This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Should we include a listed discography at the end, like a summary of his recorded work? -- Sam Francis
I'm pretty sure the "How much do you smoke a day?" quote goes:
"How much do you smoke a day, dude? Pack and a half? You little puss...Why don't you just put the fuckin' skirt on, and swish around for us? 'Pack and a half, I smoke a pack and a half..' I go through two lighters a day, dude".
At least, that's how I remember it appearing on the Dangerous album. It could be that the quote in the article is a variation from a different source.
Removed known for controversial political topics, such as the Gulf War and the LA riots, among other things. This is comedy, not a policial position. It should also be noted that these topics weren't controversial, and Bill Hicks wasn't known for them. Hicks was primarily known for controversial topics involving religion, sex, drugs, and music. So, not only was the comment irrelevant, it was wrong. You will not find any Bill Hicks fan or critic who will tell you that he was known for topics about the Gulf War and the LA riots. Yes, he commented on those topics, as did every other comedian of that era. His views on drugs and religion were and still are extremely controversial. -- Viriditas | Talk 06:22, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
"Hicks started drinking heavily and using drugs, leading to a more disjointed and angry, at times misanthropic, ranting style on stage."
-- user Are you sure his angry and disjointed style was caused by drugs and alcohol? Could very well be the anger that caused the drugs, not the other way around. I think the above sentence is speculation, not fact.
-- g0sp3L 14:07 21 Nov 2005 Anyone that says that Hicks' use of drugs caused anger or was caused by anger obviously has never heard the message of his comedy. He was angry because he had life figured out. He knew that war, politics, and ignorance are the bane of human existance. When he said "I've had some killer times on drugs", obviously that was meant to be funny, however his use of psychedelic drugs OBVIOUSLY shaped his personal philosophy and caused him to be more enlightened. When he went off on his rants about how "We are one consiousness" and whatnot, you'll notice that the crowd laughs and giggles, but these statements WERE NOT JOKES! It sounds like "druggy jibberish" to anyone who has never had a psychedelic experience, but to ANYONE who has had a spiritual awakening while under the influence of Mushrooms or LSD, it is EXACTLY what they discovered during that experience. Anyone who laughed at those statements has either never taken a psychedelic drug, and if they have they definitely didn't use them correctly. ("I took mushrooms once and went to AstroWorld and had a really bad time.")
And why is it that every time I post that he was an advocate for the use of psychedelic drugs, someone deletes it as if it is my opinion?
to Johnnyw, there is no debate to describe or take sides on. Bill Hicks not only advocated the use of psycho-active drugs, specifically LSD/Psilocybin, he believed the experience of using them should be mandatory. Any person who considers themselves a Bill Hicks fan would be aware of this fact, as Bill has stated it many times at many different points and places in his career and life. Dirk Diggler Jnr 13:34, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
No, Bill Hicks never thought Lysergic Acid and Psilocybin Mushrooms should be mandatory. Anyone and everyone who has been on them knows you have to have a clear conscious mind and know that you are doing them. He has said that marijuana should be mandatory though...
Oh yes thanks, got them mixed up with each other. I did mean to say marijuana being the mandatory one - I must have been high when I typed it up, however he did definitely strongly recommend all adults at least try psilocybin mushrooms [ [1]] once.. "Squeegee you're third eye!!!" was the heartfelt recommendation he often expressed regarding his endorsement of psilocybin mushrooms. Dirk Diggler Jnr
I didn't want to change it, as I haven't seen it, and someone who has may be able to clear it up, but should Counts Of The Netherworld be described as a sitcom? From my understanding, shit would have been a show that was broadly comedic, but much more of a discussion and stand-up show than anything resembling a sitcom, even in the broadest use of the term. NickBarlow 07:28, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Where might I obtain Counts Of The Netherworld? Anyone, please? Dirk Diggler Jnr 00:48, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Interesting thesis, I've heard it before and pretty well wrote it off as hokum. But look here, wikipedia, search anything, everyone can contribute, every sphere of human thought is to be chartered here and now. If he was wrong, he's already almost right.
The old picture doesn't seem to be working, so I moved the album cover from the Arizona Bay article. If anyone has a better image, feel free to use it.
I removed
since it is extremely POV. I also believe to remember, that Hicks also has made more sophisticated remarks regarding Denis Leary and the supposed or actual plagiarization.
Like it or not, Leary stole most of his act from Hicks. One only has to listen to Leary's recorded act back-to-back with Hicks. It's almost word-for-word. Let's not ignor the fact that when Hicks died, Leary suddenly stopped doing stand-up. Make no doubt about it, Leary is a good actor. However, his entire act was stolen from Hicks.- James.
Does this section really need to be included? I'd prefer to have the quotes from Bill about Catholicism included, so that people can make up their own mind whether it is controversial or not. The quote that springs to mind related to Waco when he says "if child molestation is an issue then why don't we have Bradly(?) tanks knocking down Catholic churches". My point isn't just me defending Bill Hicks, because if you look at the Rush Limbaugh article it simply lists his views and lets the readers decide whether they agree. I'd rather we outlined any of Bill's criticisms of Catholicism. -- Paul Tew 05:33, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
To the people who wish to have a critical section to Bill's wiki entry, either source and link to your 'facts' or expect them to be removed on every occasion. Thank you. Dirk Diggler Jnr
18:10, 26 January 2006 Jmperryuk (This is clearly NPOV as it neither condones or condemns Hicks' work. It merely presents what certain groups have thought, so is of interest. What Hick's 'humanity' was is open to question clearly.)
19:14, 26 January 2006 Dirk Diggler Jnr (Removed unsourced opinion/criticism for 3rd time. (to 'Jmperryuk' if you have to question Bill Hicks' humanity, you are ill-educated re this subject))
19:31, 26 January 2006 Jmperryuk (rv.edit from vandalism. Sorry, 'Dirk', are calling me 'ill-educated'? I've been given an offer to study History at Oxford, so please, keep this impersonal.)
Dear 'Jmperryuk', I am not remotely interested where you have been offered to study. However if you are so highly educated then it should be within your intellect to read and understand a simple two sentence statement. The easily understandable point I made was ; if you have to question Bill Hicks' humanity and the compassion behind his entire life's work, then you are ill-educated regarding this particular subject.. and therefore in a poor position to make edits regarding that same subject. As to your claim regarding my alleged vandalism, unsourced opinions are not tolerated at wikipedia. The criticism section you added is completely unsourced, therefore others wiki-users who work on this page will not tolerate it's presence. Nor will I. If you wish it to remain, I suggest you spend time in locating sources for this criticism that you can provide links to for others to verify. Thank you. Dirk Diggler Jnr
Dirk - I think you need to step away from the keyboard. Please bear in mind the 3 revert rule. The removal of sections is rarely the best way forward. Tagging a section as being possible POV or needing sources would be more productive. Mostly everything in the critism section offered by Jumperryuk is so self evident that it doesn't need sourcing in my opinion but here goes - I'll give a source for everything I can in that paragraph that could be contended. Firstly, does he rant? He released a works entitled "Rant in E minor" and "Relentless" and frequently stopped mid rant on stage with lines like "Sorry, wrong meeting" or "I am available for children's parties" - So yes he ranted and he considered himself to be ranting. Vitiriolic? Absolutely, he wouldnt have wanted to be anything less when speaking on a subject held dear to him. Discriminatory? Certainly so against certain religious types and the ill-educated -"Ever notice how those people that beieve in creationism look really un-evolved?" - "Good, we lost another idiot, I'll be another car length up in traffic tomorrow." Was he criticised in the media? Well the "Totally Bill Hicks" DVD/Video has interviews with such notable people as Jay Leno. Hicks had to be pulled because of network pressure, so yes there were media criticisms. I have no sources for social, religious and ethic groups criticising him but it should be noted that even his parents didn't know why "he had to say such things."- Again sourced from interview on Totally Bill Hicks. Condoned smoking and drug use? Erm too many sources for those to even be considered POV. "Every cigarette looks like it was rolled by Jesus and moistened shut on Claudia Shiffer's pussy" and "I had some killer fucking times on drugs" spring to mind. Anti-religeous and anti catholicism - To my mind he never singled out catholicism but he was obviously vehemently anti-christianity - "As long as we are talking shelf life here, don't bring up Jesus to me" "Got one word for ya, dinosaurs" and "God is fucking with you" spring to mind. And did he make jest of sensitive issues such as health conditions and death? Too right he did. "I'm Jim Fixx and I'm dead now, and I don't know what the fuck killed me" and "Put em in the movies" come to mind. These topics disgust certain people and many see it as cruel. If you don't think so show a video of it to someone who has just lost someone close and see how they react to it. Of course, many people do not realise that while performing these routines towards the end of his career Hick's himself knew he had incurable cancer and continued with these parts in his act. I'm going to put the section back in - less the social religious and ethic groups till that can be sourced. Tag it if you want so it can be improved but removal really wont help. Incidentally I see no questioning of Bill's humanity here - merely a statement that he wasn't everyone's cup of tea. --
LiamE
20:49, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Fine, have fun with this page and rest of wiki. I doubt I'll contribute again. Dirk Diggler Jnr
Also, for the record the kind of people who find Bill Hicks' philosophies and comedy as "disgusting.." or "interpret it as cruel or intolerant" are the same kind of people who found U.K.'s Chris Morris also disgusting, cruel and intolerant and the same kind of people who would believe in Creationism. I.E. Imbeciles. Dirk Diggler Jnr
I'm glad a compromise has finally been found on this issue. I thank LiamE for his continual help in resolving this part of the article. All Dirk Diggler Jnr I recently discovered has done is arrogantly removed the material and personally attacked me on the 'Talk' section. Just to set the record straight, I am not a redneck, Dirk, far from it. Neither do I find myself to be a target of his humour in any case (apart, perhaps, from moderate Christianity). Neither am I a believer of Creationism/intelligent design etc. My interest in a Criticism section in the first place was purely academic. As a constructive point, I do suggest that you try in future to not let your POV cloud your judgement, and participate with us in the re-editing rather than critcise people personally (by the way, I had never before encountered 're' being used as assumedly 'regarding'). I think you should reassess your maturity in cooperating with others on Wikipedia. Thank you to all who helped in positively contributing to this article. -- Jmperryuk 16:35, 27 January 2006 (GMT)
I would like to ask everyone NOT to start a flame war at this talk page. If cannot agree on the policy by discussing the issue, we should have a vote. Agreed or is there still the possibility of reaching a compromise? -- Johnnyw 00:34, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
"That this house notes with sadness the 10th anniversary of the death of Bill Hicks, on February 26th 1994, at the age of 33; recalls his assertion that his words would be a bullet in the heart of consumerism, capitalism and the American Dream; and mourns the passing of one of the few people who may be mentioned as being worthy of inclusion with Lenny Bruce in any list of unflinching and painfully honest political philosophers." - Stephen Pound MP; Parliamentary House of Commons, U.K.
sources for quote ;
http://www.marcusshelton.com/links.html
http://armour.inspiracy.com/2004_02_22_armoury.html
http://www.commonground.ca/iss/0504165/cg165_Hicks.shtml
[dirk diggler jnr]
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Bill Hicks/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
The article looks, in my opinion, to be good. It has not yet gone through good article nomination process.
