• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Magnus

  • Rank
  • Birthday 01/24/1978

Profile Information

  • Location
    Silver Spring, MD
  • Gender
  • Springsteen fan since?
    First heard Bruce in '89, diehard fan since around '93 or so
  • Does Mary's dress wave or sway?
    Well, "as the radio plays" rhymes with "sways"
  • Interests
    Bruce, rock music, history, Lego, cooking, other nerdery...
  • Sex?

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Recent Profile Visitors

8,934 profile views
  1. Yeah, it's sort of like a very mediocre first date.
  2. I have Scarecrow, listened to it a few times and honestly just never got into it. Without getting into distracting Bruce comparisons, can someone give me a quick rundown on why Scarecrow is a great album, and what I should pay attention to the next time I listen to it?
  3. If Dylan is a poet, Bruce is a storyteller. Bruce is far more than a journeyman, but I wouldn't call him a pioneer, at least not in the same kind of way as the big names who went before him. Dylan is a real pioneer.
  4. Wow, this is really really good. Thanks for sharing.
  5. Wow, I hadn't heard that at all. It is so raw and probably must be one of the most surprising opening numbers ever.
  6. I don't know the music of Paul Simon, Joni Mitchell, Leonard Cohen, or some of the other big names out there to really fairly assess how they stack up against Bruce. One thing they do have in common is that they're primarily known as songwriters. I wonder if Bruce might be better recognized as a songwriter if he didn't attract masses with those out-of-this-world shows. Live Bruce is just so damn exhilarating and distracting from the introspective songwriter side of him. I mean, if Paul Simon were a live act on par with Michael Jackson and James Brown too, people wouldn't pay quite as much attention to him as a songwriter. I don't know what current Bob fans want or expect from him, but there are definitely many longtime Bruce fans who are primarily in it for the ESB, Bosstime, rock n roll side of things. I know enough of Bob Dylan's cannon to call him my second favorite songwriter after Bruce. IMO Dylan is more capable of brilliance than Bruce, but he also has been inconsistent qualitywise for his entire career. Even my favorite of his albums have songs on them that don't stick for me. I couldn't say that about dozens of other acts I like. I love Bob Dylan, I really do. But I very rarely get his songs. And at the end of the day, I more often think of that as a strike against him than against me. He has cultivated mystery around himself his entire career, and rather than being fascinated by that, as a fan and listener, I find it keeps me at arm's length. I want music I can relate to and understand intellectually as well as emotionally. That I regard Dylan as highly as I do, despite the fact I don't like or remember a third of his songs and don't understand most of them, is a testament to the sheer quality of his best work.
  7. It's all subjective. I really love the Christmas album.
  8. For my money, Dylan is epicly brilliant at his best and completely forgetable at his worst. Highly inconsistent. I don't know his recent material very well, but I thought Love and Theft was outstanding (up there with his best), Time out of Mind was boring, and Modern times was forgetable.
  9. Happy 30th, Bridge Benefit '86... You could make a strong argument that this show represents the beginning of later-era, post-BitUSA Bruce, as best represented by the shocking acoustic reimagination of his most misunderstood song. Coming just a month before the massive summary statement that was Live 1975-85, this show managed to seem fresh and new, despite featuring no new material. It featured so many old songs reinvented dramatically, and Bruce in his rambling, entertaining storyteller mode. Many fans favor the longer and solo Christic '90 shows, but to me, the Bridge '86 performance is the dynamic, musically interesting one. Imagine if he had toured in a format developed from this, perhaps in support of ToL... Bridge '86 was the unplugged show that was ahead of its time, and never made it to MTV.
  10. I've avoided locker rooms and anything sports related as much as I could have, but have spent time in locker rooms in high school, spent a little time in the army (with 98% dudes), and spent summers in the moving business with truckers. I don't think I've ever heard anything like Trump said. The problem isn't the sexual explicitness or terminology, it's his bragging about nonconsensually grabbing someone. The former is very common of course among men, and it doesn't have to be a bad thing, but the latter is not at all common and not at all OK.
  11. Really? That's hard to fathom. I thought he was mostly riding on the wave of working and lower middle class white America - the kinds of people that Bruce sings about on Joad and WB.
  12. I wonder about that too. What things do my more-liberal-than-me friends do or believe that in ten or thirty years will be considered backwards and indefensible? Eating meat? Driving a car if you live in a city? Probably things that don't even occur to me right now.
  13. Well there lots to unpack here, as the kids say these days. There a new world out there that the Millennials are taking point in exploring, making sense of, and defining. I have many friends in the LGBT community, many of whom are younger than me by ten years or so. And as much as I try to be supportive and learn, there is still a great deal I am still learning the basics of. I do know, from my own experience, that there can be a big disparity between the way you personally identify and the definitions of certain words in a dictionary or the way that people you meet will view you; and also that identifying in several ways at the same time can be confusing, but still key to one's identity. In my case, I'm talking about nationality (and to much a lesser extent, race). And I'd guess there are people here who could relate to some of this in terms of religion. But for some people, it goes along lines of gender and/or sexuality. Now, you can make a good argument that the "T" doesn't belong with the "LGB" (the "Q" can fit in either category, depending on how you are using it). But you could also argue that racism/race identity are a separate issue from religious discrimination and religious identity, and I think it is clear that these things do often go hand in hand in the real world. It's kind of confusing for an outsider, because lots of the terminology is used in different ways by different people, or in ways that shift from year to year. Labels are difficult, because they can be used both as identities and as descriptors and there are no clear definitions. I am a firm believer in everyone getting to identify however they like, but I don't think it is realistic to expect to control how other people will describe you. I'm honestly not convinced by some of the ways some of these words are used by some people - for example there are cisgendered heterosexual people who identify as "queer" as a way to ally themselves politically with the LGBTQ community. I'm not super comfortable with that - to me it would be like a white person who wanted to be a good ally to people of color to call themselves a "person of color". But as a straight cis guy, I don't feel like I should be the one policing that.
  14. I feel like a dunce (I'm just a luddite), can someone explain how to expand this so I can read it more clearly?
  15. There are definitely Lego stores!