From: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org (ecto-digest) To: ecto-digest@smoe.org Subject: ecto-digest V6 #264 Reply-To: ecto@smoe.org Sender: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk ecto-digest Monday, September 11 2000 Volume 06 : Number 264 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Metallica (was Re: madonna) [tefinn@altavista.net] Madonna, again [kerrywhite@webtv.net (kerry white)] Re: madonna [surdamon ] Re: madonna [surdamon ] Re: madonna [root ] Re: madonna (it's a matter of opinion) [RedWoodenBeads@aol.com] Re: madonna (it's a matter of opinion) ["Suzanna Otting" ] Re: madonna [Ted ] Re: madonna [RedWoodenBeads@aol.com] Re: is she a singer? [RedWoodenBeads@aol.com] Re: We are Madonna, for we are many...(Re: madonna) ["Scott S. Zimmerman"] Re: We are Madonna, for we are many...(Re: madonna) [Joseph Zitt ] Kate Bush [RedWoodenBeads@aol.com] Re: Kate Bush [Joseph Zitt ] Re: Kate Bush ["Rosana L. de Oliveira" ] Re: Kate Bush [Jeffrey Burka ] Re: madonna [Jeffrey Burka ] Re: madonna(well, not really) [Ted ] Correction!(re:madonna) [Ted ] Re: Correction!(re:madonna) [Ted ] Re: madonna(well, not really) [Joseph Zitt ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 02:18:19 -0400 (EDT) From: tefinn@altavista.net Subject: Metallica (was Re: madonna) Now that Madonna has been thoroughly covered (or uncovered as the case may be), maybe we can extoll the virtues of some real artists. I nominate METALLICA for discussion! Do I have a second! :) Tom - ---------------------------------------------------------------- Get your free email from AltaVista at http://altavista.iname.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 01:20:25 -0500 (CDT) From: kerrywhite@webtv.net (kerry white) Subject: Madonna, again Hi, I never cared for Madonna, just not my cuppa'. I have simply stayed away from music I don't care for, this includes Madonna. The multiple posts are much too much Madonna in my ecto reading list. You like or you don't like. Both are honest opinions. Can we stop belaboring it? Could those folks who just like to argue do so privately? bye, KrW I'm Peter Pan! I'm perpetually young!! OW!! What's wrong with my back? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 03:07:27 -0400 From: surdamon Subject: Re: madonna RedWoodenBeads@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 9/8/00 10:45:36 PM Pacific Daylight Time, glenn@furia.com > writes: > > << > And in the Madonna tradition, it's as bland, uninnovative and useless to > the > > artistic world as ever! =) > > Smug bullshit. _Ray of Light_ is about as Ecto as albums come. >> > > Well, I tend to differ in my views on Madonna. I don't find anything artistic > in Madonna's music, it's just over-produced, over-comercialized nonsuch, but > that's just my opinion. I don't see her as an artist at all in the way she > sees herself. When Natalie Merchant writes about a German immigrant working > in a 1880's furtnitue shop, or when Mary Margaret O'Hara croons gracefully > over an acoustic bass "you will be loved again" or when Billie Holiday weaves > tales of 1940's black New York, that's art to me. When Madonna makes a video > where she rubs her ass against Mike Myers, that's comercial bullshit. Again, > all my own opinion. But someone else who shares my opinion is Stephen Patrick > Morrisey of The Smiths (a band which I would say has contributed brilliance > to the art world all over the place) > > "I can't see Madonna as being of any importance. She's little more that > comercialized prostitution". > > -Morrisey oddly enough, that's pretty much how i feel about morrissey- extremely overrated and unimportant. housemartins did a much better job in every aspect. - -- "We have a budget surplus but a deficit in values"- George W. Bush, ignoring the lowest crime rates and the greatest focus on human rights in a generation, instead choosing to attack his opponent. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 03:22:34 -0400 From: surdamon Subject: Re: madonna RedWoodenBeads@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 9/9/00 12:12:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > jzitt@metatronpress.com writes: > > << The Smiths had a good guitarist and good vocals. But Morrissey's > consistently > nasty, arrogant, and abusive lyrics make it hard to pay attention to his > dislike for anything, since he seems to hate everything in the world > other than himself. >> > > Well there's our difference. Morrisey had a keen insight into 1980's British > culture, the human condition and he was a brilliant poet. His command of the > English language is unquestionably outstanding. oh, nonsense. he's an okay poet, nothing special. i could, if i tired, think of twenty better lyricists off the top of my head. maybe 30. he has a wonderful voice, and marr made some very catchy hooks. aside from that, his songs are overly serious, and while his owrks are great if you're felling depressed [tho there are better bands for that too], they're hysterically mockworthy if you're not. madonna has a nice enough voice, which shines more when she does ballads, as she can add a certain wistfullness [see live to tell], she has a great ear for writing/choosing catchy songs, and, well, that's pretty much it. she' arguably had as much influence on the biz as the msiths, if only because she's one of the major inlfuences in making videos popular. Johnny Marr was one of the > greatest and most original guitarist of his generation, subtle and rhythmic > while being bold and powerful, elegant while retaining a sublime agression > that is simply umatched. oh, nonsense. robert smith was a better and more innovative guitarist. just for one. Andy Rourke was a pheonomenal and dynamic bassist > and Mike Joyce was a superb drummer. The Smiths created an entire world which > has inspired and improved the music world in ways I cannot even express. > Madonna has been nothing more than a nuesance to art. Her career has been a > barron swim in retarded sexuality and a self-obsessed sewer. Her music is > worthless. I've heard "Justify my Love" and I fail to see the innovation. > Comparing her to The Smiths is like comparing a burger from McDonalds to > Manna from heaven, as far as I'm concerned. Passionate words yes, but I am a > passionate person, and these are my opinions and my opinions alone. > i'd say lush is better than the smiths. certainly more innovative. and, again,the housemartins, which did the smiths before and better than the smiths. okay, concurrently. not to mention their musical works afterwards. marr and morrisey have remained firmly entrenched in catchy pop music [the biggest departure i know of being marr's work on the the's dusk, which is iconolcastic pop music]. meanwhile, heaton went on to the beautiful south, and whatsisname as done lots of stuff, including beats intl and fatboy slim. i will agree it's silly to compaer the smiths and madonna, tho both are in essence simple pop groups. - -- "We have a budget surplus but a deficit in values"- George W. Bush, ignoring the lowest crime rates and the greatest focus on human rights in a generation, instead choosing to attack his opponent. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 22:19:27 +1100 From: root Subject: Re: madonna On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Joseph Zitt wrote: > And do you music as a factor in the art of image-creation to be a bad thing? > Why? Well, I suppose just about every living person on this planet, artist or not, enganges in a process of creating their image. I think it could be argued that is largely what being self-aware is about... BUT that's not the same thing as building the entire career out of manipulation of one's image, up to the point where like ToriCure was saying, music becomes just one of the tools used in the process. And even so, I don't mean to say it is somehow *wrong*; It might even be some sort of art in its own right and many people might well find it fascinating. Fine. But don't call it music, because it isn't. > Can you think of a successful artist who has not partaken in image > creation? Why yes, within the limits set out above I can think of many - that would be the majority of artists discussed daily on Ecto. And I consider them all far more successful than Madonna, though of course not in terms of financial rewards, or popularity. But is that how you define "success"? > Ah, this sounds like the tired idea that a commercially successful > artist must be bad. and > John Lennon made millions of dollars. Patrick Channing (a really bad > singer-songwriter who attempted to write commercial pop and disappeared > after a few Austin gigs) didn't. Your case collapses. *sheesh* But with your "this sounds like" you turn what might be a valid idea into a nonsense statement, making it easy to refute. So let me restate it in my terms: I say statistically there *is* an inverse relation between commercial success and quality. As with all statistics there might be exceptions [1], but the trend is pretty clear. And remember that even artists we would consider both "successful" and "good" like R.E.M or Tori Amos ever sell only a fraction (in case of R.E.M a truly insignificant fraction) of the numbers produced by the absolute top-sellers.. No, I think the case still stands. [1]. IMO the most signifcant exception to this trend would be The Dark Side of The Moon... - --------------------------------------------- "Today I want to talk about piracy and music. What is piracy? Piracy is the act of stealing an artist's work without any intention of paying for it. I'm not talking about Napster-type software. I'm talking about major label recording contracts." - -- Courtney Love - ------ http://www.zip.com.au/~afries/spot.php3 ------- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 08:49:06 EDT From: RedWoodenBeads@aol.com Subject: Re: madonna (it's a matter of opinion) << > Well there's our difference. Morrisey had a keen insight into 1980's British > culture, the human condition and he was a brilliant poet. His command of the > English language is unquestionably outstanding. That command having been questioned, that statement is false. I disagree > Madonna has been nothing more than a nuesance to art. Her career has been a > barron swim in retarded sexuality and a self-obsessed sewer. Her music is > worthless. I've heard "Justify my Love" and I fail to see the innovation. > Comparing her to The Smiths is like comparing a burger from McDonalds to > Manna from heaven, as far as I'm concerned. Passionate words yes, but I am a > passionate person, and these are my opinions and my opinions alone. There is a difference between passion and insult, and between opinion and ungrounded loathing. May you learn what that is before causing serious embarrassment and confusion.> I really don't think this needs to become personal. I don't care for Madonna. You do. It's merely a difference in opinion. It says nothing about either one of us personally. That you fail to hear the innovation in "Justify My Love" shows either that you are missing its cultural context and how it fit into the time when it was released or that you have slapped the insults over your ears for some extra-musical reason and are unable to hear it.> No, it shows that I disagree with you. I might suggest that your failure to hear The Smith's innovation shows that you lack knowledge as to the direction and changes that have taken place in music over the past 20 years. I might even say that your lack of respect for Morrisey's lyrical writing shows you don't understand the difference between someone who knows the English language well and someone who lacks that knowledge. But I would never present it as fact. It's merely my opinion. Just as everything you just expressed is your opinion. I find it interesting that those who have so far joined in to this conversation in praise of Madonna have included working musicians who know what it takes to create and record music. I have not seen evidence of this among those who sling insults against her. >> I actually come from a musical family, and most of my immediate and extended family have had successful careers in everything from opera to local club pop scenes. I have known a lot of musicians in my life and I myself have worked as a paid musician on a regular basis. I have yet to meet a musician who respects Madonna. In fact, I was rather surprised that someone on this list did. In fact, I was nearly stunned. I've always considered Madonna to be just some comercial teenybopper thing from the 80's. In all honesty I never knew anyone took her seriously. Joe http://www.angelfire.com/indie/impryan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 06:17:15 -0700 From: "Suzanna Otting" Subject: Re: madonna (it's a matter of opinion) > I find it interesting that those who have so far joined in to this > conversation in praise of Madonna have included working musicians who > know what it takes to create and record music. I have not seen evidence > of this among those who sling insults against her. >> > >I actually come from a musical family, and most of my immediate and extended >family have had successful careers in everything from opera to local club pop >scenes. I have known a lot of musicians in my life and I myself have worked >as a paid musician on a regular basis. I have yet to meet a musician who >respects Madonna. In fact, I was rather surprised that someone on this list >did. In fact, I was nearly stunned. I've always considered Madonna to be just >some comercial teenybopper thing from the 80's. In all honesty I never knew >anyone took her seriously. > I thought that was an interesting reaction, one that I wanted to respond to. No, Madonna is not usually an Ecto artist, and I find many of her songs unlistenable, but I do respect her. In the same light, I have a hard time listening to Siouxsie and the Banshees and the rest of that Morrissey genre unless I'm in the right mood! Madonna's persona is part of feminism (as someone said earlier), and not that of the Lilith Fair variety. She does what she wants to, controls her life and her sexuality in unsubtle ways, and that, I think, is what many of us respect. Some of her songs are better than you might be remembering: try Live to Tell, Rain, others of her ballads. Also, in my opinion, she was perfect in her musical portrayal of Evita, especially because of her flaws. I am not debating, just explaining. Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.angelfire.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 09:41:04 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: studio tricks (no madonna) On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Paul Kim wrote: > I know doug will probably thwack me (grin), but i wanted to throw in my two > cents. not about madonna, but about vocal processing and edits. thwack!? not at all. i hope no one feels "thwacked" by anything i may say. > If you want to hear a blatant example of what the Antares Pitch Shift can > do, think of Cher's "Believe"...you know those weird vocal jumps that > happen? that's pitch shift. (I think it's also used on the Vertical > Horizon song "You're a God") It can be a powerful tool to subtly correct > pitch issues, or it can be an effect for its own sake. However, it can't > make a bad vocal performance sound good. no, but it can make a performance that's otherwise okay, but off-pitch, in pitch. imho, in terms of making someone who really CAN'T sing and doesn't have a voice, it (and similar plug-ins in the pro tools world) removes one of the last obstacles. incidentally, in the days when most recordings were using tape, you could use a lot of tape if you wanted, but there were real physical limits to the granularity of the edit. it's not really possible to punch in a whole performance individual note-by-note, the tape takes a finite amount of time to get up to speed, and the record head takes a finite amount of time to go in and out. if you try to put too many punches too close together, you start to get some unpleasant (very audible) artifacts. so, until the rise of pro tools, et al, with which you CAN edit a performance note by note, the singer had to at least get a phrase right. there's also a heap of tricks that have been available for quite a while (certainly when ms. c got her start) to make someone sound better - judicious use of reverb and compression are standard, 'flat' or 'dull' voices can be enhanced by ading harmonics in artificially, etc. but i stand by my assertion that it's only very recently that it has been possible (and even then, not really practical in a commercial environment) to make someone with no native vocal talent at all sound good (or at least interesting). (obviously, there's a whole 'nother school of interesting but not 'good' vocals, i.e. butthole surfers singing through guitar effects pedals, etc. but that's not germane to the original discussion.) - -- d. - - oh no, you've just read mail from doug = dmw@radix.net - get yr pathos - - www.pathetic-caverns.com -- books, flicks, tunes, etc. = reviews - - www.fecklessbeast.com -- angst, guilt, fear, betrayal! = guitar pop ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 09:53:21 -0400 From: Ted Subject: Re: madonna Somewhere along the way I missed the statement: > I find it interesting that those who have so far joined in to this > conversation in praise of Madonna have included working musicians who > know what it takes to create and record music. I have not seen evidence > of this among those who sling insults against her. Now Now, there! I realize my Musical resume may be short, but I was trained in classical guitar for a number of years under Harold Morris, who was trained at the Academe Musicale in Sienna Italy under Andre Segovia. Harold played Carnagie Hall solo and was the teacher of one Jose Feliciano. Before I suffered tendentious in my left forefinger from a cat bite (yes, something as simple as that can ruin your life sometimes) I was able to pull off a fairly convincing "Leyenda". That means a somewhat better than Intermediate classical guitar ability. I have since moved on into Computers and Hard core Industrial where Madonna and her ilk are equally irrelavant. So I say again, this time with the mantle of musicianship around my shoulders, from two separate musical perspectives, Madonna sucks. Now I shall retire back to Lurkdom as not to upset the natives with this meandering ranting thread. - -- They Might be Giants Dial a Song Service 1-718-387-6962 "Free when you call from work!" ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 09:59:14 EDT From: RedWoodenBeads@aol.com Subject: Re: madonna In a message dated 9/9/00 8:59:29 PM Pacific Daylight Time, jzitt@metatronpress.com writes: << Ah, I just looked at your web page, and much becomes clear. When I was 16 I too thought I knew how everyone else in the world should behave, and what was important in art, including having a clear idea of the cultural milleu surrounding events from before I was born. A few weeks short of 42, I have more information as to how little we know, and how easy it is to insult rather than to learn. Hopefully you'll find this out more painlessly. >> You have done everything in your power to make this personal. You seem to be incapable of having a rational, adult discussion without trying to pry into who I am personally and attacking my character. I'm getting so much arrogance, so much of this "haha, i got you!" attitude from you. It makes it very difficult to discuss anything. Just because you're older than me doesn't make your opinions any more valuable, or my opinions any less signifigant. So you're a 42-year-old who likes Madonna. Congratulations. The 42-year-old musicians I know laugh at Madonna and respect The Smiths. In fact I was introduced to The Smiths by a local classical guitarist who teaches college level flamenco and classical guitar styles. He relayed to me that as far as pop guitar goes, Johnny Marr took it the furthest. I'm sorry you fail to see the importance of history and how we can learn from it. But remember, there is an old saying which states: those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it". I don't pretend to know how everyone should behave but I know the type of living I prefer and the level of art I believe to be the most useful and important. It's purely a matter of personal preference. As far as Madonna's statements on race and religion. It's all very cliche and dull as far as I'm concerned. Yes, I've heard it all before. Madonna was "opressed" by her evil, mean Catholic father and her Catholic upbringing. She thinks the Catholic church is this big bunch of evil people who aren't nice, yeah yeah, it's been said. I think there are greater things we need to protest aside from a private orgnaization which has set up hospitals and conducted charitable work worldwide. Morrisey made statements about politics, and about the condition of working class people in 1980's England. He pointed out the problems and his digust with the British government. I would say pointing out problems in the government, which we all have to live under, is more important than pointing out "problems" in a private organization, especially one that has contributed so much to humanity as the Catholic Church. In short, you and I disagree. But your opinions are no better than mine. Joe http://www.angelfire.com/indie/impryan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 10:09:10 EDT From: RedWoodenBeads@aol.com Subject: Re: is she a singer? In a message dated 9/9/00 8:48:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time, owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org writes: << Listen to any compilation of bad celebrity vocals, and you will know that some voices are irredeemable. While not a great singer, she is a singer. >> She is a very limited singer. She may be able to hold a pitch, but I guaranteee you her range is VERY limited. Joe http://www.angelfire.com/indie/impryan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 08:42:19 -0700 (PDT) From: "Scott S. Zimmerman" Subject: Re: We are Madonna, for we are many...(Re: madonna) > But then again I've never been a fan of Madonna. There was much better stuff out there in the 80's, > as there is now. But is there much better DANCE music? I think this may really be a debate over a certain class of dance music (Madonna, Jennifer Lopez, Britney Spears, Spice Girls, etc.) vs. other types.... As well.. Metallica was just suggested as a new debate topic. People who dislike heavy metal in its entire scope will dislike Metallica... But I'm sure most heavy metal "authorities" would rank Metallica's early work high on the innovation scale... My heavy metal collection is nearly nonexistent, but even I think their first album is amazing! I like the Smiths far more than either Madonna or Metallica, in fact I think the Smiths whole body of work surpasses that of just about anybody, but hits like Madonna's "Borderline" (even though she didn't write it) and Metallica's "Blitzkrieg" seem like they would be in the top tiers of their respective genres unless I've really not been paying attention all of these years? Also, it's actually been my experience that plenty of Smiths fans do like Madonna... For very different reasons, probably? But then again, Morrissey does have many similiarities to Madonna. Neither has time to be bogged down by a full name, they both play the part of a sex symbol, neither plays an instrument, and neither can resist the spotlight... Scott ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 11:22:52 -0400 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: We are Madonna, for we are many...(Re: madonna) On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 08:42:19AM -0700, Scott S. Zimmerman wrote: > I like the Smiths far more than either Madonna or Metallica, in fact I > think the Smiths whole body of work surpasses that of just about anybody, > but hits like Madonna's "Borderline" (even though she didn't write it) and > Metallica's "Blitzkrieg" seem like they would be in the top tiers of > their respective genres unless I've really not been paying attention all > of these years? I'm not much of a metal fan, but I do like Metallica. I was blown away by the rhythmic complexity of their early work, and enjoy their more recent, more conservative songwriting (though in a different way). And I get a real kick out of the work that they did recently with the orchestra, though what I enjoy most about it is Michael Kamen's orchestrations. - -- |> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <| | jzitt@metatronpress.com http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt | | Latest CD: Jerusaklyn http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt | | Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List | ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 12:35:47 -0400 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: madonna Looking back at the conversation, I'm embarrassed by much of what I wrote last night. It did get too personal. I think what gets my dander up is the flinging of insults at an artist, especially one who is not present to defend herself. No one should be called a "sewer", etc. There was also a deep, though perhaps unintended, sexism and ageism in the statements made about her. The statement that her supposedly advanced age makes certain aspects of her presentation of self and sexuality wrong is deeply offensive. Being a tad older than she is, I hope never to lose the range of representation and performance that I had when younger -- in fact, after decades of work, I find myself only in the past few years approaching the feeling of freedom that I should have had when younger. (Dylan: "I was so much older then/ I'm younger than that now") And does anyone think Prince, who is also our age, is in some way too old to represent himself in highly sexual ways? How about the much older Smokey Robinson? or Robert Plant? And the hit-and-run tactic of verbal assault followed by the mask that it was just an "opinion" is a misuse of