Tom
13:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I think this page is really solid. Deserves some kind of kudo. -- 217.40.26.169 01:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC) |
Last edited at 00:59, 1 May 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 08:51, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Should we include a listed discography at the end, like a summary of his recorded work? -- Sam Francis
I'm pretty sure the "How much do you smoke a day?" quote goes:
"How much do you smoke a day, dude? Pack and a half? You little puss...Why don't you just put the fuckin' skirt on, and swish around for us? 'Pack and a half, I smoke a pack and a half..' I go through two lighters a day, dude".
At least, that's how I remember it appearing on the Dangerous album. It could be that the quote in the article is a variation from a different source.
Removed known for controversial political topics, such as the Gulf War and the LA riots, among other things. This is comedy, not a policial position. It should also be noted that these topics weren't controversial, and Bill Hicks wasn't known for them. Hicks was primarily known for controversial topics involving religion, sex, drugs, and music. So, not only was the comment irrelevant, it was wrong. You will not find any Bill Hicks fan or critic who will tell you that he was known for topics about the Gulf War and the LA riots. Yes, he commented on those topics, as did every other comedian of that era. His views on drugs and religion were and still are extremely controversial. -- Viriditas | Talk 06:22, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
"Hicks started drinking heavily and using drugs, leading to a more disjointed and angry, at times misanthropic, ranting style on stage."
-- user Are you sure his angry and disjointed style was caused by drugs and alcohol? Could very well be the anger that caused the drugs, not the other way around. I think the above sentence is speculation, not fact.
-- g0sp3L 14:07 21 Nov 2005 Anyone that says that Hicks' use of drugs caused anger or was caused by anger obviously has never heard the message of his comedy. He was angry because he had life figured out. He knew that war, politics, and ignorance are the bane of human existance. When he said "I've had some killer times on drugs", obviously that was meant to be funny, however his use of psychedelic drugs OBVIOUSLY shaped his personal philosophy and caused him to be more enlightened. When he went off on his rants about how "We are one consiousness" and whatnot, you'll notice that the crowd laughs and giggles, but these statements WERE NOT JOKES! It sounds like "druggy jibberish" to anyone who has never had a psychedelic experience, but to ANYONE who has had a spiritual awakening while under the influence of Mushrooms or LSD, it is EXACTLY what they discovered during that experience. Anyone who laughed at those statements has either never taken a psychedelic drug, and if they have they definitely didn't use them correctly. ("I took mushrooms once and went to AstroWorld and had a really bad time.")
And why is it that every time I post that he was an advocate for the use of psychedelic drugs, someone deletes it as if it is my opinion?
to Johnnyw, there is no debate to describe or take sides on. Bill Hicks not only advocated the use of psycho-active drugs, specifically LSD/Psilocybin, he believed the experience of using them should be mandatory. Any person who considers themselves a Bill Hicks fan would be aware of this fact, as Bill has stated it many times at many different points and places in his career and life. Dirk Diggler Jnr 13:34, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
No, Bill Hicks never thought Lysergic Acid and Psilocybin Mushrooms should be mandatory. Anyone and everyone who has been on them knows you have to have a clear conscious mind and know that you are doing them. He has said that marijuana should be mandatory though...
Oh yes thanks, got them mixed up with each other. I did mean to say marijuana being the mandatory one - I must have been high when I typed it up, however he did definitely strongly recommend all adults at least try psilocybin mushrooms [ [1]] once.. "Squeegee you're third eye!!!" was the heartfelt recommendation he often expressed regarding his endorsement of psilocybin mushrooms. Dirk Diggler Jnr
I didn't want to change it, as I haven't seen it, and someone who has may be able to clear it up, but should Counts Of The Netherworld be described as a sitcom? From my understanding, shit would have been a show that was broadly comedic, but much more of a discussion and stand-up show than anything resembling a sitcom, even in the broadest use of the term. NickBarlow 07:28, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Where might I obtain Counts Of The Netherworld? Anyone, please? Dirk Diggler Jnr 00:48, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Interesting thesis, I've heard it before and pretty well wrote it off as hokum. But look here, wikipedia, search anything, everyone can contribute, every sphere of human thought is to be chartered here and now. If he was wrong, he's already almost right.
