nevermind.
Forum
oh my god that's the funny SHlT
MultiQuote
#663 toomuchstash
Posted 12 April 2006 - 10:26 PM
How to be a Toomuch'stash style music snob (lifted from somethingawful, but dead fuckin on anyway):
I: The Personality
The very essence of the musical elitist is the combination of smugness and inscrutability. These two elements instill true music buffs with their veneer of authority and mystery, and learning to fake them is essential if you hope to join the ranks of the elite. Anyone who dares challenge your views will find themselves totally disarmed by the powerful combination these traits bring: they will feel a vague sense of shame for questioning someone so sure of himself, and they will almost certainly panic when they realize that they can?t get any kind of handle on your personal taste.
How inscrutable must you be? Think of the most inscrutable thing you can imagine: the Sphinx? The universe? Morrissey? Nay, you must be more mysterious still.
The number one rule of musical inscrutability is to carefully flout the conventional notions of what?s good and bad. Pretending to hate good music is easy enough, especially to those who read the first installment of How to Fake It. Pretending to like bad music, which may occasionally be necessary, is a little trickier. If you fail, you?ll just wind up looking like a philistine with terrible taste, or even worse, an ironist. You can?t merely prance around telling everyone The Beatles are terrible and Kelly Clarkson is great; you have to dress it up a little. Talk about stupid music in meaninglessly erudite terms: ?Def Leppard brilliantly conveyed the foundation of existential despair which necessarily lurks beneath a life of hedonism.? ?If Foucault were alive today, he would undoubtedly listen to Hoobastank.?
Occasionally, you must vehemently disagree with conventional wisdom and critical consensus. There?s a persuasive counterargument to everything, and if you can think on your feet, it?s possible to refute even the most ironclad rock notions. Everyone knows, for example, that the Rolling Stones have lost it. Not you! You think they?re better than ever! ?The Rolling Stones do our culture a much greater service now, as a commentary on the West?s insecurity about age, than they ever did as a bland young rock outfit.? Be confident of your fake opinions, because the bullshit detectors built into music snobs are like mild polygraph tests. If you?re worried that thinking on your feet might take too much actual knowledge, don?t be ashamed to prepare your opinions in advance.
Most people who try to fake musical expertise do so only by not admitting that they like anything. While that?s a good start, it?s also an eventual dead-end. It?s equally important to your inscrutability to be cagy about what you don?t like. Be quick to defend even the most worthless pop music, and do so completely without irony. If someone quite reasonably complains that the Ying Yang Twins are medically verifiable retards, scold them as if they?ve just called Martin Luther King Jr. an ape. Not only will this pull the rug out from under any rational person, but it will create an air of superior liberal open-mindedness toward all varieties of music.
The ultimate goal of all this isn?t simply to have something good to say about anything bad and something bad to say about anything good. The goal is to make your taste and opinions completely baffling, unpredictable and impenetrable. Being ridiculous and contrary all the time might just make you look insane, so don?t overdo it. Engage in normal, civil conversations about music and then spring a bizarre opinion on your adversary like a mental rat trap. Make sure you pepper your lies with the truth: defend universally panned albums by critically beloved artists, like Neil Young?s ?Trans? or Lou Reed?s ?Metal Machine Music.? Say you like Bob Dylan, but only for his voice, not his lyrics.
If your inscrutability is convincing enough, smugness is easy to fake. Always remember that you?re the expert. Your opinions are the correct ones, no matter how bizarre. As I mentioned in the previous installment, always steer the conversation toward your own opinions.
II: The Grand Declaration
Speaking in grand declarations is an excellent way to be smug. Every sentence you utter is an expression of some well-thought-out conviction which you demand to share with the world. Say everything emphatically and then look around to see if anyone has written it down so they can quote you later. You might think that grand declarations are risky, but if handled properly they?re as tame as kittens. Here?s a handy guide:
Wrong: ?Matchbox 20 was better than the Beatles.?
While it may be tempting to make grandiose claims just to court controversy, you?d only be shooting yourself in the foot. A declaration like this just invites questions like ?by what standard?? and ?are you an idiot?? Remember that controversy isn?t the goal. The goal is simply to impress upon those around you that you are a person with Big Ideas.
Right: ?At his best, Robyn Hitchcock was every bit as good as Bob Dylan.?
While not as risky or controversial as the previous one, a declaration like this is plenty bold. You are basically saying ?yes, I am in the position to include or exclude artists from the critical canon at my whim.? Canonizing random artists is a perfect way to establish authority, even if the person to whom you?re talking has never even heard of the artist in question.
Wrong: ?The Clash was better than The Sex Pistols.?
A statement like this is simply comparing apples to apples, and at least 50% of the population would be inclined to agree with it. It?s merely an opinion, not a grand declaration.
Right: ?The Smiths were better than The Sex Pistols.?
Unlike the Matchbox 20/Beatles comparison, this one involves two entirely dissimilar bands with a similar level of critical acclaim. Although both bands are firmly entrenched in the canon, most people wouldn?t bother comparing them, since there?s no particular logic or point to it. But such concerns need not deter you, for it is your god-given right to hierarchically file bands however you see fit.
Wrong: ?Magazine was the best band of all time.?
Such a declaration is bold and tempting, but once again it is too controversial and might require some form of actual support. ?Best-of-all-time? claims are to be avoided, because they?re a sure-fire way to start an argument you can?t win.
Right: ?Magazine is one of the ten best bands of all time.?
This cleverly circumvents the pitfalls of a best-of-all-time claim while at the same time implying that you?ve figured out exactly what the ten best bands of all time are. In most cases you won?t be pressed to reveal your entire list, because people involved in music discussions don?t actually care what other people think, they?re merely concerned about the politics of domination and submission.
III: The Barometer
If you?re going to convey an impression that you?ve got everything figured out, you need to remember that every band or artist in history is either underrated or overrated. Only you are the true arbiter of how to correctly rate any given band, since you are immune to the hype, nostalgia, and politics that make up the critical reputation of a musical act. Within you is the single flawless barometer that reveals the true quality of every band in the universe. Make sure to use it whenever possible, for it is a mainstay of smugness.
In keeping with your persona, it goes without saying that you need to be perfectly inscrutable about your over/under barometer. Remember not to go for the obvious choices.
What?s Underrated:
Saying that a band is underrated is a good way to advance them for consideration in the critical canon (which, of course, you control). As a benevolent dictator, it is wise and just to allow a fair number of underdogs and obscure indie bands into your hallowed halls of underrating, but you must also throw caltrops in the path of those trying to get a handle on your taste by admitting some odd ones, too. Sammy Hagar? Underrated. Michael Bolton? Underrated. What?s even more confusing is to accord underrated status to extremely well-liked bands. Nothing confuses your adversaries like calling The Beatles or Jimi Hendrix underrated. It?ll spin their heads. They?ll have no choice but to think you?re two steps ahead of them.
What?s Overrated:
Anything liked by anyone but you is overrated. Keep in mind that there are unlimited degrees of overrating, and you can employ them based on how much you want to offend and belittle others. If you?ve got a clean shot at some goofball liking Nirvana, don?t hesitate to point out that they?re disgustingly overrated. He knows that they are. He won?t be able to argue; you?ve got him cold. However, if someone mentions liking an underground favorite like Television or The Velvet Underground, you?d be treading on thin ice to claim that their critical acclaim is unwarranted. Instead, you can use the most devious trick in the smug bastard handbook: ?They?re definitely good, yeah. But a little overrated.? Checkmate!
I: The Personality
The very essence of the musical elitist is the combination of smugness and inscrutability. These two elements instill true music buffs with their veneer of authority and mystery, and learning to fake them is essential if you hope to join the ranks of the elite. Anyone who dares challenge your views will find themselves totally disarmed by the powerful combination these traits bring: they will feel a vague sense of shame for questioning someone so sure of himself, and they will almost certainly panic when they realize that they can?t get any kind of handle on your personal taste.
How inscrutable must you be? Think of the most inscrutable thing you can imagine: the Sphinx? The universe? Morrissey? Nay, you must be more mysterious still.
The number one rule of musical inscrutability is to carefully flout the conventional notions of what?s good and bad. Pretending to hate good music is easy enough, especially to those who read the first installment of How to Fake It. Pretending to like bad music, which may occasionally be necessary, is a little trickier. If you fail, you?ll just wind up looking like a philistine with terrible taste, or even worse, an ironist. You can?t merely prance around telling everyone The Beatles are terrible and Kelly Clarkson is great; you have to dress it up a little. Talk about stupid music in meaninglessly erudite terms: ?Def Leppard brilliantly conveyed the foundation of existential despair which necessarily lurks beneath a life of hedonism.? ?If Foucault were alive today, he would undoubtedly listen to Hoobastank.?
Occasionally, you must vehemently disagree with conventional wisdom and critical consensus. There?s a persuasive counterargument to everything, and if you can think on your feet, it?s possible to refute even the most ironclad rock notions. Everyone knows, for example, that the Rolling Stones have lost it. Not you! You think they?re better than ever! ?The Rolling Stones do our culture a much greater service now, as a commentary on the West?s insecurity about age, than they ever did as a bland young rock outfit.? Be confident of your fake opinions, because the bullshit detectors built into music snobs are like mild polygraph tests. If you?re worried that thinking on your feet might take too much actual knowledge, don?t be ashamed to prepare your opinions in advance.
Most people who try to fake musical expertise do so only by not admitting that they like anything. While that?s a good start, it?s also an eventual dead-end. It?s equally important to your inscrutability to be cagy about what you don?t like. Be quick to defend even the most worthless pop music, and do so completely without irony. If someone quite reasonably complains that the Ying Yang Twins are medically verifiable retards, scold them as if they?ve just called Martin Luther King Jr. an ape. Not only will this pull the rug out from under any rational person, but it will create an air of superior liberal open-mindedness toward all varieties of music.
The ultimate goal of all this isn?t simply to have something good to say about anything bad and something bad to say about anything good. The goal is to make your taste and opinions completely baffling, unpredictable and impenetrable. Being ridiculous and contrary all the time might just make you look insane, so don?t overdo it. Engage in normal, civil conversations about music and then spring a bizarre opinion on your adversary like a mental rat trap. Make sure you pepper your lies with the truth: defend universally panned albums by critically beloved artists, like Neil Young?s ?Trans? or Lou Reed?s ?Metal Machine Music.? Say you like Bob Dylan, but only for his voice, not his lyrics.
If your inscrutability is convincing enough, smugness is easy to fake. Always remember that you?re the expert. Your opinions are the correct ones, no matter how bizarre. As I mentioned in the previous installment, always steer the conversation toward your own opinions.
II: The Grand Declaration
Speaking in grand declarations is an excellent way to be smug. Every sentence you utter is an expression of some well-thought-out conviction which you demand to share with the world. Say everything emphatically and then look around to see if anyone has written it down so they can quote you later. You might think that grand declarations are risky, but if handled properly they?re as tame as kittens. Here?s a handy guide:
Wrong: ?Matchbox 20 was better than the Beatles.?
While it may be tempting to make grandiose claims just to court controversy, you?d only be shooting yourself in the foot. A declaration like this just invites questions like ?by what standard?? and ?are you an idiot?? Remember that controversy isn?t the goal. The goal is simply to impress upon those around you that you are a person with Big Ideas.
Right: ?At his best, Robyn Hitchcock was every bit as good as Bob Dylan.?
While not as risky or controversial as the previous one, a declaration like this is plenty bold. You are basically saying ?yes, I am in the position to include or exclude artists from the critical canon at my whim.? Canonizing random artists is a perfect way to establish authority, even if the person to whom you?re talking has never even heard of the artist in question.
Wrong: ?The Clash was better than The Sex Pistols.?
A statement like this is simply comparing apples to apples, and at least 50% of the population would be inclined to agree with it. It?s merely an opinion, not a grand declaration.
Right: ?The Smiths were better than The Sex Pistols.?
Unlike the Matchbox 20/Beatles comparison, this one involves two entirely dissimilar bands with a similar level of critical acclaim. Although both bands are firmly entrenched in the canon, most people wouldn?t bother comparing them, since there?s no particular logic or point to it. But such concerns need not deter you, for it is your god-given right to hierarchically file bands however you see fit.
Wrong: ?Magazine was the best band of all time.?
Such a declaration is bold and tempting, but once again it is too controversial and might require some form of actual support. ?Best-of-all-time? claims are to be avoided, because they?re a sure-fire way to start an argument you can?t win.
Right: ?Magazine is one of the ten best bands of all time.?
This cleverly circumvents the pitfalls of a best-of-all-time claim while at the same time implying that you?ve figured out exactly what the ten best bands of all time are. In most cases you won?t be pressed to reveal your entire list, because people involved in music discussions don?t actually care what other people think, they?re merely concerned about the politics of domination and submission.
III: The Barometer
If you?re going to convey an impression that you?ve got everything figured out, you need to remember that every band or artist in history is either underrated or overrated. Only you are the true arbiter of how to correctly rate any given band, since you are immune to the hype, nostalgia, and politics that make up the critical reputation of a musical act. Within you is the single flawless barometer that reveals the true quality of every band in the universe. Make sure to use it whenever possible, for it is a mainstay of smugness.
In keeping with your persona, it goes without saying that you need to be perfectly inscrutable about your over/under barometer. Remember not to go for the obvious choices.
What?s Underrated:
Saying that a band is underrated is a good way to advance them for consideration in the critical canon (which, of course, you control). As a benevolent dictator, it is wise and just to allow a fair number of underdogs and obscure indie bands into your hallowed halls of underrating, but you must also throw caltrops in the path of those trying to get a handle on your taste by admitting some odd ones, too. Sammy Hagar? Underrated. Michael Bolton? Underrated. What?s even more confusing is to accord underrated status to extremely well-liked bands. Nothing confuses your adversaries like calling The Beatles or Jimi Hendrix underrated. It?ll spin their heads. They?ll have no choice but to think you?re two steps ahead of them.
What?s Overrated:
Anything liked by anyone but you is overrated. Keep in mind that there are unlimited degrees of overrating, and you can employ them based on how much you want to offend and belittle others. If you?ve got a clean shot at some goofball liking Nirvana, don?t hesitate to point out that they?re disgustingly overrated. He knows that they are. He won?t be able to argue; you?ve got him cold. However, if someone mentions liking an underground favorite like Television or The Velvet Underground, you?d be treading on thin ice to claim that their critical acclaim is unwarranted. Instead, you can use the most devious trick in the smug bastard handbook: ?They?re definitely good, yeah. But a little overrated.? Checkmate!
#667
- doin' it after dark
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 6304
- Joined: 10-June 04
- Locationthe Canadian Shield
Posted 14 April 2006 - 8:57 PM
Christian Mom Thinks "Blog" is a Euphemism for Sex
Sue Harrington is troubled by her daughter's frequent use of the word "blog," an Internet-era term she thinks is a euphemism for sex. The term, which Harrington's daughter Brittany has used several times during the last month, recently landed the 15-year old in her room for two weeks.
As net-savvy teenagers everywhere know, "blog" is nothing more than a shortened form of "weblog," or online diary. Mrs. Harrington, however, is worried that her daughter may be engaging in premarital sex. "Just yesterday Brittany told me she had been late for dinner because she had spent the day blogging at Heather's house," she told THO. "When I told her she was grounded for her sexual indiscretion, she lied and said that's not what she meant. But I've seen those Monty Python movies, and I know all the lingo."
Harrington, who describes herself as "a pretty hip Mom," believes she has a very good understanding of the slang her teenage daughter uses, citing "toke," "reefer," and "high" as examples of marijuana terminology. "I know all about illicit drugs and sex," says Harrington. "I lived through the 70s, you know. I got saved in the Jesus Movement!"
Brittany, however, disagrees with her mother's self-assessment. "Yeah, Mom is basically completely wack," the teenager said in an interview with THO. "She has no idea what my life is like. She's all into this, like, Buddy Mom thing lately, where's she, like, tries to understand me and crap. But I'm like, please! If I wanted someone breathing down my neck all the time, I wouldn't have dumped Brandon [Neely] last month."
The "blog" incident is the latest in a string of troubling behavior for Brittany Harrington. Walter Harrington, the teenager's father, has recently noted a decline in his daughter's interest in Youth Group activities and family outings. But the most serious sign, he laments, is Brittany's recent habit of sleeping through church: "I'm no old fogey, but I do think Brittany should be getting up for church more often. Maybe if she didn't stay out until 2 a.m. with that Neely boy, she'd have a little easier time of it."
Although Sue Harrington is concerned that her daughter might be involved in premarital "blogging," she does admit that for the most part, Brittany is a well-behaved teenager. "Why, just last weekend I overheard her talking to her friend on the phone about 'buying some E.' I just love that she appreciates Elvis enough to spend her allowance on his records. Most of her friends can't stand the music from my generation. I just know she'll be all right in the end."
X-D
Sue Harrington is troubled by her daughter's frequent use of the word "blog," an Internet-era term she thinks is a euphemism for sex. The term, which Harrington's daughter Brittany has used several times during the last month, recently landed the 15-year old in her room for two weeks.
As net-savvy teenagers everywhere know, "blog" is nothing more than a shortened form of "weblog," or online diary. Mrs. Harrington, however, is worried that her daughter may be engaging in premarital sex. "Just yesterday Brittany told me she had been late for dinner because she had spent the day blogging at Heather's house," she told THO. "When I told her she was grounded for her sexual indiscretion, she lied and said that's not what she meant. But I've seen those Monty Python movies, and I know all the lingo."
Harrington, who describes herself as "a pretty hip Mom," believes she has a very good understanding of the slang her teenage daughter uses, citing "toke," "reefer," and "high" as examples of marijuana terminology. "I know all about illicit drugs and sex," says Harrington. "I lived through the 70s, you know. I got saved in the Jesus Movement!"
Brittany, however, disagrees with her mother's self-assessment. "Yeah, Mom is basically completely wack," the teenager said in an interview with THO. "She has no idea what my life is like. She's all into this, like, Buddy Mom thing lately, where's she, like, tries to understand me and crap. But I'm like, please! If I wanted someone breathing down my neck all the time, I wouldn't have dumped Brandon [Neely] last month."
The "blog" incident is the latest in a string of troubling behavior for Brittany Harrington. Walter Harrington, the teenager's father, has recently noted a decline in his daughter's interest in Youth Group activities and family outings. But the most serious sign, he laments, is Brittany's recent habit of sleeping through church: "I'm no old fogey, but I do think Brittany should be getting up for church more often. Maybe if she didn't stay out until 2 a.m. with that Neely boy, she'd have a little easier time of it."
Although Sue Harrington is concerned that her daughter might be involved in premarital "blogging," she does admit that for the most part, Brittany is a well-behaved teenager. "Why, just last weekend I overheard her talking to her friend on the phone about 'buying some E.' I just love that she appreciates Elvis enough to spend her allowance on his records. Most of her friends can't stand the music from my generation. I just know she'll be all right in the end."
X-D
#670
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1055
- Joined: 30-October 04
Posted 15 April 2006 - 2:18 AM
Darkstarexodus Escribi�:
Christian Mom Thinks "Blog" is a Euphemism for Sex
Sue Harrington is troubled by her daughter's frequent use of the word "blog," an Internet-era term she thinks is a euphemism for sex. The term, which Harrington's daughter Brittany has used several times during the last month, recently landed the 15-year old in her room for two weeks.
As net-savvy teenagers everywhere know, "blog" is nothing more than a shortened form of "weblog," or online diary. Mrs. Harrington, however, is worried that her daughter may be engaging in premarital sex. "Just yesterday Brittany told me she had been late for dinner because she had spent the day blogging at Heather's house," she told THO. "When I told her she was grounded for her sexual indiscretion, she lied and said that's not what she meant. But I've seen those Monty Python movies, and I know all the lingo."
Harrington, who describes herself as "a pretty hip Mom," believes she has a very good understanding of the slang her teenage daughter uses, citing "toke," "reefer," and "high" as examples of marijuana terminology. "I know all about illicit drugs and sex," says Harrington. "I lived through the 70s, you know. I got saved in the Jesus Movement!"
Brittany, however, disagrees with her mother's self-assessment. "Yeah, Mom is basically completely wack," the teenager said in an interview with THO. "She has no idea what my life is like. She's all into this, like, Buddy Mom thing lately, where's she, like, tries to understand me and crap. But I'm like, please! If I wanted someone breathing down my neck all the time, I wouldn't have dumped Brandon [Neely] last month."
The "blog" incident is the latest in a string of troubling behavior for Brittany Harrington. Walter Harrington, the teenager's father, has recently noted a decline in his daughter's interest in Youth Group activities and family outings. But the most serious sign, he laments, is Brittany's recent habit of sleeping through church: "I'm no old fogey, but I do think Brittany should be getting up for church more often. Maybe if she didn't stay out until 2 a.m. with that Neely boy, she'd have a little easier time of it."
Although Sue Harrington is concerned that her daughter might be involved in premarital "blogging," she does admit that for the most part, Brittany is a well-behaved teenager. "Why, just last weekend I overheard her talking to her friend on the phone about 'buying some E.' I just love that she appreciates Elvis enough to spend her allowance on his records. Most of her friends can't stand the music from my generation. I just know she'll be all right in the end."
X-D
What the fuck???
X-D X-D X-D X-D X-D X-D X-D
Is this real?
#671
- Chimney Fisting !
