More Xmas Pain
And here's a guy singing "Jingle Bell Rock" with no lyrics except the title words. Again, courtesy of The Sneeze (which you should all be reading daily so I won't have to tell you the funny parts. Which are all of them).Remember, I bring you these gifts because I love you.
Word Watch 2006
Count: 226,974
Remaining: 23,026


10 Comments:
Posted by:
Jeri at 12/19/2006 7:01 PM
"take ME out to the ball GAME, take
ME, out to the crowd BUY..."
It's kind of disconcerting, and I love it so.
Posted by:
Rob S. at 12/20/2006 10:50 AM
Questions:
1) Does rock beat bell, or jingle, or both? Etc.
2) Is that not some of the coolest minimal synthesizer around?
Posted by:
Dave S. at 12/20/2006 2:56 PM
I think bell would beat jingle, because it contains it. Rock beats bell because you can crush a bell with a rock (a jingle bell, at least, not the Liberty Bell). And jingle beats rock because ROCK IS DEAD. According to Marilyn Manson, anyway.
I woke up with "Jingle Rock Bell" in my head today, after a disturbing dream about Tom Cruise (he really is short, but only in terms of height). The original version, with all those other meaningless words, keeps popping in, though.
Which can mean only one thing: it's time to play it again!!
Posted by:
Jeri at 12/20/2006 3:29 PM
Posted by:
Anonymous at 12/21/2006 4:47 PM
Oh, and I think the real reason why jingle would beat rock is because advertising jingles that use rock songs (like using Led Zeppelin to sell Cadillacs) are hammering the last nails in rock 'n' roll's coffin.
(Using Aerosmith to sell Buicks, however, is perfectly acceptable and appropriate. The perfect marriage of mediocrity and mediocrity.)
Posted by:
Jeri at 12/21/2006 5:02 PM
Posted by:
Unknown at 12/22/2006 4:01 AM
Posted by:
Jeri at 12/22/2006 8:10 AM
Posted by:
Rob S. at 12/22/2006 10:12 AM
Besides, none of my projects are in a first draft stage. I could work on something completely different just to stubbornly stick to my arbitrary goal, or I could get something useful accomplished.
Posted by:
Jeri at 12/22/2006 12:57 PM
Post a Comment