The old picture doesn't seem to be working, so I moved the album cover from the Arizona Bay article. If anyone has a better image, feel free to use it.
I removed
since it is extremely POV. I also believe to remember, that Hicks also has made more sophisticated remarks regarding Denis Leary and the supposed or actual plagiarization.
Like it or not, Leary stole most of his act from Hicks. One only has to listen to Leary's recorded act back-to-back with Hicks. It's almost word-for-word. Let's not ignor the fact that when Hicks died, Leary suddenly stopped doing stand-up. Make no doubt about it, Leary is a good actor. However, his entire act was stolen from Hicks.- James.
Does this section really need to be included? I'd prefer to have the quotes from Bill about Catholicism included, so that people can make up their own mind whether it is controversial or not. The quote that springs to mind related to Waco when he says "if child molestation is an issue then why don't we have Bradly(?) tanks knocking down Catholic churches". My point isn't just me defending Bill Hicks, because if you look at the Rush Limbaugh article it simply lists his views and lets the readers decide whether they agree. I'd rather we outlined any of Bill's criticisms of Catholicism. -- Paul Tew 05:33, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
To the people who wish to have a critical section to Bill's wiki entry, either source and link to your 'facts' or expect them to be removed on every occasion. Thank you. Dirk Diggler Jnr
18:10, 26 January 2006 Jmperryuk (This is clearly NPOV as it neither condones or condemns Hicks' work. It merely presents what certain groups have thought, so is of interest. What Hick's 'humanity' was is open to question clearly.)
19:14, 26 January 2006 Dirk Diggler Jnr (Removed unsourced opinion/criticism for 3rd time. (to 'Jmperryuk' if you have to question Bill Hicks' humanity, you are ill-educated re this subject))
19:31, 26 January 2006 Jmperryuk (rv.edit from vandalism. Sorry, 'Dirk', are calling me 'ill-educated'? I've been given an offer to study History at Oxford, so please, keep this impersonal.)
Dear 'Jmperryuk', I am not remotely interested where you have been offered to study. However if you are so highly educated then it should be within your intellect to read and understand a simple two sentence statement. The easily understandable point I made was ; if you have to question Bill Hicks' humanity and the compassion behind his entire life's work, then you are ill-educated regarding this particular subject.. and therefore in a poor position to make edits regarding that same subject. As to your claim regarding my alleged vandalism, unsourced opinions are not tolerated at wikipedia. The criticism section you added is completely unsourced, therefore others wiki-users who work on this page will not tolerate it's presence. Nor will I. If you wish it to remain, I suggest you spend time in locating sources for this criticism that you can provide links to for others to verify. Thank you. Dirk Diggler Jnr
Dirk - I think you need to step away from the keyboard. Please bear in mind the 3 revert rule. The removal of sections is rarely the best way forward. Tagging a section as being possible POV or needing sources would be more productive. Mostly everything in the critism section offered by Jumperryuk is so self evident that it doesn't need sourcing in my opinion but here goes - I'll give a source for everything I can in that paragraph that could be contended. Firstly, does he rant? He released a works entitled "Rant in E minor" and "Relentless" and frequently stopped mid rant on stage with lines like "Sorry, wrong meeting" or "I am available for children's parties" - So yes he ranted and he considered himself to be ranting. Vitiriolic? Absolutely, he wouldnt have wanted to be anything less when speaking on a subject held dear to him. Discriminatory? Certainly so against certain religious types and the ill-educated -"Ever notice how those people that beieve in creationism look really un-evolved?" - "Good, we lost another idiot, I'll be another car length up in traffic tomorrow." Was he criticised in the media? Well the "Totally Bill Hicks" DVD/Video has interviews with such notable people as Jay Leno. Hicks had to be pulled because of network pressure, so yes there were media criticisms. I have no sources for social, religious and ethic groups criticising him but it should be noted that even his parents didn't know why "he had to say such things."- Again sourced from interview on Totally Bill Hicks. Condoned smoking and drug use? Erm too many sources for those to even be considered POV. "Every cigarette looks like it was rolled by Jesus and moistened shut on Claudia Shiffer's pussy" and "I had some killer fucking times on drugs" spring to mind. Anti-religeous and anti catholicism - To my mind he never singled out catholicism but he was obviously vehemently anti-christianity - "As long as we are talking shelf life here, don't bring up Jesus to me" "Got one word for ya, dinosaurs" and "God is fucking with you" spring to mind. And did he make jest of sensitive issues such as health conditions and death? Too right he did. "I'm Jim Fixx and I'm dead now, and I don't know what the fuck killed me" and "Put em in the movies" come to mind. These topics disgust certain people and many see it as cruel. If you don't think so show a video of it to someone who has just lost someone close and see how they react to it. Of course, many people do not realise that while performing these routines towards the end of his career Hick's himself knew he had incurable cancer and continued with these parts in his act. I'm going to put the section back in - less the social religious and ethic groups till that can be sourced. Tag it if you want so it can be improved but removal really wont help. Incidentally I see no questioning of Bill's humanity here - merely a statement that he wasn't everyone's cup of tea. --
LiamE
20:49, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Fine, have fun with this page and rest of wiki. I doubt I'll contribute again. Dirk Diggler Jnr
Also, for the record the kind of people who find Bill Hicks' philosophies and comedy as "disgusting.." or "interpret it as cruel or intolerant" are the same kind of people who found U.K.'s Chris Morris also disgusting, cruel and intolerant and the same kind of people who would believe in Creationism. I.E. Imbeciles. Dirk Diggler Jnr
I'm glad a compromise has finally been found on this issue. I thank LiamE for his continual help in resolving this part of the article. All Dirk Diggler Jnr I recently discovered has done is arrogantly removed the material and personally attacked me on the 'Talk' section. Just to set the record straight, I am not a redneck, Dirk, far from it. Neither do I find myself to be a target of his humour in any case (apart, perhaps, from moderate Christianity). Neither am I a believer of Creationism/intelligent design etc. My interest in a Criticism section in the first place was purely academic. As a constructive point, I do suggest that you try in future to not let your POV cloud your judgement, and participate with us in the re-editing rather than critcise people personally (by the way, I had never before encountered 're' being used as assumedly 'regarding'). I think you should reassess your maturity in cooperating with others on Wikipedia. Thank you to all who helped in positively contributing to this article. -- Jmperryuk 16:35, 27 January 2006 (GMT)
I would like to ask everyone NOT to start a flame war at this talk page. If cannot agree on the policy by discussing the issue, we should have a vote. Agreed or is there still the possibility of reaching a compromise? -- Johnnyw 00:34, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
"That this house notes with sadness the 10th anniversary of the death of Bill Hicks, on February 26th 1994, at the age of 33; recalls his assertion that his words would be a bullet in the heart of consumerism, capitalism and the American Dream; and mourns the passing of one of the few people who may be mentioned as being worthy of inclusion with Lenny Bruce in any list of unflinching and painfully honest political philosophers." - Stephen Pound MP; Parliamentary House of Commons, U.K.
sources for quote ;
http://www.marcusshelton.com/links.html
http://armour.inspiracy.com/2004_02_22_armoury.html
http://www.commonground.ca/iss/0504165/cg165_Hicks.shtml
[dirk diggler jnr]
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Bill Hicks/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
The article looks, in my opinion, to be good. It has not yet gone through good article nomination process.
Tom
13:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I think this page is really solid. Deserves some kind of kudo. -- 217.40.26.169 01:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC) |
Last edited at 00:59, 1 May 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 08:51, 19 April 2016 (UTC)