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 7492
- Joined: 25-January 05
- LocationParis, France
Posted 15 April 2006 - 3:39 AM
haha talking about going to church... My grand parents are celebrating their 50th mariage birthday and tey want us to go to church on sunday... obviously I really don't want to go
I made a bet with my sister : I said my brother won't go but she says he will go :D
I made a bet with my sister : I said my brother won't go but she says he will go :D
#672
- dork
-
- Group: Moderators
- Posts: 15302
- Joined: 06-November 02
- Locationin the valley of the acid clowns
Posted 15 April 2006 - 6:09 AM
Ben_j Escribi�:
haha talking about going to church... My grand parents are celebrating their 50th mariage birthday and tey want us to go to church on sunday... obviously I really don't want to go
I made a bet with my sister : I said my brother won't go but she says he will go :D
You should go.
It's not every day that your grandparents celebrate their 50th wedding anniversary. Your being there - no matter how much you don't want to go to church - will mean more to them than you might realize...
be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle
#674
- doin' it after dark
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 6304
- Joined: 10-June 04
- Locationthe Canadian Shield
Posted 15 April 2006 - 9:01 AM
whirlygirl Escribi�:
Ben_j Escribi�:
haha talking about going to church... My grand parents are celebrating their 50th mariage birthday and tey want us to go to church on sunday... obviously I really don't want to go
I made a bet with my sister : I said my brother won't go but she says he will go :D
You should go.
It's not every day that your grandparents celebrate their 50th wedding anniversary. Your being there - no matter how much you don't want to go to church - will mean more to them than you might realize...
Agreed. It's the people, not the venue, that makes an event important.
(..... and that's why I can have a good time at bad clubs, if I'm with the right people.... and have enough drugs ;) )
#675
- Chimney Fisting !
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 7492
- Joined: 25-January 05
- LocationParis, France
Posted 15 April 2006 - 4:35 PM
Darkstarexodus Escribi�:
whirlygirl Escribi�:
Ben_j Escribi�:
haha talking about going to church... My grand parents are celebrating their 50th mariage birthday and tey want us to go to church on sunday... obviously I really don't want to go
I made a bet with my sister : I said my brother won't go but she says he will go :D
You should go.
It's not every day that your grandparents celebrate their 50th wedding anniversary. Your being there - no matter how much you don't want to go to church - will mean more to them than you might realize...
Agreed. It's the people, not the venue, that makes an event important.
(..... and that's why I can have a good time at bad clubs, if I'm with the right people.... and have enough drugs ;) )
Hm so you mean I should take drugs ? :)
#676
- dork
-
- Group: Moderators
- Posts: 15302
- Joined: 06-November 02
- Locationin the valley of the acid clowns
Posted 15 April 2006 - 6:07 PM
Well, since it would be a family event of sorts, it's cause for a celebration. You can't celebrate without a drink! ;)
be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle
#677
- Chimney Fisting !
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 7492
- Joined: 25-January 05
- LocationParis, France
Posted 15 April 2006 - 8:43 PM
whirlygirl Escribi�:
Well, since it would be a family event of sorts, it's cause for a celebration. You can't celebrate without a drink! ;)
No, we won't go, anyway there will be lunch with all the familly after that...
#679 toomuchstash
Posted 16 April 2006 - 9:23 AM
Ben_j Escribi�:
Hm so you mean I should take drugs ? :)
Before he was thrown out of Yale, timothy leary gave a group of divinity students mushrooms before an easter mass, in order to see if they really aided in people having 'religious experiences', like the native indians in mexico had.
They did.
I've dropped acid and visted with my grandparents. It's educational.
#680
- dork
-
- Group: Moderators
- Posts: 15302
- Joined: 06-November 02
- Locationin the valley of the acid clowns
Posted 16 April 2006 - 9:41 AM
toomuch'stash Escribi�:
Ben_j Escribi�:
Hm so you mean I should take drugs ? :)
Before he was thrown out of Yale, timothy leary gave a group of divinity students mushrooms before an easter mass, in order to see if they really aided in people having 'religious experiences', like the native indians in mexico had.
They did.
I've dropped acid and visted with my grandparents. It's educational.
And on New Year's 99-2000, I had some ecstacy. Then after midnight, I called my parents and had the longest conversation with my dad that I've ever had in my entire life.
True story. It was weird, disconcerting almost.
Of course he'd had a few to drink, so he was in a much more talktative mood than ever.
be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle