From: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2007 #607 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, March 16 2008 Volume 2007 : Number 607 ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Re: defending Madonna, SJC [Monika Bogdanowicz ] Re: Madonna and the 80s NJC [David Eoll ] NJC Previous elections [Monika Bogdanowicz ] Re: defending Madonna, SJC [Rian Afriadi ] Re: defending Madonna, SJC ["Mark Scott" ] Re: Leonard Cohen does resemble Madonna... ["Miguel Arrondo" ] Re: more 80s musings NJC [David Eoll ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 18:32:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Monika Bogdanowicz Subject: Re: defending Madonna, SJC Alright, Rian, you spurred on a few questions from me. What exactly do you mean by "rocks the music industry harder" than other musicians, including Joni? More controversial? (Although the Sex Pistols were very, very controversial in their day and remain famous even though they only let out one album). More successful? As for that something does better than Joni, I can only think of one thing. Perhaps better PR? I can't think of anything else honestly. I say better PR because when Madonna was really popular, I remember (even as a child) her being EVERYWHERE whereas Joni keeps a lower profile. However, I wouldn't qualify good PR as a qualification to be inducted into any hall of fame. Now I had said I wouldn't put Madonna in the R&R Hall of Fame but a general music hall of fame, as she isn't rock. However, I always respect someone much more who writes their own songs. That is a gift yes, but very much a craft as well. Since we're discussing Madonna, isn't Madonna someone who said she was influenced by Joni (among others of course)? Did she say that or should I pass the crack bong along? -Monika rian afriadi wrote: well, and, to be frankly, if we look back at the music history 1960-present, history says that madonna rocks the music industry harder than lots of the already-inducted-musicians, say : sex pistol, prince, or even our joni mitchell. joni's music is smarter and higher in quality than madonna's. but, there is something that madonna does better than joni. you know that something, don't you? rian np. radiohead - how to dissapear completely from Kid A (ummm... Kid A contains lots of suicide-trigger-songs, IMO. am i correct?) ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ - --------------------------------- Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 21:48:59 -0400 From: David Eoll Subject: Re: Madonna and the 80s NJC Randy Remote wrote: > From: "David Eoll" > (RR):> Madonna is to rock and roll as Steven Hawking is to pole vaulting. >>> >>> *cough*, *cough*, *sputter*... Stephen Hawking? I'll grant Madonna >>> is not entirely devoid of talent, but Hawking is a serious freaking >>> genius. Maybe its just me, but I don't think Madonna is the Stephen >>> Hawking of anything. > > You've misconstrued my meaning completely, my dear fellow, > please read the sentence again I think I was reading something between the lines that you weren't implying. Stephen owes his celebrity pretty much entirely to being a total freaking genius. He's pretty much the go to guy (Einstein's another) when someone wants to hold up an example of raw, uncut geniusness. So, I just assumed that was central to the analogy. Anyone else confined to a wheelchair probably would've worked just as well for your purposes, though, right? Whatever, I'm done nitpicking. I understand what you meant. Whatever it is that Madonna does, its not Rock and Roll. Roger that. > I agree that the 80's were the worst decade for music since the > 50's...for every good band there were ten Duran Sirhans, but at least the 50s can claim the birth of Rock'n'Roll. Which is nice. And the jazz back then was fantastic. I don't think the 80s can claim anything like that. Synth-pop? Curled bangs? > but other bright spots (for me, anyway): > The Pretenders check > Dire Straits I dig their first three records the best (1978-80). Love Over Gold was good too. After that ... enh. > The Cars Candy-O is the only album of their's I care for, and it came out in 79. > Tom Petty He's done great work from the 70s through to the 90s. And he's still going strong. > Frank Zappa Speaking of serious freaking geniuses... > Neil Young > Grateful Dead > Okay the last 3 were 60's artists, but did some of their > best work in the 80's. As far as Frank goes, I think one could point to any era of his and claim it as some of his best work. For the other two, I'd say they peaked in the 70s. But, that's just me, YMMV. Obviously, the Dead peaked commercially in the late 80s, and I was seriously into them at the time. I didn't really "get" them until '86 or so, even though I consorted with plenty of deadheads earlier than that. The others you mentioned, I either never listened to, or never got into. Hey, I forgot Bob Seger. He was definitely still doing good work in the 80s. Against the Wind came out in 1980, I think. But, that's still a pretty thin soup, at least for me. Nope, to me, the 80s will forever be the decade of Mr T and Flock of Seagulls. Pbbbttt.... Peace, David ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 18:58:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Monika Bogdanowicz Subject: NJC Previous elections This may seem like a strange question but I am curious nonetheless. Because of my age and certain circumstances, this was the first Primary Election (and first time voting even) I have ever voted in. This was the first time I really got involved in the process. I remember the Bush-Kerry showdown. I supported Kerry although I couldn't vote and didn't dive into the issues as I am doing now. I remember the Bush-Gore showdown back when I was in high school. I was in 10th or 11th grade and we had to do a speech supporting a candidate in American History for the next Election. I researched the issues thoroughly then and gave a speech on Gore although I couldn't vote (I remember my teacher was a diehard Bush fanatic...I forgive her for that since she really was a fine teacher who actually cared about the students). I remember certain things about Bill Clinton's Presidency though I've read more than I remember (although I vividly remember his appearance on some talk show playing the sax and certain speeches he gave). I can't remember a thing about Big Bush's Presidency as I was just too little to even care then or think about anything political! Anyhow, after that ramble, I come to my question. It seems that the Democratic Party is very divided in this race for the White House. In fact it seems even some Republicans are frustrated in McCain as their candidate. The whole country is divided, inspired, and a bit angry. I hope, we can only hope, the Dem Party reunites in the end. But...my question is this....is this division/anger common in elections or something more particular to this election? I ask some of you folks who know and remember the elections in the past. There is quite a bit of anger targeted towards the opposing candidate on both sides (both Hillary and Obama). Is this common or this election peculiar that way? -Monika - --------------------------------- Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 19:14:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Rian Afriadi Subject: Re: defending Madonna, SJC [TABLE NOT SHOWN] - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 19:43:30 -0700 From: "Mark Scott" Subject: Re: defending Madonna, SJC - ----- Original Message ----- From: "rian afriadi" > but, there is something that madonna does better than joni. > you know that something, don't you? > Make a spectacle of herself? Joni once said Madonna looked like a hard hooker. I wouldn't disagree with that. Sorry, Rian. Like I said, it may not be logical or nice, but I just don't like Madonna. Mark in Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 13:54:04 -0300 From: "Miguel Arrondo" Subject: Re: Leonard Cohen does resemble Madonna... I've read strange things in these digest before, but... comparing Leonard Cohen with Madonna!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Some of you may have choosen the wrong pills for the few last days. In the original words of a talented countryman of mine: "?Qui tiene que ver el culo con la timpera?" Saludos, Miguel ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 01:30:10 -0400 From: David Eoll Subject: Re: Come Away, Melinda & Tiny Tim NJC > From: Lucy Hone > Subject: Re: Photos from the new book, and Cohen, and stuff musings > and probably NJC > > Tim Rose(come away Melinda, so eerie). Ooh. Have you heard the Judy Collins version? Sorry, I've just been all about Judy this past year or so. She finishes off album #3 with Come Away, Melinda followed by Turn, Turn, Turn. Both are absolutely haunting. I think Come Away, Melinda is one of the more poignant anti-war songs I've ever heard (Peter Yarrow's Great Mandella is another). Not only does it speak about war, but also about the vast difference in perspective between the young and the old. I've never heard Tim Rose's version, but in Judy's version the verses sung by Melinda and her mother are in a completely different rhythm and tempo (and in different keys, I think). Melinda's parts are bouncy, and even silly sounding. Just like a child: bouncy, jovial, upbeat, optimistic. And inquisitive! Questions, questions, questions. And the mother's reponses are slow, somber, cynical. "Come away, Melinda. Come in and close the door." Oh, it breaks my heart. How do you explain war to a child? > I would have to add in Marianne Faithful - Joan Baez, Francois Hardy, > Pentangle, The Seekers, Donovan, Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Free, > Cream, Fairport Convention, the Doors, James Taylor, the Strawbs, Yes, > Elton John and Pink Floyd and Van Morrison - even these become edited > to favourite tracks - well some of them do.. Yes, yes, and yes. My list wasn't meant to exhaustive. I was just throwing names out. :) > There were some truly truly awful artists around - TINY TIM??? Y'know, I heard something interesting about Tiny Tim, recently, from someone who had seen him play. Apparently, he had an exhaustive and encyclopedic knowledge of folk music from traditional to contemporary and everything in between. He'd throw factoids out during his show, and my friend talked to him after his set, and got even more info. The guy knew everything about everything. I still can't stand to hear him, but its interesting nonetheless. Peace, David ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 01:38:21 -0400 From: David Eoll Subject: Re: more 80s musings NJC > From: Em > Subject: Re: was Leonard etc./ now 80's wasteland NJC > > - --- David Eoll wrote: > >> Going through high school was hell enough for me, but doing it in >> the musical doldrums of the 80s was worse. And that hair. And the >> clothes. And Reagan. And Mr. T. Ugh. > > For me, as far as listening to commercial radio, the bright spots were > the "one hit wonders" that seemed like good pop, or better than alot > of the other stuff. > Like Slade's "Run Run Away" or Kajagoogoo's "Too Shy" or Tommy > Tutone's "Jenny 867 5309" I loved Jenny, still do. Another OHW that I liked at the time was "What I Like About You", but that has since been overplayed to the point that when I hear it, I want to reach through the radio and strangle the DJ. Not a healthy feeling. Jenny is uncommon enough to hear that I still like it when I hear it. I rarely listen to the radio at all anymore. I think I came up near the end of the time when commercial radio stations would actually play deep cuts from records. The station I listened to the most in high school, WROQ in Charlotte, NC, still played whole albums sometimes. I think it was like Saturday after midnight, or something. They'd play 5 albums in a row. Maybe it was just one Saturday a month. And this wasn't college radio, it was one of the biggest stations in that part of the Carolinas. The first time I heard Hendrix's Electric Ladyland was on that station. Wow! I've been a die hard Hendrix fan since that night. Another thing they'd do is have "matches" between different bands, which involved calling in and requesting songs from either band. So one week it would be Rush vs Pink Floyd, and another week it would be Hendrix vs the Who, etc. And they would play anything from any album as long as it got enough votes. And I think at the end of the night which ever band got the most requests won. Or something like that. I haven't heard of any station doing anything like that in a long while. There's no way in hell that any station today would spend an entire Friday night playing nothing but 2 bands. Today most stations are owned by big corporations and the play lists are dictated from the corporate HQ. And they are not allowed to deviate from that list. Anyone in broadcast radio care to confirm or deny that? Its just what I've heard. I think there are a handful of corporations (e.g. Clear Channel) that own almost all radio stations in the country. Peace, David ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2007 #607 ***************************** ------- Post messages to the list by clicking here: mailto:joni@smoe.org Unsubscribe by clicking here: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe -------