 AM

To each her/his own. I got the "complete" book back in 1976 just prior to going over to the other side of the planet & back. I played for & jammed with lots of Musicians & amateursfor a couple of years on my way there & back. In these days & times, I play & jam with lots of Musicians, pros & amateurs, most all genres of Music, from places all over the planet, & often many of these tunes are requested/played. The old '76 book is still around, but in several pieces. I've always been an acoustic Musician, pickin' & strummin' my trusty old J-45.
   I've also played Beatles tunes on my Mountain Dulcimer, Piano, Organ, & a few other instruments. I once played "Eleanor Rigby" on tinwhistle in the Irish style (highly ornamented) & everyone was asking me what was the name of "that old Irish tune" I was playing?
Within you without you is always lots of acoustic fun--if you can find a sitar player. Bouzouki is kinda fun to substitute for the sitar.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Dug
Date: 31 Oct 05 - 05:33 PM

OK Sidewinder- here is your challenge-pull out some Steibeck grammatical lapses (two or three will do) and let's have a look at them.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,Sidewinder.
Date: 22 Oct 05 - 02:18 AM

But does she sing it with a Liverpool accent?

Regards.

Sidewinder.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 20 Oct 05 - 05:50 PM

I managed to have another listen to the Judy Collins rendition, it is just acoustic guitar.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,Sidewinder.
Date: 20 Oct 05 - 01:48 AM

I think we have digressed from the original point somewhat and I would like take this opportunity to say that in my view it is not really necessary to add any verses or interludes to Beatles songs when performing them.If you want to bore people with 10 minute opuses you need to be looking elsewhere for inspiration.The Beatles music is a part of pop culture and is readily identifiable and cherished in all popular fields of music and can be adapted without such unnecessary alterations.I perform numerous songs by numerous artists but it is The Beatles music primarily that makes people participate and enhances the experience of the performance I have found on many occasions.

FAO DUG: Kerouac wrote on one continuous sheet of paper and was not the best of spellers apparently and Hegel, Kant and Nietchze probably had their bad days and Steinbecks most poignant peices are grammatically challenging to say the least. Shakespeare? Whatever, happened to him? Maybe he was a bit like me but less cultured obviously.

Regards.

Sidewinder.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 06:10 PM

Too late to grab my Collected Works, but Shakespeare is rife with grammatical errors, just like pop and rock music. He wasn't creating a textbook but a vibrant drama.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Dug
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 06:08 PM

Once more- for the slow learners- let me tell you about folk song...A song passes into the folk tradition when it distills down to its essence, taking its life and its power from its words and its melody. Then people can take it and create all sorts of different and valid interpretations of it.

Honestly, I think some of you just don't take the trouble to read everything!

With regard to the wholeprocess of interpretation, you can do whatever you want with a song.    Your musicianship and your sensitivity can make the song speak- or not. You can inspire others to take the song and make it speak, possibly in a different way. This is how songs pass into the tradition. And yes- I admit that this has happened and is happening with Beatles songs.

About grammar and Shakespeare- can somebody here show me an example of his grammatical inaccuracy?   Look- I know we're not all scholars here and we do our best, but at least let's make our subjects and our verbs agree with each other! Surely that's not asking too much!

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 01:58 PM

I feel we nearly returned to one of my original points: The living oral tradition!

The original tunes and arrangements cannot be damaged. We who sing and play, can do what we will. Go on just an odd new verse here abd their?

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Matt R
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 01:35 PM

"what about an acoustic version of helter skelter"

I've done this ! And it works!

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,BazT
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 11:45 AM

Sorry about the rubbish typing. (above)

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,BazT
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 11:44 AM

I agree with the people who've said that the trick to playing "pop" somgs in a folkee stylee is in the arrangement, nit necessarily in writing new verses or anything. At Fylde Folk Festival a couple of months back I heard a chap (who I think was called Pete Rimmer but I might be wrong) play a really nice version of "I've just seen a face". He made it into a great fingerstyle guitar piece, and included a ragtime-ish intro and solo. I was quite inspired by this, and so went home and started trying out the same sort of thing with other songs. At my local singaround last week I played "Teenage Kicks" as a bit of a tribute to the late John Peel. I slowed it down, changed a the rythm a wee bit, and made it a bit bluesy. Now I'm not claiming to have re-invented the wheel or anything, but I was pretty pleased with the result.

And, I've sort of forgotten my point now, but hey ho. I guess I'm just trying to say that wrecking pop songs is fun. ;-)

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: M.Ted
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 10:39 AM

McGrath's point is well taken--Shakespeare's spelling of his own name was nearly unforgivable, as it was pronounced "Mullins"--

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 07:25 AM

Makes one see Rap in another light?

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 02:09 AM

Shakespeare's prime concern was writing something dramatic that could be acted.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Oct 05 - 07:01 PM

Shakespeare was a shocking speller. (Even his own name...) Amd his grammar was pretty flexible too.

The important thing with stuff like grammar is that it doesn't get in the way of communicating. That means it'll vary accoriding to circumstances - ie, who it is you are trying to communicate with, and what you are trying to get across.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Dug
Date: 17 Oct 05 - 06:41 PM

Thank you for sharing those thoughts, Mr Sidewinder.   Let's be fair to you and agree that the Beatles still enjoy an enormous amount of respect worldwide.   My earlier post was I suppose an expression of frustration at all of the Beatles idolatry. I don't find their songs particularly significant- and that's a personal thing.

I'd be interested to know which of the greatest literary figures of all time lacked grammatical accuracy, though.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: M.Ted
Date: 17 Oct 05 - 01:27 PM

Good luck on improving the Beatles songs by writing new verses, Les--I am sure you'll do well--

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,Sidewinder.
Date: 17 Oct 05 - 07:13 AM

Scaramouche,
I beg to differ, I was merely putting asunder those Beatlehaters that because they are unable to get to grips with the songs find it necessary to insult and belittle the artists and their works.And before we start the backlash- I don't think everybody should worship at the alter of "The Beatles" and go around singing "All You Need Is Love" (as I myself do on a daily basis).It is perfectly acceptable to submit an opinion on a song and/or artist that is negative as long as you have taken the time to listen and reflect and evaluate before writing a piece for discerning music fans like myself.That is my perspective on this issue anyway.As for Dug (Professor Higgins) it ain't what you say- it's the way that you say it! Some of the greatest literary figures of all time were poor at spelling and lacked grammatical accuracy but you read their books and marvel at their talent I am sure. Maybe you are vying for a position editing my insights into the mindset and devisive meanderings inherent within our friendly little communications settlement? Or maybe you just want to engage with a superior intellect - Well "It Ain't Me Babe".

Regards.

Sidewinder.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 02:23 PM

Ah, yes, but in your post you were putting down anyone else who dared pick up an instrument or belt out a song. At leas that's how it came across.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,Sidewinder.
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 02:11 PM

I hold my hands up to being a "Beatlemaniac" as I have always done. As for my "idiosyncratic grammar" I make no apologies for my expressive writing.Ain't nothing wrong with tellin' it like it is! I don't subscribe to the principal and practise of an outmoded uniform code in the putting forward of opinions and ideas as some "sheep" seem pre-programmed to comprehend to the exclusion of all other literary configurations.Anyhow, I didn't know I was being graded on my efforts to shed a little light in a sometimes dull environment. FREE THINKING AND FREE EXPRESSION FOR ALL -Except "The Sheep" ofcourse.

I am not a perfectionist and do not expect a cover version to be an absolutely perfect copy of the original.I love Wilson Picketts version of "Hey Jude" and Ray Charles' versions of "Let It Be" and "Eleanor Rigby" and The Stones "I Wanna Be Your Man" etc. as much,if not more than the originals. I really get annoyed when, through sheer jealousy or ignorance, people put down such talented artists no matter who they may be.

Bien Venue

Sidewinder.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 12:02 PM

'A song passes into the folk tradition when it distills down to its essence, taking its life and its power from its words and its melody. Then people can take it and create all sorts of different and valid interpretations of it.'

Sounds good to me. Lets get going then.....................

Now 'Things we said today' Just an odd verse or two more maybe?

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Dug
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 04:25 PM

I have a friend who spends hours learning songs from recordings.   He faithfully re-creates exactly what he hears, and gets disappointed with himself if he forgets bits of licks etc when performing these songs. This is because he has an idea of the song being the recording and the recording being the song.   Although his guitar playing is complicated and impressive I do not want him to join my traditional group. He says he can learn all the stuff from recording it, etc, but all this shows is that he does not understand folk music.   

Let's take the Beatles song "When I'm 64".   I performed it with him once and he expressed disappointment that I did not play all of the fill-in bits on my fiddle exactly as they sound as played on other instruments on the original recording.   To my mind I was listening to a song and doing things that I considered appropriate to the performance of it.   To his mind what I was doing was just not right.

A song passes into the folk tradition when it distills down to its essence, taking its life and its power from its words and its melody. Then people can take it and create all sorts of different and valid interpretations of it.

Sidewinder - you on the other hand have a fairly subjective and intepretative approach to the rules of grammar. I hope that you can understand proper English, as well as your peculiarly indiosyncratic version of it.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 09:41 PM

hi Le Scaramouche..

theres no problem..

i was just quickly quoting your post
in response to GUEST,Sidewinders enraged beatlemaniac outburst...

"I cannot abide such derogatory and tersid criticism of the greatest rock or pop group to ever grace the musical landscape. You people should stop kidding yourselves you are anything more than three chord wonders with a vocal range of about a quarter of an octave flat..."


i certainly got the impression i was included as one the folks
he was having a go at.. ??!!


.. so then, who has the most crazy scary devout cultworshipping fans..

.. michael jackson.. or.. the beatles..!!!???

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: JWB
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 06:54 PM

Jon W., I think the music industry name for indispensable instrumental licks is "hooks". They're what make you remember the song.

Random thoughts: "I've just seen a face" works very well as a bluegrass number. A number of Lennon/McCartney songs are on their way to being folk songs that people will still be singing a century from now -- they're so well known it's inevitable they'll stick around in the cultural consciousness for a good while; heck, my 19 year old daughter says the Beatles are her favorite group. A lot of the Beatles stuff is silly ("Why Don't We Do it In the Road"), or uninteresting ("Revolution #9"), and those songs won't ever get covered or remembered -- that's the folk process, even for rock music; just imagine how many songs were in public circulation at the same time as those we call the Child Ballads and which didn't survive to be collected by Mr. Child.

That's all I'm saying for now.

Jerry

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 03:26 PM

Doesn't drink help the folk process?

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 03:23 PM

Meanwhile in big pubs acroos England the evil hand of Kareoke is stopping the creative and powerful forces of the oral tradition from morphing popular songs into folk songs.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: M.Ted
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 01:35 PM

Is that what happened? I wondered....

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Jon W.
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 12:53 PM

Here's what happened:

In the beginning there were "call and response" songs - work songs, spirituals, etc.

When the blues came along, the "response" part was turned into an instrumental (usually guitar) lick.

When the blues went to the city and became electric, the lick became that much more important.

When rhythm and blues came along, the same phrasing was retained, just speeded up a bit.

When rhythm and blues morphed into rock and roll, the instrumental lick was eliminated from some songs, survived in some, and became the most important feature of others. Those songs from which it was eliminated work well sung with little or no accompaniment (e.g. Yesterday). Songs where the lick survived but was not the most important feature work less well unaccompanied - for instance how can one perform "I Want to Hold Your Hand" without the little chromatic guitar run after the first line of each verse? Songs where the instrumental lick is the most important feature (think "Day Tripper")- well, they just can't be done without it, can they?

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 12:29 PM

Punfolkrocker, where, pray tell, did I include you?

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: M.Ted
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 11:53 AM

I went back to the original post, then listened to several versions of the song in question (In My LIfe), including The Beatles, Judy Collins, Johnny Cash, and Dave Matthews--pulled out some Richard Thompson, just as a reference--

"In My Life" is simple, brief, and direct. That's why its so good.

It'll be around long after this thread is dead.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 11:34 AM

Dug and Sidewinder- Thesis and Antithesis?


... and punkfolkrocker ???


errrmmm.. the voice of rational objective reason..??!!


at what point did i 'slag off' the beatles..

i must have liked 'em enough over the last 30 odd years to invest
many ££££s of my own cash on their LPs and CDs..

but then again i have a very large and diverse and well informed
music collection..

and the beatles are only 1 of the good bands i can choose whether or not to to listen to..

the beatles were clearly one of the best 60's pop groups,
i got no real problems with them..

its the arse headed 'beatle'utopia' sycophants & acolytes
i have 'issues' with..


remember the beatles had the creative genius of george martin
and the full power and support and international clout
of EMI corporate marketing
to keep them over-exposed & tediously over-saturated in the public media arena..


most other equally good and long forgotten bands did'nt..


extreme overfamiliarity with any artist
eventually breeds contempt for that artists most extreme fanworship

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,Betsy
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 10:40 AM

I don't want to modify or add to any of the Beatles songs.
I can play dozens accoustically - they were good enough for them and good enough for me .
Most of the so called Beatle song books with chords are generally crap and unplayable for someone of my standard i.e. not knowing jazz shapes and chords on the guitar , but they are emminently playable when you get / transpose them into Majors and Minors .

If you want to add to the verses, do so tongue in cheek, and tell your audience so.

I love the songs for what they are, and they are a treasured part of my life.

I would only exclude No 9 and Helter Skelter and sometimes Yellow Submarine from my last sentence.

Cheers, Betsy

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,Dave'sWife without cookie
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 06:01 AM

Emmylou harris has done a few nice covers of Beatles songs. her recording of 'Here, there and everywhere' is simple, light and tender without being cloying. On a very early album, PIECES OF THE SKY, she covered 'For No One' and to my mind, it's the best version of that song I've ever heard.

Any woman with a similar vocal range interested in playing some Beatles tunes would do well to listen to her covers for pointers on how to make their songs appropriate for a female voice with a folk/acoustic type arrangement.

I often sang 'Dear Prudence' and 'Across The Universe' using a folk arrangement back when I had people to play music with. (sniff sniff - no Los Angeles Mudcatters)

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 03:58 AM

Oops, forgive the double post.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 03:15 AM

Dug and Sidewinder- Thesis and Antithesis?

I think the Beatles have loads of wonderful songs, but also some really yucky ones, like I Am Walrus. There are many bands, and many 60s bands, I prefer. Neither idol-worshipping nor deluding myself.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 03:14 AM

Dug and Sidewinder- Thesis and Antithesis?

I think the Beatles have loads of wonderful songs, but also some really yucky ones, like I Am Walrus. There are many bands, and many 60s bands, I prefer. Neither idol-worshipping nor deluding myself.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,Sidewinder.
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 01:47 AM

I cannot abide such derogatory and tersid criticism of the greatest rock or pop group to ever grace the musical landscape. You people should stop kidding yourselves you are anything more than three chord wonders with a vocal range of about a quarter of an octave flat.The Beatles made music that will live on forever and is as valid today as it was back when it was issued to acclaim and unprecedented success.Every single, EP and album has something that stirs the soul and fires the imagination of anyone who is open and susceptible to groundbreaking ideas and approaches to recording compositions that are way beyond the capabilities of the likes of the Hollies et al.Listen to "You've Got To Hide Your Love Away" and listen to "And I Love Her" and listen to "Yes It Is" and listen to "I'm Looking Through You" and countless other ACOUSTIC masterpieces and dream of getting anywhere near the pitch perfect harmonies and superbly crafted guitar phrasings that flow through their unmatched stellar progressions as composers, musicians and artists.If you don't allow The Beatles to colour your musical education you will never ever achieve anything with a guitar worthy of any serious evaluation just ask any of the artists you admire if you don't believe me.

Regards.

Sidewinder.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: mousethief
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 12:35 AM

Interesting when people feel the need to slag the Beatles (or any other cultural icon). Make yourself feel bigger by putting down something larger than yourself? I myself despise most of the music by the Who but am prepared to admit that many, many people love them and therefore there must be something there that I just don't get.

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Oct 05 - 10:39 PM

good or bad..


so many of us have heard too many beatles songs far too much..


shame really..

overfamiliarity..

it makes it something of a chore now,
to have to motivate myself
to listen to their CDs more than once every few years..
[and i own most of them..]


and its not exactly a high point of a night out
if a live entertainer
decides to inflict a beatles tribute routine..


..on the other hand there were countless other equally good 60's
pop groups that we dont get to hear enough of..


the zombies, hollies and searchers for instance..

let alone the myriad lost & forgotten bands who recorded absolute gems..

Subject: RE: Incomplete Beatles songs
From: PennyBlack
Date: 12 Oct 05 - 10:30 PM

Hear Hear Dug - They'll never stand the test of Time :o)

PB