1. I think it would be gallant to pretend that the words “…somebody who asked to be identified as…” did not exist.

  2. P.S. I’ve seen the plural “baits” in text composed by Germans, but I thought it was a foreigner’s error. I’ve never considered it an ennumerable term.

  3. I don’t think bait is ennumerable in English. But the guy who does Dark Side of the Horse is Finnish, so it’s probably the same as when Germans do it.

    I really liked the first two comics. I’d thought “You Got It” was a Traveling Wilbury’s song featuring Orbison, but it’s not. It’s just that the first Wilbury’s album and Orbison’s final album came out just a couple of months apart and I apparently merged them in my head.

  4. Thanks for that information DemetriosX. I also always thought that it was a Traveling Wilburys’ song. In fact it does have a couple of those bandmates as backing vocalists, which added to the confusion.

  5. According to https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bait the word can be countable (more or less synonymous with “enumerable”) in certain contexts. For example, where legal, a fisherman might use a line with several hooks on which he loads several baits, or anglers might debate whether natural or artificial baits are more effective for certain fish species.

    BTW, I believe “enumerable” is the standard spelling. The double “n” in the not quite antonymous “innumerable” may cause confusion.

  6. @ Andréa – I think anything connected to the Beatles is effectively geezer-proof. Orbison is instant geezerdom, even back when the Wilburys were still touring. If the character in the third panel of the last strip really is Mr. T, then I’d vote for the geezer tag there, roo.

  7. “I think anything connected to the Beatles is effectively geezer-proof.”

    I’ve always disliked the geezer tag but… everything even remotely related to the Beatles is *immediately* cast into geezer territory. Young folks have *no* interest in the Beatles and know nothing of their work.

  8. Supposed quote: “Did you know that Paul McCartney was in a band before Wings?” And, of course, Wings is old enough to be geezerish.

  9. Age alone is not enough to qualify something as “geezerish”, nor is complete obscurity. As I see it, the classic “geezer” item is something that used to be popular enough to be commonly known, but has since faded into partial obscurity. We are looking for items for which the “recognition” quotient is strongly dependent upon age. The current interests of the “young whippersnappers infringing on the old fart’s lawn” are irrelevant: we are not worried about willful ignorance, but rather whether a younger person with reasonable intelligence and curiosity would have any chance of having been exposed to the item or concept in question.
    When I said that the Beatles are “geezer-proof”, I meant that they still enjoy significant exposure in radio, movies, and elsewhere, so that they aren’t anywhere near becoming obscure(*).Teenagers may not be actively listening to their music, but anyone with the IQ of a rutabaga (or better) should be able to recognize at least some of the more “classic” titles.
    P.S. (*) – For example: Agent K (in the first MiB movie) complained that he was “going to have to buy the White Album again“.
    P.P.S. @ Orbison – My earlier comment was not entirely at all serious. His appearance and music with the “Wilburys” had a “retro” flair that I assume was intentional.

  10. “Teenagers may not be actively listening to their music, but anyone with the IQ of a rutabaga (or better) should be able to recognize at least some of the more “classic” titles.”

    My point is that, actually, no, they don’t. They would not and do not recognize “The Yellow Submarine” and though everyone has *heard* of the Beatles I’d say few can name any of the songs (except people who are as into music as we are into comics).

    “For example: Agent K (in the first MiB movie) complained that he was “going to have to buy the White Album again“.”

    Uh, that film is *22* years old!!!

    And I think anyone “young” hearing it would just figure that it just sounds so very much like something a person Tommy Lee Jones’ age would say… mainly because he *is* Tommy Lee Jones’ age.

  11. @ woozy – I do not care what willfully ignorant teenagers would not do (or think), nor do I think that your wholesale castigation of the breed is correct. The question is NOT whether a young person WOULD know (or would want to know) about something (Beatle-esque or otherwise), the question is whether a young person COULD know about said subject: whether or not the information is still ambiently available for absorption, period, end of story.

  12. A lot of young people know Beatles songs. I bet they’re more familiar with pop music from 50 years ago than we were with stuff from the 1910s.

  13. It’s not really surprising that there were some other Wilbury’s on Orbison’s album. The group came into existence through sheer coincidence. Jeff Lynne was in LA producing both the Orbison album this song was on and Petty’s album of the time. Then George Harrison approached Lynne, because he needed to cut a song for a single B-side. He was in a hurry, so they contacted Dylan to use his studio. Lynne invited Orbison and Petty to come in and act as session musicians. And thus were the Traveling Wilbury’s born.

  14. Kilby,

    I’m not talking about willfullly ignorant teenagers, I’m talking about intelligent people in their early to late thirties. ANd as for *could* know, anyone could know *anything* and if this is the criteria of a geezer tag then *none* of the geezer tags are appropriate (which actually maybe I *am* arguing for).

    Brian in STL

    That’s true but that doesn’t make Beatles exempt from Geezer Tags. Of course, some people care and no more about the classics of the generations ahead. Most people my age when I was younger had *heard* of Frank Sinatra or Charlie Parke but most didn’t care and couldn’t name a work (although they picked up bits of pieces the older they got so by the time we were forty we could recognize Sinatras voice and know My Way which we wouldn’t have been able to do in our early twenties). On the other hand, most of people are very dull and not the type of people you want to talk to at parties. There were of course many music buffs (just like there are sci-fi buffs and comic buffs) who consider these that greats and would have been utterly flabbergasted to realize how little the average person knows. (Much as I’m flabbergasted when I find out most people my age don’t actually know who Krazy Kat[*] is and have never actually *seen* a Charlie Chaplin film. I always assumed they were *classics*.)

    Also *shouldn’t* we and don’t we know quite a bit about music of the 1910s. Scott Joplin, and WWI songs, and stage productions; hello my baby; tea for two; etc. We don’t *swim* in them but those of us who *do* know the pop culture of the days before our birth probably do know them better than we think we do.

    [*A college friend of mine recently posted on facebook about coming accross a youtube video of a cartoon version of Krazy Kat that he used to have seen on television as a kid. He said he had tried to describe it to friends all his life about a cat that gets hit by a brick and says “My Angel” but no-one had heard of them and he was doubting his memory. I’m not surprised no-one remembered the cartoons– they are obscure and not very good– but I was surprised that of all the people he supposedly described it to, *none* of them said “Hey, that sounds like the Krazy Kat comic”. I think Beatles have answered that “not everyone knows them” category.]

  15. What you said was: Young folks have *no* interest in the Beatles and know nothing of their work.

    I don’t think it’s true and generally isn’t unusual that large percentages of young people don’t know music from 50 years in the past.

  16. “I don’t think it’s true and generally isn’t unusual that large percentages of young people don’t know music from 50 years in the past.”

    So you are saying young people both do and don’t have interest in music 50 years in the past? You say what I said isn’t true and then you say that what I said wasn’t unusual.

    I was talking in general. I have friends who are music buffs and friends who are not. Of my friends under 40 the music buffs know about the Beatles but the ones who are not movie buffs don’t know much and don’t view them as relevant or anything the should know. The knew who they *are* and can name one or two songs but that’s about it.

    All I’m saying is the Beatles don’t get geezer tag exceptions.

  17. You’ve misinterpreted much of what I said. My point was that many young people do know the Beatles and know older music better than people who were young during the Beatles era. It’s not unusual that a lot of and possibly the majority of young people these days don’t know the Beatles. But many do. I took exception to your statement, without qualification, that young people don’t know and don’t care about the Beatles.

Add a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.