From: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2007 #394 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk Unsubscribe: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.smoe.org/lists/joni Website: http://jonimitchell.com JMDL Digest Sunday, September 30 2007 Volume 2007 : Number 394 ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Re: Jumps out / Grooves you line [Motitan@aol.com] The ballet and Joni... [Motitan@aol.com] Jonifest DVD's [Motitan@aol.com] Songs from Shine... [Motitan@aol.com] TV Alert: HUGE JONI CONTENT [Patti Parlette ] Re: TV Alert: HUGE JONI CONTENT [Motitan@aol.com] Re: If, and all the 'adaptations' NJC ["Mark Scott" ] Re: If, and all the 'adaptations' NJC [jeannie Subject: TV Alert: HUGE JONI CONTENT Hi Loves: I often send out little "NJC, TV Alerts" when musicians we like are supposed to appear on TV (Stephen Stills, Emmylou, Neil, and you know there may be more), but this one is so huge that I can't go to sleep w/out alerting you all encore une fois. It is my civic JMDL duty. Joni is supposed to be on the CBS Sunday Morning Show tomorrow, 9 a.m. EST. I watch this show every Sunday morning, and have always dreamt that some day Joni would be on it. I never really thought that would happen (that was just a dream some of us had), but I *think* that every fairy tale comes real tomorrow. While I am unable to confirm this (Librarians Extraordinaire Deb and Jerry, can you help?), I *know* I read on the list this week that Joni is supposed to be on tomorrow. This has been "That Was The Week That Was." All Joni, all good. Oh, my heart and mind be still. I will take my phone off the hook tomorrow at 9 a.m. Idontwantnobodycomingovertomytableigotnothingtotalktoanybodyaboutwhilejoniisonmytvscreen! I hope this is not just a false alarm. Love & Peace, Patti P. _________________________________________________________________ Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy! http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mkt=en-us ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 23:07:22 EDT From: Motitan@aol.com Subject: Re: TV Alert: HUGE JONI CONTENT I'll be at work but I already made sure my sister knows to throw a tape in the vcr at 9! I told her it was of the utmost importance--life or death. - -Monika ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 20:57:10 -0700 From: "Mark Scott" Subject: Re: If, and all the 'adaptations' NJC - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Slouching Toward Bethlehem" is regarded as one of the great poems > of the twentieth century; Isn't the Yeats poem titled 'The Second Coming'? > > Mitchell's setting it to music was a disaster, and diminished > both her work and Yeats's. I have read the poem once or twice only and I'm not a student of poetry but I have to disagree with you, Aleda, based solely on the quality of the song. And I happen to love the song and think it is a work of high quality. Somewhere Joni aired her views on the poem and, as I recall, she actually said she thought it needed some work! I believe she said something to the effect that the first part of it is good but that it sort of comes unravelled in the second half. So humble, our Siquomb can be sometimes! She went on to say that she did some rearranging of Yeats' language and added some of her own to create the lyric. So this was not strictly a 'setting it to music' scenario. I look at it more as adapting one artistic medium to another. Like adapting a novel into a film, to use your analogy. Joni did have to ask permission from Yeats' estate to record and publish the song and that permission was granted. I think the sonic landscape she created for this song is brilliant. And for me the re-shaped poetry makes a very powerful song lyric. It gave me chills the first time I heard it. > > > I was simply saying that there is a long history of great films > being > made from second-rate novels and _not_ a long history of great > films being made from great novels. And I don't think I agree that there is no long history of great films being made from great novels. I will agree that adapting a novel into a film changes the original work. That is inevitable when a literary work is turned into a visual/aural work. David Lean has done some excellent adaptations of Dickens' novels, not to mention 'A Passage to India' and 'Doctor Zhivago'. (I suppose this is all subjective and one can argue whether Dickens' novels or Forster's or Pasternak's would be considered 'great' or whether the films are 'great'.) Merchant/Ivory's 'Howard's End' is a beautiful film and very faithful to Forster. 'A Room With a View' as well. The Soviet Union made a mammoth film of 'War and Peace' in the 60s that I have finally seen on dvd. It's long and not always what you would call riveting but it is hard to deny that, in its spectacular scope and faithful adherence to the plot and spirit of Tolstoy's novel, it has greatness in it. Well that's one that it would be hard to argue with the novel being 'great' anyway. The film 'To Kill a Mockingbird' is a classic adaptation of an American classic. And I know there are many, many more. > I'd appreciate being included in whatever memo > goes out telling list members they aren't allowed to say anything > even remotely critical about Mitchell's work without being > deemed some kind of pariah. Although there are some members who will defend anything Joni does or says, the JMDL has *always* been an open forum for people to air any opinion of Joni's work (or anything else, for that matter) that they like. We may disagree with you, but personally I don't see that most of us see you as a 'pariah' just because you happen not to like a particular song. Or because you don't see Joni as a poet. Or that we all have to don > pleated skirts and lead the chorus of "Gimme a J, gimme an O, > gimme an N, gimme an I! What's that spell--JONI!" > > I respect her work much more than that. I'm glad you respect her work. I think we can disagree here and respect one another as well. Everybody has their own opinion and their own way of expressing it. In view of the fact that email is an imperfect medium and that content can be easily mis-construed, I think we should all give each other the benefit of the doubt. Mark E. in Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 21:31:52 -0700 (PDT) From: jeannie Subject: Re: If, and all the 'adaptations' NJC Okay, Aleda, I got your poem/lyric apple/orange definitions and descriptions down on the second or third time around you posted them down, thank you! I also got what your opinions just as many times concerning Yeats' poetic masterpiece and the deplorable "disaster" Ms. Mitchell' did by diminishing Yeats' work, as well her own work, with her cheapening sounds, over and over! You don't get me, Aleda. I'm looking beyond all old rules of an ancient game. Maybe one day you'll hear clear-headedly beyond all the cheapening sounds you hear through Kipling's fifth rate sappiness, or through Ayn Rand's pathology, or Joni's STB, and all of the negative things you hear through my cheapening stupidities, I imagine, being the poetic critic you are and the dwelling in it that comes with the critic's package deal. If I could think like you, the justafiable critic, I could also learn how to listen to Joni in a sleezy like style as she destructs Slouching Towards Bethlehem in disgust. But, I can't Aleda. I can't help but love the way Joni sings that song. All that orange/apple/lyric/poem thingy said is understood, just so you know and won't have to repeat it again. And, maybe you can use a signature stating your disapproval with Joni's meddling into Yeats' masterpiece and destroying it, and that way you know your Yeats stands clearly separated from Joni causing the poem any more harm and you won't have to dwell in defense of your mean ol' daddy, W.B. Yeats any longer. Okay, back to your post. You were reading Ayn Rand at thirteen? I can't imagine any 13 year old kid interested in Ayn Rand. Now, that sounds strange. I'm interested to know why you find Ayn Rand pathological and as of when into her studies and after what work of hers you were exposed to, made you come to the conclusion of a pathological Ayn Rand. And now, how did, "poor Frida" get into my post? I put her there, Aleda! That is how la pobresita de Frida got there. Three decades with Frida and three with Joni, too? Now that sounds cool! I haven't been familiar with Frida's work as long as you have. But, I have the advantage to read and understand Frida in Spanish and she's an absolute loving and passionate delight in so many colors and themes, especially in her native tongue of Spanish, which cannot be captured in the same colorful and expressive way she had, with the English language. Have you been to the Mexico Frida sprouted from? It's absolutely awesome! I know that Mexico! I love it!! The book you mentioned, 'Frida-A Biography of Frida Kahlo' by Hayden Herrera is far from my favorite reference. And, a couple nights ago, even my son mentioned the tackiness of the book cover with Salma Hayak's picture on it and not Frida's. That a major turn-off though I can appreciate Hayden Herrera's total immersion into Frida's world and the time it took for her her to research so many, many minor details that makes the book feel not all that inviting. Herrera's too involved in tiny detail that she fails to capture Frida's true essense as I know it personally because I've been there and she's of the same holy wine and blood as mine and well, I cherish the things I've got and I shine on the things I keep and am one with, and Frida's just another one of girls I relate to and whose love I can hold on to, like Joni's! That's all, Aleda! I put off some things to get this write-up going and now I'm back to simple chores around the house before I can hang again with the girls of truth and beauty. Why did I take so long with Yeats, now? I'm on her-stories and not his-stories. dang!! Peace, Aleda, Jean PS: It was nice to know you wept with Yeats, Aleda, when the dunce and his donald duck decided to invade Iraq. Reality's a bitch with such lousy leadership and I think, no, I KNOW, I'm putting Joni on the stereo and I'm going to listen to Slouching Towards Bethlehem just to make sense of this crazy war and state of the world we are in right at this very moment in time and to pull me through these wars, I'll put Shine on after that, even if it's just in the background, it'll soothe me like a child's lullabye. ajfashion@att.net wrote: [Top-posting intentionally] Jeannie, Poems and lyrics are not the same thing. Perhaps the easiest distinction is that lyrics are always better with their music than they are alone. Whereas poems are not better when set to music. [Is there an echo in here? Have I not stated this several times already?] This does not mean poems are better than lyrics or lyrics better than poems; they are simply different, like apples and oranges, or painting and sculpture. "If," the poem, is a cloying, sentimental, poorly written 'poem' that no poet or poetry critic in the 20th or 21st century bothers to think about. I liked it when I was 13 and reading Ayn Rand (it was Rand's favorite poem) but by my next birthday I saw how utterly sappy it was. (Not to mention how pathological Rand was.) "Slouching Toward Bethlehem" is regarded as one of the great poems of the twentieth century; if you polled poets and poetry critics and scholars, I daresay it would easily be in their top ten greatest poems, if not their top five. It's a poem that addresses a very specific moment in world history, and yet I read it, and wept as I read it, to a class the day after the first President Bush started bombing Iraq. It is, quite simply, a peerless work of art. Mitchell's setting it to music was a disaster, and diminished both her work and Yeats's. > Where's the meaning of the sense you're speaking about. Aleda? :) > That Joni cannot compete poetically or lyrically with a first rate poet but > she can with a poet such as Kipling who wrote fifth rate poetry, maybe? Well, I'm sure as heck not talking about competition here, Jeannie. (As Wm Blake said, there is not competition among true artists.) I don't know how to state this any more clearly than I have before, in post after post, but I love Joni Mitchell, I think she is a genius; I think her lyrics are, along with Sondheim's, two of the great achievements of the 20th (and now 21st) century; I would give my right arm to write one phrase as good as some of hers, etc, etc, etc, etc. > "First rate," "fifth rate," "she can't compete with the big boys of poetry" Oh please. This has nothing to do with gender. She can't compete with the big boys and girls of poetry BECAUSE SHE ISN'T A POET. The big boys and girls of poetry can't compete with Mitchell because they're not musicians and / or lyricists. Is this really that hard to comprehend? I was simply saying that there is a long history of great films being made from second-rate novels and _not_ a long history of great films being made from great novels. It was an analogy. An A-N-A-L-O-G-Y. Not an insult to a woman who has enriched my life almost daily for thirty-five years. If "Shine" makes you happy, then good for you. I personally take Mitchell pretty seriously, and don't feel the need to lead cheers on her behalf, but if that is the way you want to express yourself, that's your right, and I'm happy you're excited. I have loved and adored Joni Mitchell since the first album I ever listened to closely, which was FTR, in the spring of 1973. This is not an attack on her. It was my opinion that "If" is a much more successful song than was STB. And I decided to explain, briefly, the reasons why I hold that opinion. > Okay, I'll leave 'ya now, Aleda, back to your Yeats and Kipling and their > first and fifth rate poetry . I can't rationalize like that. I just feel and see > the lights of every word and line of the poem shine on me..like little light > punches of love hitting all through my heart and mind. Laters! I don't have a clue what you mean by "rationalize" in the paragraph above (I've just never seen thw word used that way), but I hope there's room on this list for people to discuss their reactions--positive, so-so, or negative--to Mitchell's music. I would suggest that "feeling" is just one way to approach art, the gateway drug, as it were, and that knowledge can enhance enormously one's appreciation--and feeling--for art. Not sure how poor Frida Kahlo got into your post, but I'm a tremendous admirer of her work and have been for three decades. Not to sound too "rational" or anything, but I found my appreciation for her painting greatly enhanced by reading the long Hayden Herrara biography of her. While I'm no longer a newbie, I'm still newer to this list than many people. I'd appreciate being included in whatever memo goes out telling list members they aren't allowed to say anything even remotely critical about Mitchell's work without being deemed some kind of pariah. Or that we all have to don pleated skirts and lead the chorus of "Gimme a J, gimme an O, gimme an N, gimme an I! What's that spell--JONI!" I respect her work much more than that. Peace, Aleda -------------- Original message from jeannie : -------------- > Aleda, > > Whadda'ya tryin' to say? > > That Joni's version of Yeats' poem, 'Slouching Towards Bethlehem,' in song, > fails because it's a first rate poem? > > Joni's adaptation of Kipling's 'If,' is okay by you because it's only a fifth > rate poem? > > Where's the meaning of the sense you're speaking about. Aleda? :) > > That Joni cannot compete poetically or lyrically with a first rate poet but > she can with a poet such as Kipling who wrote fifth rate poetry, maybe? > > This little statistical data you've provided is all static to me. > First rate, fifth rate, is out of touch and obsolete to me because if I put it > into a Shine ratio, would 'STB' be a first rat e light ray and 'If" could only > put out a fifth rate ray? > > For me, Joni's a great complement to any artistic endeavors she attempts to > put her efforts into, with all of the demanding ups and downs it takes, she > doesn't hesitate with that awesome, unwaivering artistic will of hers, if anyone > likes it or not. > > "First rate," "fifth rate," "she can't compete with the big boys of poetry", > "who's better?," "it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter," you > know! > > She tries her best to let her little light shine and it's always signed and > sealed with a little lace along the seams and sometimes it's even delivered with > an angel's kiss from Up Above! > And we're all better for it, in the long haul, after all! > I, for one, cannot ask anymore from an artist. > Joni gives and gives and gives! > What more is needed? > > And, she has given new light to Yeat's and Kipling's poetry in a polite and > positive style for the public. Joni's pre-requisites before attempting such > artistic feats, I'm sure required a truckload of humility with the greatest > respect for the authors. Joni's never been a tramp-ler of other people's work. > I'm sorry if you don't care for Joni's STB nor care much for, 'If,' but these > are the reasons I see that give Joni full poetic license to do what she darn > well pleases with lines of her life. > . > And once again, Joni, being the unselfish dancer and poet that she is, can > complete other people's poetry here in my heart anytime she wants and the > beating rhyme is all about beauty in motion of the first degree, always! > > Okay, y'all, now back to Shine and Joni on this quiet Saturday evening, after > I spend time with my little creatures in a bit. No interruptions tonight with > technologies nor the land phones, even. > I also began reading and studying Frida Kahlo deeper for some unexpected > reason and I've got lots of Frida books galore all over the house. I love Frida > now more than ever, so I won't get to Shine until late tonight. Frida and Joni > are far out!! > > Okay, I'll leave 'ya now, Aleda, back to your Yeats and Kipling and their > first and fifth rate poetry . I can't rationalize like that. I just feel and see > the lights of every word and line of the poem shine on me..like little light > punches of love hitting all through my heart and mind. Laters! > > Jeannie > > > ajfashion@att.net wrote: > There's a long precedent in film that second-rate novels > often lead to first-rate films and vice versa. My feeling is > that Slouching Toward Bethelem fails as a song but that > If is OK. Which makes sense, since t he Yeats is a first-rate > poem, and If is, at best, a fifth-rate one. > > --Aleda > > -------------- Original message from "Jeff Hankins" : -------------- > > > > Yes to much of the above (praise for Shine) especially 'great driving > > music'. My car's lovin' it. > > Now, back to 'If', a special treat in many ways, because of the pre-release > > cringe of dread I suffered. > > But here's the thing: it's not the poem, Joni has used the poem and made > > something else - and for me the something else is, as I said earlier, more > > palatable and more enjoyable, even more thought-provoking as received wisdom > > because its particular selection of expression, its own melodic structure, > > its own leisurely song-rhythms have a more subtle immediacy, but at the same > > time offer natural pauses for reflection in ways which (any reading I've > > ever heard of) Kipling's poem simply don't - there we have a slightly > > embarrassing preachy rapid fire accumulation of wise saws leading to the > > most cringe-worthy 'you'll be a man' business. > > BUT again - I guess that's not the point. Even if (IF) I'd loved the poem, > > Joni's song is still something different, her own work. > > > > Which is what I always felt about 'Slouching Towards Bethlehem'. I love > > Yeats' 'Second Coming' and as a poem it has a complexity and a chilling > > beauty which repays reading after reading. But Joni's song is powerful in > > different ways, and I don't equate the two - any more than I would listen to > > 'Job's Sad Song' and bemoan the loss of theological complexities present in > > the scriptural book of Job! It's different. It's like comparing the film of > > Pride and Prejudice to the Jane Austen bo ok. It's different - some plot - > > even text- selection and synthesis goes on , but then it becomes its own > > vision, its own piece of work > > > > And that's one of the reasons why we love her work, isn't it (Let me count > > the ways)? She shows us not only that life can beget art, but that Art can > > beget Art! And she's being doing it ever since she made a pretty little > > 'operetta' out of an O Henry story; ever since one little phrase from Saul > > Bellow send her to composing a neat little duality anthem; ever since an art > > film about an Australian dancer inspired a jokey Coke commercial; ever since > > a Tom Wolfe book sent her reflections to the Boho dance...and on and on and > > on. And of course it goes on, hearing other music, seeing paintings, reading > > books or poems, and making something out of it which will provoke and > > insp ire in different ways. (Think of the two films referenced by songs on > > 'Shine') > > > > And hey, the circle goes on - because isn't that what she does for us too? - > > that's certainly what she'd want to do, I'd guess - making us want to make > > our own music - prodding us to paint our own pictures, write our own poems, > > make our own films, so that Art keeps on begetting art? > > Here endeth > > Jeff, Wales > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on > Yahoo! TV. - --------------------------------- Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids. ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2007 #394 ***************************** ------- Post messages to the list by clicking here: mailto:joni@smoe.org Unsubscribe by clicking here: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe -------