From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V3 #266 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: les@jmdl.com Errors-To: les@jmdl.com Precedence: bulk JMDL Digest Monday, July 20 1998 Volume 03 : Number 266 The Official 1998 Joni Mitchell Internet Community Shirts are available now. Go to http://www.jmdl.com/ for all the details. ------- The New England Labor Day Weekend JoniFest is coming soon! Send a blank message to for all the details. ------- Trivia buffs! We are compiling an in-depth trivia database on all things Joni. Send your bit of trivia - or your questions you would like answered - to ------- And don't forget about JoniFest 1999! Reserve your spot with a $25 fee. Only 100 rooms have been reserved. Send a blank message to for more info. ------- The Joni Mitchell Homepage is maintained by Wally Breese at and contains the latest news, a detailed bio, Joni's paintings, original essays, lyrics and much more. ------- The JMDL website can be found at and contains Joni-related interviews, articles, member gallery, info on the archives, and much more. ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- re: tape trees [Don Sloan ] (NJC) clarification WRT accountants [Michael Yarbrough ] "Ethics" of a Joniphile [Marsha ] Re: to buy or not to buy? bootlegs, etc. [Don Sloan ] Re: The Unfiltered Joni Mitchell - Part 2 (Mojo 8/98) [TerryM2442@aol.com] Teen Ethics in Los Angeles [davidmarine@webtv.net (David Marine)] re: tape trees [kg@ibm.net (Kenny Grant)] Dog Eat Dog [davidmarine@webtv.net (David Marine)] RE: (NJC long) Teen Ethics in Los Angeles [Michael Yarbrough Subject: re: tape trees I think this is a great idea... a definitive answer would be good as long as we knew it came directly from Joni. Don briano@interisland.net (Odlum, Brian) wrote: > Supposing someone who knew Joni (Wally?) and who could also act as a > convincing spokesperson for the tape trees and the anti-bootlegging crusade > actually spoke to her and asked for her blessing of the tape trees. What do you (all of you) think? > > Brian ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 21:15:24 -0400 From: Michael Yarbrough Subject: (NJC) clarification WRT accountants It has been brought to my attention in a private post that a recent remark of mine on the list could be interpreted as an attack on the ethics of the entire accounting profession. I had written that corporations "accountant and loophole their way out of any taxes whatsoever." It would be more correct to say that, with the repeal of the minimum corporate tax in last year's balanced budget agreement, it is now possible for an unscrupulous corporation to pay no taxes whatsoever. Your belief in the advisability of that change depends on your faith in the ethics of corporations. Accounting is an honorable and necessary profession IMO because, without accountants, certain regulations and tax structures necessary to protect society at large and ensure fair play would be unenforceable. I publicly apologize to accountants on the list for any misunderstanding my previous remarks may have caused, and I hope that this post clarifies my opinions for you. - --Michael NP: David Bowie, _Ziggy Stardust_ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 21:32:19 EDT From: IVPAUL42@aol.com Subject: Re: to buy or not to buy? bootlegs, etc. In a message dated 98-07-19 17:38:09 EDT, ORLTed@aol.com writes: << on the other hand, making a product available that is not accessible any other way is a service, not a crime. >> Sorry, Ted, but I don't agree. The people selling this "product" and making money off it have NO RIGHT to do so, regardless of whether you think it is a valuable service to you or not. IT is not theirs to sell. Do not encourage them or support them. And I have no problem with being rude to people who do support and encourage these thieves. Paul I ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 19:15:30 -0700 From: Susan Chaloner Subject: (NJC?) Payola I bet you're all wishing I would just disappear with this topic ;~D Alas, that is just not to be :~D "...Ahmet Ertegun paid court to Alan Freed like everybody else-and, like everybody else, he paid money to him. Freed did not invent "payola" but he was one of those who institutionalized it. In the end it destroyed his career while he destroyed himself. He died penniless and persecuted at the age of forty-two, abandoned by almost all of those who had once sat at his court. The story of the rise and fall of Alan Freed says a great deal about the record industry-and some of the people in it..."-From MUSIC MAN by Dorothy Wade and Justine Picardie Susan L.A. "...stoking the star-maker machinery behind the popular song..."-JoniM ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 22:15:17 -0400 From: Marsha Subject: "Ethics" of a Joniphile So I'm a greedy bitch Joni Mitchell's already rich I crave her voice, even stolen In dough we know she's rollin' So throw me in jail Toss away the key Just give me my walkman And the address to the next tape tree! Mistress of Parody ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 19:41:59 -0700 From: Don Sloan Subject: Re: to buy or not to buy? bootlegs, etc. briano@interisland.net (Odlum, Brian) wrote at the end of his 19 Jul 1998 post: > In any case, I think this will be my sign-off on this thread. If it is > *not* a real concern of this community, then more words from me are > probably just annoying. If it *is* a concern of this community, then more > words from me are unnecessary. Either way, I'm outta here. Thanks for > reading. > > Brian I for one want to thank Brian for his posting on this issue. Maybe I have a more keen interest then some when it comes to this topic in general as I have these kinds of discussions almost everyday with my *clients*. I am a probation officer in L.A. and I deal with locked up kids/gangsters who've done it all. With absolutely no offense meant to anyone here, I will say that this list discussion sounds much like the ones I have with my kids... they sometimes struggle with it but in the end always justify what they do because, bottom-line, their crimes allow them to have what they want. Doesn't matter to most of them if they hurt other people physically, monetarily or emotionally through their criminal and often terroristic behaviors because they are experts at rationalization. I try to bring the feeling of their victims to them... if you ask them how they would feel if someone victimized a member of their family in the same way they victimized a stranger you see a completely different (though short-lived) attitude. Suddenly he relates; for a moment he cares. Sometimes, if a kid is locked up for property crimes and he is especially thick-headed, I will go over to his locker and (temporarily) take what little personal property he has. This may be nothing more than a couple of magazines, some letters and a few photos of family or girlfriend. It really does a number on him, but, unfortunately, I doubt if it brings about much longterm change in his refusal to empathize with the rest of humanity. It doesn't help that these kids have grown up in a society that has told them since birth that they are the victims, that they are *entitled* and that they are not really responsible for their personal behavior. But that's another story. BTW, most of these kids are not sociopaths in the strict sense of the word, but it is amazing how disconnected they are emotionally from the pain and suffering they cause to individuals, families (even their own) and communities. Thanks, Brian and all who have contributed to a most interesting and enjoyable thread. Don ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 21:39:17 -0500 From: Michael Paz Subject: Guilty Hello Folks- Well this bootleg/tape tree thing seems to have grown like a fungus. I figured what the hell let me throw my dos centavos in. I have made many tapes throughout the years of shows that I have attended. Let me say that I have no problem sleeping at night (even after all the stuff I have read here). Most of the tapes I have made as an audience member if you will, have been for the sole purpose of having a keepsake or reference of the experience. I have never sold or considered selling any of these tapes for profit or any other reason. I do enjoy going back to relive alot of these shows and have also made clone tapes of the performances from the artists actual store bought CD's. I know I'm a freak, but I LOVE MUSIC, what can I say. Personally, I don't see how this hurts anyone. I continue to support the artists I like by buying their releases. In Joni's case many times over albums, cassettes, CD's, and I always give music as presents. (sometimes I even GIVE away copies of my tapes, but shhhhhhhhhhh don't tell). I also promote the artists that I like to my friends and even through these vary means (hence all the NP posts). Since I have been in the music production business I have many chances to tape right off the sound board. I also do this very regularly, but I always ask the artist or artist management. Many times I am asked to make copies for them.Many artists are very open nowadays to being taped, all you have to do is ask. If this is such an issue here, why don't we simply ask the woman weather or not she minds if we trade copies of the Audio/Video tape trees. If not then we best stop using this venue to do it. Other lists that I belong to do not allow this type of activity period.While we have her ear I guess we should ask if she minds if people are pass her personal life around like it was a tape. I certainly do not want to offend anyone (especially Joni). On the Eric Johnson discussion group, their group leader gets an audience with Eric every so often and he takes questions from the list (filtered through the group leader at his discretion mind you) and the answers are posted on the list. Would'nt that be cool, if Wally or Les or any of us for that matter could do that. There are a couple of simple rules on the Eric Johnson List, no personal questions and no bootleg tape trading. So there you have it, actually it's more like dos centavos y medio, but I digress. Love and kisses, Michael NP-Mikey whining to get at the computer so he can go to the Backstreet Boys page. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 22:51:19 EDT From: TerryM2442@aol.com Subject: Re: The Unfiltered Joni Mitchell - Part 2 (Mojo 8/98) Rob, What a treat! Thanks for taking the time to type and send. Lots of insights to digest here. Terry ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 22:01:41 -0700 (PDT) From: davidmarine@webtv.net (David Marine) Subject: Teen Ethics in Los Angeles With genuine respect to Don, who no doubt is caring and helpful in the work he does, I can't imagine why we would expect a teen in Los Angeles to adhere to the law, especially if he or she comes from a disadvantaged neighborhood. It seems to me that a kid with his eyes open will indeed learn his code of ethics from the world around him. Michael Y. posted recently about corporate America. Honestly, what do you think the ethical codes of most CEOs in this country are like? At least as self-serving, I would wager, as those of the average criminal behind bars. And as for the treatment of citizens by the LAPD, well, I have some friends on the force, I am an adult "white" male, and after nine years in this city I am petrified by the police here (I still trust New York cops, more or less). Many of my African-American friends find the brutality of this city to be nothing short of spirit-crushing. On that topic, I find it interesting that while a disproportionate number of inmates in this country are African-American, no one responded to Simon's posting of the Camille Cosby article, but many have posted about their frustration with the rise in crime. To be honest, I think the legal system deserved the kick in the balls that it got with the O.J. trial. And my only confusion about the rioting a few years back is why it hasn't flared up again. PLEASE understand that I am well aware that the great majority of criminals in this country are "white." Racism is only a part of a larger problem in this country:, across-the-board economic inequity, and a fundamental dehumanzing of the individual. Yes, people want to survive. They are doing what they are doing in order to survive. That's what I do, that's what you do. I suspect that most of use here on the list are relatively privaleged. Let's listen to Dog Eat Dog or Turbulent Indigo again, and then ask ourselves how we might look to change society. A lesson to our children on "situational ethics" (just for clarification, this is not the context in which Brian Odlum discussed ethics)? More police? More arrests? How about more equity, more fairness, more genuine oppurtunity, more sharing of this country's enormous wealth, more quality education........... On prime time crime the victim begs Money is the road justice And power walks it on crooked legs - J.M. Peace, David (bracing himself for the consequences of his rant) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jul 98 05:13:36 GMT From: kg@ibm.net (Kenny Grant) Subject: re: tape trees Hey Don, Wally is definately not the choice to approach her. Let's remember, Wally's friendship with Joni is very new, and that approaching her for her blessing on tape trees would be extremely awkward (sp?) -- in fact, in the event that she strongly opposses them, it could actually end the friendship, which has barely started. Someone else would be a better choice IMO. Joni -- and to a greater degree, her "people" (e.g., record company, management, daughter) have seen both Wally and Les' website, and know that tape trees exist. In fact, she received a tape tree (Tape Tree 4 - A Tape Of You - JMDL artists covering her music)last year for either her birthday or Xmas, and she was reportedly pleased with it. The packaging said Tape Tree 4, so she must have put 2+2 together and known there was a 1,2, and 3. Isn't it possible that if she were highly morally opposed to this that it would have gotten back to Wally and Les by now? I fail to see what would be gained by her "officializing" our tape trees, now that it's been accepted that we own them and trade them because most of our "subjective morality" says it's not wrong, or that it's "less wrong" than bootlegging because there's no profit motive and it discourages illegal profiteers. But let's think this through for a second. Let's say we got someone to ask her what her views were on tape trading of unauthorized recordedings, and her reply was "I strongly dissapprove of the practice." (which is quite likely, because she is so fussy about what she releases). The JMDL would obviously have to cease sanctioning/coordinating Tape Trees. After going to the bother of soliciting her opinion on the matter and learning it didn't meet with her approval, the JMDL, as a group of true fans, would not outwardly defy her. Would the practice of tape trading itself go away? NO, plenty of people would still record and trade her concerts. Would the bootleg market go away? NO, plenty of people would still record and distribute these recording for illegal profits. Unfortunately, a *conversation* with Joni Mitchell will have no impact on the *supply* of her recorded material. And if JMDL Tape Trees were to stop: Would some list members' subjective sense of morality be vindicated? YES. Would all list members have to wait 4-5 years in order to hear new material from her? YES! (unless she tours or does some talk shows, which get less likely as she gets older, and with a self-imposed ban on tape trees, we'd have to be lucky enough to be *at* the concert or know about *and* catch her TV/radio appearances). I just don't see what would be accomplished, other than a small group of possibly her greatest admirers sacrificing the joy of hearing her rare recordings, while the rest of her larger -- and possibly "lesser" fan base -- who never bothered to ask her permission, continued to enjoy such recordings. Now if she came to Les independently and said "hey, stop promoting my unauthorized recordings" that's entirely different. I just don't see what's gained by approaching her, other than a better nights' sleep for Brian Odlum :-) -Kenny On 7/18 Les wrote: If she said no, then not much will have changed from where we are now, except that some fans who are conflicted regarding the ethical questions will have a clearer idea of the choices they are making. What do you (all of you) think?" On 7/19/98, Don Sloan wrote: I think this is a great idea... a definitive answer would be good as long as we knew it came directly from Joni. Don briano@interisland.net (Odlum, Brian) wrote: > Supposing someone who knew Joni (Wally?) and who could also act as a > convincing spokesperson for the tape trees and the anti-bootlegging crusade actually spoke to her and asked for her blessing of the tape trees. What do you (all of you) think? > > Brian ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 22:50:21 -0700 (PDT) From: davidmarine@webtv.net (David Marine) Subject: Dog Eat Dog What greater transgression than to misquote Joni? The corrected (I hope) and expanded text: Dog Eat Dog On prime time crime the victim begs Money is the road to justice And power walks it on crooked legs Prime-time-crime Holy hope in the hands of Snakebite evangelists and racketeers And big wig financiers Where the wealth's displayed Thieves and sycophants parade And where it's made -- the slaves will be taken Some are treated well In these games of buy and sell And some like poor beasts Are burdened down to breaking -- J.M. Peace, David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 02:13:07 -0400 From: Michael Yarbrough Subject: RE: (NJC long) Teen Ethics in Los Angeles David Marine wrote: <<>> Absolutely. I can only begin to understand what it must be like to work with kids in this situation on a daily basis, and Don should be applauded as someone who is absolutely a part of the solution. I also think his post approached something important in talking about how the kids in question have internalized their "victim" status and thus feel "entitled" to what they're taking. I think this is only the beginning, though. After all, in many ways, they *are* victims of entrenched geographic, legal, and social forces that systematically limit their opportunities and fundamentally alter the context in which they make decisions, or assert their personal agency, as it were. We must remember that the same societal forces that continue to "tell" these kids that they are victims also tell suburban white kids that they are privileged, entitled, and empowered. The assumptions that a ghetto kid will become a poverty-stricken adult, even criminal, are no stronger nor more nefarious than the assumptions that a suburban kid will go to college and become at least minimally gainfully employed. It works both ways, and the set of preordained assumptions largely functions not only to shape the choices the separate kids make, but to provide a context in which their actions are evaluated, which leads to a further set of choices, etc., until the assumptions on both ends become self-fulfilling prophecies. I've been doing a lot of sociology reading lately, and one of the articles was a fascinating study of juvenile delinquency among two groups of high school boys. One group was from the well-off high school; the other was from the "wrong side" of town. In quantity, severity, and frequency the delinquency of the two groups was comparable, but because of different economic status, their delinquencies were interpreted very differently by the community. The richer group was both logistically empowered to remove their delinquency from the community proper (via car) and enlist the assistance of their parents in begging off police when they got in trouble. Even more importantly, because of the general expectation that they would succeed in life, they had incentive to preserve their pre-ordained future and knew exactly how far they could push the boundaries (e.g. they were never rude to police officers). Four of the five boys graduated in the top 10 of their class. Two went on to the military. One became active in state politics after college. They assumed the places their parents had had before them. The poorer group, on the other hand, conducted their delinquency in and around the community because they had no car. Because there was no expectation that they would succeed in the future, they were frequently rude to police officers as they figured they had nothing to lose and at least needed to preserve their "dignity." If their parents ever tried to plead with police officers, they were ignored because they were politically powerless and seen only as a nuisance. After high school (not all of them graduated) only one completed college, on a football scholarship. One disappeared. One was convicted on murder charges. Another became involved in illegal numbers games. For substantially similar activities the two groups were evaluated completely differently, and the subsequent choices made available to them were completely different. Societal stereotypes became self-fulfilling prophecies. This is neither crime caused by a need to eat, nor is it sociopathic behavior. It is a direct ramification of the US class system. I don't know how to fix it, but I am pretty convinced that this model is fairly representative of the reality of most crime in America. Your economic position, thus your social position, creates changes in values, options, and ramifications so profound that you interact with the same systems in completely different ways, ways so different that those from a different class don't even know how to try to understand them. And what's true for juveniles is true for adults, too. CEOs are dealt a far better hand if they wish to evade the law, even write the law, than are lower class city residents. The value systems with which they made decisions are fundamentally different. Their means of protection against punishment are fundamentally different. Their incentives for evasion of punishment are fundamentally different. This doesn't necessarily mean that either CEOs or lower class people are all criminals. It does mean that as middle-class folk, our first thoughts about their crimes or lack thereof are probably inaccurate, perhaps wildly so. Sorry this is so long, and as always, it's MHO. - --Michael NP: time for bed ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 02:51:28 EDT From: Bolvangar@aol.com Subject: Re: tape trees briano@interisland.net (Odlum, Brian) wrote: > Supposing someone who knew Joni (Wally?) and who could also act as a > convincing spokesperson for the tape trees and the anti-bootlegging crusade > actually spoke to her and asked for her blessing of the tape trees. I don't think that would be the best idea. I think she might feel like she was being asked to make an ethical/moral decision for us -- and since (as we know) she is very sensitive to contact from her fans, I fear that might make her really uncomfortable. Also, it seems a bit odd to ask for her blessing on the trees *after* we've made, what, six of them? She might feel like she would gain nothing by objecting to the trees other than hurting our feelings -- again putting her in an uncomfortable position. I agree with Kenny's thoughts on this subject too. - --David ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V3 #266 ************************** Post messages to the list at Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe joni-digest" to ------- Siquomb, isn't she?