This entry was posted
on Monday, August 16th, 2004 at 11:08 am and is filed under Cartoons, Gorjus, TeeVee.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
16 Responses to “why six feet under suxxit, as described by couples performing fashionable dances from the nineteen-sixties.”
I think his feelings were hurt by the constant refrain of “you’re totally going to die like that” and “that’s totally you” and “look at those comic book nerds” and “that’s jp! talking about how you want to be buried with that comic book.”
You know, I don’t watch SFU or The West Wing (or really anything else besides ER for that matter), but the title of this post is pure genius. For some reason, it reminds me of the Monty Python skit where they act out famous literary works via nonverbal communication, so we get “The Semaphore Version of Wuthering Heights,” “The Morse-Code Version of Mutiny on the Bounty,” etc.
I don’t think the Charleston (panel 2) was a “fashionable” dance “from the nineteen-sixties.”
Even if its supposed to be the Lindy Hop (a post Spirit of St. Louis 1927 craze), the best you get is a minor beach music revival along the Atlantic Coast.
a-HA! let me tell you why you’re both wrong. ‘cuz in the book i was using—”dancing for teenagers”—underneath the lindy it was specifically listed as “a dance for rock’n’roll.” and the book was certainly of the 1960’s vintage—checked out regularly in that time period.
so there were at least some jax kids doin’ the hop in that time period! and i’d say this life magazine cover shows the lindy hop certainly had some post-war appeal: http://www.jitterbuzz.com/life1947.html
That page also shows the Lindy was at least named in 1927 (for obvious reasons); it eventually morphed into what would more properly be called the jitterbug by the ‘60’s. the book was likely made during the forties and intermittently updated to make it “hip” (it was in its 9th printing).
I was waiting for the lame “my book says its from the 1960s” so I must be right defense. What took you so long Gorjus? Jumping from Life 1947 to the 1960s kinda undercuts your argument though. The 40s seems right for the origins of those cartoons based on the clothing.
What was the copyright date on your 9th edition? How far into the 60s do the check out dates go? Who do you think was checking out this book? My best guess—desperate gym teachers and youth ministers!
Here’s where we agree to disagree: my point was about the notion of the illustrated dances as being fashionable in the 1960s. If by fashionable you mean
mean old-fashioned and outmoded (think Jackson Country Club Cotillion class of 1961), you might have a point. But if by fashionable you mean what’s groovy and happenin’ now with the hip kids, forget it.
BTW, the Jitterbug dates to a 1934 Cab Calloway song of the same title.
Sheezus…reading about y’all debating about dancing is more boring than a Doug Henning magic show in the Catskills circa 1982. You know, when his leotard was fitting right.
Gorjus…sure, it was sorta lame, but I take no criticism of a show I like from someone who liked the West Wing past the first season.
I think his feelings were hurt by the constant refrain of “you’re totally going to die like that” and “that’s totally you” and “look at those comic book nerds” and “that’s jp! talking about how you want to be buried with that comic book.”
You know, I don’t watch SFU or The West Wing (or really anything else besides ER for that matter), but the title of this post is pure genius. For some reason, it reminds me of the Monty Python skit where they act out famous literary works via nonverbal communication, so we get “The Semaphore Version of Wuthering Heights,” “The Morse-Code Version of Mutiny on the Bounty,” etc.
The title is saucey, but it does reveal the darker “comic-book guy” from the Simpsons side of Gorjus.
I don’t think the Charleston (panel 2) was a “fashionable” dance “from the nineteen-sixties.”
Even if its supposed to be the Lindy Hop (a post Spirit of St. Louis 1927 craze), the best you get is a minor beach music revival along the Atlantic Coast.
The concept of the comic is funny though.
bulb, please.
i never could get into 6ft under. i can’t say it’s bad. i just can’t say i’ve been able to make myself care.
bulb is right.
a-HA! let me tell you why you’re both wrong. ‘cuz in the book i was using—”dancing for teenagers”—underneath the lindy it was specifically listed as “a dance for rock’n’roll.” and the book was certainly of the 1960’s vintage—checked out regularly in that time period.
so there were at least some jax kids doin’ the hop in that time period! and i’d say this life magazine cover shows the lindy hop certainly had some post-war appeal:
http://www.jitterbuzz.com/life1947.html
That page also shows the Lindy was at least named in 1927 (for obvious reasons); it eventually morphed into what would more properly be called the jitterbug by the ‘60’s. the book was likely made during the forties and intermittently updated to make it “hip” (it was in its 9th printing).
six feet under still suxx!! comics rool!
daring to p.o. Sally:
I was waiting for the lame “my book says its from the 1960s” so I must be right defense. What took you so long Gorjus? Jumping from Life 1947 to the 1960s kinda undercuts your argument though. The 40s seems right for the origins of those cartoons based on the clothing.
What was the copyright date on your 9th edition? How far into the 60s do the check out dates go? Who do you think was checking out this book? My best guess—desperate gym teachers and youth ministers!
Here’s where we agree to disagree: my point was about the notion of the illustrated dances as being fashionable in the 1960s. If by fashionable you mean
mean old-fashioned and outmoded (think Jackson Country Club Cotillion class of 1961), you might have a point. But if by fashionable you mean what’s groovy and happenin’ now with the hip kids, forget it.
BTW, the Jitterbug dates to a 1934 Cab Calloway song of the same title.
zzzzzzz.
bulb, you must be murdered immediately. But we will bury you with gorjus’s dance book if you want, just to prove you were correct all along.
Hurrah! for free time!
Sheezus…reading about y’all debating about dancing is more boring than a Doug Henning magic show in the Catskills circa 1982. You know, when his leotard was fitting right.
http://www.rotten.com/library/occult/magic/magicians/doug-henning/
Personally, my biggest beef is that Claire makes coed lesbians seem BORING and ANNOYING, instead of HOT and GROOVY.
Oh, that’s so true. Couldn’t her and the gigantically-headed Mena Suvari just have DONE IT? And done it A LOT? On screen?
Is that so much to ask? Teenaged lesbians and a sensible portrayal of comic book fans? Nay, I think not.
Dance rebuttal tomorrow!
I’m glistening with antcipation… dance rebuttal!