From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2003 #421 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, August 25 2003 Volume 2003 : Number 421 Sign up now for JoniFest 2003! http://www.jonifest.com ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Re: Joni With Wayne Shorter [Seulbzzaj@aol.com] Fw: joni's career goals (For aol members) [=?iso-8859-1?Q?Emiliano_Pati=F] Re: Joni With Wayne Shorter ["kakki" ] Re: Yahoo Group of Interest ["kakki" ] Re: STAS cover art [Roger Burns ] Re: STAS cover art [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] Re: JMDL Digest V2003 #418 [Claud9 ] the Catholic Church and the mafia [anne@sandstrom.com] njc angry at the altar ["Lavieri, Vince [185776]" ] Re: sorry sorry sorry njc ["ron" ] Magdalene sisters NJC ["Lucy Hone" ] JOni fest menNJC ["Lucy Hone" ] Re: 9th's and such [Bobsart48@aol.com] Re: Magdalene sisters NJC ["kakki" ] Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc [Bobsart48@aol.com] Performance Photos are up [] Re: joni's career goals, 100% jc [] Re: Performance Photos are up NJC [FMYFL@aol.com] Re: Performance Photos are up [Catherine McKay ] Joni on Rolling Stone's poll of top guitarists [Deb Messling ] sexism in the temptation stories- njc [vince ] Re: Joni on Rolling Stone's poll of top guitarists njc [Susan Guzzi ] Re: sexism in the temptation stories- njc [vince ] Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc [vince ] Counting Crow's concert [vince ] Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc ["kakki" ] Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] Re: Magdalene sisters NJC [Murphycopy@aol.com] more views on woman as temptress njc [vince ] njc baltimore catechism #43 [vince ] Re: njc baltimore catechism #43 [Catherine McKay ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 03:38:36 -0400 From: Seulbzzaj@aol.com Subject: Re: Joni With Wayne Shorter Wasn't there talk a while back about Joni making a concert appearance with Wayne Shorter at the Hollywood Bowl this August? Did it happen yet? Scott ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 10:08:24 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Emiliano_Pati=F1o?= Subject: Fw: joni's career goals (For aol members) Hmm.. what about our SIQUOMB's clothes taste? I recall one Mikaye?, by now... - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wally Kairuz" To: "jmdl" Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 7:53 AM Subject: joni's career goals > i was just reading the 1979 rolling stone interview. at one point joni says > that in her detroit times all she wanted to do was to save some money while > she could because she was sure that she would have to go back what she > REALLY knew about: clothes. she thought she could get a job as a buyer for > some department store. > sometimes a mediocre dream is NOT the measure of one's medicrity. > wally > > [demime 0.97c-p1 removed an attachment of type application/ms-tnef which had a name of winmail.dat] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 01:37:50 -0700 From: "kakki" Subject: Re: Joni With Wayne Shorter Scott asked: > Wasn't there talk a while back about Joni making a concert appearance with Wayne >Shorter at the Hollywood Bowl this August? Did it happen yet? The Wayne Shorter concert was back on August 6th and I did not get the chance to post about it at the time. Joni was originally billed as appearing and then her name was taken off the roster. I held out a slim hope that she would appear but she did not. It was an interesting show. Great music and guest appearances by Savion Glover (tap dancing to Wayne's music was a new wonderful kind of art), Herbie Hancock and Carlos Santana. A few of the JMDL'ers were there. Have to say I saw Yo Yo Ma at the Bowl a few nights later doing his Brazilian concert and it was phenomenally incredible. He is touring so if he comes your way try to catch it. A couple of days ago a co-worker (who knows how much I follow Joni) said she stood outside the stage door at the Wayne concert trying to spot her but......she was an apparent no show. Too bad - it was billed as Wayne Shorter and Friends and she certainly should have been present. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 01:45:17 -0700 From: "kakki" Subject: Re: Yahoo Group of Interest Michael Mr. Paz recommended: > acousticharmonies@yahoogroups.com I have also heard from a JMDL friend this is a great group for those (we know who we are) interested in a certain "era" of music, including Joni. I am beside myself awaiting the Byrds weed - Whoo hoo hoo! Thank you! Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:30:35 +0000 From: Roger Burns Subject: Re: STAS cover art MINGSDANCE@aol.com wrote: > Just a Quick chime in on this. > In 1967 I was in an Art class and freeform pen and ink was being taught, > hence a period piece. I did one that won first place in the "Hallmark" art show > for high school, I considered it a daydreaming type of doodle. Yes, altho the STAS cover is partly colored in. This reminds me of the story of Cream's "Wheels Of Fire" cover art where the inside-the-cover stuff is colored in but the outside cover is sketched in the same style yet it remains an uncolored sketch. The story is that the artist started to haggle for more money before the outside art was colored in and he was fired. The record company decided to go with what they had. I could imagine a scenario where Joni's record company might have set a deadline by which the completed art must be submitted, Joni asked for a few more days, they said no, she said fine, then here's what I've got, take it or leave it, and they took it. But that's just my imagination. The LOTC cover, which is part sketch and part colored images, makes some sense to me, but STAS does not. But it could nonetheless be intended and I'm just not getting it. Heck, the whole world praises da Vinci's Mona Lisa but I've never seen anything in that, so what do *I* know. (I don't get John Coltrane either.) So I was just wondering if there was a story behind the STAS cover. > Mingus I thought you were dead? - Roger ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 08:42:01 -0400 From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: STAS cover art In a message dated 8/25/2003 8:30:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time, cfs-news@att.net writes: > So I was just wondering if there was a story behind the > STAS cover. Not one that I'm aware of, Roger...there is a nice interview that Wally Breese had with Mark Roth (the photographer with the 'fish-eye' lens who took the STAS photos) if you haven't already seen it: http://www.jonimitchell.com/Roth98.html In regards to the cover art, I'm reminded of a visit I made to a Philadelphia used book/record shop with Brei & Catgirl...we were just browsing and found a copy of that record. When we held it up to look at it, this older guy in the store said that he remembered watching Chuck & Joni making this kind of drawing together...they'd start on opposite sides of the page and work towards each other. Don't know if that's true or not but I didn't have any reason to believe the story. Bob NP: Tom Waits, "Spare Parts" May '78 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 09:01:54 -0400 From: Claud9 Subject: Re: JMDL Digest V2003 #418 > Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 22:19:51 -0700 (PDT) > From: peter stefanides > Subject: IT WAS NICE MEETING U ALL > > u guys are a neat bunch. thanks ashara. > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software Glad you found us agreeable ;-))) It was nice meeting you as well. In my case only briefly. Maybe next year we'll get to enjoy you some more! Claud ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 06:36:26 -0700 (PDT) From: anne@sandstrom.com Subject: the Catholic Church and the mafia Catherine McKay wrote: There was a pretty strong link between the Jezzies and the Mafia, as I recall, Living in Boston, I have to say that there are certainly indications of a link. Former Cardinal Law used to meet with some powerful people in government all the time, including Billy Bulger, whose brother Whitey is a known mobster and has been on the FBI Ten Most Wanted List for ages. For my money, I think it's all one and the same. And, btw, I SWEAR I saw Whitey one Saturday morning, walking out near U. Mass Boston (where Billy was president). And then there's Ray Flynn, former mayor, who irks me no end when he gets in front of tv cameras and tries to defend his precious church. (He served as envoy to the vatican during the Clinton administration.) I just wonder if, in fact I'd bet money, that yesterday in masses all around the Boston area prayers were said for "the repose of the soul of Father Geoghan." Yuck!!! lots of love Anne ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 13:07:57 -0400 From: "Lavieri, Vince [185776]" Subject: njc angry at the altar The murder of Geoghan announced on Sunday morning as I am getting ready for worship - I am so totally angry at the abuses of the church and of the Roman power structure and its polity in particular - my contempt is so strong, my people have all heard me pray for forgiveness for the evils that the church has, the healing of all those abused by those in authoruity, and the cleansing of the church from those who abused their position so that they could abuse others, particularly children - I was almost spitting out the words yesterday - so angry at what these people have done, and yet that we must have compassion for those so ill they cannot control themselves - the reminders of what people like him have done are ever before me as my former partner was abused by a Michigan version of Geoghan and is a text book example of every misery that happens in the life of a person abused by a priest - the substance abuse, the totally manipulating and controlling personality (so as to never be controlled or manipulated again), etc. etc. etc. ending with the failure to trust, the failure to love on an adult level without reverting to the state of mind of long ago. And my anger at God in these situations continues - we'll save that for another time - with the Magdalene movie and other discussions, let me remind thatb the Candians did a mive on vcr about 10-12 years ago called the Boys of St. Vincent which is a pretty realistic (and graphic) portrayal of abuse of male children in an orphanage and portrays it from various angles - including the isolation of the abuser who then reaches out to what is available - and then the utter denial of the abuser - it is an incredible movie that would never be made in this country and is a two-tape vcr. Next time I get going in my rage about God not being a very good "father" when there is such failure to protect - a charge for which in real life we would take children away from a parent for, in foster care work, which I have done - - and other such things - well, I really won't post that because it gets ugly (the Rev) Vince ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 19:50:50 +0200 From: "ron" Subject: Re: sorry sorry sorry njc hi can someone who is on non digest not just set up their pc to automatically just forward your mails to the list again? probably best done by someone logged on permanently - eg from a work computer. ron - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Catherine McKay" To: ; ; Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 6:28 AM Subject: Re: sorry sorry sorry njc > --- Murphycopy@aol.com wrote: > > > In a message dated 8/22/03 11:04:48 PM, > > anima_rising@yahoo.ca writes: > > > > << are > > > aol users getting my posts to the list?????? > > > somebody please reply. >> > > > > NO! Not unless someone copies you in a reply. I wish > > someone would just copy > > and resend your posts every time they appear. The BF > > message to Ashara was > > priceless! > > > > --Bob > > This is baffling. There must be some computer nerd > that can figure this out. > > Possible problems (from the sublime to the > ridiculous): > - aol hates Wally (aol no habla espanol?) > - aol hates Wally's isp > > Possible solutions: > - Wally changes isp's (like, maybe you should get aol > - ha ha ha!) > - someone remembers to forward every message Wally > sends to the list at large; or responds to everything > he sends, thereby copying the list at large (same > difference, really) (problem with this solution - that > someone really has to remember to do this and has to > be available to do it within a reasonable amount of > time - to be honest, this isn't a solution, it's just > giving in to the problem) > - everyone boycotts aol because it's not playing nice. > > Anyone else? > > > > ===== > Catherine > Toronto > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 19:16:35 +0100 From: "Lucy Hone" Subject: Magdalene sisters NJC Ashara wrote........ Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 17:36:54 EDT From: AsharaJM@aol.com Subject: Re: magdalene sisters NJC .........EDIT re Film Lucy, thank you for the story of Ruby Mary Neruda J McBride. No offense intended to anyone, but I find it almost impossible to know of these injustices and understand how someone could still have such deep faith in a religion that perpetuates this inhuman things. It is just not within my comprehension. Hugs and tears, Ashara My response is that I think it was all she had to believe in. Sometimes in extreme stress and brainwashing the person lives in utter belief of the "rightness" of what is happening to them. They become complicit to what is happening and therefore totally unable to live outside the reality of the wrongness of it all. Ruby Mary Neruda J McBride held onto her utter faith as( my mother seemed to think) she seemed to feel that to abandon it would have been to negate all that she went through and to have such a void would have meant her life was in vain. She served her church (knowing she would never be allowed to be a nun) and paid so dearly with her 30 years (14 to 44). She served ... Oh boy did she serve..... My mother only told me Ruby Mary Neruda J McBrides full story when she was in hospital a week or so before she died. WE were talking about the people who had been and gone from our lives and she told me her story. At the end of every session at our house when the prayers were finished the ironing stacked and the hat placed on her head (and secured with a very vicious pin) that she would fix my mother with her very bright blue eyes and ask for "My Cash" and she would sieze it and bless it and tuck it into her handbag and then straighten her back and leave the house with her head high......... Ruby Mary Neruda J McBride was an extraordinary soul... I feel blessed to have known her and to have been able to understand her individuality... And that is what people who suffer are...... they are individuals who have suffered. It is only when we delve out of our busy lives and stop and talk or actually just listen to them that we begin to understand... WE need to listen to the homeless, the disadvantaged and vulnerable to be able to make sense of our own lives. It is one thing I have gained from my work with Barnardo's.. that we need to listen to understand and try to do something to make sure what has happened does not happen again. Sadly throughout the world it is not just the churches who use and abuse people, but governments, despots, those who have become skewed by life and are able to influence others, those who we call "mad, bad and dangerous to know" were once babies..... what happened to them? ASk that question of every person who does "wrong" and we can see what this world has to pay for....... NOw it seems we can all look back with regretful hindsight on all that the world has done but sadly it seems lessons are not being learned......the cycle remains unbroken... Luckily the Magdalene Laundries are a thing of the past.... but you can be certain that elsewhere things are being done to young men and women who trangress some facet of their society and they are the "disappeared" the "missing" the "lost"... I should love to see every organisation that treats its members stripped of their power and made to repay for the lives they robbed..... HOw they could do that I have no idea but its time for the ostriches of the high and mighty to remove their heads from the sand and recognise their complicity..... Oh I have rambled again but we can blame and name and shame and rant and rave but it will not change what has happened... what needs to be done is to change the future...... Lucy ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 19:23:49 +0100 From: "Lucy Hone" Subject: JOni fest menNJC I seem to be a bit out of sync with everyone but my line on the Joni Fest men (there is a bit of a confusing post below) is that they were all lovely, gave great hugs, nicked my cigarettes, shared their time and laughter and were the nicest guys I could have hoped to travel 5,000 miles to see. You were fantastic and I can only assume those who did not get there are equally wonderful too.... well you have to be....... And as to the women........ Oh they all rock!!! They are beautiful, funny, witty, erudite, fanstastic performers and I had the happiest time with everyone...My kids want to come to Fest too now..... and so does my man! so that should be fun..... just have to give up the smoking and get saving!!!! Lucy who is missing everyone a lot..... Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 18:54:29 -0700 From: Michael Paz Subject: Re: Jonifest men NJC I was far more impressed with the Jonifest women, but thanks very much. I am also an honorary lesbian several times over. Best Paz > PSSSST......can you believe those Jonifest men? Can we have a discussion > about jonifest men? Jonifest men are among the most beautiful and > special men I have ever met. The gay men.. the straight men... and all of > them in between. Cute..cute and adorable. What can you say about these > Jonifest men? > PS. I'm assuming that the JMDL men who have not yet attended are equally > as special. > "You could charm the diamonds off a rattlesnake > Marianne END OF COPIED TEXt ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 14:29:38 EDT From: Bobsart48@aol.com Subject: Re: 9th's and such Cathering wrote: > I'm not even sure what the difference is between a 9th > and a 2nd, unless it's that a 9th is always an octave > plus one note above the root (or an octave above the > 2nd). I get a bit confused about it once it goes past > a 7th. Also I'm not clear on whether or not you have > to play the entire triad PLUS the other note (a 7th > for example), or whether you can cheat a bit by > getting rid of one of the notes. Well, I am no expert here. But my understanding was that a major 9th chord was a major 7th plus the 9th. In effect, you play G major on top of C major to get a C 9th. CEGBD Joni "cheated" on 9th's all the time in her piano playing, using - for example - a simple C chord on top of a GDGDG bass arpeggion, creating an inverted C 9th type of sound, with the B missing (I suspect it could be added without wincing too much) in many, many of her songs. Similarly, a "major 6th chord with an added 9th" can be inverted (as used often by Joni) by playing a C chord over a DADAD bass arpeggio. Sometimes Joni uses a major chord over the 4th bass - for example, a D chord over a G bass GCGCG arpeggio produces an inverted sus7th chord - see the words "sex appeal" in The Same Situation. Also, in that song (and others) one sees a major chord on top of the dominant 7th bass note, to transition (such as the E chord over the DA bass after the word "bathroom" in that song. I suspect that this rather playful placing of major chords in the right hand over a different major chords played by the left hand at the same time was an early "trick" Joni learned, to color her compositions - simple, but you gotta give her credit for running with it once she found it. Bobsart ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 13:03:46 -0700 From: "kakki" Subject: Re: Magdalene sisters NJC Ashara wrote: > No offense intended to anyone, but I find it almost impossible to know of these > injustices and understand how someone could still have such deep faith in a religion >that perpetuates this inhuman things. It is just not within my comprehension. Regardless of what inhumanity certain corrupt or sick individuals representing the Catholic religion perpetuate, nowhere in true Catholic Christian teachings are such things taught or condoned. I also think that the history of Ireland (1000 years of oppression, genocide, slavery, poverty, etc.) probably led to a dysfunctional culture. The desperate oppressed become the oppressors. You never hear of Magdalene Laundries in Catholic orders in Italy, Spain, France, etc. It seems confined particularly to the Irish. Interestingly, the Catholic church in the Northeast U.S. was pretty much established and run by imported Irish nuns and priests. Unfortunately, some of their skewed ideas was imported along with them, including a sense of denial at confronting real problems, such as the child molestation issue. Nonetheless, this is no more reflective of what the rest of millions of Catholics around the world believe and follow. Just as suicide bombers and the vicious oppressors of women who claim to be representive of the Muslim religion are not reflective of true faith of Islam. Thanks to Lucy for the story of Ruby and your subsequent thoughts. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 17:34:41 EDT From: Bobsart48@aol.com Subject: Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc In a message dated 8/22/03 3:01:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time, les@jmdl.com writes: > But then the church is a patriarchy and part of the religion is > founded on the principle of 'original sin' as committed by Eve in the > Garden. And women have been paying for it ever since. That doesn't > make it reasonable. That doesn't make it right. > > 'Wash my guilt of Eden > Wash and balance me' > > Mark E. in Seattle Mark - I speak from the perspective a long-lapsed Catholic, who left because of my perception that, net net, the bad of 'my' organized religion outweighed the good. But that does not mean that I rejected all of the basic principles, nor does it mean that I ascribe to it evils which extend beyond the already egregious bounds that we know (or at least hear) about. I never recall learning on any level that 'original sin' was of Eve's wrongdoing but not of Adam's. And I had quite a few years of brainwashing to get exposed to that 'story', if not indoctrinated in it. Am I missing something here ? Credibly yours, Bobsart PS - I have great respect for your posts, and think you are one of our most sensitive members. No offense intended. Not sure why I am reading my regular digest today - usually Joni only - probably fear of missing more post-fest reports. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:03:15 -0400 From: Subject: Performance Photos are up I'm done. All of my performance shots are up on Chris Marshall's http://www.hatstand.org/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=album26 If you click on <4> you can go to the newly posted performance shots. (You can skip over everything I posted last week.) The shots are all different shapes and sizes, like JMDLers I suppose, because I cropped them. The song circle photo took 4 hours to build but I really like it. I did that one over and over and over. I think I scanned it four times, each time bigger to get more detail. The one of Bree giving someone a standing ovation got a very tight crop. I had the top of her hat in the neg but it moves better with her hat chopped off. She jumps right out of the frame and that's the whole point, eh? Enjoy, Lama Apologies to joni-onlys! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:26:36 -0400 From: Subject: Re: joni's career goals, 100% jc It's a damn shame she had to stumble along in a field she was so ill-prepared for! LOL. Lucky for us she changed her mind about a career as a buyer. I guess she went into songwriting with Business in the back of her mind. Very interesting. Lama Wally Kairuz said, i was just reading the 1979 rolling stone interview. joni says she wanted to do was to save some money while she could because she was sure that she would have to go back what she REALLY knew about: clothes. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:56:12 EDT From: FMYFL@aol.com Subject: Re: Performance Photos are up NJC Great shots Lama. I knew you'd come through with the performances. Question............WHERE IS THE GROUP PHOTO??? Please don't tell me it didn't turn out, or are you saving that for a special occasion? Jimmy ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 19:07:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Catherine McKay Subject: Re: Performance Photos are up --- jlamadoo@fuse.net wrote: > I'm done. All of my performance shots are up on > Chris Marshall's > > http://www.hatstand.org/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=album26 > These are excellent photos and it was well worth the wait. I think these demonstrate why using a "real" camera is so superior to digital - unless you have one of those $10,000 digitals, that is. ===== Catherine Toronto ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 19:23:17 -0400 From: Deb Messling Subject: Joni on Rolling Stone's poll of top guitarists Reuters reports that Joni Mitchell came in at #72 on Rolling Stone's list of the 100 top guitarists of all time. Jimi Hendrix is number 1. The only other woman to make the list is Joan Jett, at #87. Not sure from the Reuters article if this is a reader's poll or a creation of the Rollling Stone editors. I can think of a couple of other women who might deserve to make such a list. Didn't someone on the list recently mention Ellen McIlwaine? What about Rory Block? - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Deb Messling -^..^- messling@enter.net - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 19:09:49 -0700 From: Michael Paz Subject: Re: Molesting Priest's Last Chapter, njc SOME things are better left unsaid! Albeit tragic and sad on so many levels. Paz > Lama writes: > > << I also can't believe that no one else has posted about the last > > chapter in John Geoghan's life. >> > > I wrote about it last night, Jim. See what happens when you block posts from > my e-mail address? > > --Bob ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 20:09:45 -0400 From: "Richard Flynn" Subject: RE: Joni on Rolling Stone's poll of top guitarists How about Bonnie Raitt? > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-joni@jmdl.com [mailto:owner-joni@jmdl.com]On Behalf Of Deb > Messling > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 7:23 PM > To: joni@smoe.org > Subject: Joni on Rolling Stone's poll of top guitarists > > > Reuters reports that Joni Mitchell came in at #72 on Rolling > Stone's list > of the 100 top guitarists of all time. Jimi Hendrix is number 1. The > only other woman to make the list is Joan Jett, at #87. Not sure > from the > Reuters article if this is a reader's poll or a creation of the Rollling > Stone editors. I can think of a couple of other women who might > deserve to > make such a list. Didn't someone on the list recently mention Ellen > McIlwaine? What about Rory Block? > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Deb Messling -^..^- > messling@enter.net > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 19:20:05 -0700 From: Michael Paz Subject: Re: JOni fest menNJC Did I nick any of your fags love? I was a bad boy while I was there and was smoking like a cheap hooker on Iberville Street during a Baptist convention. The king and prince/princess with the Queen is quite a pic to behold. Hope that happens. Mikey was asking me so much about the fest this year that I asked him to join me on the next one. We will see what the future brings. I have always loved the idea of having families involved. Best Paz > I seem to be a bit out of sync with everyone but my line on the Joni Fest men > (there is a bit of a confusing post below) is that they were all lovely, gave > great hugs, nicked my cigarettes, shared their time and laughter and were the > nicest guys I could have hoped to travel 5,000 miles to see. You were > fantastic and I can only assume those who did not get there are equally > wonderful too.... well you have to be....... > > And as to the women........ Oh they all rock!!! They are beautiful, funny, > witty, erudite, fanstastic performers and I had the happiest time with > everyone...My kids want to come to Fest too now..... and so does my man! so > that should be fun..... just have to give up the smoking and get saving!!!! > > Lucy who is missing everyone a lot..... > > Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 18:54:29 -0700 > From: Michael Paz > Subject: Re: Jonifest men NJC > > I was far more impressed with the Jonifest women, but thanks very much. I am > also an honorary lesbian several times over. > > Best > > Paz >> PSSSST......can you believe those Jonifest men? Can we have a discussion >> about jonifest men? Jonifest men are among the most beautiful and >> special men I have ever met. The gay men.. the straight men... and all of >> them in between. Cute..cute and adorable. What can you say about > these >> Jonifest men? >> PS. I'm assuming that the JMDL men who have not yet attended are equally >> as special. >> "You could charm the diamonds off a rattlesnake >> Marianne > END OF COPIED TEXt ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 20:48:26 -0400 From: vince Subject: sexism in the temptation stories- njc >I never recall learning on any level that 'original sin' was of Eve's >wrongdoing but not of Adam's. And I had quite a few years of brainwashing to get >exposed to that 'story', if not indoctrinated in it. > >Am I missing something here ? > > > > The whole of theology from the time of Tertullian through the middle ages in Roman theology puts forth that Eve was at fault and that Adam's fault if any was being seduced by the temptress - this is at the root of so much of the sexism within the church church headquartered in Rome - and that is shared by the eastern (orthodox church) from the time of Luther - the Reformation- the Counter Reformation - that was picked up and continued by the (roman) Counter Reformation and by parts of the Protestant reformation, i.e., John Knox (Scottish and from him stems essentially English presbyterianism) and "....The Monstrous Reign of Women .... " (referring to Mary Q of S and her regent mother Mary de Guise, Mary Tudor, Elizabeth I, Catherine di Medici (power behind French throne), etc. - the King James Bible (James VI of Scotland, I of England, son of Mary Q of S and successor to Elizabeth I) is translated in an especially sexist way that is not supported by the original languages but was done to counter the 16th century and its situation where women were the powers in England-France-Scotland right through modern times in many theologies until the rise of the historical-critical method of the late 19th century is the idea that Eve bears a greater guilt and Adam was seduced - which was originally checked when the historical-critical school of Biblical studies identified that with ancient Mesopotamian stories and all that followed down to the fact that there are two creation stories in Genesis and neither one of them is historical in the slightest - and that allowed new interpretations that eliminate the sexism, i.e., the pivotal work of Barth, Bonhoeffer, Tillich, and many others in the 20th century which looking at the mythological meanings of those creation/temptation stories in a post WWI-postWWII age, has nothing to do with gender - which game rise to the new Biblical work by scholars and theologians such as Amy Jill Levine (my hero!), Elizabeth Bettenhausen, Mary Daly, Rosemary Reuther, etc. as well as John Dominic Crossan (my other hero!) and others. But look carefully at almost every catechetical work, including Baltimore, used through the 60s (it takes catechetics a while to catch up with scholarship) and it is there implicit and explicit -and is still seen in a number of places today in various places in the Church - orthodox, roman catholic, protestantism, etc. We still have much work to do. Why where the women in Magdalene Laundries locked up? Because they were temptresses to men - boys/males who have been institutionalized through the years have been because they were orphans or to be slave labor, females because they were to be slave labor or fr a sexual reason, either as a sex worker or because they were temptresses. Boys may sow their wild oats, but girls are bad and the bad influence/corrupting girls must be put away. (the Rev) Vince ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:11:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Susan Guzzi Subject: Re: Joni on Rolling Stone's poll of top guitarists njc YES! I think it may have been Heather who mentoned Ellen McIlwaine. I know we have discussed her before. Ellen - who I had the honor of seeing over 20 years ago, in a tiny club here in Chicago. But I am not sure she ever got the national recognition she deserved, nor enough to be mentioned especially ahead of Joan Jett! And by the way I would love to own something by Ellen McIIwaine does anyone have any suggestions on a best of or compilation and where to get my hands on something like that? Peace, Susan Deb Messling wrote: Reuters reports that Joni Mitchell came in at #72 on Rolling Stone's list of the 100 top guitarists of all time. Jimi Hendrix is number 1. The only other woman to make the list is Joan Jett, at #87. Not sure from the Reuters article if this is a reader's poll or a creation of the Rollling Stone editors. I can think of a couple of other women who might deserve to make such a list. Didn't someone on the list recently mention Ellen McIlwaine? What about Rory Block? - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Deb Messling -^..^- messling@enter.net - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:15:59 -0700 From: "Mark or Travis" Subject: Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc Mark - I speak from the perspective a long-lapsed Catholic, who left because of my perception that, net net, the bad of 'my' organized religion outweighed the good. But that does not mean that I rejected all of the basic principles, nor does it mean that I ascribe to it evils which extend beyond the already egregious bounds that we know (or at least hear) about. I never recall learning on any level that 'original sin' was of Eve's wrongdoing but not of Adam's. And I had quite a few years of brainwashing to get exposed to that 'story', if not indoctrinated in it. Am I missing something here ? Thanks for your response, Bob. To be quite honest, I am not nor ever have been a member of the Catholic faith. So I may be completely off base in making that statement about Original Sin. It just seems to me that historically and culturally it has been the female who bears the brunt of punishment and recrimination for alleged wrong-doings of a sexual nature. And the story is that Eve succumbed to temptation and ate the Forbidden Fruit and then persuaded Adam to follow suit. Personally I think the whole thing is a myth and it baffles me that any educated person can take this story literally (or most of the Bible for that matter) but that is my *opinion* and everyone is entitled to one. I don't mean to attack anyone's religious beliefs. Again, I may be totally wrong about how the Catholic Church views original sin. If I am, I thank you for correcting me in my thinking. But whether the official church line on this is one thing or another, it seems to me that many, many people have made Eve the chief perpertrator of Original Sin over the centuries and by extention have tended to unfairly cast the female sex in either the whore or saint role. While men are admired for their sexual prowess and not held accountable for having any part in the supposed ruin of 'fallen women'. Mark E. in Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 21:19:43 -0400 From: vince Subject: Re: sexism in the temptation stories- njc asked privately but I feel like being all theological tonight information on Amy-Jill Levine http://divinity.library.vanderbilt.edu/div/academics/levine.html http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1841272116/102-1983165-0964127?v=glance http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1555404634/qid=1061860283/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/102-1983165-0964127 information on John Dominic Crossan http://www.westarinstitute.org/Fellows/Crossan/crossan.html only one link for Crossan since it is more comprehensive a few months ago PBS ran a new show called "Peter and Paul and the Christian Revolution" and it not only was good - a rarity in the tv world - but it featured both A-J and Crossan and when I heard their voices I just flipped - it was good to see them and hear them - kind of like a theological orgasm - like a sudden Joni sighting I suppose - except theologically it is far more rare so I was in bliss Naturally when I was consecrated a bishop the Bible that I had used in the service was one in which A-J (Amy-Jill Levine) was a contributing editor and autographed for me because I wanted something from a female Jewish agnostic at the heart of that service just to make it more "me" than it would have been otherwise - my blow against the patriarchy and the Christian chauvinism - Vince ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 21:29:07 -0400 From: vince Subject: Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc Mark or Travis wrote: >Personally I think the whole thing is a >myth > it is >and it baffles me that any educated person can take this story literally > me too >(or most of the Bible for that matter) > and in a Biblical scholarship way, me too "myth" in Biblical studies is a way to express that which cannot be expressed - and it teaches a truth that can't be arrived at in normal language - but it is no way "true" - look at the first of the two creation stories - Genesis 1-2.4a - male and female are created together in the image of God, there is no distinction - it is in the second creation story (Genesis 2.4b ff) from a totally different source with a totally different purpose that has a two stage creation of male and female - I don't believe either story is "true" and yet there is much truth in those stories, but to suggest that women are inferior to men or any of the other ways that second story has been misused has nothing to do with what the Scriptures are really trying to say >but that is my *opinion* and everyone >is entitled to one. > true > >I don't mean to attack anyone's religious beliefs. > nor do I - you did a good job on the subject though > > Vince (getting almost Rev'd out for the day -notice I never post about chords because I don't know a thing about them other than they sound purty but now this is my territory...) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 21:57:03 -0400 From: vince Subject: Counting Crow's concert I can't get the actual article since the archives will not let me but in the August 5th Kalamazoo Gazette, the concert review of their appearance in Grand Rapids' Van Andel Arena, their version of BYT was praised and Joni was mentioned by name. It said their version of BYT was "peppy" (in a good way) and it wasn't til they did it that they opened up and started playing good. Vince (I can't search the GR Press either that far back - the search feature only allows a 14 day search - maybe if I read my papers faster I would have had this info sooner...) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 19:25:11 -0700 From: "kakki" Subject: Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc Mark wrote: > I don't mean to attack anyone's religious beliefs. Again, I may be totally > wrong about how the Catholic Church views original sin. If I am, I thank you > for correcting me in my thinking. But whether the official church line on > this is one thing or another, it seems to me that many, many people have made > Eve the chief perpertrator of Original Sin over the centuries and by extention > have tended to unfairly cast the female sex in either the whore or saint role. > While men are admired for their sexual prowess and not held accountable for > having any part in the supposed ruin of 'fallen women'. I only know how the Catholic church explained original sin and Adam and Eve to me and it had *nothing* to do with sex or the "sin" of Eve. I was told that the forbidden fruit was from the tree of knowledge and that God told Adam and Eve never to eat its fruit. Then Satan tempted Eve to try it and she persuaded Adam to have some, too. The forbidden fruit was not sex but rather was that the humans God created had part of God in them but could never be God. Satan convinced them that they could be as powerful as God and they decided to go for it and it upset the balance in paradise. Myth or not, the point was that humans are fallible and can never be all-knowing. Sorry to give a little Catholic Sunday school lesson here, but I was exposed to anti-Catholic bigotry as a child and it amazed me then and amazes me even more to see some of it displayed here on the list all these years later. Not saying at *all*, Mark that you have displayed this,but I have felt it in some of the other posts and sometimes one feels the need to set some of the record straight. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 22:29:55 EDT From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc In a message dated 8/25/2003 9:17:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mark.travis@gte.net writes: Personally I think the whole thing is a myth and it baffles me that any educated person can take this story literally I too think that the Adam/Eve story is created myth...and just to inject a little Joni content, she uses it to explain why she was thrown off of religion early on. After all, if they had only 2 sons, Cain & Abel, how did the population increase, unless the sons were getting it on with Mom and that doesn't come off as being too biblical to me. Anyway, when Joni asked her Sunday School teachers this same question, she was pretty much told to sit down & shut up, so she stumped the band at an early age. As far as my belief goes, I've always been taught (and believed) that the blame was equal between the two for their failure to trust God. Adam blamed Eve, Eve blamed the serpent...the point of the story is partially that people don't take responsibility for their own actions. Besides, God punished them both, saying that Adam would now have to till the earth to raise his food, and that Eve would suffer during childbirth. Again, representative as I don't take the story literally. I've always thought that most religions try to basically address 3 things: - -How did we get here? - -Why are we here? - -What happens to us when we die? And of course, while we're thinking about all this, here comes the collection plate! Bob ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 22:52:30 EDT From: Murphycopy@aol.com Subject: Re: Magdalene sisters NJC Kakki writes: << I also think that the history of Ireland (1000 years of oppression, genocide, slavery, poverty, etc.) probably led to a dysfunctional culture. The desperate oppressed become the oppressors. You never hear of Magdalene Laundries in Catholic orders in Italy, Spain, France, etc. It seems confined particularly to the Irish. Interestingly, the Catholic church in the Northeast U.S. was pretty much established and run by imported Irish nuns and priests. Unfortunately, some of their skewed ideas was imported along with them, including a sense of denial at confronting real problems, such as the child molestation issue. >> An excellent point, Kakki. I have always said that Irish Catholicism is driven by guilt, whereas Italian Catholicism, for example, is fueled by love -- love of Jesus, Mary, saints, etc. There have been cases of pedophilia alleged in other Catholic cultures -- even the Vatican -- but I do agree that the Irish "denial at confronting real problems" was a major contributor to the situation in the Northeast US. --Bob ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 23:01:31 -0400 From: vince Subject: more views on woman as temptress njc University of Pennsylvania has an interesting site on Lillith - according to midrash Lillith was the actual first wife of Adam (hence Lillith Fair, all ye feminists) and she is often in medieval - which is to say institutional church - art, Lillith is represented as the female serpent who offers the fruit to Eve http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~humm/Topics/Lilith/aNePics.html info on Lillith http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/biblio_lillith.html In almost all medieval art, and pre medieval art, note that Eve is fully breasted, standing in a sexually provocative pose, offering the fruit to a shy Adam. that is also a standard of the "everyman plays" of the middle ages and so much written theology beginning in the post-patristic period up 'til the quietude of the late 1st millennia (dark ages) and picks up again in the time of Aquinas and following and as I have pointed out, endemic in almost all theology until the historical critical period (mid 1800s) note the similarity of the Arthur legends, Camelot, with the Magdalene Laundries for a consensus across the centuries - the male goes his own way but the Temptress, be it Guenievre or some poor Irish lass, has her head shaved and is shut away in a convent or convent type place. In an in-between time, Henry II locked up his beloved wife Eleanor of Aquitaine because of her beauty (and his fears that she was irresistible to all men, plus he was angry she was smarter than he). The 16th century Protestant (Scottish) Lords of the Congregation locked up Mary Queen of Scots to keep her from all men who would smitten with her beauty which was felt to led men to their downfall (Francis (II?) of France, Henry Lord Darney of England, and Earl Bothwell of Scotland) or perhaps bring her an army that would overthrow the Lords. As for sex, if I had a dime for every time a religious saying included the line "conceived in original sin" (i.e., sex) I would buy Joni Mitchell's contract and she'd be playing in the backyard of each and every one of you. Vince ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 23:07:55 -0400 From: vince Subject: njc baltimore catechism #43 what did the Romans teach? Go to the source: the Baltimore Catechism http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Catechism/4/bk4ls5.html#RTFToC6 The official catechism taught that Eve sinned and then induced Adam to sin, lead Adam to sin - it was Eve inducing Adam to sin, not a joint, in concert action of Adam and Eve, but something Eve induced Adam to do. And that is the basis for question of how - sex, woman as temptress to cause men to stray. (Emphasis added to the below reprint of the Baltimore catechism #43. 43. Q. Did Adam and Eve remain faithful to God? A. Adam and Eve did not remain faithful to God, but broke His commandment by eating the forbidden fruit. As it is told in the Bible (Gen. 3), Eve went to the forbidden tree and was standing looking at it, when the devil came in the form of a serpent and, tempting, told her to take some of the fruit and eat. It does not appear that she went and tasted the fruit of all the other trees and finally came to this one, but rather that she went directly to the forbidden tree first. Do we not sometimes imitate Eve's conduct? As soon as we know a certain thing is forbidden we are more strongly tempted to try it. See, then, what caused Eve's sin. She went into the dangerous occasion, and was admiring the forbidden fruit when the tempter came. She listened to him, yielded to his wicked suggestions, and sinned. So will it be with us if through curiosity we desire to see or hear things forbidden; for once in the danger the devil will soon be on hand to tempt us-not visibly indeed, for that would alarm us and defeat his purpose, but invisibly, like our guardian angels; for the devil is a fallen angel who still possesses all the characteristics of an angel except goodness. But this is not all. Eve not only took and ate the fruit herself, but induced Adam to do likewise. Most sinners imitate Eve in that respect. Not satisfied with offending God themselves, they lead others into sin. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 23:15:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Catherine McKay Subject: Re: njc baltimore catechism #43 --- vince wrote:> > Eve not only took and ate the fruit > herself, but > induced Adam to do likewise. Most sinners imitate > Eve in that respect. > Not satisfied with offending God themselves, they > lead others into sin. This sounds kind of like what happens when kids want something yummy to eat. They'll ask you if YOU want a cookie, when in fact, they want one - but if they get you to eat one, then it's OK for them. ;) ===== Catherine Toronto ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2003 #421 ***************************** ------- 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? (http://www.siquomb.com/siquomb.cfm)