From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2000 #75 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: les@jmdl.com Errors-To: les@jmdl.com Precedence: bulk JMDL Digest Saturday, February 5 2000 Volume 2000 : Number 075 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: -------- Thought for the day (NJC) ["Alan Lorimer" ] Re: Posts about Wally ["Alan Lorimer" ] More on political correctness (NJC) [David Wright ] Wally [Linda Worster ] Re: More on political correctness (NJC) ["Alan Lorimer" ] Wally [Marian ] Re: Fairwell ["Jim L'Hommedieu" ] Wally [mann@chicagonet.net] Re: Farewell, Wally ["Matthew Hall" ] Re: HOSL ["Matthew Hall" ] Wally ["Chuck EIsenhardt" ] Waitangi Day (NJC) [waytoblu@mindspring.com] Re: More on political correctness (NJC) [catman ] Wally [Steve Dulson ] Michael [Steve Dulson ] Joni in Entertainment Weekly Magazine 2/11/00 [mann@chicagonet.net] "Justice" (NJC) [David Wright ] Wally [pyramus ] Re: More on political correctness (NJC) [Jason Maloney ] Re: More on political correctness (NJC) [Jason Maloney ] PWWAM viewing (SJC) [Emily Kirk Gray ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 19:51:50 +1100 From: "Alan Lorimer" Subject: Thought for the day (NJC) I walked down to the beach late this afternoon. There was a strong breeze blowing out to sea. It was so strong that it was blowing the tops of the waves back out to sea. From a distance it looked as though the waves were trying to escape and get back out to sea instead of landing on the beach. You could even see colours of the rainbow through the spray. Thought you might enjoy a few positive vibes Alan Lorimer Hawley Beach Tasmania ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 19:46:08 +1100 From: "Alan Lorimer" Subject: Re: Posts about Wally I've just read another Digest full of wonderful posts about Wally. It's been a beautiful day here, and the words of a song jump to mind: "hey, there's not a cloud in the sky it's as blue as your good bye and i thought it would rain on a day like today hey there's not a cloud in sight it's as blue as your blue goodbye and i thought it would rain on the day you went away" Alan Lorimer Hawley Beach Tasmania NP: Wendy Matthews "the day you went away" ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 05:40:48 -0500 (EST) From: David Wright Subject: More on political correctness (NJC) Hey everyone! :) I'm getting all heartfelt and eloquent this time! (By which I mean....please read this? I shudder to think I'm writing it all if everyone stopped reading the thread thirty posts ago.) Alan Lorimer wrote: > If we can't adequately define PC we can't debate it. Oh, I think we discuss/debate, say, concepts like "art," "beauty," "justice," "love," "the VG-8," and probably many others every day without an "adequate definition" such as you're asking for. Incidentally, Alan, if you don't know what PC means, what did *you* mean when you wrote "Political correctness is a scary concept in itself" in your first post on this thread? It apparently means *something* to you. > We can, on the other hand, discuss (as opposed to debate or worse) real > issues facing society today such as racism, sexism and all forms of bigotry. [snip] > If people say the wrong thing, you can explain why what they > are saying is offensive instead of trying to tell them to be PC. Well, now, that brings up an interesting point: (It occurred to me, when I said how part of political correctness to me meant confronting racism and prejudice in ourselves and others, and in reading some of LL's comments about manipulation of language, that someone might ask why we don't just call it "racism and prejudice" instead of "political incorrectness" -- which is part of what Alan is saying here, I think. So here's my answer.) I saved something Patricia O'Connor wrote on this list the last time we had this thread which I really loved, and which I hope she doesn't mind my requoting: that before the term "politically correct" was coined, "that's not to say that one didn't recognize a racial slur when one met one in a dark alley, or in a crowded bar, or on a record album, or when one ran head-first into the slur-maker. We didn't call it politically incorrect, we called it racist." Well, Rev. Vince's original post on this thread didn't call Henley's statement politically incorrect, either; he said that Henley made (or may have made) a racist statement. The PC label was then brought up, and at times in rather inflammatory terms, by some of the *responses* to the Rev's post. So I think the suggestion that somebody "explain why what they are saying is offensive instead of trying to tell them to be PC" is a good one, but since that's exactly what was done, don't we seem to have somehow lost sight of the reality in this thread? Well, I think that happened because the PC red herring was dragged in. And, frankly, I just knew it would be. It always is. When someone protests what they see as racism or sexism, and is then attacked (or let's say criticized) for being "politically correct," doesn't that suggest that someone somewhere along the line has managed to substitute "politically correct" for "anti-racist"/"anti-sexist"? And more than that: attacking anti-racism and anti-sexism as such are not very popular positions, but attacking political correctness is practically a national pastime. In other words, I'd suggest it's anti-PCers doing the manipulation of language here. Note that I'm not accusing any of the people who have posted to this thread of effecting this substitution; I think that, as Mary P. said, there was a certain view of "political correctness" -- the "vertically challenged" caricature -- propagated in the media several years ago, which has been prevalent ever since then. And I think it's significant that this backlash, which I'd date at least as far back as 1991-92 or thereabouts, occurred in America in the wake of the decade in which Reagan and Bush undermined decades of progressive reforms. (Can you tell I'm a "big picture" person?) Like all caricatures, the "vertically challenged" portrayal of political correctness is effective because it contains a grain of truth -- recognizing how even everyday language can have a very real power to hurt *is* an important part of political correctness. There's almost always an implicit (or explicit) value judgment whenever PC is brought up the way it is in these threads. There's a kind of knee-jerk "PC is bad" response. And once something's been smeared as "political correctness," the baby (racism and prejudice) often gets thrown out with the supposed bathwater ("political correctness"). Because of this, the "PC" label is certainly a hindrance to discussing issues of racism and prejudice, but as far as I can tell it's not often introduced into the discussion by the people who started the discussion. But hindrance though it may be, to say that we can talk about racism and bigotry and just leave "political correctness" (whatever that may be) out of it -- sorry, I think the ship has sailed on that one. Once it gets brought into the discussion, as it was here, it's absolutely a part of the issue of racism and bigotry in our society, not only because of whatever it is, per se, but more importantly because of the backlash against whatever it is, and because of the way the term has been used (without regard for its meaning) to silence those who speak out on those issues. And that's why I tend to post frenziedly on this topic every time it comes up: it's the backlash against speaking out (however nicely or reasonably) against prejudiced comments that, in a way, always hurts a thousand times more than the comments themselves. It will never stop hurting. And it's not a matter of free speech; it's a very bitter irony to me that proponents of "political correctness" are always the ones accused of censorship. (As Mary P. wrote, "Personally, I find the phrase 'politically correct' to be one of the most ironic in the English language, used as it often is by those on the political right to intimidate and shame those on the political left into silence, based on the principles on 'free speech.'") Rev. Vince wasn't issuing some blanket condemnation of Henley and calling for a mass burning of his albums. And I'm not issuing a blanket condemnation of those who posted opposing views on this thread and other similar threads. The political correctness that I'm fighting for is not exactly the opposite of racism and prejudice: political correctness, for me, is right now as good a label as any -- despite and in a way even *because of* its knee-jerk negative connotations -- for some kind of process or framework, rather, by which we think critically about and confront racism and prejudice and all discrimination and inequality. The goal of that process is community, equality, and respect -- undoing racism and prejudice. That's another reason I jump in on these threads: it hurts to have this term for the process used as a red herring to prevent that process from taking place. If we aren't willing to think critically about posts like the Rev's -- if we're kept from doing so by anti-PC smears that throw out the baby with the bathwater -- then we lose the chance to stop reinforcing internalized prejudices. There, I think I've wrung the last drop of anguish from my tortured soul for the time being. ;) (My quoting other JMDLers in my posts should not, of course, be taken to mean that I'm trying to speak for them.) Take care, - --David "It's in our water and our education/We are oppressed into association" --The English Beat ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 02:38:22 -0800 From: pmeyer Subject: Farewell, Wally I grieve over Wally's death, though I knew him only through his beautiful work. He is an inspiration. "Love is touching souls; surely you've touched mine..." I'll miss Wally. I'm heartened by the JMDL community and the unique bond we share. Wally helped create us. Paul Meyer-Strom pmeyer@ibm.net ps Funeral? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 19:08:44 -0500 From: Linda Worster Subject: Wally Down with the flu, I had Wally's photo up on my computer monitor for most of yesterday. Sometimes crying, sometimes smiling... I thought of him and Jim and all of you. What a fine example Wally is of how doing what we love most yields that which is most valuable in this world. His work and love continues with us. God bless you Wally. love- Linda ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 23:30:02 +1100 From: "Alan Lorimer" Subject: Re: More on political correctness (NJC) WARNING: MORE POLITICAL CORRECTNESS DISCUSSION :-) David said: >Incidentally, Alan, if you don't know what PC means, what did >*you* mean when you wrote "Political correctness is a scary concept >in itself" in your first post on this thread? It apparently means >*something* to you. Like most people in the Western world, I really have little concept of what "Political correctness" means. Repeating your quotation of Mary P.'s comments: >"Personally, I find the phrase 'politically correct' to be one of the most >ironic in the English language, used as it often is by those on the >political right to intimidate and shame those on the political left into >silence, based on the principles on 'free speech.'" Although the Political system is vastly different in Australia to the US, we are heavily influenced by the US. Australians tend to be honest to the point of bluntness. We 'call a spade a spade'. If someone is Racist, we want to know and expose them for the 'bigots' they are. "Political correctness" is not seen as something Australian but is seen as something that has been forced upon us that can be used by those in power to hide injustice and inequality in society behind words. When it comes to the abuse of "Political Correctness", the worst offenders in the Western World are of course the media. They use it so they can crucify people with it, not in the hope of stopping racism or fighting for the rights of minorities, but just to sell stories. When they *do* try to be PC they don't have a clue how to be anyway. I am not attacking the ideals which people have attached to "Political Correctness" but what to me is a meaningless label. Please, no flame-throwers required ;-) This lets me get back to your comment: >Oh, I think we discuss/debate, say, concepts like "art," "beauty," >"justice," "love," "the VG-8," and probably many others every day >without an "adequate definition" such as you're asking for. We can discuss subjects such as "art", "beauty", "love" because we have enough in common to discuss such subjects without definitions. In fact trying to "define" those subjects would be near impossible. We could probably *debate* justice, but even though I've only been a member since December, and haven't seen justice mentioned, I suspect modems would be going up in flames as we argued about what 'justice' meant ;-) I had absolutely no intention of starting a debate on Political Correctness. My original much dissected post was basically agreeing with Jason that the Don Henley quote was a non issue, that racism is a real issue, and what was important was what you believed in your heart. The debate that followed ranged from good discussion to outright abuse. To me, the reason for this was not the people involved, not their attitudes towards topics such as racism, but simply that there was no common ground for the debate. To me the obvious solution was to stop arguing about Political Correctness and address real issues instead. David goes on to say >Well, I think that happened because the PC red herring was dragged in. And, >frankly, I just knew it would be. It always is. Yes, and it was my fault! Why can't we get Les to bounce any messages that have "PC" in them? The rest of David's post is an excellent summary of the use and abuse of "Political correctness". Unfortunately the "Baby" *has* been thrown out with the "Bathwater". Lets pick the "Baby" back up and *Not* put it back in the "Bath of Political Correctness". And this is what the replies to my post with "red herring" PC comment in it should have been. "It's got nothing to do with Political Correctness. The issue is racism. Don Henley made a racist remark, whether in jest or not we don't know, it was still a racist remark" Alan Lorimer Hawley Beach Tasmania np: "Hit me with your rhythm stick" Ian Dury ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 12:50:41 +0000 From: Jason Maloney Subject: Re: More on political correctness (NJC) David, Great post. I've just been re-reading the progression of this whole thread, and - unless I'm mistaken - I belive it was me who first brought the term *PC-ness* into the discussion. So, maybe I ought to address some of the pertinent points made in your post. The trigger for my comment about PC-ness was more the reaction to Henley's remarks, before any significant review of context or intent had been allowed. That, more than ever nowadays, merely the mention of anything remotely suggesting or resembling a possible degree of racism (or any similar offence) will produce a outcry. While I obviously do not advocate unfettered offensiveness, or seek to condone it, I fear that too often this *knee-jerk* reaction clouds the issue that first provoked such an outcry. That is not to banish any discussion that suggests any offensive comments or actions took place, because clearly offence was taken at Henley's remark. It is simply the speed at which such comments are frowned upon which concerns me. It was seeing this reaction to something which *could* be construed as racist or defamatory, that brought to mind the recent pledge by our Government to crack down on anything even *suggesting*or *inferring* racism. While obviously such things as racism should not exist, this declaration comes at a time when there are so many other vital and urgent issues elesewhere in society that need to be addressed sooner rather than later. Those guilty of true racism should of course be dealt with accordingly, but bringing in any kind of measures that render *anything* that could be vaguely construed (by the receiving party) as rascist, is potentially playing into the hands of people who will use such a measure to their own ends. Racism should be wiped out, but this kind of statement of intent from New Labour is both a case of saying the blindingly obvious, and weakening the value of common sense. That is something which they are applying to every issue, not just racism, and the Henley post (and initial responses) just happened to remind me of this fact. So, I brought *PC-ness* into the discussion in the context of the New Labour government, and their delight in proiritising and championing causes and issues which they think will appease the electorate and make them seem caring, tolerant and liberal.....at the expense of going head-on with the problems in, for example, the Health Service and Social Security system. In such a context, I do feel that this form *PC-ness* is very much politically-related and even politically-motivated. Whereas, to use the PC term on a personal level is, I agree, often a poor (and misguided) substitute for a real tackling and acknowledgement of the actual issues at hand (whether they be racism, sexism, equality or cruelty......whatever). So, to further clairfy, I believe my usage of the term *PC-ness* was appiled with a certain relevance, though I do agree with your views that it can (and will) be used to manipulate discussion and divert attention from unpleasant issues. That was never my intention, however. New Labour are set on being seen to act upon a ceratin area of issues in a way that reflects favourably upon them. In other words, they view such rationale as being the *correct* thing to be seen to do *politically*, to please voters, to maintain power. Hopefully, I've managed to explain myself clearly! Jason. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 07:55:49 EST From: MGVal@aol.com Subject: My Wally thoughts Like Mark and many others, www.jonimitchell.com was the very first stop I made when I unpacked my pc and hooked it up. Unlike Mark, I was travelling at 2,400 bps in those days, (and for longer than I care to say until the helpful intervention of fellow JMDL'er Al Date - thank you Al), so I had plenty of time between downloading and reading to stay glued in front of my pc for hours. I remember reading in awe the essay that Wally posted about "Joni Mitchell and the History of My Sadness," (title not exact). It was the first piece of writing by someone other than a reporter that talked about Joni's place in someone's personal life. I was hooked. Like Mark, I too, posted and corresponded with people from the Cafe section, but I can no longer remember who they were. People may remember the old epoxy glue that required the mixing of two compounds. I often think of Wally and Les as standing over two separate and different pots of epoxy base. When mixed together, it creates an incredible bonding substance that stands strong and true. I do not think that I am exagerating when I say that the glue of the Joni Mitchell Homepage and the JMDL has helped to create an Internet community that shares a common heartbeat. I couldn't un-sub if I wanted to now. I joined the list in 1997. That summer, I was lucky enough to participate in one of the first jmdl gatherings. Leslie and Steve Mixon, Rich Neuwith, Merriweather Jones and Wally and his friends. At the time, I don't think that any of us had any idea of what love would blossom within the chaos of sitting through the recitation of the night's blue plate special. Thank you, Wally. Through you, through Les and through all the rest of my JMDL family, I have been blessed. Life is short, love is precious. MG ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 12:40:19 -0000 From: "David Foley" Subject: wally tribute I hope this idea isn't too far-fetched. Thinking of Wally and all of the messages I've read in the last couple of digests an idea came to mind. Is there any Joni material we could tree and put out as the 'Wally memorial tree' Sadly I don't have anything I could offer but I would gladly help out in the UK side of things. It just seems a golden opportunity to do something positive Best Wishes to all David ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 16:14:18 +0100 From: Marian Subject: Wally Today I have added to the JMDL Guitar Files an arrangement of Shadows And Light dedicated to Wally's memory. I am grateful to Wally for many reasons, not the least of which was his assistance in getting the JMDL Cookbook to Joni through her management. Although we did not always agree on everything, I feel that his motivation was always to protect and further the best interests of SIQUOMB. I hope to meet him in the world beyond - I'm quite sure he's having a much easier and more interesting time over there. Marian Vienna ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 10:39:43 -0500 From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" Subject: Re: Fairwell Farewell Wally. Your talent and enthusiasm will be a beacon for the rest of us. All the best, Jim L'Hommedieu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 10:02:11 -0600 From: mann@chicagonet.net Subject: Wally THE REDWOOD & THE SPIRIT Wally & Joni You started out a small tree and touched and embraced many with your arm-branches. Many have looked for shelter under your leaves that have brought them knowledge and friendships and musical pleasures. You've since become a Redwood with roots firmly established. We are the cathedral trees and redwood burls. People come from all over the world to see your tree. A "regular" ordinary tree has become extraordinary. The Mysterious Redwood has become a forest. The Spirit blows thru the forest like fire. Her heat reaches the core of the many trees....... they are warmed and continue to grow and sprout. The forest grows. Many that have lingered in that forest have met and spoke with the Spirit. Others feel her presence like never before. Lives have been changed. Directly and indirectly. Because of you, dear Redwood. Smaller trees that otherwise could not grow together have flourished. The environment is one of harmony as we all seek the spirit in the respected Redwood's forest. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Thank you, Wally for creating a new path for my feet. You've made my life much richer. Love, Laura ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 16:23:05 -0000 From: "Matthew Hall" Subject: Re: Farewell, Wally I have been reading a lot about Wally's death - I'm not going to say much because I really didn't know him at all, but I did smile thinking about what a cool funeral/service he would have. Hundreds of Joni songs to choose from! Matthew ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 16:23:02 -0000 From: "Matthew Hall" Subject: Re: HOSL Well I've had HOSL for nearly a week now (I am so good at these little abbreviations) and I thought I'd give you a little update on what I think (like you care). My fave songs on it : 'In France They Kiss On Main Street' - for obvious reasons, it's no accident that this is the first song on the lp 'Don't Interrupt The Sorrow' 'The Hissing of Summer Lawns' 'The Boho Dance' - Is it true that Bjork is doing this one for the tribute album? That would be so good, I love Bjork. I saw her live about a year ago in Manchester and she was mesmerising, with her little angel wings too. 'Shadows and Light' I do love 'Harry's House/Centerpiece' but I already knew this one, so I take it a bit for granted. One song that I thought I would really like, just from what I'd heard about it, is 'Edith and The Kingpin' but it doesn't really do anything for me... yet. I have resisted buying any more Joni releases yet, although I did get Patti Smith, Fiona Apple and the new Raissa single this week. Matthew ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 11:28:12 -0500 From: "Chuck EIsenhardt" Subject: Wally It strange how expected, and even somewhat hoped-for, news can grab you by the throat. Wally's passing is a great loss. My thoughts and prayers are with Jim, family and friends, and that's all of you in the larger family as well. This morning I keep coming back to his 'Woodstock' for some solace. This was his contribution to tt#4 'A Tape of You' which we distributed in early 98. Here's what Wally wrote in the notes about it: "For me, 'Woodstock' perfectly reflects the Aquarian ideals that were being tested back in the 1960's when I was an impressionable teenager. This recording with guitarist John Connolly is from 1985. At that time, back before the days of 'The Joni MItchell Homepage', I was still devoting most of my energies to songwriting; as was the case with almost all of the cover tunes we experimented with, it was a first and only take. This celebratory song's minor key adds a touch of poignancy for me. reflecting the sad improbability of ever getting "back to the garden". ChuckE ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 12:59:40 -0500 From: waytoblu@mindspring.com Subject: Waitangi Day (NJC) Can someone from New Zealand tell me what Waitangi Day is? I saw it listed on my calender for this Sunday but have no idea what it means. Victor http://www.mindspring.com/~waytoblu/Tangled.htm NP: HOSL on vinyl ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 17:59:00 +0000 From: catman Subject: Re: More on political correctness (NJC) > It is simply the speed at which such comments are frowned upon > which concerns me. I am confused by this. What has speed got to do with it? An offensive remark is offensive and a rebuke needs to be swift. > > > It was seeing this reaction to something which *could* be construed as racist or > defamatory, that brought to mind the recent pledge by our Government to crack down > on anything even *suggesting*or *inferring* racism. While obviously such things as > racism should not exist, this declaration comes at a time when there are so many > other vital and urgent issues elesewhere in society that need to be addressed > sooner rather than later. There are other things that need dealing with AS WELL not instead of. like child abuse for eg. Personally, I think fighting racism is vital and urgent. fighting it does not take away from anything else. In fact it would greatly relieve many of the problems we have. Racism doesinvolve child abuse, it involves crimes of other natures. In short it fucks up our society. So it needs to be given priority and fought against now and not later. > Those guilty of true racism should of course be dealt > with accordingly, but bringing in any kind of measures that render *anything* that > could be vaguely construed (by the receiving party) as rascist, is potentially > playing into the hands of people who will use such a measure to their own ends. who is qualified to say what true racism is? Who is it qualified to say what is only construed as such? > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 13:43:46 -0600 From: dave fairall / beth miller Subject: (no subject) Being a long time JM fan, I, like many of us, inevitably met Wally Breeze through cyberspace, and admired his efforts to promote one of my favorite artists. I bookmarked the site after my first visit, and was thrilled with having found a source for "all things Joni". As a result of Wally's tireless efforts, I first heard about the Day in the Garden concert (trekked from Baltimore to NY to attend), and really appreciated having a forum through which to share my experience. I'm sure that many of us who didn't know him personally feel a very tangible sense of loss today. My thoughts are with his close friends and family. Seeing Wally in a state of bliss seated in the front row in the Painting w/ Words and Music video will always serve to remind me of his commitment, dedication, and passion for JM, through which he succeeded in uniting a global community. THANK YOU WALLY. Dave Fairall Baltimore Md. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 11:01:37 -0800 From: Steve Dulson Subject: Wally Dear friends, Michael Paz gave me the news about Wally yesterday. While I am glad his suffering is over, our world is a lesser place without him. I will be forever grateful for the doors he opened for me. Look at his beaming face in so many shots of the PWWAM video. Wally was in Heaven that day. Now he's in Heaven every day. sigh, mournful sister, whisper and turn, i will rattle like dry leaves when i go stand in the mist where my fire used to burn, i will camp on the night breeze when i go and should you glimpse my wandering form out on the borderline between death and resurrection and the council of the pines do not worry for my comfort, do not sorrow for me so all your diamond tears will rise up and adorn the sky beside me when i go from When I Go © 1998 Dave Carter - BMI ######################################################### Steve Dulson Costa Mesa CA steve@psitech.com "The Tinker's Own" http://www.tinkersown.com "Southern California Dulcimer Heritage" http://members.aol.com/scdulcimer/ "The Living Tradition Concert Series" http://www.thelivingtradition.org/ (Website under construction!) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 11:06:02 -0800 From: Steve Dulson Subject: Michael In our sorrow, there is always light. I believe Michael Paz wil be posting some good news for our community soon. Michael and I were at the NAMM show in LA yesterday (I swear Michael knows EVERYBODY in the music biz!) and picked up some interesting info - but I don't want to steal his thunder. ######################################################### Steve Dulson Costa Mesa CA steve@psitech.com "The Tinker's Own" http://www.tinkersown.com "Southern California Dulcimer Heritage" http://members.aol.com/scdulcimer/ "The Living Tradition Concert Series" http://www.thelivingtradition.org/ (Website under construction!) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 15:12:36 -0600 From: mann@chicagonet.net Subject: Joni in Entertainment Weekly Magazine 2/11/00 The press is starting. Unfortunately, the first one I've seen is not a raver. Entertainment Weekly magazine (February 11, 2000 issue) pg.74, under MUSIC has a nice b/w pic of Joni with the caption: STANDARDS BEARER Mitchell's latest is a not-so-great experiment. The paragraph goes on to say: JONI MITCHELL Both Sides Now (Reprise) In which one of America's most respected singer-songwriters rents an orchestra and tries her hand at some standards, including two of her own. It's tough to argue with the spirit of the set, a song cycle tracing the arc of love gone wrong highlighted by "You're My Thrill" and "You've Changed" (both associated with latter-day Billy Holliday), a ripe re-visioning of Blue's "A Case of You", and a take on "Both Sides Now" that benefits from her vocal maturity. But Mitchell's art is about her writer's voice more than her intreperter's voice, and in the end, this is more curio than keeper. B - Will Hermes Some good news: I went and had my first Starbucks coffee yesterday (Friday). There was a coupon in the paper for a free cup of their new 'light' coffee (sounded good to me because I'm not much of a coffee drinker.....altho I do love Dunkin' Donuts coffee). Heard Joni singing Chelsea Morning over the speakers above. Then walking out another newer Joni song (I cannot remember the tune right now) came out from the spakers and one of the employees was humming it as she went out the door. It made my day and I like Starbucks a little more because of it!! A great freebie.........you can use this toward a purchase or to pay for the shipping at on-line stores like: Tower Records Mothernature.com drugstore.com (go here for a complete list of stores:) http://www.flooz.com/send/liststores.asp Take a few minutes to complete this survey. They will then email you $10 of Flooz. To be eligible for the Gift Certificate, you must complete the survey by February 14, 2000. I believe flooz is good for up to a year (and not easy to get some) so get in on this while you can. Take the survey here: http://www.esurvey.com/mail/jan/mail-survey.html If you need any help using the flooz feel free to email me and I'll be glad to help you out. They do have instructions on the flooz website. Laura ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 16:14:22 -0500 (EST) From: David Wright Subject: "Justice" (NJC) On Sat, 5 Feb 2000, Alan Lorimer wrote: > We could probably *debate* justice, but even though I've only been a member > since December, and haven't seen justice mentioned, I suspect modems would > be going up in flames as we argued about what 'justice' meant ;-) "Just ice." ;) - --David ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 21:13:29 +0000 From: pyramus Subject: Wally Very sad news about Wally. I never had the privilege to know him but from the comments of people on the list it seems like he was quite a guy. Although he has departed, his heartbeat will remain, on the website and the list. Kevin. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 21:14:52 +0000 From: Jason Maloney Subject: Re: More on political correctness (NJC) Somehow my most recent post has muddied the waters rather than cleared them, but no matter...I shall do my best to clarify. catman wrote: > > It is simply the speed at which such comments are frowned upon > > which concerns me. > > I am confused by this. What has speed got to do with it? An offensive remark is > offensive and a rebuke needs to be swift. Of course it is, but the best judgement may not always be the most immediate. Unfortunately, you've only quoted the last segment of the point I was making. In fact, it's so out of context in on its own that I've had to go back and re-read the paragraph it belongs to. Here's what I said : "The trigger for my comment about PC-ness was more the reaction to Henley's remarks, before any significant review of context or intent had been allowed. That, more than ever nowadays, merely the mention of anything remotely suggesting or resembling a possible degree of racism (or any similar offence) will produce a outcry. While I obviously do not advocate unfettered offensiveness, or seek to condone it, I fear that too often this *knee-jerk* reaction clouds the issue that first provoked such an outcry. That is not to banish any discussion that suggests any offensive comments or actions took place, because clearly offence was taken at Henley's remark. It is simply the speed at which such comments are frowned upon which concerns me." So, effectively, I am trying to say that when offence is felt, the immediate (even nartural) response is to harshly judge that which caused the offence before allowing context or intent to be considered. Now, in some cases, there will be little or no need to consider anything, if the offence is clear-cut and beyond defence or rationalisation. Then, as you say, a rebuke should be swift. However, not everything in life is black-and-white. In this particular case, which is what we are talking about (or at least I am, that is the origin of the thread), Henley's remarks caused offence - or were deemed offensive - to a number of people on here. It is true his use of language could be construed as inflammatory, if we do not seek to consider context or intent. It's also true that if his remark caused offence, then it is by definition offensive. However, to immediately decry the man as *a* racist purely on this remark is a little rash. Too often in society, people are castigated for being supposedly racist when their actions or words are interpreted by the other party as being so. From my own experience (and what I have observed around me), the person who feels they have been racially abused will be believed and given credibility over the other. Racism is a weapon that can (and sometimes is) used by both parties, and although such practice may still be in the minority, it's a dangerous situation. That is why any kind of measures to *outlaw* inferred or suggested racism are potentially hazardous. I don't think we agree on this, as your view of racism appears far more cut and dried. If only it was like that. I have seen too much to suggest otherwise. > > It was seeing this reaction to something which *could* be construed as racist or > > defamatory, that brought to mind the recent pledge by our Government to crack down > > on anything even *suggesting*or *inferring* racism. While obviously such things as > > racism should not exist, this declaration comes at a time when there are so many > > other vital and urgent issues elesewhere in society that need to be addressed > > sooner rather than later. > > There are other things that need dealing with AS WELL not instead of. like child abuse > for eg. Personally, I think fighting racism is vital and urgent. fighting it does not > take away from anything else. I don't believe I ever said it would. You've interpreted my comments as saying that, and they can read as such if you wish to interpret them that way. However, as I've repeatedly said in my previous posts on this thread, I don't consider any issue more *worthy* of attention than another. I'm just pointing out that New labour only breaks its hapless and incompetent silence when it comes to issues such as racism (and others which I suspect you feel strongly about too, and understandably so)...because - and again I expect you'll disagree - in their minds those are the issues which they feel will reflect well on themselves if they are seen to be tackling them. The problem is NOT that they are seeking to address racism. To quote something I said in reply to David Wright : ".....The only times New Labour actually make any kind of statement of intent or take action on any issue is continually in relation to a PC issue, or a shallow public realtions exercise that smacks of dubiousness or hokey-ness" ..whereby the term *PC* is used according to the definition I explained in my previous post (also in response to David). I think the problem is that my comments openly criticize New labour, and they are a government which is putting a high degree of emphasis on certain issues that you feel strongly about. Fair enough. I don't subscribe to either a left-wing or right-wing viewpoint. I just see what is common sense, and balanced....and what is not. Yes it is right to address these issues, and no it shouldn't be at the expense of other problems in society. I totally agree. However, the reality is not quite the same. I wish it were. > In fact it would greatly relieve many of the problems we > have. Racism does involve child abuse, it involves crimes of other natures. In short it > fucks up our society. So it needs to be given priority and fought against now and not > later. Can you expand upon this any further? As I said just now, I agree it needs addressing, so I am with you there. I follow the link from racism to crime etc, but what other ways is it responsible for fucking society up? I'm not insinuating there aren't other ways it does, but if you could shed more light on it, I'd be interested. > > Those guilty of true racism should of course be dealt > > with accordingly, but bringing in any kind of measures that render *anything* that > > could be vaguely construed (by the receiving party) as rascist, is potentially > > playing into the hands of people who will use such a measure to their own ends. > > who is qualified to say what true racism is? Who is it qualified to say what is only > construed as such? Well, if nobody dares to acknowledge the difference bewteen them, we are headed for trouble. As for *who* decides, well...*who* judges criminals, etc? Any judgement needs to be rational, and considered, and balanced. And perhaps not left to individuals, who may have their own agendas. I fear for a future where common sense and open-mindedness and a desire for *fair play* are rendered obsolete by the kind of thinking championed by New Labour and the most extreme factions of minority groups. I hope it doesn't happen. In Joni-spirit, Jason. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 13:43:33 -0800 (PST) From: zapuppy2@webtv.net (Penny) Subject: NAMM? (NJC) Mr Dulson, would you refresh my memory. What, again, does NAMM stand for? Thanks! Penny :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Grace dies when it becomes us verses them......Philip Yancey ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 17:06:34 -0500 From: Vince Lavieri Subject: Re: NAMM? (NJC) National Association of Mini-Mitchells (far far better than being a Mini Me) Penny wrote: > Mr Dulson, would you refresh my memory. What, again, does NAMM stand > for? Thanks! > > Penny > > > > :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: > > Grace dies when it becomes us verses them......Philip Yancey ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 22:20:16 +0000 From: Jason Maloney Subject: Re: More on political correctness (NJC) David, David Wright wrote: > Hello Jason, > Thank you for your post, and I hope I didn't seem to be singling > you out by saying that PC was "dragged into this thread." No, I didn't feel singled out, but I will readily admit to being the pesron who first mentioned the term (however tangental) in this thread. > As to the above, here's part of Rev. Vince's original post: > "Presuming that Joni is quoting Henley correctly, that is a racist > statement." (Note that he didn't even say Henley is a racist.) "Does > anyone know more about Henley to put this in any context by which we can > otherwise understand this? I am sincerely asking." > I don't see how that can possibly be considered a knee-jerk > reaction or an unreasonable outcry. The Rev. made quite a reasonable > allowance for reviewing context (even though it could easily be argued > that that statement is no less offensive in context than out of context) > and intent. He apparently came to a different conclusion that you or Don > Rowe or Catherine did, but I don't think that's outside the boundaries > of reason. As I said in my last post (in reply to Colin), I totally agree with this view, that regardless of context, the *statement* Henley made could be labelled racist, and there is understandable reason for some people to find it offensive. I felt Vince approached the matter intelligently and with scope for discussion. My remarks were not directed at him personally, and never have been. Apologies if it appeared that way. Yes, Don, Catherine and myself sought to provide some possible explanations or scenarios by which this exchange took place, which followed the opportunity given to us by him. So far, so good. With a thread such as this, the difference between what *has* been said, and the wider *significance* of what has been said, can become blurred. Much of what I have written over the last few days is as much *triggered* by other's comments, as by what such a line of thinking and action IN THE U.K. *right now* could bring upon society. I admit that I have sometimes gone at a tangent to the initial subject. Now, I am apprehensive of another head-against-wall series of exchanges, which is something I certainly do not want, and will not engage in. As long as grace and dignity are present in this discussion, then fine. Again, apologies if anyone has felt I was directly inferring anything at them personally. That was not my intention. Not everyone can agree 100%, but for the most part I have detected a degree of common ground amongst us, or as much as could be reasoably hoped for in such a discussion. Jason. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 17:31:54 -0500 (EST) From: David Wright Subject: Re: More on political correctness (NJC) Jason just replied on-list to an off-list post of mine, so part of this has already been covered, but here it is anyway: Jason Maloney wrote: > "The trigger for my comment about PC-ness was more the reaction to Henley's > remarks, before any significant review of context or intent had been allowed. [snip] > However, to immediately decry > the man as *a* racist purely on this remark is a little rash. But that's not what happened. Let's all look at Rev. Vince's post again: "Is Henley a little bit of a bigot? A big bit of a bigot? Presuming that Joni is quoting Henly correctly, that is a racist statement. 'You're not gonna take me off and replace me with ANOTHER SINGER' would have been understandable and human; 'with a Negro' is offensive. Does anyone know more about Henley to put this in any context by whcih we can otherwise understand this? I am sincerely asking. I didn't expect this type of statement from him." Nowhere does the Rev "decry the man as *a* racist." He says the man made "a racist statement," which you seem to be arguing does not necessarily make one a racist. And the Rev specifically asks for a context for the statement. Throughout this thread two slightly contradictory justifications for Henley's statement have been used, in my opinion: 1) that Henley's statement was justifiable in context either as humor or as some reference to "the black singing voice," and 2) that we have no right to judge his comment because we don't know the context. Well, if we can't judge the comment out of context, you can't justify it out of context either. You can't have your cake and eat it too. > From my own experience (and what I have observed around me), > the person who feels they have been racially abused will be believed > and given credibility over the other. That's not my experience at all, except for when the person who feels they have been racially abused happens to be white. > I just see what is common sense, and balanced....and what is not. Implying that the rest of us do not? We all have different perspective on this. To imply that one perspective is "*common* sense" -- i.e., the universal, sensible, "right" one -- is not correct. - --David ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2000 11:39:55 +1300 From: "Helen M. Adcock" Subject: Re: Waitangi Day (NJC) Victor wrote: >Can someone from New Zealand tell me what Waitangi Day is? I saw it listed >on my calender for this Sunday but have no idea what it means. I guess that would be me! Waitangi Day, or New Zealand Day, as it's now known, is the Anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi. This was a document in which 500+ Maori chiefs signed governership over to the British. There has been much controversy over the Treaty in recent years, particularly how the British "ripped off" the Maori in the settlement. There is now a section of government exclusively for dealing with Treaty claims, where different Maori tribes can claim back the land and or fishing rights they were cheated out of in the Treaty. If you'd like more information (since I haven't explained things very well!) then go to: http://webworkshop.com/nz/waitangi/waitangi.html This site also explains the problems with the Treaty. Hell _______________________________ "I don't believe in livin' in the middle with available extremes" - Carole King hell@ihug.co.nz ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 17:52:45 -0500 (EST) From: Emily Kirk Gray Subject: PWWAM viewing (SJC) hi everyone i'm so stressed about how to quantify my joni-content these days...nervous that referring to a joni-related item without large doses of in-depth analysis of her music will piss off lots of people! but i digress... anyway, i showed my PWWAM video to a friend/boyfriend last night (the guy who lives under the hejira-playing window dresser for those of you keeping track...actually he just moved but that's another story), and ANYWAY i was hoping he'd like it (his taste runs to the sex pistols and such) or at least hoped that he'd fake liking it knowing my allegiance. i suspect the latter occurred. but his only real disparaging comment was towards larry klein! out of nowhere, my friend says, "who the hell is that chump?" gesturing towards larry, and i explained, getting irked but also giggling. my friend said "why is he playing bass like he has to make up for the fact that he's not jaco?" and i disagreed and tried to argue. but there was no arguing and my friend was relentless in poking fun at larry the whole time we watched the video. and you know what? now I'VE caught the bug and i DO find larry's oh-so-into-it facial expressions and such kind of annoying. or i did last night, i should say. isn't that annoying? i'm annoyed that he's gotten me annoyed about larry! - -- emily NP: "The Truth," by The Artist Formerly... ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2000 #75 **************************** 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 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?