language and power. Regardless of whether the person being attacked and insulted is a commercial dynamo, I hope to retain the sense of justice to call people on these statements (though my own reactions could be a tad less extreme). - -- |> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <| | jzitt@metatronpress.com http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt | | Latest CD: Jerusaklyn http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt | | Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List | ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:57:52 EDT From: RedWoodenBeads@aol.com Subject: Kate Bush The other day I was rumaging through my mom's old tapes when I found a recordable cassette marked simply "Kate Bush". Always intent on introducing myself to her music, I began listening. The first track includes the repeated line "where would we be without you". The next track has a sound clip of an english man saying; "just get on your feet child, because you're all grown up now". Kate repeats this in singing. The third track opens with the lines: "see how the child reaches out instinctively" and "see how the man reaches out instinctively for what he cannot have". Can anyone tell me what dubbing of an album I have acquired here? Joe http://www.angelfire.com/indie/impryan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:34:32 -0400 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: Kate Bush On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:57:52PM -0400, RedWoodenBeads@aol.com wrote: > The other day I was rumaging through my mom's old tapes when I found a > recordable cassette marked simply "Kate Bush". Always intent on introducing > myself to her music, I began listening. The first track includes the repeated > line "where would we be without you". The next track has a sound clip of an > english man saying; "just get on your feet child, because you're all grown up > now". Kate repeats this in singing. The third track opens with the lines: > "see how the child reaches out instinctively" and "see how the man reaches > out instinctively for what he cannot have". Can anyone tell me what dubbing > of an album I have acquired here? Those songs would be "Love and Anger", "The Fog", and "Reaching Out", tracks 2,3,&4 of her "The Sensual World". While it may not be her finest work, it's the Kate album I return to most, since it has my favorite of her songs, "Deeper Understanding" (track 6). (I was unsure of the first, but a search on Google for "kate bush without you" led me to a compendium of her lyrics at http://lenny.dyadel.net/kate.htm ) BTW, this may interest you from a literary sense: The first, title track of the album was originally a setting of text from the end of James Joyce's "Ulysses". Check out the MP3 file linked from http://www.smoe.org/woj/tsw.html for a cover of the song with the original Joyce text (for which KaTe couldn't get the rights) reinstated. - -- |> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <| | jzitt@metatronpress.com http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt | | Latest CD: Jerusaklyn http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt | | Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List | ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 18:27:17 -0400 From: "Rosana L. de Oliveira" Subject: Re: Kate Bush At 04:57 PM 09/10/2000 EDT, you wrote: Hi, >The other day I was rumaging through my mom's old tapes when I found a >recordable cassette marked simply "Kate Bush". Always intent on introducing >myself to her music, I began listening. The first track includes the repeated >line "where would we be without you". The next track has a sound clip of an >english man saying; "just get on your feet child, because you're all grown up >now". Kate repeats this in singing. The third track opens with the lines: >"see how the child reaches out instinctively" and "see how the man reaches >out instinctively for what he cannot have". Can anyone tell me what dubbing >of an album I have acquired here? > >Joe > >http://www.angelfire.com/indie/impryan These songs are from "The Sensual World". The first line is from "Love And Anger" (which is actually the second track of the album, not the first), the line "Just put your feet down child, 'coz you're all grown up now" is from "The Fog" and the last one is from "Reaching Out" (one of my favorite Kate Bush songs, by the way). Rosana rioliv@br.homeshopping.com.br http://www.geocities.com/jerayna ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 22:02:44 -0400 From: Jeffrey Burka Subject: Re: Kate Bush RedWoodenBeads@aol.com sez: > Can anyone tell me what dubbing of an album I have acquired here? 1989's _The Sensual World_ jeff n.p. launchcast ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 23:11:57 -0400 From: Jeffrey Burka Subject: Re: madonna what a long, pointless thread this has been. In honor of the emmys, I'll award a "single best response" in the thread to Glenn McDonald with his *fabulous*: > > And in the Madonna tradition, it's as bland, uninnovative and useless to > > the artistic world as ever! =) > > Smug bullshit. _Ray of Light_ is about as Ecto as albums come. Parts of the thread amused me because I was just discussing the whole "art vs entertainment" issue with my boyfriend yesterday afternoon. I listen to music as art; he tends to view it was entertainment. I still listen to the Smiths and, as local long-time-alterna-DJ Weasel likes to call him, "Miserable Stephen Patrick Morrissey" way more than I should 10 years since I left college. But I also profess respect for Madonna. While quite frankly there are only two albums of hers I've bothered to actually buy (the others are too inconsistent for my tastes), _Ray of Light_ and especially _Like A Prayer_ remain personal favorites. I'll not question that Joe Zitt went a bit far on some of his statements, but the bulk of the ridculousness in this thread has definitely come from the other Joe... Let's start with one of my favorite exchanges... >>> Well there's our difference. Morrisey had a keen insight into 1980's >>>British culture, the human condition and he was a brilliant poet. >>>His command of the English language is unquestionably outstanding. >> That command having been questioned, that statement is false. >I disagree You can't disagree. Morrissey's command of the English language *had* been called into question and was therefore *not* "unquestionably outstanding." Your disagreement is patently absurd. Besides, c'mon..."Urgh, I think I'm in lerv"? And while we're at it, could you explain how the 'discovery' that "some girls are bigger than others / some girls mothers are bigger than other girls mothers" is art? A good pop song? Sure. Art? Probably not. >her work is stagnant Hunh? I'm not sure where that comes from, given that Madonna has consistently worked in different styles for more than a decade. There's little in _Evita_ that's comparable to anything from _Like A Prayer_, and while there were certainly folks who found _Ray of Light_ to be electronica-light, the Orbit-ness of it certainly made it sound completely different from anything else Madonna had released up to that point. In what way is this stagnation? I suppose one of things that's amused me through this thread is the idea that somehow Madonna's lyrics (and yes, she often writes her own lyrics) are cliched but Miserable Stephen Patrick Morrissey's tiresome whining about how difficult it is to be Morrissey are the tortured writings of a genius. Why is it not okay for Madonna to discuss the catholic church, but it's brilliant when Morrissey, with typical hyperbole, whines, "The Christians / they want to kill me / and my life has not even begun"? Do you really think a video for "Vicar in a Tutu" would somehow have been more meaningful than the video for "Like a Prayer"? Joe Zitt pointed out that you missed the context of the age in which that video was released (you were, what, 5 years old at the time?). I got the impression you were more interested in being offended by the perceived (and not intended) sleight on your age than you were in actually understanding the significance of the video, which was a hell of a lot more than Madonna rolling around on an altar. > But your opinions are no better than mine. Contrary to popular belief, opinions *can* be wrong. jeff n.p. launchcast ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 23:46:51 -0400 From: Ted Subject: Re: madonna(well, not really) Joseph Zitt wrote: > There was also a deep, though perhaps unintended, sexism and ageism in > the statements made about her. The statement that her supposedly > advanced age makes certain aspects of her presentation of self and > sexuality wrong is deeply offensive. Being a tad older than she is, Ihope never to lose the range of representation and performance that I > had when younger -- in fact, after decades of work, I find myself onlyin the past few years approaching the feeling of freedom that I shouldhave had when younger. (Dylan: "I was so much older then/ > I'm youngerthan that now") And does anyone think Prince, who is also our age, isin some way too old to represent himself in highly sexual ways? How about the much older Smokey Robinson? or Robert > Plant? Some things *do* look better on young people, for example: A young Mick Jaggar strutting across the stage like Rooster was bold (dare I say Cocky), an old Mick Jaggar doing the same thing was an embarrassment, he looked like Barney Fife with a Mick Jagger mask on. Everybody was afraid he was going to break a hip. At some point in a person's life they become old, square, and impotent. For some reason in the Rock and Roll world this means they become the enemy. They start growing hair in places they never thought hair could grow. They fear dying, more and more with each passing day, because they start to realize they're getting closer, and closer still. They start appreciating the concept of law enforcement. That is part of the cycle of life. It happens to all of us. Why do Rock and Roll's elders sweep it under the rug? Is Robert Plant embarrassed that his sexual drive has dissipated? Has he ever done a song about indigestion? This is why I think polkas have it all over R&R. Polka is a lifetime music. > And the hit-and-run tactic of verbal assault followed by the mask that > it was just an "opinion" is a misuse of language and power. I disagree. Are you ready? Are you ready? But that is