Could Phil Collins outlive Trey Parker and Matt Stone?

I suppose you all know what I'm talking about. And sorry if it has already been posted. This is, of course, about the recent study on Oscar winner life expectancies, and of course, Trey and Matt losing to Phil Collins. Speaking of which, does anyone have a copy of the Entertainment Weekly in which Trey and Matt gripe about losing to Phil Collins, and if so, can they print the text of that? I'd appreciate it.

Vot iss ziss? Sounds vaguely amusing.

PZB

Speaking as someone who writes a little music himself, just hearing that John Corigliano won the Oscar or something for some really shitty music, there is the opposite factor, the "He sucks, my music is better than his crap, that 'award' is a badge of mediocrity" feeling.

Charles Ives wrote his Third Symphony around 1904, revised it a bit in 1910 (when Gustav Mahler walked off with a professionally-copied copy), gave his own final score to a "professional" conductor (Walter Damrosch, a real mediocrity if there ever was one), and didn't get it played ntil 1947 when he was 73 years old. It won the Pulitzer. Ives gave the money to they guys who had made the performance possible (they edited it anew from his full pencil score) -- he said "Prizes are for boys, I'm a grown-up." (He also told the guy he sent the money to, "Well, you got me into this mess, youtake this money!" Or something like that.)

No matter who won that silly prize, "Blame Canada!" blew Collins's little wimpy fag-music right out of the water like a duck!

Bravo! But, for us living on the "other side of the pond", would someone mind filling me/us in on A) The recent study?? Haven't seen or heard of it B) Would love to see the copy of the Entertainment Weekly article - if someone could post it, that would be tits!

Ciao tutti-

Roberto

-- ---------

"mganai" wrote in message news:[email]...