| now playing | menu | music library |
The Who
Won't Get Fooled Again Who's Next (1971) Buy CD Buy MP3 |
| 452 comments: | lyrics: | add your comment |
k-man May 15, 2013 - 11:13 | Monumental. The whole friggin' album. What were they thinking? |
Der_Hamburger May 08, 2013 - 01:45 | Vivaldis four seasons and then the Who - WIE GEIL IST DAS DENN!!!!!! |
Sawyer Apr 26, 2013 - 10:48 | not about this song...but my God, what a segue from Aaron Copland to The Who .... |
ottojschlosser Apr 26, 2013 - 10:48 | gillespp wrote: Chicago-Copeland-The Who, what a goddamn amazing string. Who but Bill can come up with such a perfect lineup. This! |
msymmes Apr 26, 2013 - 10:48 | And now after Aaron Copland's "Fanfare.." - Awesome. msymmes wrote: And my day on a cold snowy morning in Southern Ontario!!!!! |
ThePoose Apr 26, 2013 - 10:47 | Everybody on my monolith loves this song. Lazarus wrote: Everybody in my church loves this song... |
gillespp Apr 26, 2013 - 10:46 | Chicago-Copeland-The Who, what a goddamn amazing string. Who but Bill can come up with such a perfect lineup. |
devilturtle Apr 06, 2013 - 21:53 | hilarious! thanks Mrytle L Myrtle_L wrote: "There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." |
kcar Mar 13, 2013 - 20:23 | rdo wrote: Right, I was specifically referring the 60s a la Woodstock and "Sex, drugs and Rock and Roll", which had nothing at all to do with the Civil Rights Movement and other social progress that occurred in the 60s. Civil Rights was a watershed event in the 60s, I agree. We lost a lot as a society as regards the Woodstock ethos. I for one cannot stomach it. I really have to disagree with your opinion on the "Woodstock ethos." All sorts of lasting evils are blamed on the 60s freer attitudes and behaviors, an approach that masks or ignores other factors at work in the US. Remember that youth cut loose in the same way before the 60s—say in the 20s—and America didn't suffer as a result. The youth culture of the 60s was a response to the rise of consumer culture in the US after the brutal economic austerity of the 30s, the national unity of WWII and the craving for "normalcy" of the 50s. There was a convergence of a demographic bulge (baby boomers), a TV-driven mass media culture of consumption, and a rebellion against political and cultural trends. The civil rights, women's rights and anti-war movements came out those demographic, commercial and political trends; apparently you view those efforts positively as do I. But I really don't see "sex, drugs and rock n' roll" (which also developed from those trends) as long-lasting socially or culturally destructive forces. They may not have advanced high culture or deep science, but they were outgrowths of a rebellion against a society that had become outdated, repressive and unrewarding. Experimentation with drugs, relationships and music may have encouraged people to become less religious, patriotic, and respectful of the establishment, but it allowed youth to make its own marks and force American society to adapt to changed times. As an undergraduate, I had a professor who bitterly condemned the 60s because students during those years rejected classic works of literature that he had devoted his life to and because he felt the books replacing his favorites were shallow. But people typically don't rebel for just self-indulgent reasons; for them, society was dysfunctional. Did Americans retreat from political and cultural involvement during the "Me Decade" of the 70s? Yes, but that I think was due to disillusionment over Vietnam and Watergate and the tough transition from a manufacturing-based economy to a service-based one with high energy prices and stagflation. I don't blame the craziness of the 60s for all of the selfishness and ennui of the 70s. Bottom line: whatever you think society lost because of a Woodstock ethos, I believe that far larger political and economic forces caused the losses you're thinking of. |
subdude Mar 13, 2013 - 18:01 | I get it. the Who and U2 are paying you to play their songs on fast cycle. Glad you installed a PSD button. |
kingart Mar 06, 2013 - 10:18 | I heard Townsend remark in a documentary on the Who that Moon was a — I'm not quoting this accurately, but the essence is the same — shitty drummer. What? !!! |
msymmes Mar 06, 2013 - 10:10 | d-don wrote: After Vivaldi? Only on RP!!! Rock on...this makes my day on a gray, drizzly Oregon morning. And my day on a cold snowy morning in Southern Ontario!!!!! |
d-don Mar 06, 2013 - 10:08 | After Vivaldi? Only on RP!!! Rock on...this makes my day on a gray, drizzly Oregon morning. |
kingart Mar 06, 2013 - 10:06 | Talk about a segue. Vivaldi/Four Seasons to screamin' nose-thumbin' blow this shit up rock and roll! Hey Zeus! |
msymmes Mar 06, 2013 - 10:06 | After Vivaldi ? Bill. You are good!!!!! |
oldsaxon Feb 22, 2013 - 12:14 | RobN wrote: This could be the signature tune for the Arab Spring. See the new boss? Same as the old one? |
big_gare Feb 22, 2013 - 12:13 | Who else but Radio Paradise could pull off a segue like that. From Aaron Copeland to The Who. You ROCK RP! :-) I want to take this song out behind the barn & get it pregnant! |
clickfaster Feb 22, 2013 - 12:12 | OK, best transition ever! Aaron Copland's Fanfare for the Common Man > The Who Won't Get Fooled Again. |
idiot_wind Feb 22, 2013 - 12:12 | FREAKIN RIGHT FOR A FRIDAY AFTERNOON!!!!!! Just listen to Moon's drums. He must have a third arm. No one plays like him. And RnR saved my life...this is why. |
weez Feb 22, 2013 - 12:11 | Whoa - cool segue from "Fanfare for the Common Man" |
