From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V4 #509 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: les@jmdl.com Errors-To: les@jmdl.com Precedence: bulk JMDL Digest Friday, November 12 1999 Volume 04 : Number 509 The Official Joni Mitchell Homepage is maintained by Wally Breese at http://www.jonimitchell.com and contains the latest news, a detailed bio, original interviews and essays, lyrics, and much more. ------- The JMDL website can be found at http://www.jmdl.com and contains interviews, articles, the member gallery, archives, and much more. ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Re: language NJC (long) [Don Rowe ] Re: Joni and me (A de-lurking newby's first post) [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] Greetings and introduction fom Oxford ["Tony Wyer" ] Re: language NJC (long) [catman ] RE: language (NJC) [David Wright ] RE: language (NJC) ["Wally Kairuz" ] Re: NJC Gigs of the Year NJC - (but Sib content!) [Rob Jordan ] Music... Hymns... etc (NJC) [Vince Lavieri ] Re: language NJC (long) [Vince Lavieri ] Re: language her-his-its-story(NJC) [Vince Lavieri ] Fw: Cute Poem NJC!!! ["gene mock" ] Re: Greetings and introduction fom Oxford [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] Re: language her-his-its-story(NJC) [CaTGirl627@aol.com] Re: Music... Hymns... etc (NJC) ["Kakki" ] Re: Mariana (since Bob asked) (NJC) ["Kakki" ] Re: Greetings and introduction fom Oxford [CaTGirl627@aol.com] Re: Music... Hymns... etc (NJC) [Vince Lavieri ] RE: Music... (NJC) ["Wally Kairuz" ] Re: 10 Commandments (NJC) ["Kakki" ] Re: language her-his-its-story (NJC) ["Eric Taylor" Subject: Re: language NJC (long) The problem with attempting to "force" a change in an organic language is much the same as attempting to legislate morality. It just doesn't work -- Prohibition did nothing but criminalize behaviors which the government could not hope to control. And the whole PC movement demonizes words, and in more ridiculous cases syllable fragments, without respect to their effectiveness at communicating information -- which is what an organic language is designed for. In pursuit of this goal, language evolves like any other organism. Anyone lamenting the fact that Latin is no longer taught in schools might as well bemoan the demise of primate quadra-pedal locomotion in humans. Language does what creatures do -- uses what works and leaves the rest to the fossil record. Where PC talk remains devisive and counter-productive, it is destined for the fossil record as well ... no matter the good intentions of its inventors or more well-meaning advocates. In the event that PC talk contributes some effective communications tools to our language, you can be assured that those will be retained. The rest is ... well you know what it's called. ;-) Don Rowe ===== "I would not bet against the development of a time machine. My opponent may have already built one ... and know the future." -- Stephen Hawking __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 17:33:18 EST From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Joni and me (A de-lurking newby's first post) Rick writes: << I think I saw her six or seven times, including twice at the Mariposa Folk Festival. I met her backstage a couple of times and she once gave me a daisy in exchange for a pen of mine she lost while signing autgraphs. >> Wow, what a great memory Rick...and welcome! As you can no doubt see, you are in the company of kindred spirits here! Do you still have that daisy pressed in the pages of a Joni Songbook or something? And I also appreciated what you had to say regarding our discussions focusing on the issue and not the personality, that's typically something this list does an OUTSTANDING job of... Anyway, welcome again, post often, I'd love to hear more from you! Bob NP: Counting Crows, hidden track from "this desert life" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 22:43:43 -0000 From: "Tony Wyer" Subject: Greetings and introduction fom Oxford Does this mean I belong to a fan club?? No, seriously the following appeared in The Independent, a UK broadsheet newspaper on Sunday the 7th of November as part of its 'Guide to the Internet', you must remember that we are somewhat behind this side of the Atlantic. (no free local calls being the reason), and it inspired me to look at the site. "The Joni Mitchell Homepage http://www.jonimitchell.com This independent tribute quickly won the recognition of its subject, and with reviews, clips and display of Joni's artwork, the whole thing is lovingly maintained by its creator. Two years ago these pages helped to reunite the singer with her long-lost daughter, perhaps the ultimate validation for any fan site." Well I have been a fan from the early 70's when I purchased Court and Spark, but first came across Joni on a live radio prog that she shared with James Taylor in the late sixties, all on a big glowing valve radio, Can not remember who headlined but she played both piano and dulcimer, no guitar, and I was quite taken with what I heard. At the time I was heavily into more rock orientated music, and so logged it somewhere in the back of my memory cells for a later date. From Court, it was an eager procession of acquisitions through to Mingus, when interest waned slightly, but without counting there must be another 5 albums collected since that period. I have 2 vinyl's and one CD each of Court, Hissing and Hejira, the vinyl's being worn out with playing them on inferior decks during my student days, whilst the others are either just a CD or vinyl copy. Have not seen, over here at least, either Miles of Aisles or Shadows and Light on CD which I would not mind adding to my collection. To my mind Court through to Don Juan contains my personnel favourites with Hejira being the greatest by far. Favourite track? Well there you have me and like most of you it will depend on the mood. Song for Sharon comes close as I too took that Staten Island Ferry, but it is a toss up between Coyote and Hejira itself, then maybe..... The progression from the LA Express through the Jazz Crusaders to part Weather Report was not only highly fruitful, but produced such a distinctive and original sound that no other female composer has matched it to this day. Joni herself has not even matched it since. It was her collaboration with Jaco that bought out the best in her, and it was a sad lost to all when Jaco was stabbed to death in Miami. Saw Joni once,at Wembley Stadium, around '84, A vast echoey hall totally unsuited to her music, So too was the lead guitarist (far too loud and aggressive) and the back up band. It was a relief when she sang solo, and greatly appreciated by her audience. Still this and more at a later date. regards Tony Tony's Rough Guide to Skiing La Plagne http://www.wyer.force9.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 17:49:09 -0500 From: "Eric Taylor" Subject: Re: language her-his-its-story(NJC) Marcel claims: << The reality is TIME is gender free. There is no HIS-story or HER-story. The word itself is not derived from a gender applied to the word. >> Tell THAT to Father Time! From what I understand Herstory was coined in the 1960's to describe matriarchal cultures of pre-Greco-Roman-Christian Eurasia & America. So it is historically correct.... E.T. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 23:06:09 +0000 From: catman Subject: Re: language NJC (long) some pc changes that we are glad of, aren't we? Mongol to Down's Sydrome cripple to disabled Nigger to black or other terms queer to gay(even tho some have reactivated it) spastic to cerbral palsy chattel to wife(although chattel is used still in other contexts) obey has been dropped from many marriage vows the law does not support being fired because of one's race or being denied housing etc and in some cases the same can be said for sexuality or gender. The Black&White Minstrels are no longer successful! women have the vote and equal under law children are no longer, at least in our countries, sent up chimnies and down mines , and it is no longer, in many places, acceptable for a parent to do whatever they wish to their children. So although PC can belaughed at and ridiculed(and sometimes it ought to be), without it we would not have the above changes and i am sure there are other examples. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 23:05:28 +0000 From: catman Subject: Re: language NJC (long) You know, i never knew why Ms. came about. i always thought it was because Miss sounded so belittling. I got quite a surprise upon reading the rest of your writing concerning the use of man, especially in the Bible and the hymns etc. I realised that when i hear or read the word man i never identify with it. i always feel like they are talking about somone else, i.e. men. i know that sounds weird but i truly do not think of myself as a man. I also don't think of myself as a woman. I think of myself as me. As a gay man(sorry to bring that up yet again, and being paranoid about being accused of being in your face about it, it is appropraite to this discussion), i don't fit the idea of a man that society has set. When someone refers to me as a man, like maybe in the supermarket i hear a mother asking her child to get out of the mans way, I am always surprised they mean me! However, I also find that other people genrally do not treat me or view me as a man. this is especially true of women I have found. One reason why I have good relationships with women. Although thinking about it maybe it isn't so good that they don't see me as a man. Now I am confusing myself! Basically I was trying to say that i understand how you feel excluded by the term because you are a woman. i feel excluded because i am not accepted as a man, because I don't fit the societal definition of a man, and i also don't feel like one. I am not sure i want to tho, i am happy being me and thinking of myself as me. to me, there are men and women and me. I enjoyed your post and it made sense to me. > > > i ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 18:15:17 -0500 (EST) From: David Wright Subject: RE: language (NJC) On Thu, 11 Nov 1999, Wally Kairuz wrote: > facetiousness won't help make your argument stronger, david Nor will your adding little editorial comments to all of my quotes instead of letting them speak for themselves make your argument stronger, Wally. Incidentally, did you write to Kakki after her "Womyn of Heart and Mind" post to tell her that facetiousness (since her post was, perhaps in a different way, no more or less facetious than mine was -- since those lyrics don't actually exist -- nor was its point more or less fundamentally serious) won't make *her* argument any stronger? Did you tell her that she was trying to pass off wisecracking as intelligence (as if she needed to!), like you told me I was? > > The word's not more ridiculous than any other word to begin with. > > Now then, Pat Robertson accuses all feminists of being lesbians (and > > witches and baby-killers). By your reasoning, we should therefore ban > > lesbianism or lesbians from the feminist movement (or ban feminists from > > being lesbians) because that might give him more ammunition? > > the analogy is faulty. lesbians are not artificial concoctions created by > linguistically incompetent speakers. Well, Pat Robertson thinks that lesbianism is an artificial concoction created by women who are too ugly to be attractive to men (he's said that; I'm not making it up). Anyway, the basis of this argument remains: the women's movement should let itself be defined by its (male) opponents, and should disown any people or groups of people, or words (like "herstory"), which threaten their mainstream acceptance or their ability to assimilate into the dominant culture. That's a pretty sorry progressive movement, if you ask me. (As Emma Goldman said, I think: "I won't join your revolution if I can't dance.") Regarding "to each his own"/"mankind" (I do think "humanity" is better) etc. as non-gender-specific terms: Here's a funny passage from one of my favorite movie critics, Pauline Kael, from her review of _West Side Story_ (which she didn't like). She says, "After West Side Story was deluged with Academy Awards as the best movie of 1961, Murray Schumach reported in the New York Times that 'there seemed to be general agreement that one reason' it won 'was that its choreography, music, and direction were devoted to the serious theme of the brotherhood of man.' A few weeks ago, in a talk with a Hollywood director, when I expressed surprise at the historical novel he had undertaken to film, he explained that the 'idea' of the book appealed to him because it was really about 'the brotherhood of man.' I averted my eyes in embarrassment and hoped that my face wasn't breaking into a crooked grin....Some suggested new 'serious' themes for big movies: the sisterhood of women, 'no man is an island,' the inevitability of death, the continuity of man and nature, 'God Is All.' "Sometimes, when I read film critics, I think I can do without brothers." (Were that reporter and that director including Pauline Kael in "the brotherhood of man"? They might have thought so, but she evidently didn't.) > they do a disservice to > the cause of liberation because they banalize language and its political > power by playing with false etymologies [snip] No, they *acknowledge* the political power of language because they acknowledge that language exists in the real world, not in some etymological paradise where words are entirely divorced from the things they refer to and the way they're used, and mean only what their etymology says they mean. (Another example: the "n-word" is derived from the Latin word for "black," via the Romance languages -- apparently a perfectly innocuous etymology. That doesn't make the "n-word" itself innocuous.) They also acknowledge the power of language to call attention to injustice in a thought-provoking way. Etymology, false or otherwise, is not the issue here for me. I'm thinking about what the reality of what the term "history" encompasses in our society today -- what is taught as "history" (for example, in the "music history" [meaning western-European classical music history, of course] classes I have to take at the Conservatory here, or in the books on music history in the library) -- as well as the word itself. In a perfect world, I'm sure, how the word "history" is used would more accurately reflect its inclusive etymology, but this isn't a perfect world, and we can't make it one by acting as if it were one when it isn't. > once again: the first three letters in the word history are not the english > word his. I never said they were, *etymologically*. But they are, both on the surface and more importantly in *practice*, when the story of women, and of every other minority group, has been left out of what it taught as "history" (here in the U.S. -- the "founding fathers," for instance). And some people want to keep leaving women out of language (by pretending that male-gendered language is universal -- "the brotherhood of man") just like they want to leave women out of "history." > still, i am very distressed when linguistic cuties are mistaken for > actions and wisecracking for intelligence. I am so hurt and offended by that, Wally. And frustrated -- I've posted here for two years and apparently I still haven't convinced you (or anyone else?) that I'm intelligent. - --David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 21:48:13 -0300 From: "Wally Kairuz" Subject: RE: language (NJC) > Incidentally, did you write to Kakki after her "Womyn of Heart and > Mind" post to tell her that facetiousness (since her post was, perhaps in > a different way, no more or less facetious than mine was -- since those > lyrics don't actually exist -- nor was its point more or less > fundamentally serious) won't make *her* argument any stronger? No. Her lyrics were funny, not facetious. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 00:46:32 +0000 From: Rob Jordan Subject: Re: NJC Gigs of the Year NJC - (but Sib content!) At 07:00 PM 11/10/99 EST, AzeemAK@aol.com wrote: >The Joni list was also represented by Rob Jordan, so with a bit luck we'll >get his thoughts too. They may even make sense. > >Much Love, Joni and Sib to you all! Azeem, you tempted me out of retirement! I don't know that I can add much to your fine commentary. You said that Jane made half the audience cry with In My Dream... you didn't say that they were not just wiping a tear from a corner of the eye, but breaking down and bawling! It was the first time I've heard the song, and it's an amazing one. Ostensibly about a dream of childhood happiness and idyllic family life, you can't escape the feeling of immense loss. A beautiful song. Love Is Everything has the same sense of joy set against pain. To get philosophical for a minute, sometimes I think life is balanced on a knife edge; any happier and it'd be sickly sweet; any sadder and it'd be unbearable. Jane captures that feeling. My favourite poem was (maybe) called The Bridge, about struggle and obsession and "care taken" to present things in absolutely the best way. It seemed to me it must relate to Jane's adventure these past few years to escape from a major label and set up Sheeba on her own terms. Old Man River was brilliant and funny and uplifting in a way I didn't imagine it could be. Azeem forgot to relate his own close encounter with Jane: just before the show started, as the lights went down, we'd endured 2 or 3 fat blokes shoving their way to the front and tut-tutted to one another. However the last of them was followed by this small, meek woman, making her way through the crowd. It was Jane on her way to the stage. She didn't even tap anyone on the shoulder, just quietly waited until, one by one, the audience noticed her and let her pass. She held me spellbound. Even when she strummed the same guitar chord for fully five minutes in Oh My My! Rob PS: I'm sure the audience must've been full of celebrities, and I wanted Kakki to be there to spot them for me. I read on the siblings list that Eddi Reader was there. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 17:14:26 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: language NJC (long) Debra wrote: > It may be the demand to make sudden, instant changes that some of you are > objecting to, and that can be jarring (although everything now seems > unnaturally speeded up), but to confuse that discomfort with lack of the need > for language to evolve is putting energy in the wrong place, in my opinion; > it's just another way of avoiding some uncomfortable issues. If you're > willing to only use language from an earlier time, be aware that the > attitudes you're expressing are also from an earlier time, since there's no > separation of language and attitude. Of course language is ever-evolving, but, like Don expressed, it should be a natural evolution and what works will endure and what doesn't won't. Your use of the word "demand" is probably the concept that makes me feel uncomfortable. That one group of people will decide for the rest and start pressuring and demanding that only certain words are acceptable or new words must be invented and used. Treating people with regard and respect causes me no discomfort whatsoever. What does cause me extreme discomfort personally is "group thought" and "group speak." I've always recoiled from anyone telling me what to do or thinking they know better than I how I should conduct myself in life. This is just my inherent nature. I never wanted to belong to, and avoided, cliques all through school and I had never even belonged to any type of special interest group or club in my life until the JMDL. But I sensed that Joni, being the creative individualist she is, would attract other individualist and creative thinkers (and I was right!). As for the concept of battling various kinds of oppression by changing the language or inventing new language, that personally would not be effective for me. In my experience, someone who is an oppressor is going to be the last person in the world to want to be "enlightened". If someone oppresses me (and it happens to one extent or another all through life), I prefer to use my own choice language for dealing with them! I'll kick the butt of anyone who attempts to oppress me or anyone else - I just don't need or want someone else to decide for me the best methodology for accomplishing that. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 21:59:19 -0500 From: Vince Lavieri Subject: Music... Hymns... etc (NJC) The discussion on hymns caught my eye, of course. I am (as you may guess) one who believes totally in NOT using sexist hymns, hymns which after all are the theology that most people remember. And of course the word "hymn" is not sexist, as it does not have an orgin in a sexist word. Many of the so-called standard texts that people just know and love vary by church body anyway. Hymns have been translated from many languages into various other languages often before they got into English. And many English translations were sexist. And many standard translations are poor translations. Take an example: Many of you may sing ":A mighty fortress is our God, a bulwark never failing..." while Lutherans sing "A mighty fortress is our God, a sword and shield victorious." I could give you many translations of hymns that vary by church body so there is no one standard text that was someone handed down by God, only the one that was particular to your church body. Many of us have gone through numerous new translations; in the Lutheran church, we had versions of hymns that had been translated from four different Scandanvian languages and German and thus new translations were used as the ethnic church bodies merged. And guess what: the sexist, male-oriented language is not in the original texts of many of the familiar versions. Now, hymns can be translated poorly, or well. Hymns can be translated poetically, or not. Hymns can be translated with an eye towards gender-free, non sexist references and be done well and poetically, or it can be done poorly. I was saddened to see here a blanket indictment of retranslating hymns. No congregation of mine is going to sing "Good Christian Men, rejoice and sing..." when "Good Christian Friends, rejoice and sing" includes ALL of the worshippers. And frankly, continued resource to words like "men" and "man" is decisively not creative, not poetic, unjustified by the text or the theology, and lazy, sloppy translating. Consider when we complain about something being different: the Lord's Prayer in English is probably said in at least four different versions amongst American worshippers, and each group thinks their translation is the only one. On a wider scale, what are the Ten Commandments? The Jewish, Roman & Lutheran, and Anglican & Protestant lists each have a DIFFERENT set of the 10 commandments as God, alas, failed to put the numbers in and so different traditions number differently. So whenever I hear people saying they changed THE version of something to something new, I wonder why they think that THEIR version is the only, universal one... or why the church can never update its language or do something new and real to this time and place. If the new, nonsexist translations that some complain of are sloppy, and I have seen those, of course those need to be re-done. But I am really tired of church people saying "We've never done it this way before" as that stifles all growth. It usually means, this isn 't the way I personally remember it from my childhood and thus the rest of the whole church shoudl be bound by what I remember because I don't feel like learning a new thing." When I hear someone say, "we've never done it that way before" or "that's new, I don't like it" I want to take away their car, their shoes, give them sandals, and tell them they can walk everywhere and only worship in Aramaic. It was all new once... Sorry for the rant, but this issue is real to me. (the Rev) Vince ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 22:14:31 -0500 From: Vince Lavieri Subject: Re: language NJC (long) David Wright, I thank you for what you have written. dsk wrote: > Whether old hymns should be changed... I'd say yes if people trying to spread > Christ's message want women to continue sitting in the pews. I do my best to > ignore the "when I became a man..." reading from Corinthians, for example, > but every time I hear it or all the other man references in hymns or from the > Bible (and there are LOTS of them), I feel excluded. As much as I try to keep > in mind the etymology of certain words and intellectually understand that > "man" includes me, it doesn't feel that way, and hymns especially need to > engage the feelings, not just the intellect. So, of course, most men are > comfortable with hearing "man" over and over, and would see no reason for any > change; it just FEELS right -- well OF COURSE it does; that doesn't mean it > IS right. This concern would not have been a part of my (or anyone's) > consciousness if I'd been around when the Bible was written, or even as > recently as 20-25? years ago, but it IS a part of my awareness now. For the > Bible or hymns or language to continue to be meaningful they HAVE to change. > Debra, right on, and many of those gender-specific words are not in the Biblical texts, only the English translations that are rooted in the King James Version, which was - surprise - intentionally translated gender-specific (ie. sexist) because the church of James I and VI time was reacting to the previous century when some dominant monarchs included Elizabeth, Mary Tudor, Mary Stuart, and the regencies and power behind the throne era of Mary de Guise and Catherine di Medici. They wanted to establish male supremecy; it was John Knox of Scotland who wrote "On the Monstrous Reign of Women..." during King James' infancy (and guess who had a major role in his religious training?). Thus, in the old Lutheran liturgy, we said, "He who believes and is baptised..." but the closest English translation would be "whoever believes..." In the King James, the same word the we would now translate as "deacon" was translated as "leader" when used about a man but "deaconess" when used about a woman. Much of what is a problem, Debra, is not because God speaks in gender-specific words, but only his predominatently male translators. (the Rev) Vince ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 22:16:35 -0500 From: Vince Lavieri Subject: Re: language her-his-its-story(NJC) Eric Taylor wrote: > Marcel claims: > > << The reality is TIME is gender free. There is no HIS-story or HER-story. > The word itself is not derived from a gender applied to the word. >> > > Tell THAT to Father Time! > From what I understand Herstory was coined in the 1960's to describe > matriarchal cultures of pre-Greco-Roman-Christian Eurasia & America. So it > is historically correct.... > E.T. So Marcel is still absolutely right... and so is Eric! Cool! (the Rev) Vince ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 22:19:08 -0500 From: Vince Lavieri Subject: Re: language NJC (long) catman wrote: > some pc changes that we are glad of, aren't we? > > Mongol to Down's Sydrome > cripple to disabled > > > So although PC can belaughed at and ridiculed(and sometimes it ought to be), without it we would not have the above changes and i am sure there are > other examples. Add: dumb to hearing impaired. Thanks for the post, Colin. (the Rev) Vince ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 19:33:14 -0800 From: "gene mock" Subject: Fw: Cute Poem NJC!!! - ----- Original Message ----- From: Mikey To: Mikey Sent: Thursday, November 11, 1999 7:31 PM Subject: Cute Poem > > > MERRY CHRISTMAS MY FRIEND, > > TWAS THE NIGHT BEFORE CHRISTMAS, > HE LIVED ALL ALONE, > IN A ONE BEDROOM HOUSE MADE OF > PLASTER AND STONE. > > I HAD COME DOWN THE CHIMNEY > WITH PRESENTS TO GIVE, > AND TO SEE JUST WHO > IN THIS HOME DID LIVE. > > I LOOKED ALL ABOUT, > A STRANGE SIGHT I DID SEE, > NO TINSEL, NO PRESENTS, > NOT EVEN A TREE > > NO STOCKING BY MANTLE, > JUST BOOTS FILLED WITH SAND, > ON THE WALL HUNG PICTURES > OF FAR DISTANT LANDS. > > WITH MEDALS AND BADGES, > AWARDS OF ALL KINDS, > A SOBER THOUGHT > CAME THROUGH MY MIND. > > FOR THIS HOUSE WAS DIFFERENT, > IT WAS DARK AND DREARY, > I FOUND THE HOME OF A SOLDIER, > ONE I COULD SEE CLEARLY. > > THE SOLDIER LAY SLEEPING, > SILENT, ALONE, > CURLED UP ON THE FLOOR > IN THIS ONE BEDROOM HOME. > > THE FACE WAS SO GENTLE, > THE ROOM IN SUCH DISORDER, > NOT HOW I PICTURED > A UNITED STATES SOLDIER. > > WAS THIS THE HERO > OF WHOM I'D JUST READ? > CURLED UP ON A PONCHO, > THE FLOOR FOR A BED? > > I REALIZED THE FAMILIES > THAT I SAW THIS NIGHT, > OWED THEIR LIVES TO THESE SOLDIERS > WHO WERE WILLING TO FIGHT. > > SOON ROUND THE WORLD, > THE CHILDREN WOULD PLAY, > AND GROWNUPS WOULD CELEBRATE > A BRIGHT CHRISTMAS DAY. > > THEY ALL ENJOYED FREEDOM > EACH MONTH OF THE YEAR, > BECAUSE OF THE SOLDIERS, > LIKE THE ONE LYING HERE. > > I COULDN'T HELP WONDER > HOW MANY LAY ALONE, > ON A COLD CHRISTMAS EVE > IN A LAND FAR FROM HOME. > > THE VERY THOUGHT > BROUGHT A TEAR TO MY EYE, > I DROPPED TO MY KNEES > AND STARTED TO CRY. > > THE SOLDIER AWAKENED > AND I HEARD A ROUGH VOICE, > "SANTA DON'T CRY, > THIS LIFE IS MY CHOICE; > > I FIGHT FOR FREEDOM, > I DON'T ASK FOR MORE, > MY LIFE IS MY GOD, > MY COUNTRY, MY CORPS." > > THE SOLDIER ROLLED OVER > AND DRIFTED TO SLEEP, > I COULDN'T CONTROL IT, > I CONTINUED TO WEEP. > > I KEPT WATCH FOR HOURS, > SO SILENT AND STILL > AND WE BOTH SHIVERED > FROM THE COLD NIGHT'S CHILL. > > I DIDN'T WANT TO LEAVE > ON THAT COLD, DARK, NIGHT, > THIS GUARDIAN OF HONOR > SO WILLING TO FIGHT. > > THEN THE SOLDIER ROLLED OVER, > WITH A VOICE SOFT AND PURE, > WHISPERED, "CARRY ON SANTA, > IT'S CHRISTMAS DAY, ALL IS SECURE." > > ONE LOOK AT MY WATCH, > AND I KNEW HE WAS RIGHT. > "MERRY CHRISTMAS MY FRIEND, > AND TO ALL A GOOD NIGHT." > > This poem was written by a Marine stationed in Okinawa, Japan. The > following is his request. I think it is reasonable... > > "PLEASE. Would you do me the kind favor of sending this to as many > people as you can? Christmas will be coming soon and some credit is due to > our > U.S. service men and women for our being able to celebrate these > festivities. > Let's try in this small way to pay a tiny bit of what we owe. Make people > stop and think of our heroes, living and dead, who sacrificed themselves > for us. Please, do your small part to plant this small seed." > > Happy Holidays! > > > ---Mikey--- > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 22:34:20 EST From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Greetings and introduction fom Oxford In a message dated 11/11/99 4:42:16 PM US Central Standard Time, Tony.Wyer@wyer.force9.co.uk writes: << Saw Joni once,at Wembley Stadium, around '84, A vast echoey hall totally unsuited to her music, So too was the lead guitarist (far too loud and aggressive) and the back up band. It was a relief when she sang solo, and greatly appreciated by her audience. Still this and more at a later date. >> Great intro Tony...welcome! And a little synchronicity...I was just reading the review of the Wembley concert on Les' site today, the critic seemed to think the same as you, although he commented as much on what the band was WEARING as to what they were playing...I should imagine if you liked the purer Hejira version of "Sharon" you didn't care for her "metal" version of it... Look forward to hearing more from you, mate! Bob NP: Jericho ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 22:56:33 EST From: CaTGirl627@aol.com Subject: Re: language her-his-its-story(NJC) In a message dated 11/11/1999 5:52:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, ewwtaylor@adelphia.net writes: << Tell THAT to Father Time! From what I understand Herstory was coined in the 1960's to describe matriarchal cultures of pre-Greco-Roman-Christian Eurasia & America. So it is historically correct.... E.T. >> or Herstorically correct!!! LOL!! Hugs, Cat.... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:15:42 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Music... Hymns... etc (NJC) Vince wrote: > And guess what: the sexist, male-oriented language is not in the > original texts of many of the familiar versions. I'm curious - what was the original language and if they were non-sexist, then why not just use the original. I'm thinking it would go better with the original music, right? I think that probably part of the resistance some people feel to changing the ancient hymms into new translations is that it alters the original music and beat. > Now, hymns can be translated poorly, or well. Hymns can be translated > poetically, or not. Hymns can be translated with an eye towards > gender-free, non sexist references and be done well and poetically, or > it can be done poorly. I was saddened to see here a blanket indictment > of retranslating hymns. No congregation of mine is going to sing "Good > Christian Men, rejoice and sing..." when "Good Christian Friends, > rejoice and sing" includes ALL of the worshippers. Well, I'm sorry of it seemed like a blanket indictment. In my particular church, they've come up with *new* songs to sing and I have not heard revised versions of the old and that concept seems kind of off to me, sorry. They do still sing the holiday standards in my church like Joy to the World and Silent Night, and have not altered the lyrics in those. At the church I attended in college we sang all contemporary songs from the popular artists at the time which had themes of love, friendship and humanity like "Come on people now, smile on your brother, everybody get together and love one another right now" and some Cat Stevens and others. And no, this wasn't in California where everyone is far out anyway. ;-) Rather than alienating the older members of the congregation who don't like the old hymms being changed and may feel like they are being forced into something, why not teach them some brand new ones that are just as beautiful? I think they would be very receptive. My elderly father "discovered" and came to love many of our favorite artists by hearing their music in church, but I think he too would feel at odds with a rewriting of the songs he grew up with. Not because he would miss the perceived sexist content, but simply because they were familiar to him long before he ever had a thought about sex or anything else! > Consider when we complain about something being different: the Lord's > Prayer in English is probably said in at least four different versions > amongst American worshippers, and each group thinks their translation is > the only one. On a wider scale, what are the Ten Commandments? The > Jewish, Roman & Lutheran, and Anglican & Protestant lists each have a > DIFFERENT set of the 10 commandments as God, alas, failed to put the > numbers in and so different traditions number differently. I was taught both a Protestant and Catholic religion growing up (and learned both Bible versions) plus had exposure to the Jewish religion through some of my relatives. I never thought there were any substantive differences at all between the Protestant and Catholic versions of the Lord's Prayer and the 10 commandments. In fact, the Catholics now have adopted the Protestant ending of the Lord's Prayer. They all said the same thing in content to me - they just used a few different words to describe the same thing. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:35:54 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Mariana (since Bob asked) (NJC) Bob inquired: > NP: The Breeders, "Roi" (In honor of Mariana...has anyone heard from her recently?) Yes, I've been in touch with her and we recently did a tape trade. I sent her the Second Fret Sets, the Hissing Demos and the Alternate Blue and she went wild over them (although she said her mom has been hoarding the Second Fret tape ;-) In return she made me a huge compilation of about 80 tunes from Sleater-Kinney! She is doing well and has a really wonderful-sounding new boyfriend and they are constantly going to the Troubadour and to Elliott Smith concerts and gatherings. I tried to get her to come back but I think she's moved on from us old cranky folk ;-D Kakki NP: Yardbirds -Too Much Monkey Business ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 00:00:28 EST From: CaTGirl627@aol.com Subject: Re: Greetings and introduction fom Oxford In a message dated 11/11/1999 5:42:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, Tony.Wyer@wyer.force9.co.uk writes: << Favourite track? Well there you have me and like most of you it will depend on the mood. Song for Sharon comes close as I too took that Staten Island Ferry, but it is a toss up between Coyote and Hejira itself, then maybe..... The progression from the LA Express through the Jazz Crusaders to part Weather Report was not only highly fruitful, but produced such a distinctive and original sound that no other female composer has matched it to this day. Joni herself has not even matched it since. >> Tony! Welcome to the list!!! Yes,,,,I guess we are all fans but all in a positive way!!! I know it is so hard to come up with one songs of Joni's as a favorite. Too many to chose from!!! Enjoy your stay here and feel free to post often! Catgirl ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 00:23:50 -0500 From: Vince Lavieri Subject: Re: Music... Hymns... etc (NJC) > I said, > > > Consider when we complain about something being different: the Lord's > > Prayer in English is probably said in at least four different versions > > amongst American worshippers, and each group thinks their translation is > > the only one. On a wider scale, what are the Ten Commandments? The > > Jewish, Roman & Lutheran, and Anglican & Protestant lists each have a > > DIFFERENT set of the 10 commandments as God, alas, failed to put the > > numbers in and so different traditions number differently. and Kakki answered: > > > I was taught both a Protestant and Catholic religion growing up (and learned > both Bible versions) plus had exposure to the Jewish religion through some > of my relatives. I never thought there were any substantive differences at > all between the Protestant and Catholic versions of the Lord's Prayer and > the 10 commandments. In fact, the Catholics now have adopted the Protestant > ending of the Lord's Prayer. They all said the same thing in content to > me - they just used a few different words to describe the same thing. > Jewish: starts with 1st Commandment "I am the Lord your God" and "Thou shall have no other gods before me" is second commandment. Episcopal/Protestant has these as one, not two, commandment(s). Lutheran/Catholic, "I am the Lord your God" is preface, first commandment is "You shall have no other gods." For Lutheran/Catholic, the graven image comment is apart of the first commandment. For Episcopal/Protestant, it is commandment 2. Because the Episcopal/Protestant version has made two commandments here where the Lutherans/Catholics made one, they make up the difference with the last commandment(s): Lutheran/Roman have two "You shall not covets..." as nine and ten, while the Episcopal/Protestant have the two prohibitions on coveting as one commandment, the tenth, The significance is that antiCatholics and antiLutherans make much (historically and you still here it today) about the graven image thing, which is not a separate commandment for the Luth/Cath but is for the Epis/Protestants, for this "proves" that the Catholics have "thrown out" the graven image commandment to have their statuary ("idols") in the church. A lot of religious bigotry and persecution has arisen because of the above. And to commit adultery violates the Sixth Commandment for Luth/Cath but the Seventh for Epis/Prot and Jewish. That may sound minor, but consider the politicians who want to post the 10 commandments (in violation of the constitution... ) in schools: whose version? There are major theological reasons we number them differently, for it represents different emphases that the various faith traditions have. To the person in the pew, it may mean little, but these differences are intrisic to the theology of the church bodies. These are, theologically, substantive differeances. And as a pastor who has led public worship many times over 22 years, I always hear the pause over whether we are forgiving "debts" or "tresspasses" or "sins" and whether we say "Lead us not into temptation" or "Save us from the time of trial" (and there is a substantive load of theological difference between those two translations of the same greek words) and do we use the "Protestant" ending (not found in the book of Matthew) or use it as an addendum (in the Roman way). Sorry to heavy up on this for those bored with this religion stuff. (the Rev) Vince ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 02:24:33 -0300 From: "Wally Kairuz" Subject: RE: Music... (NJC) > I really have to go. I've got to dust the persontlepiece and the > tall-still-growing-person, and then I'm going to eat a couple of > persondarins. > > Helen helen, oh helen! you work too hard! you should take a trip to the cayperson islands and lie down in the homophone for male child for a while. wallyk ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 21:51:21 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: 10 Commandments (NJC) Vince, Wow, this is really interesting and I never noticed that they were numbered differently and how that has led to mistaken interpretation. And it could definitely present a problem for those wanting to post them in schools (which version, indeed). > The significance is that antiCatholics and antiLutherans make much > (historically and you still here it today) about the graven image thing, which > is not a separate commandment for the Luth/Cath but is for the > Epis/Protestants, for this "proves" that the Catholics have "thrown out" the > graven image commandment to have their statuary ("idols") in the church. > > A lot of religious bigotry and persecution has arisen because of the above. I have always wondered why some Christian denominations would have this wild idea that Catholics "worshiped statutes and stained glass windows." I was actually taught that in a Christian (non-Catholic) school back in the ancient age (my parents told me to just ignore it) yet am amazed to be still confronted with it occasionally to this day. It does tend to bring home the point that not all Christians are the "same" to some people (although to me, they *are* the same in essential substance). But I think these quibbling points do more harm than good when it leads to different sects of the same basic belief practising bigotry against each other. Eesch! Kakki, promising to stop posting for the night and give it a rest! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 01:32:52 -0500 From: "Eric Taylor" Subject: Re: language her-his-its-story (NJC) << > << > Tell THAT to Father Time! > From what I understand Herstory was coined in the 1960's to describe > matriarchal cultures of pre-Greco-Roman-Christian Eurasia & America. > So it is historically correct.... > E.T. > > >> > or Herstorically correct!!! LOL!! > Hugs, > Cat.... >> But, since it was coined at the end of the patriarchal age, wouldn't that still make *herstory* history? Actually I think it's hysterically correct! Kisses, genEric ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 23:53:34 -0800 (PST) From: zapuppy2@webtv.net (Penny) Subject: (NJC) Reply To Colin (1 of 2) Hi Gang and Colin! Sorry for the interruption by my delay with this, but my e-mail has been all screwed up. I usually wouldn't bother with defending my character but, I saw Colin's lashing out at me from the other day serious enough to make me feel I must respond in order to be able to continue posting on the JMDL. The list was talking about oppression, slurs and bigotry. I commented on a recent statement of Colin's....and the ripping began. In an effort to bring about a better list enviroment for all, I approached Colin off-list back in July over frequent derogatory statements and gross generalizations about Christians that he had been making in his posts. Sometimes he used "fundie xtian" sometimes "xtian" sometimes just "they" or "them". If any wishes to determine how offensive the statements that he's posted to the list, all one has to do is go back through this year's archives and everywhere he calls all members of that group a derogatory name, insert the race, religion, sexual orientation, nationality, etc., that is close to your heart and you'll see what I'm talking about. I still feel I was not in the wrong to approach Colin over this. I've felt myself to be in his cross hairs ever since. I'll just give the most recent example of what I've observed that I feel justify my position that he subverts my (and others'?) right to express themselves freely. Maybe he honestly just can't see the problem that myself and others do. Azeem wrote during the Matthew Shepard thread: <> To which Colin replied: <> I happen to agree with both posts. But this is what Colin posted in reply to my similar in rationale statement in the post: <<'Because if they didn't have a chip on their shoulder, or weren't still uncomfortable in their own skin, the cause they continually spout off about wouldn't be so forefront in their mind.' This is writen in pure ignorance. You obviously have no conception at all as why some gay people stand up for themselves. (by the way as for the self esteem thing-again ignorance speaking.>> Do you see the irrational contradiction in agreeing with Azeem but attacking my intelligence for saying basically the same thing? Is it all in *who* is being oppressed or having bigotry imposed against them, before it becomes applicable or valid? Is it who says it? Maybe a difficulty of thinking in terms of concept rather than written out in specifics? And to also comment on Colin's above statement, there is a huge difference in standing up for oneself and being combative, antagonistic and bludgeoning people with whatever the cause it is one supports. But even that I can handle, just not how he directs his insults. Colin, you are allowed to say whatever you wish here, as we all should be. But for me or any other who makes statements that you have strong feelings about with an opposing viewpoint, often the result is the same type of character attack I took the other day. That's oppressing freedom of speech through means of intimidation. Do you recall the fairly recent Lolita thread? I doubt anyone here likes to see that sort of debacle, but that can easily become the case when you disagree with another's viewpoints. I can only guess that most of us here want the JMDL to be a pleasant place to hang out, but if someone disagrees with you on-list, the place can quickly become very depressing. Maybe you don't even realize how much effect that has on everybody being willing to chime in with their thoughts on different topics, especially if it's a viewpoint you've made it known you oppose. Why should they risk getting the shit kicked out of their character before approx 600 others like you've now tried to do to me? Personally, I love hearing different points of view on all topics. I want to hear in-put from people of all races, religions, sexual orientation and nationalities on the wonderful and insightful threads Joni's lyrics evoke, no matter if I agree with them or not. It's in the derogatory and offensive way you word your posts that I object to. And to call you on the offensiveness or have a differing viewpoint can put that person in your cross hairs, resulting in attempted character assassination. That's exactly the kind of oppression (in my case, I believe solely for my faith) you've made these recent statements about: <> <> Can you not see the hypocrisy of your sincere sounding statements and in how you treat me? As for the personal put-downs from the other day, why is it OK for you to freely state your religious points of view, but when I tried to explain my theological stance to you so you could see why I would never bash gays, it was labelled by you as some kind of horrible "sermonizing?" I think the thing that concerns me most about Colin's post attempting to rip apart my character, is if somehow I have offended other homosexual listers by any of my on-list posts, I would like them to please confront me off-list. (1) So I can personally and sincerely apologize....I'll apologize on-list if you prefer. I always seek to be at peace with others. (2) So I can be made aware of my unintentional offense, perhaps a blind spot, so I don't repeat the same offense to another in the future, avoiding another from being hurt in a similar manner. Thanks. And I hope you all can understand why I have to ignore and not respond to any of Colin's posts, his participation in threads I may also be in, or even further attempts to degrade my character by posting selective snips of private e-mails I sent to him in July. (the snip he selected the other day from a private post I sent him, went on to reference that my own husband was diagnosed as bipolar 3 years ago.) I don't wish to appear rude or condescending but, I simply don't seem to be able to say anything during some of our more serious or sensitive threads without setting him off. (I've intentionally posted only the thread participants off-list, when I know he's sensitive to a particular topic, in an effort to try to not provoke him.) But from all I've been able to decipher from Colin's public and private posts, the only way I could get out of his cross hairs and stop him trying to screw with me, would be to renounce my faith. Not a chance! Paraphrasing what another lister said a month or two ago.... A mature person can agree to disagree. I don't think any lister should have to tiptoe around another just to avoid the list turning ugly. I have earnestly tried to get along with Colin, but ultimately it *does* take two. I'll take Colin's own advice from an above snip to avoid his antagonism and combativeness toward me by going back to list delivery, instead of digest delivery, so I can filter out all his posts. Sorry Colin. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Grace dies when it becomes us verses them......Philip Yancey ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V4 #509 ************************** The Song and Album Voting Booths are open! Cast your votes by clicking the links at http://www.jmdl.com/gallery username: jimdle password: siquomb ------- Don't forget about these ongoing projects: Glossary project: Send a blank message to for all the details. FAQ Project: Help compile the JMDL FAQ. Do you have mailing list-related questions? -send them to Trivia Project: Send your Joni trivia questions and/or answers to Today in History Project: Know of a date-specific Joni fact? - -send it to ------- Post messages to the list at Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe joni-digest" to ------- Siquomb, isn't she?