From: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org (ecto-digest) To: ecto-digest@smoe.org Subject: ecto-digest V4 #438 Reply-To: ecto@smoe.org Sender: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk ecto-digest Wednesday, December 16 1998 Volume 04 : Number 438 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: So, how do we make Happy famous? [jfrancis@villagenet.com] Rearmament (Re: A new confession: I was wrong about Happy! ["Xenu's Sist] Re: So, how do we make Happy famous? ["Jeffrey C. Burka" ] Re: shooting stardom [desmond in a tutu ] i'll shut up now [desmond in a tutu ] Re: More about 'The Keep', more about Happy [desmond in a tutu Happy [desmond in a tutu ] Re: A new confession: I was wrong about Happy! ["Jeffrey C. Burka" ] Re: So, how do we make Happy famous? ["Xenu's Sister" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 22:58:33 -0500 From: jfrancis@villagenet.com Subject: Re: So, how do we make Happy famous? >1. Send her to the UK for a working holiday - it worked for Tori and they >really do adopt talent quickly. Already they're acting like Australia's >Paradise Motel are Brits born and raised, and are giving them many a >four-star rating to prove it. And who do The Paradise Motel sound remarkably >like? >2. Get her in a big shiny studio with lots of things to play with, and >perhaps a low-but-rapidly-rising profile studio partner. 3. Wear tight fitting, extremely short, low-cut outfits. Bend over often and jiggle alot. Say "kootchie, kootchie" following every sentence. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 21:55:07 -0600 From: "Xenu's Sister" Subject: Rearmament (Re: A new confession: I was wrong about Happy! At 04:40 PM 12/14/98 -0500, Kevin Pease wrote: > Hi all... on the (sort of) same topic... > > I'm curious how you all feel Rearmament compares to The Keep... I bought >& listened to MWABT, and it just didn't do much for me... then I bought & >listened to Rearmament, which was *somewhat* better, but still didn't >really grab me. After that, I figured I just wasn't ever going to "get" >Happy's music. But, with all the rave reviews The Keep is getting the past >couple days, I'm wondering if maybe it would be worth picking that one up >for a listen. I wasn't completely turned off by MWABT or Rearmament, they >both sort of fell into my "take it or leave it" category - I'll listen to >them now and then, but I don't think they're going to be in heavy rotation >for me anytime in the near future... although, I did like Rearmament a >little bit more than MWABT. > > So, in the hopes that maybe I just didn't get the right introduction to >Happy (it's happened with other artists, so it's entirely possible it >happened again), any thoughts you all have on the relative merits of The >Keep vs. Rearmament are more than welcome. :) Hi Kevin, I can only think it's the electronics that's putting you off and in that case, I'd highly recommend The Keep, since it is acoustic. Now, purists would scream, since after all there are electric guitars and bass used on the songs, but no drums-well, except for acoustic percussion on "Collective Heart" but it's just such a "soft" album, very soothing. Happy's acoustic guitar and Kevin Bartlett's spacy electric guitar and Carl Adami's bass will have you singing their praises too, I'd bet. Regarding Rearmament, I agree with Tim about the joys of this album. The Casio-ish electronics on some songs may be off-putting at first, but try giving the songs some more chances. There might be songs that you'll never be able to handle (I'm with Tim on this one, Box H.A.P. still grates me the wrong way, and it's only because of the electronics because I love the vocals and lyrics) but others may grow on you and after a while you may not even notice the electronics. I tend to grant Happy a whole bunch of leeway, since these songs were Happy's experiments with a synth. Who knew (Happy sure didn't at the time) that not only would these songs later get put on an actual album, that that album that would one day be re-released on CD, an album that could be ordered, bought, listened to and loved by people halfway around the world, but also that that album would be listened to and critiqued over a decade later? I think when you (not a specific "you" but a general you) listen to the 1st 3 especially knowing that Happy had *no idea* that these songs as recorded would be gathered on to actual albums, then it becomes (for me) less of a "Oh, let's see, this album sounds like this and that album sounds like that, and there are these problems here and those problems there" than a "My god this woman is brilliant and listening to these songs is like a special glimpse into Happy's soul and hearing her early experiments in finding her way, and peeking at a slice of her life that rarely, rarely gets to be seen by fans of other artists." Something like that, anyway. Works for me! I cherish them. But of course, I'm so biased it's ridiculous, because I love this album *so* much and have listened to it hundreds (maybe thousands, who keeps track?) of times over the years. It's very hard for me to hear it the way somone in 1998 might hear it, when electronics are so sophisticated. But then, that's the problem for you with MWABT too, so I really think you should try The Keep, and if you like it and want to try more, go for RhodeSongs, I & II, then maybe Warpaint. Vickie ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 23:25:27 -0500 From: "Jeffrey C. Burka" Subject: Re: So, how do we make Happy famous? jfrancis sez : > 3. Wear tight fitting, extremely short, low-cut outfits. > Bend over often and jiggle alot. > Say "kootchie, kootchie" following every sentence. "Oh Albany, My Leotard"? Oy. jeff (wondering how many people out there are actually obsessed enough with a certain someone to understand this...) - -- |Jeffrey C. Burka|||||http://www.cqi.com/~jburka|||||"I've got time to rest / | ||||||||||||||| And I've got a clear, able mind that sees my life going fine. | ||| 'Cause everything I need is right here in my hands..." --Melissa Ferrick | ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 23:34:07 -0500 From: desmond in a tutu Subject: Re: shooting stardom i wrote: >much as it sucks and much as i'd like to be proven wrong, i don't think >happy is ever going to be well-known or even recognized outside the >slowly-widening circle of ectophiles (knowing and unknowing) and musicians >she's worked worked with. Dirk responded: >No-one ever knows who will enter the top of the music charts and who not. absolutely true, but i can still choose to be pessimistic about the possibility. however, in the freak chance that one way or another happy and the charts align, i can't imagine that the harmony would last more than a song or two. i don't recall laurie anderson having a follow-up to "o superman".... and carol said: >I would like to know your reasons for believing this. simple: i don't think the music that happy creates, much as i like it, has what it takes to be a commercial success in the mainsteam market (i am talking about the mainstream, mind you). look at what fills the charts: sappy power ballads, vapid dance tunes, the oddball country thang. look at happy's music. i see a big disparity there and i don't expect the gulf to be bridged that easily. the mainstream has budged closer to the ecto side, but it hasn't gone very far, lilith fair non-withstanding. jewel, sarah mclachlan and natalie merchant (just to pick a few) aren't exactly challenging stuff. happy, on the other hand, is. on the other side of the coin, happy hasn't really moved to make her music any more accessible. _many worlds_ is lush, but not really pop enough in the, well, pop sense to be chart material. _building the colossus_ is, by far, happy's pop record and that's behind her now. >Aural G. didn't have the resources to promote her properly in the very >competitive music markets we've got out there. I think Samson can and >will do very good things for Happy as they develop their own "name >brand" for their label. i don't think promotion is the big unknown in the equation. you can promote some things all you want but they still won't become popular. promotion will increase the fold by including those who are receptive to this sort of thing, but you still have to have material which is compatible with the mainstream for it a breakthrough. >It happened with Tori (as different from "the pack" as she can be), tori has one big advantage: a *huge* emotional connection with her fans. she speaks to her fans, unlocks their feelings and forms a two-way bond with them. i don't think happy has that going for her. >it happened with Bjork (a total oddball...how do we account for *her* >success?), i think tim hit it on the head: the sugarcubes paved the way, but i'd say that bjork tapped into the dance scene which greatly assisted her stardom. (actually, the success of the sugarcubes more puzzling than bjork's, but i suppose that was mostly a, at the time, college radio thing -- at least here in the united states). >it happened with Fiona Apple (who has trouble even singing on key). i am at a total loss to explain this. ;) ;) ;) please, don't misunderstand me! i'm not saying that we shouldn't hope and wish for happy's success, begrudge her the success she has had (as some cult artist fans sometimes do) or work to help out where we can. far from it! i'm just saying that i, personally, don't expect it. i don't feel like the above is very convinicing, so let me try to put this another way. for me, a new happyfan is worth *so* much more than a top ten hit. everyone who has happyvangelized knows the joy of seeing (or reading about) music that is dear to you touch someone else in a similar way. *that's* what this is all about. eponine's epiphany is what this is all about. yeah, it doesn't pay the rent (that's why compact discs cost $15 instead of $5! ;) ), but getting caught up in the charts doesn't feed the heart either. woj ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 23:42:05 -0500 From: desmond in a tutu Subject: i'll shut up now positivity tomorrow! honest! off to bed, woj ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 23:40:16 -0500 From: desmond in a tutu Subject: Re: More about 'The Keep', more about Happy also sprach Eponine: >If I could chime in regarding the discussion of whether Happy could >really "break" in a bigger way, I absolutely know that she could. I >mean, look at me: I took one listen to 'The Keep' and became an >instant, ardent, devoted, slave - er, I mean, fan. The people that I >used to be in band with years ago, I *KNOW* - I swear it on my >grandmother's grave - would also become instant fans if they heard 'The >Keep'. i don't think this is inconsistent with what i am saying. i just believe the segment of the population who would be receptive to happymusic, if exposed, isn't that large. >I mean, who would >have thought that Loreena McKennit, 39 years old and a well-kept secret >with the oft-cited "small but devoted cult following", would suddenly >"break" as she did last year with 'The Book of Secrets'? one word: riverdance. (and you thought you were cynical?) mind you, i'd still love to be proven wrong! go hapster! woj ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 23:53:15 -0500 From: desmond in a tutu Subject: Re: Bjork's success --> Happy i lied. one last thing. also sprach Tim: >3. Bjork was broken in the UK first, a place where success can be more >closely linked to critical acclaim than in the US where it hardly matters. as with success, so with failure. the critics in britain are fickle and their benevolent faces shine for but a short time.... >The Sugarcubes had a lot to do with it - Birthday was, is and always will be >one of the most perfect guitar-pop songs ever. ?!?!? guitar-pop? "birthday"? 'splain yourself! "perfect guitar-pop" is shiny, shimmery and in 4/4. >Everyone was terribly disappointed to find Einar Orn ranting all over The >Sugarcubes' albums, i, for one, wasn't. einar rules! the world needs more mind-fucks like einar. i'm proud to have shared a urinal with him. >Thus, when Debut came out, not only did they have an album that was >superior to all of Bjork's former band's work, superior to the latter 'cubes records, perhaps, i don't think any of bjork's solo records have come close to _life's too good_. or even the pre-cubes bads like kukl and i-forget-the-other-one. >but was also free of annoying male vocals, :P woj, feeling snarky ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 23:56:28 -0500 From: "Jeffrey C. Burka" Subject: Re: A new confession: I was wrong about Happy! Paul Blair sez: > Abso-fargin-lutely. "Be Careful What you Say" also has that Happy > Rhodes-end-of-album feel to it, though I'm sure I'll be reminded that it > wasn't originally the last track on *Rearmament.* I'm usually one of the ones with that reminder; I still get thrown hearing the bonus tracks (which I guess just goes to show often I listened to the 1st4 on tape before I got the CDs). But the truth is, the only album on which I really feel it's a problem is _Ecto_. "To Be E. Mortal" is just so utterly brilliant (I never would have guessed that 8 minutes of so much repetition could be as utterly spellbinding as *those* 8 are!), and such the perfect closer to that album (musically, thematically, emotionally), that to then have the upbeat "Look for the Child" and "When the Rain Came Down" pop in and destroy my reverie can be just a bit too much. Which is unfortunate, because WtRCD is just spellbinding, and I don't hear it often enough. jeff np: _Rearmament_. Ahhhhhh. "For we believe in what we do..." - -- |Jeffrey C. Burka|||||http://www.cqi.com/~jburka|||||"I've got time to rest / | ||||||||||||||| And I've got a clear, able mind that sees my life going fine. | ||| 'Cause everything I need is right here in my hands..." --Melissa Ferrick | ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 23:46:22 -0600 From: Mark Lowry Subject: Keep it up Um, Just a brief message in the midst this great thread about the Keep, MWABT, Rearmament, success, etc. It all reminded me that I want to get a copy of The Keep for a friend. Have been unsuccessful finding it here. Anyone have one to sell? Know where to get it? I know where to find some copies of I & II here ... maybe a trade? Mark n.p. nothing. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 00:02:14 -0600 From: "Xenu's Sister" Subject: Re: So, how do we make Happy famous? At 11:25 PM 12/15/98 -0500, Jeffrey C. Burka wrote: >"Oh Albany, My Leotard"? > >Oy. > >jeff >(wondering how many people out there are actually obsessed enough with >a certain someone to understand this...) I got it, I got it! It's a Kate Bush reference! What do I win? Vickie ------------------------------ End of ecto-digest V4 #438 **************************