From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2002 #198 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: les@jmdl.com Errors-To: les@jmdl.com Precedence: bulk Unsubscribe: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.smoe.org/lists/joni Websites: http://www.jmdl.com http://www.jonimitchell.com JMDL Digest Monday, May 6 2002 Volume 2002 : Number 198 The Official Joni Mitchell Homepage, created by Wally Breese, can be found at http://www.jonimitchell.com. It contains the latest news, a detailed bio, Original Interviews, essays, lyrics and much 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: -------- Today in History: May 6 [les@jmdl.com] Re: Fred's remarks (NJC) [dsk ] Re: Roe v. Wade ,etc. (NJC) [dsk ] Re: Fred's remarks (NJC) ["Kakki" ] Joni's sexiest song [dsk ] Re: Fred's remarks (NJC) [dsk ] Re: the Prince collaboration? [Julius Raymond ] Re: Cinematic Joni, Perfect Joni ["William" ] Re: Roe v. Wade ,etc. (NJC) [Deb Messling ] Re: Roe v. Wade ,etc. (NJC) ["Kakki" ] Re: Bonnie Raitt's I can't make you love me NJC ["hell" ] Dead Can Dance NJC [Mags N Brei ] Re:Cinematic Joni, Perfect Joni ["Erica Trudelle" ] Re: Just some loose, unfinished thoughts of a Dutch lurker (NJC) [anne@] NJC [colin ] Re: Joni's sexiest song [Merk54@aol.com] Re: Re: Joni's sexiest song [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] Re: Night Ride Home [Lori in MD ] wha? njc ["Kate Bennett" ] joni's vase ["Kate Bennett" ] No Place Special [Lori in MD ] Middle East, France, NJC ["Laurent Olszer" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 03:01:57 -0400 From: les@jmdl.com Subject: Today in History: May 6 On May 6 in history: 1972: Joni performs at Royal Festival Hall in London - Jackson Browne is the opening act. List member Philip writes: "[This concert] had been a disaster from a technical point of view. It started over an hour late and the p.a. broke down a number of times during the concert, which delayed things even more. When she left the stage after the last song I went down to the front in case there was going to be an encore. The house lights were on and most people were leaving apart from me and about twenty other die-hards gathered in front of the stage. She eventually reappeared. The stage was low and I was about three feet from her. Up close, she seemed very sophisticated to a freckled kid like me who was out late in the big city - she smoked, her toenails were painted and she was tanned. She seemed slightly taken aback and asked us why everyone was leaving. A voice from behind me informed her that they were rushing out to catch the last underground. Thinking I was the one who had! spoken, she looked at me with a puzzled look and said "underground?". I managed to blurt out the word "subway", remembering the word from American tv shows. She replied "Oh right" and began picking the first notes of The Circle Game. When she sang I was so close I was hearing her live without the amplification. In 1996, Q magazine published a fan's thoughts on the event: "I was just 13 and totally in love with Joni. She didn't seem at all fazed by the technical trouble and invited us all to cluster round the front of the stage as she sang acoustically to us. It was magical, sitting right at her feet, hearing the songs from Blue in such an intimate way. It was the essence of what Joni would be like in your dreams." More info: http://www.jmdl.com/articles/docs/720513s.cfm 1979: Joni performs onstage with Graham Nash, Jackson Browne, and others at the Washington antinuke demonstration. 1995: Joni performs at the 26th annual "New Orleans Jazz & Heritage Festival". [Today], Joni gave an 80 minute concert... At this show, she premiered her new electric guitar- the Roland VG-8. Built for Joni by Fred Walecki of Westwood Music in Los Angeles, the apparatus solved a great deal of tuning problems for Joni. The VG-8 is actually the computer processor that her Stratocaster-like green guitar is plugged into. This computer stores all her tunings and can recreate them at the push of a pedal. More info: http://www.jonimitchell.com/NewOrleansJazz95.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 03:18:58 -0400 From: dsk Subject: Re: Fred's remarks (NJC) Deb Messling wrote: > > Actually, here's how it works: the states, not the Federal government, > regulate abortion. But as long as Roe vs Wade is the law of the land, > states cannot prohibit abortion, And Roe v Wade became the law of the land because there were so many contradictions between the state laws regarding abortion that a case finally worked its way to the Supreme Court, and their decision became federal law that overrides state law. If an anti-abortion justice is appointed, the immediate effect would be a lot more challenges on the state level. They probably would not be direct challenges to Roe v. Wade but would be cases having to do with the father's rights, or the unborn baby's rights, or reproductive rights, something that would have the effect of contradicting or overriding Roe v. Wade and thereby attempting to make it meaningless rather than directly overturning it, all on the state level. At some point when there's too much conflict between states' laws (or between the laws within states themselves) a case would work its way to the Supreme Court and they'd make a final decision that would be federal law. If that happened, I'm not sure if some states could hold onto their pro-choice laws. So, one conservative Supreme Court judge and choice is in jeopardy, not instantly, and probably in a roundabout way, but Roe v. Wade, like any decision, can be modified or overturned completely. As Vince mentioned, there have been challenges to Roe v. Wade since it was first decided, but most have ended at the state level. Put a few more conservative state judges in, as Bush is currently trying to do, and such cases may go farther. Even without the addition of Bush's conservative judges, a couple of cases got to the Supreme Court in the past few years, but the Supreme Court's decisions had the effect of upholding Roe v. Wade. One more conservative Supreme Court justice, and that would probably not be the case. any more than they can pass a law > establishing a religion or banning a book. Don't know about state laws establishing religion, but haven't there been communities that have tried (or have) passed laws banning certain books? And then someone challenges such laws in court and they're overturned (or upheld). It's a very alive system, with laws constantly being made, challenged in court, and modified to fit a changing society (not always in a way that pleases everyone, of course; that's why there are constant challenges to many decisions that have been made). If an anti-abortion justice is > appointed to the Court, and Roe is overturned, then the states would be > free to prohibit abortion. Not all states would. New York, bless its > heart, legalized abortion on its own, about a year before the Roe > decision. But I am confident that many, many states would very happily > step in to prohibit abortion if they were constitutionally empowered to do > so. Pennsylvania would; I'm sure of it And, as I understand it, when there are so many contradictory laws that there's no clearcut direction, the Supreme Court would eventually accept a case so they could sort it all out. If their decision had the effect of not allowing abortions, I don't know if states could still have pro-choice laws. New York legalized abortions before Roe v Wade was decided and so before any federal laws regarding abortion were in place. Debra Shea ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 03:34:17 -0400 From: dsk Subject: Re: Roe v. Wade ,etc. (NJC) Kakki wrote: > > Deb and Vince, > > I'll try to find the legal analysis I read - it was very interesting and > exhaustively cited both the Constitution and Roe v. Wade to support its > conclusion. I hate to try remember the legal gist of it without reading it > again, but there seems to be something inherent in the Roe v. Wade decision > which prevents *any* court from overturning it. The analysis said that > *maybe* a president/executive action alone could overturn it, but even then, > there were, arguably, provisions in the Constitution which would preclude > that. I'm very curious about this, too, Kakki. My guess is that the writer's point is that it would be extremely difficult to directly overturn Roe v. Wade, and the many challenges so far have proven that to be true, but it's hard to imagine that Roe v. Wade, or any Supreme Court decision, could *never* be overturned. If it is ever overturned, I think it will be in some way that we can't foresee now. As far as a presidential order overturning such a long-standing Supreme Court decision... wow, I can't imagine that ever happening just because the negative political fallout would be so intense. There may be ways for Roe v. Wade to be undermined, though, sneakily and bit by bit, in the same way that long-standing laws regarding privacy, search warrants, and rights to legal representation are currently being undermined by Attorney General Ashcroft. One of Bush's first acts as president, on the first day I think, was to stop government funding of overseas family planning clinics, so he's made it very clear what his agenda is regarding a woman's right to choose. Debra Shea ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 00:10:23 -0700 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Fred's remarks (NJC) Debra wrote: > Put a few more conservative state judges in, as Bush is currently trying to do, and such cases may > go farther. Even without the addition of Bush's conservative judges, a > couple of cases got to the Supreme Court in the past few years, but the > Supreme Court's decisions had the effect of upholding Roe v. Wade. One > more conservative Supreme Court justice, and that would probably not be > the case. I don't know about that. Conservative judges are not known for being judicial activists, but rather for uphoding consitutional law rights. As I understand it (very simplisiticly I admit) Roe v. Wade tied in the right to abortion to the 4th amendment and right to privacy. > And, as I understand it, when there are so many contradictory laws that > there's no clearcut direction, the Supreme Court would eventually accept > a case so they could sort it all out. If their decision had the effect > of not allowing abortions, I don't know if states could still have > pro-choice laws. New York legalized abortions before Roe v Wade was > decided and so before any federal laws regarding abortion were in place. I think a number of states had legalized abortion before Roe v. Wade and some like California tightened up the state consitution after that decision as insurance in the chance Roe v. Wade was ever overturned. Where I start to have a problem with the rhetoric is when I hear people start bashing and automatically lumping in ALL Christians and conservatives universally as "extremists" and anti-choice and various other and sundry terms with regard to this issue. It gives me the creeps and in more paranoid moments makes me think that there are many in the U.S. who would like to totally disenfranchise Christians and conservatives from any participation and representation in government. When it comes to government policies and laws these groups have many other issues and concerns other than abortion. It also seems that some of the disagreements have nothing to do with the right to abortion per se, but rather to the taxpayer funding of abortions in other countries, or whether 12 year old girls should have the right to have an abortion without their parents' knowledge. There are valid questions, IMO, that have nothing to do with the right itself, yet they seemed to be all lumped into an anti-choice, "extremist" category. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 03:46:42 -0400 From: dsk Subject: Joni's sexiest song SCJoniGuy@aol.com wrote: > > So what do we think is Joni's sexiest song? This is something pleasant to ponder. The first song I think of is "My Secret Place", with the seductive sound, the interplay between Joni's voice and Peter Gabriels's, and just wondering about Joni's or anyone's secret place is full of oh my my innuendo. Debra Shea ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 05:08:27 -0400 From: dsk Subject: Re: Fred's remarks (NJC) Kakki wrote: > > I don't know about that. Conservative judges are not known for being > judicial activists, but rather for uphoding consitutional law rights. I've heard that lately from conservatives, including Bush himself I think, on tv so I've also heard the scornful tone of voice. It's strange to me that only liberal judges would be "activists" when all judges, even the Supreme Court ones (as the election debacle showed), are not completely impartial and base their decisions somewhat on their personal viewpoint and prejudices. So, what does this "activist" thing mean anyway? Conservatives seem to think only they see the Constitution purely. From my point of view, they're just as activist (although their activism is to move us backward, as in back to the 1950s if some conservatives had their way). I could tolerate conservatives' attitude a lot more if they honestly said "we want the action to go our way." Just admit it rather than scornfully talk about those liberal judges. I get annoyed at the self-righteous "we see it all purely and those liberals don't" attitude. That's just not the case. (And, Kakki, I'm not even hinting that there's any scorn in what you've written so please don't spend even a second thinking that. I'm recalling what I've heard from politicians.) > I think a number of states had legalized abortion before Roe v. Wade and > some like California tightened up the state consitution after that decision > as insurance in the chance Roe v. Wade was ever overturned. Good for California regarding the tightening up. I hope it works. It seems like if the Supreme Court outlawed abortion then abortion would not be allowed in any state, but maybe that's not the case. > Where I start to have a problem with the rhetoric is when I hear people > start bashing and automatically lumping in ALL Christians and conservatives > universally as "extremists" and anti-choice and various other and sundry > terms with regard to this issue. I don't know about ALL anything. There are liberals who are anti-abortion because they are also anti-death penalty and it doesn't make sense to them to sanction death of any kind, so people's views can be quite complex and even contradictory sometimes. Most people do put themselves somewhere on the political spectrum because most (not all, but most) of their beliefs fit into a consistent world view, but where someone is on that spectrum is their business, although it does usually show in their actions and attitudes. My statements about conservatives are about politicians who have said or by their actions shown they have a certain agenda, which they themselves would label conservative, or about radio talk show hosts, who also label themselves conservative, usually proudly so, and push their viewpoint on the airwaves. Both groups are making their viewpoints public so disagreeing with them seems fair to me, especially when they're politicians whose actions may have some effect on my life. It gives me the creeps and in more paranoid > moments makes me think that there are many in the U.S. who would like to > totally disenfranchise Christians and conservatives from any participation > and representation in government. Really? I think the conservatives (some of whom are Christians but I don't automatically assume they are) are doing very well these days. Even the president is one! So how are they being disenfranchised? Conservative candidates have a lot of money to spend, there are lots of places to vent on all those talk shows where they can freely make fun of liberals, and they almost have control of Congress (although I hope that changes this fall). If anything, from my point of view they'd like to wipe out all liberals. When it comes to government policies and > laws these groups have many other issues and concerns other than abortion. > It also seems that some of the disagreements have nothing to do with the > right to abortion per se, but rather to the taxpayer funding of abortions in > other countries, or whether 12 year old girls should have the right to have > an abortion without their parents' knowledge. There are valid questions, > IMO, that have nothing to do with the right itself, yet they seemed to be > all lumped into an anti-choice, "extremist" category. I agree that there are many side issues that get put under the abortion concern, and not all people who are anti-abortion are extremists. Talking about each single issue can get quite complicated, which is why it often is all lumped together and made to seem very simplistic. Plus, abortion is such an emotional issue, not only in the awareness that it's about loss as well as choice, but also in bringing up questions about the worth and purpose of a woman's life, so it's a hard subject to speak of in depth; much easier to talk about laws and rights and taxpayer money, and sometimes argue about all that. Debra Shea ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 05 May 2002 01:52:30 -0700 From: Julius Raymond Subject: Re: the Prince collaboration? Love will find a way. :-) From VH1.com: - -Julius NEW YORK - The first rule when you're about to drop $75 to $150 on a concert ticket should be "Do your research." Anyone who expected a straightforward greatest-hits retrospective from Prince at Lincoln Center's Avery Fisher Hall Tuesday night [April 9] will have to write their pricey ticket off as a fine for laziness. After all, any artist who is as unpredictable as Prince has historically been should warrant no less than a quick Google search for set lists. Therein, the scientific fan would find that "Little Red Corvette" and "When Doves Cry" aren't bloody likely. Rather, much of the One Nite Alone Tour draws from Prince's most recent public release, The Rainbow Children, an occasional obscurity, a few less-obvious oldies such as "When You Were Mine," and some jammed-out covers like the Delfonics' "La La Means I Love You" and Erykah Badu's "Didn't Cha Know." The result is a show mostly tailored for current fans of the man's music, not just his legend. The two-hour set began as the album begins, with a distorted spoken word leading into the title track, a jazzy battle cry for the new Prince "concept," a continuation of the New Power Generation idea or the Controversy-era call, repositioned as the reproduction of the New Breed Leader ("Stand up, organize!"). From out of the shadows, Prince emerged to pose the question: "Is it better to give than to receive?" Teasing an audience member that he should "give up that front row seat to that brother back there," he began an old-school guitar solo, rousing fans completely before pushing them into their seats for a couple of slow numbers. A high-pitched cover of Joni Mitchell's "Case of You" included an improvised ending that Joni herself wouldn't recognize... > Yeah, it may not be Prince's "fault". She also rejected material from > Charles Mingus for heaven's sake! She rebuffed the Chieftains when they > repeatedly asked to remake "Magdeline Lauderies" with her vocal. > (Eventually she accepted.) She chose not to contribute to Karen O'Brien's > biography. It's her method of operation. Her pattern. Joni is permenantly > unavailable. > > Lamadoo > > > James in Urbana IL > asked: > <> > > Bob from South Carolina answered: > > It never materialized...Joni says that Prince approached her with some > songs, > but they were too 'out there' for her, Prince being the combiner of the > profound & the profane that he is. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 10:39:14 +0100 From: "William" Subject: Re: Cinematic Joni, Perfect Joni In response to CC's; <<>> It's the exception rather than the rule for people here to be sitting out in their gardens in T-shirts at any time let alone early May. However yesterday was one of those exceptions; not a cloud to be seen and warm. So it was a day for getting ourselves out to the garden. Our garden abuts a wooded area David Attenborough would have a field day with. I've gotten to know the habits of a lot of the wild-life as I spend so much time on the computer looking out the window. Just last Thursday our town was on the national weather news; hail the size of golf balls. I saw two magpies under the curve of a tree sheltering from that very pelting only to be shooed by a squirrel seeking the same shelter. Next thing the two magpies are swooping down at the squirrel and so it went on. I digress. Point is I feel like I'm getting to know the animals and their routines. Watching and listening to them is so therapeutic. So I'm playing The Hissing Demos and Dreamland comes on. The penny whistle at the beginning and then again, or was that a bird? The whistle is used throughout the song. Well what with the birds chirping, tweeting, cheeping, twittering and singing along I thought of Joni; " So I sat out in the sun ... ... and I tuned my guitar to the sound of that day ... ... so I tuned to the crows and the seagulls and the sonic references available ..." Dreamland coming on, dreamland dreamland. WtS ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 02:21:27 -0700 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Fred's remarks (NJC) Debra wrote: > I've heard that lately from conservatives, including Bush himself I > think, on tv so I've also heard the scornful tone of voice. It's strange > to me that only liberal judges would be "activists" when all judges, > even the Supreme Court ones (as the election debacle showed), are not > completely impartial and base their decisions somewhat on their personal > viewpoint and prejudices. With regard to the election, I intently followed every court proceeding in Florida and the two appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. I'm not a lawyer but I called every decision in advance correctly 100%, not based on my political prejudices, but from everything I ever learned about the Constitution, Federal and State rights and laws and the U.S. government and electoral system. I work with some of the most highly educated lawyers in the country and they argued with my reasoning throughout each and all court proceedings. Each time a decision came down, the reasoning taken by the court was the same as mine. (those lawyers, by the way, avoided me for a couple months afterward ;-) > So, what does this "activist" thing mean anyway? Anything that would subvert or abolish constitutional and state rights - owning a gun, extra-legal confiscation of personal property, banning free speech when it takes the form of displaying a flag, banning religious or political displays on private property to name a few that come up from time to time. One of the scarier things I heard during the election debacle was the call to the abolish the electoral college. Another scary episode was Janet Reno's justice department attempting to federalize law enforcement in Los Angeles when there was a scandal in the police department a few years back. > Good for California regarding the tightening up. I hope it works. It > seems like if the Supreme Court outlawed abortion then abortion would > not be allowed in any state, but maybe that's not the case. No, states would still have the right to do what they want. The U.S. Supreme Court can only rule on constitutional questions. Roe v. Wade got tied into a constitutional question and that is why they took the case and ruled on it. > My statements about conservatives are about politicians who have said or by their actions shown >they have a certain agenda, which they themselves would label conservative, or > about radio talk show hosts, who also label themselves conservative, > usually proudly so, and push their viewpoint on the airwaves. Both > groups are making their viewpoints public so disagreeing with them seems > fair to me, especially when they're politicians whose actions may have > some effect on my life. Well I have a jaded eye towards most politicians and media personalities. Sometimes one has to glean the gist of the issue from the rhetoric and grandtstanding. Pat Buchanan, Newt Gingrich, Bob Dornan and a number of other conservatives make my hair turn up on end when they are not totally disgusting me. Same for so-called Christian media personalities such as Jerry Falwell and Dr. Laura and the tele-evangelists. They are no more representative of all conservatives or Christians than many politicians and religious personalities on the left are representative of all liberals. > Really? I think the conservatives (some of whom are Christians but I > don't automatically assume they are) are doing very well these days. > Even the president is one! So how are they being disenfranchised? Attempts to disenfranchise by tactics of demonization and stereotyping (all are "far right extremists") and slander (Bush caused Enron, Bush caused the California energy crisis, Bush paid off the Taliban, etc.). Holding up judicial appointments based solely on political affiliation, etc. Aren't these some of the same odious tactics used by Gingrich and company a few years back? Turned me way off the Republican party at the time. > I agree that there are many side issues that get put under the abortion > concern, and not all people who are anti-abortion are extremists. > Talking about each single issue can get quite complicated, which is why > it often is all lumped together and made to seem very simplistic. And that's where some people start to feel disenfranchised - when individual issues are deliberately obscured and truncated in the cause of some larger political goal. I can't oppose funding abortions in other countries for fear of being called mean and anti-choice when really I simply don't want my tax dollars squandered recklessly in foreign countries, many of whom have a long track record of taking the money for their own corrupt political elites and not spending it where it is intended. In the end I am not so invested personally in all the various political rhetoric that I have some huge problem with it. But there is something personally disturbing to me about the demonization of Christians and other religious groups. I'm really not very religious myself, but there is something that really chills me when that particular kind of rhetoric starts up. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 06:19:36 -0400 From: Deb Messling Subject: Re: Roe v. Wade ,etc. (NJC) I'm not a lawyer, but my husband is, and I did go to law school for a year and pulled an A in constitutional law. There is nothing in the law to prevent a court from overturning a previous court's decision. Even Marbury v Madision, could theoretically be overturned! (that's the decision in which the court gave itself the power to review acts of Congress). A president cannot, legally, overturn a decision of the Supreme Court. He could defy a decision, but he would probably be impeached if he tried. I'll bet the analysis you read was written by a political advocate, not a lawyer. Either that, or you misunderstood the presumably convoluted language of the analysis. At 10:21 PM 5/5/02 -0700, you wrote: >Deb and Vince, > >I'll try to find the legal analysis I read - it was very interesting and >exhaustively cited both the Constitution and Roe v. Wade to support its >conclusion. I hate to try remember the legal gist of it without reading it >again, but there seems to be something inherent in the Roe v. Wade decision >which prevents *any* court from overturning it. The analysis said that >*maybe* a president/executive action alone could overturn it, but even then, >there were, arguably, provisions in the Constitution which would preclude >that. > >Kakki - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Deb Messling -^..^- messling@enter.net - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 03:12:07 -0700 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Roe v. Wade ,etc. (NJC) Deb, Everything you wrote makes sense to me, too. The reasoning in the analysis was a new twist to me, too. But this was a legal analysis which was not so much interpreting the law in general but analyzing this specific case and and discussing why attempts to overturn it could not succeed. If I ever find it I'll post a link to it. > I'll bet the analysis you read was written by a political advocate, not a > lawyer. Either that, or you misunderstood the presumably convoluted > language of the analysis. That could very well be. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 23:23:45 +1200 From: "hell" Subject: Re: Bonnie Raitt's I can't make you love me NJC Bob wrote: > Bonnie's sexiest song: "Love Me Like A Man", written by Chris Smither from > her '72 classic 'Give It Up'. Check it out, Abby...you won't regret it. > My favorite Bonnie song ever is her cover of "That Song About The Midway", > incredible song, interpreted brilliantly. Although "I Feel the Same" (another > Smither song) is a close second. I'd have to agree that Love Me Like A Man is ONE of Bonnie's sexiest songs - but only one, there are so many more! Like Cure For Love, Love Letter, Slow Ride, Feeling Of Falling, etc., etc.! I also think she's one of those artists who gets better and better with time. She's incredible live, and her latest album is absolutely wonderful! A huge variety of styles on this one as well - blues, funk, soul, rock...... the woman can do no wrong! And the first song (The Fundamental Things) on her last album (Fundamental) was co-written by Larry Klein (kind of Joni content)! > So what do we think is Joni's sexiest song? That's a hard one, because I don't think Joni has any REALLY sexy songs (just my opinion!) because her musical style just doesn't sound that way to me, but I think I'd go with A Case Of You (the BSN version) as her most romantic, and her sexiest would have to be In France They Kiss On Main Street..... "And we were rolling, rolling, rock 'n' rolliiiiiiiing". I'd be interested to hear any other opinions? Hell - also a DEDhead (even if it's not sexy music)! ____________________________ "To have great poets, there must be great audiences too." - Walt Whitman hell@ihug.co.nz Hell's Personal Photo Page: http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hell/main/personal.htm Visit the NBLs (Natural Born Losers) at: http://www.nbls.co.nz ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 04:42:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Mags N Brei Subject: Dead Can Dance NJC Listening to the Serpent's Egg just now and for Mark in Seattle, I will post the lyrics to 'Severance', third song on the disc, so powerful this. Good music to write to. Sends *shivers*. I don't know much about the band, just that I've always liked them. The music of Dead Can Dance is moody and melancholy. I love it for that very reason, with no need to explain. ;-) Severance Severance, The birds of leaving call to us, yet here we stand endowed with the fear of flight. Overland the winds of change consume the land, while we remain in the shadow of summers now past. When all the leaves have fallen and turned to dust, will we remain entrenched within our ways. Indifference, the plague that moves throughout this land Omen signs in the shapes of things to come. Mags ===== You open my heart, you do. Yes you do. - JM Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 08:11:49 -0400 From: "Erica Trudelle" Subject: Re:Cinematic Joni, Perfect Joni cc wrote: "around 2am, a beautiful calm still night in Los Angeles, driving slowly down a forlorn Santa Monica Boulevard in downtown Hollywood with "The Wolf That Lives In Lindsay." I will carry these chills forever." I just wanted to tell you I loved your post so much, I am as far as you can get from LA and still be in the US, but I vicariously soaked up every ounce of this moment. Nothing gives the chills like a good Joni thrill!!Cheers!! Erica NP: "Fat Back Taffy" Jill Scott _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 14:24:01 +0200 From: "John van Tiel" Subject: Re: Just some loose, unfinished thoughts of a Dutch lurker (NJC) Bree wrote: > You sir..... are a gentleman and a scholar. Maybe you should be the one > doing the negotiating in the middle east. Your post gave a wonderful > calming effect. Thank you! Well, one of my middle names is Proze-Ac(ademic) ... in a world of pissy proze a shared meal can work wonders. One of the ways the Indonesians integrated into Dutch society was the way in which the Dutch massively embraced their "rijsttafel" (rice table) - a table with one big bowl of rice and 30 to 50 small bowls of a wide variety of dishes, meat, vegetables, fish, tofu, spicy, sweetish, pickled, fried, etc. Everyone is supposed to take a plate of rice and just taste a tiny bit of the other dishes that look attractive. The rice is the actual food. You always finish the rice on your plate. All the rest is 'shared spice of life'. A rice table is a calming experience. It takes time. It is different every time. And it makes you realize that the essence, the food, is simple (rice, just rice). How you spice up your food is up to you. But whatever you pick, you always share certain choices with others. And you talk about what you share. As a result, you are always almost automatically invited to try out things you have never seen before, just because someone else enjoys it. Food as a sharing experience can be so soothing. I believe that sharing food - particularly preparing meals together - can be a katalyst in solving problems. But then ... I am slightly ;-)) overweight. Would it work on a larger scale? Locking up Arafat and Sharon together in a kitchen and ask them to prepare a big meal for a combined family dinner in private? I must be naive. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 08:37:16 -0400 From: Jerry Notaro Subject: Re: Joni's sexiest song For me it is Night Ride Home. The beach, the breeze, the love............. the possibilities are endless! Jerry dsk wrote: > SCJoniGuy@aol.com wrote: > > > > So what do we think is Joni's sexiest song? > > This is something pleasant to ponder. The first song I think of is "My > Secret Place", with the seductive sound, the interplay between Joni's > voice and Peter Gabriels's, and just wondering about Joni's or anyone's > secret place is full of oh my my innuendo. > > Debra Shea ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 05:47:17 -0700 (PDT) From: anne@sandstrom.com Subject: Re: Just some loose, unfinished thoughts of a Dutch lurker (NJC) "John van Tiel" wrote > Would it work on a larger scale? Locking up Arafat and Sharon together in a > kitchen and ask them to prepare a big meal for a combined family dinner in > private? > > I must be naive. No, I think you're brilliant! We all live life on the small scale, not the grand stage. Anyone, no matter how famous and powerful only walks onto the "stage" briefly. And what could be more essential than food? And, I'm kind of thinking I'll do something along the lines of the rice table at my next get-together. lots of love Anne ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 13:54:31 +0100 From: colin Subject: NJC This will make more unpopular than I already am but i have got to the point I don't give a damn about that. I refuse to allow ignorance and cruelty to unsettle me. people who resort to cruelty because they cannot explain themselves are abusive. full stop. and thsort of mail sent to the list about me was indeed cruel. i have never ever sent a post a post like that. I once told a person who had haragnued me and kept telling me how bad I was thnat they were cruel and a liar and arrogant. I had reason to believe that and have not yet had a reason to change my mind. What people write is plain to see. If someone says they do not like it or disagree with or see it as offensive they have the right to say so. It is NOT the same as saying the person who wrote is bad or an offensive person. It is saying that the words used were. I am astounded that adults that do not get that. Maybe I am supposed to sing your praises and agree with everything written. That would get very confusing but it would please some wouldn't it? It also really pisses me off that when people do resort to name calling and or cruelty, no one says anything although they might privately. In recent times, just a few I can recall, I have been blasted for my opinons. These blasts were not people putting the other side. they were mean sprited on attacks on me personally. eg: I wrote that elderly people do notgain wisdom just by virtue of being old. a nice cyber friendship was ruined becasue someone took it personally!!!! I asked someone why they seemed to be taking what i wrote personally. They respoinded that they didn't and in the very next post said they said took it personally. How on earth can one deal with that? What I coinsidered to be a friendly friendship down the drain. I have never taken it personally whne people disagree with me. Although it seems that was a mistake. Judging by the venom that comes my way from those who disagree with me. I once responded with a sarcastic comment to 'only a fool would not like whichever Joni album it was'. I found that offensive. I did know it was mreant to be quote from seomthing else. So I got blasted for that to. Another person I thought had been a friend now longer wirtes because I happen to think circumscion of babies is wrong and don't fully support their stand on Israel. People find the time to ask people to trim posts or rememeber to use the NJC tag(even tho they commit said crimes themselves) yet ignore blatent abuse. The abuse Debra received went on and on for ages and most people ignored it. Perhaps mistakenly, I have been very open about my past. For one reason only. To edcuate people. All I achievd is giving people ammunition to use against me, to have people make cruel remarks about it. I had people tell me to get therapy, to take my pills etc etc etc HOW DARE THEY? Who the hell do they think they are? They ahve absolutely no idea at all what they are talking about.Nevr in a million years would I be so cruel to anyone, no matter how much I didslike them. We can't like everyone but we can respect people. It is abusive not to. So many people who have survived such horrors are treated appallingly. No wonder so many of us keep it a secret. I have said what i have said, made myself vulnerable for good reasons, and I had faith that those who read it would take it for what it was, but no I was stupid and all they did was use it as ammo. disgusting. Instead they chose to see it as some quest for myself. They ahev cheek to talk to about forgiveness, to tell me how I should feel. They do NOT have the right. Especially when their own issues are so cleary on display. None of you, absolutley none of you, have lived what i lived. you have no clue! NONE! Not even my John knows so why the hell would I tell you lot? I have told one person, and that was my therapist. (of course I know others have had similar lives I am just saying we all different) I am not as open as you may think I am. I have not given deatails.Did I tell you what it feels like to held down and raped when you are five? Did I tell you what it feels like to used in child porn?Did I tell you what it feels like to see your best friend killed horrendously when you are 7 as a direct result of racism? Did I tell you what it feels like to be reguallry knocked unconscious by epople who are supposed to love and care for you? Did I tell you what it feels like to grow up unloved and knowing it was all your fault? Did i tell you how it feels to be so lonely and just wish your time here would hurry up and be over? did I tell you what it feels like to feel like nothing?No I fucking didn't. You will NEVER be told that. Not ever. For five years this list has been so important me. Someone once told me to go get a life in one of those mean spirited posts. How is that possible when people are just as cruel in the real world? I can tell you, that most people, the vast majority, gay or str8, do not want to know someone with a mental illness. I make friends with people, I am easy going and like people, and as soon as it is realised I have a problem, they disappear. i don't have to say'hi I am colin, i have Bi polar disorder'. It is not a disease you can hide. So the pc has been a godsend for me. because for those of you who will relish this, I spend all my time on my own, except when John is here at weekends. I used to make the effort, go to church( mistake), join clubs, but the attitude out there for anyone different is not good. And yes, I have spent years thinking ti must be my fault, just like you are thinking. And I'll tell you what, the bahviour and nastiness I have seen here astounds me and people have the cheek to disrespect me, to diminish me, to dismiss me, because I am 'not all there' should take a look at themselves! I recently asked a freinds opionion becasue I felt I was becoming too cynical. Right now, I just don't feel any different. My fatith in people is shatterd. I was told that you learn trust by trusting. Bollocks to that. those who don't want to see me as a real person, with real feelings, will see this as nothing more than self pity. Or they will just blame me. It makes it all much easier for them. I have NEVER intentionally hurt anyone.(of course the person I told how I felt to about them, will call me a liar but I can't help that). The sort of mails I talking about are sent by people with that sole intention-to hurt.I don't like to cause people pain. I have slipped up and apologised. I cannot apologise for somehting I have not done. Although i did once, I wrote soemtbning like 'some cow I don't even know sent me a virus'. This was before I knew about virii and how they spread. I immediately apologised but contiued to be slagged off for it anyway. No doubt I have opened myself up for more abuse. And thsoe of you who wish I'd fuck off might well get your wish. i haven't decided yet. if I do fuck off it will becasue I decieded to. oh and just a little thing-I can spell I just can't type well. Oh and Laurent(if you got this far!)-I do not dislike you at all. I don't know you.. I don't agree with you. That is allowed isn't it? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 09:49:31 -0400 From: Merk54@aol.com Subject: Re: Joni's sexiest song My vote would go to Coyote. He picks up my scent on his fingers... That line gets me everytime. Jack ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 09:53:22 -0400 From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Re: Joni's sexiest song I would also have to suggest "Crazy Cries of Love" Whoa, whoa...my my...ice cream melting on a piece of pie. Bob NP: Van Morrison, "Celtic Ray" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 07:10:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Lori in MD Subject: Re: Night Ride Home Susan G wrote: > I totally agree about "Come in From the Cold." It seems so obvious, > I wonder how or why she felt the need to go on and on. Hmmm ... perhaps the song IS too long ... unless you're making love as it's playing ... then it can't be long enough ... Lori, with a particularly fond memory for that song ~ Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 07:25:20 -0700 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: wha? njc man, i feel like i took the brown acid...an ancient post from kakki just showed up on the list, someone said there are now 2 macks, colin's apologizing for something that i completely missed, vince is quoting his own self & everyone's responding to kakki's old post...twilight zone indeed...what's the astrology doin out there rosalita? ******************************************** Kate Bennett www.katebennett.com sponsored by Polysonics Discover the Indies at Taylor Guitars: http://www.taylorguitars.com/artists/awp/indies/bennett.html ******************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 07:25:31 -0700 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: joni's vase a bit of joni trivia...tonight i was talking to my neighbor who was telling me about going to see csny in la recently...the friend she went with is nash's friend & took her backstage to meet him...she said she asked him a question about the song our house...whether it was the flowers or the vase that she had bought today (i'll place the flowers in the vase that you bought today)...he said he loved that question & that actually he was the one that bought the vase & once when he went to visit joni in her bel air home she had that vase way up high in a special place...he showed them the photos from his pink birthday bash too... ******************************************** Kate Bennett www.katebennett.com sponsored by Polysonics Discover the Indies at Taylor Guitars: http://www.taylorguitars.com/artists/awp/indies/bennett.html ******************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 08:28:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Lori in MD Subject: No Place Special Just saw this at the bottom of one of CC's posts: > "If you've got a place to go, you just got to go there." -- JM It reminded me that I recently saw a chartered bus in southeast DC, and the placard above the driver said, "NO PLACE SPECIAL." I love that. Lori NPIMH: Cotton Avenue ~ Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 17:49:55 +0100 From: "Laurent Olszer" Subject: Middle East, France, NJC Hi everybody, At least there's one thing positive about this topic: we don't get bored at JMDL, although sometimes I wish the world would leave Israel alone and stop scrutinizing its every move. On the topic of France vs the U.S.: It was never my intent to say that the U.S. was all bad and France was terrific. If I spent 10 years in L.A. obviously I must have liked something. Ever since I was 15 years old I dreamed about moving there because I believed (at the time) that the society was more open than France. I accomplished that dream at age 22. Actually, I try not to relay my opinions about the U.S because everybody assumes I had terrible experiences while living there. The truth is at first it was a little rough but for the most part I was doing fine. If you had told me at age 31 that I would be moving back to France I would have said you were crazy. Then on january 1st 92, 1 month before my first child was about to be born, I realized I didn't want to raise american children, that I would always be a foreigner there and that my culture was French, whether I liked it or not. My wife, who's French, didn't even want to leave. 10 years later, we are sure we made the right move and that our assesment was realistic for a family. Although as a "wandering jew" we have to be ready to pack up and leave as soon as someone like Le Pen would get elected someday (God forbid). Who knows, we may be going back to the U.S. for survival one day. Like John Van Tiel said, there are good and bad points about each country. It all depends what one's priorities are. Of course I realize that L.A. is not representative of the U.S. Other parts of the country would have been much better but the weather in those parts was as bad as France so might as well go back there. On the topic of health care, one of my best friends was a MD resident in L.A. county hospital. Sure the poor people could get some treatment in the county hospital but in what conditions! Plus there was only 1 hospital for the entire L.A county that would accept people without insurance, so you can imagine the wait. I doubt the most sophisticated (i.e expensive) medical procedures are used there for those patients. Regarding the French: it's true that for a long time they resented Americans. I think it was pure jealousy + de Gaulle's personal resentment for being left out at Yalta . Now nobody cares, at any rate we live in a McWorld culture. If you don't behave like an "ugly american", being obnoxious and waiving dollars, then there's no reason for you not to enjoy a trip to France. Middle East: I've been called "condescending and know it all" and that I'm relaying my own propaganda. When I first got involved in this debate last august, there was some professional propaganda being relayed by Azeem in London (who by the way has disappeared since september). The initial letter which I posted that sparked the debate was written by a certain Dr Morley. Being alone against a major backlash, I decided to ask Dr. Morley for help. His only response was: "read". So I did just that. Believe me if you want, but none of the books I've read have been written by jews, let alone Israeli propagandists. For example, some of the info in Friday's post came from a book written in 1980 (feels like it could have been written yesterday!) by an intellectual french political writer named Suzanne LABIN, called: "Israel, the crime to live". This writer got the "Freedom Prize" in 1957 and the "Henry Malherbe Writers prize" in 1979. She has been writing for 30 + years about Stalin, China, URSS vs USA, Vietnam, Chile, drugs, so I mean here is a non-partisan writer as far as the middle east goes. The reason I'm saying all this is quite simple: I feel the media (in France, + BBC news which I watch all the time) is totally biased in favor of the new palestinian underdog. I mean when you show an israeli tank next to a stone throwing boy, this itself conveys a message. So, all my friends in France who get their only source of info by watching TV or reading newspapers have pretty much the same opinion as the people who are posting on JMDL. I don't blame them nor do I blame the JMDLers I disagree with, in fact we're still friends. They can't help thinking what they do with this media coverage. All I'm saying is you need to look at the whole picture by reading history and then you can make your own opinion. True, simplistic lies make me mad. I've tried to supply historical facts, not hearsay, that can be easily verified in many history books (non-partisan of course). So far I've not gotten any facts to contradict me. We can debate until dawn about Sabra & Shatila but, in all due respect, this is not the whole picture. So, I'd be very happy to meet JMDLers, including the ones who disagree with me, in France or elsewhere, for coffee and cake. Laurent ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2002 #198 ***************************** ------- Post messages to the list by clicking here: mailto:joni@smoe.org Unsubscribe by clicking here: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe ------- Siquomb, isn't she?