just my opinion. > Regardless of whether the person being attacked and insulted is a > commercial dynamo, I hope to retain the sense of justice to call people > on these statements (though my own reactions could be a tad less > extreme). In a world where everybody is "ok" as an artist, there are no artists. I say pick an artist you don't like and say they suck! There must be some artist you would never want to emulate! If you can't find one I will volunteer myself. - -ted PS - Although I pretty much think Skippy had it all over you in that Madonna discourse, I personally didn't think taking jabs at his youth and inexperience was terribly below the belt, but then again what do I know, I came here from the Love-Hounds mailing list. - -- They Might be Giants Dial a Song Service 1-718-387-6962 "Free when you call from work!" ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 23:59:41 -0400 From: Ted Subject: Correction!(re:madonna) Earlier today I wrote: Before I suffered tendentious in my left forefinger from a cat bite.... OOPS!, That's tendentious! I lost some range of motion and some strength in a very important finger for a guitar player. - -- They Might be Giants Dial a Song Service 1-718-387-6962 "Free when you call from work!" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 00:06:09 -0400 From: Ted Subject: Re: Correction!(re:madonna) Ted wrote: > Earlier today I wrote: > > Before I suffered *tendentious* in my left forefinger from a cat bite.... > > OOPS!, That's *tendentious*! I lost some range of motion and some strength in a very important finger for a guitar player. I have stopped laughing just long enough to apologize for my spell checker which seems to have a mind of its own. I formally give up trying to properly spell the word describing the injury to my forefinger as to not upset my browser. - -- They Might be Giants Dial a Song Service 1-718-387-6962 "Free when you call from work!" ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 23:30:00 -0400 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: madonna(well, not really) On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 11:46:51PM -0400, Ted wrote: > At some point in a person's life they become old, square, and impotent. > For some reason in the Rock and Roll world this means they become the enemy. > They start growing hair in places they never thought hair could grow. > They fear dying, more and more with each passing day, because they start to > realize they're getting closer, and closer still. > They start appreciating the concept of law enforcement. > That is part of the cycle of life. It happens to all of us. > Why do Rock and Roll's elders sweep it under the rug? > Is Robert Plant embarrassed that his sexual drive has dissipated? > Has he ever done a song about indigestion? The jaw-dropping arrogance, presumptiveness, and offensiveness of these statements speak for themselves. They are patently false about many of the older people that I know. Especially the balding ones :-) > > Regardless of whether the person being attacked and insulted is a > > commercial dynamo, I hope to retain the sense of justice to call people > > on these statements (though my own reactions could be a tad less > > extreme). > > In a world where everybody is "ok" as an artist, there are no artists. A world where nobody/everybody is singled out as an artist could be wonderful. Note that there are many cultures in which this is the case, and art is part of everyone's everyday life. > I say pick an artist you don't like and say they suck! > There must be some artist you would never want to emulate! There are artists whose music I love but whose life I would not want to emulate (such as Miles Davis), as well as those who led exemplary lives but whose music does not particularly interest me (though I dislike sufficiently little music that no one comes immediately to mind). I just watched "Gimme Some Truth", a video about the making of John Lennon's "Imagine" album. In it, there's a scene in which a particularly pathetic fan arrives at Lennon's doorstep, expecting to have some sort of epiphany as to how Lennon's music was written specifically for him. Lennon disappoints him by saying that he's "just a guy" writing songs about what happens with him and Yoko that other people happen to resonate with. But then they invite the fan in for lunch. > PS - Although I pretty much think Skippy had it all over you in that > Madonna discourse, I personally didn't think taking jabs at his youth > and inexperience was terribly below the belt, but then again what do I know, > I came here from the Love-Hounds mailing list. It been years since I subscribed to Gaffa, but I recall it as getting quite snipey at times. Ecto spun off partially as a more flame-free zone, where we try (but don't always succeed) to keep these things from happening. - -- |> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <| | jzitt@metatronpress.com http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt | | Latest CD: Jerusaklyn http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt | | Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List | ------------------------------ End of ecto-digest V6 #264 **************************