23 Comments

  1. Well, it’s at the heart of a lot of things, I guess…the environmental crisis, political instability, the wealth gap, ill-advised wars, salad dressing, and on and on. I’m not sure why that’s funny though.

    He also seems to be contradicting himself here. If the next song is about oil, that suggests the previous one wasn’t, ergo not everything is about oil. Pedantic, ok, but still.

  2. Well, I actually laughed.

    That doesn’t mean it makes sense; just that I laughed.

    Someone a few days ago said that Cornered is always about taking common phrases and either taking them literally or in contexts they don’t fit. So… P.C. quasi-hippy when talking about U.S. foreign policy or business practice or government deregulation or what have you often says “It’s all about oil”

    So what’s the next song about? Oil. Isn’t everything?

  3. Also there’s plastics… lot of that about now. Not to mention the likely energy-sauce used to drive his amps and speakers. Oil-based pesticides. Olive oil, essential oils. Baby oil. Metaphorical oils for lubricating social intercourse, especially as a euphemism for alcohol, as in well-oiled. Oi’ll be damned. Oily hair. Oil’s everywhere!

    There is at least one list of oil and gas songs:
    http://oilandgasmanpowerprovider.blogspot.com/2015/11/oil-and-gas-songs.html

  4. “He also seems to be contradicting himself here. If the next song is about oil, that suggests the previous one wasn’t”

    Uh…. No, it doesn’t.

  5. As the song says, ‘He’s an old hippie . . . ‘ and I assume the audience is, too, but he’s still dressing the part.

  6. @ Andréa – “…he’s still dressing the part…
    I really liked the final touch of putting him in sandals(*), but unfortunately the colorist didn’t notice that the straps should be brown.
    P.S. (*) – Birkenstocks are occasionally referred to as “Jesuslatschen” in German (“Jesus’ slippers”).

  7. They kind look like saddle shoes without the saddles. Didn’t realize they were sandals. I’m surprised they weren’t flipflops!

  8. @Brian in STL – “What kind of oil goes in energy sauce?” – olive, sesame, rapeseed… something like that.

    (For the avoidance of doubt, the misspelling was deliberate: humour in a jocular vein and all that).

  9. @ Andréa – I had considered flipflops, but on second thought both flipflops and sandals would leave open toes, so maybe white is the right color, and he’s wearing terrycloth sauna slippers.

  10. You guys are fixated on his footwear while I’m looking at that strange microphone stand.

  11. “Uh…. No, it doesn’t.”

    It doesn’t? I said ‘suggests’, right? If it doesn’t, what has he done then? “This next song is about oil. Just like the last one. And the one before that. And the one before that. And, well, all of them.” And if every song was about oil, why would he bother mentioning that the next song is about oil? Wouldn’t they have worked it out by then?

  12. Stan, your argument fails if this is his second song. (The first song is a little early for the revelation.)

  13. I agree with Stan. Even if this is his second song, it would be strange to say “the next song is about oil,” rather than “the next song is also about oil.” Sure, it’s possible for him to say it even if both songs are about oil, similarly to in Urban Variable’s joke. But it would be odd.

  14. You mean something like, “Well folks, that first song was about oil. This next song is about oil.” If it was his second oil song, I’d think he’d have added a ‘too’ at the very least. I don’t know. I still think the way that caption is phrased suggests that this is his first oil song of the evening. YMMV, I guess.

  15. “This next song is about Oil. But then again, isn’t everything? Which means I guess the first song was too. But anyway, the next song is about oil”

    isn’t really a contradiction.

    You are correct “my next song is” *suggests* the first song wasn’t. But then “but isn’t everything” suggests that the first song may not nominally be, but can under further analysis and still without contradiction actually be.

  16. “You are correct “my next song is” *suggests* the first song wasn’t. But then “but isn’t everything” suggests that the first song may not nominally be, but can under further analysis and still without contradiction actually be.”

    All true, but he doesn’t seem to be suggesting that by the actual words he uses, which was my point at the start that elicited the definitive and condescending retort, “Uh…No it doesn’t”. You may well be correct, and the more thought you put into it, the more interpretations you can come up with I’m sure. However, I think Occam’s Razor applies here, and if you avoid needless multiplication, therein lies the contradiction.

Leave a Reply

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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