<!--QuoteBegin-Rodchenko+Feb 20 2006, 01:12 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>
QUOTE (Rodchenko @ Feb 20 2006, 01:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I too will rest my case.
Long live The Smiths, Morrissey and all Mozfans of the world, even the Radioheaders.
Why argue at a Smithsforum?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
agreed.
wow, i certainly didn't mean to provide a stimulus for argument by starting this thread!! though it's really nice to see so many opinions and healthy discussion <!--emo&;)-->

<!--endemo-->
i'm not so sure about evaluating music according to the background of the artist. i don't do that as a rule of thumb because i think that would blind me to genius, but i'll admit i do that when it comes to blues music.
in the end, The Truth is a multi-faceted gemstone. each side as valid and important as any other, and without all of them, the stone ceases to exist.
and just for clarification, radiohead is not a band i listen to everyday. nor have they been a band that has sent me into some weird autistic spiral of them, and
them only (ween, REM, the smiths, beck, and the white stripes have waged successful guerilla warfare on my consciousness in the past).
really when i think about it, i fear what would happen to music as an entity if everyone agreed all the time. there'd be nothing new, and that would suck.