From: owner-mad-mission-digest@smoe.org (mad-mission-digest) To: mad-mission-digest@smoe.org Subject: mad-mission-digest V8 #91 Reply-To: mad-mission@smoe.org Sender: owner-mad-mission-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-mad-mission-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk * If you ever wish to unsubscribe, send an email to * mad-mission-digest-request@smoe.org * with ONLY the word unsubscribe in the body of the email * . * For the latest information on Patty's tour dates, go to: * http://www.pattygriffin.net/PattyInConcertDB.php * OR * go to http://www.atorecords.com * . * PLEASE :) when you reply to this digest to send a post TO the list, * change the subject to reflect what your post is about. A subject * of Re: mad-mission-digest V8 #___ gives readers no clue * as to what your message is about. * Also, PLEASE do not quote an entire digest when you reply to the * list. Edit out anything you are not referring to. mad-mission-digest Monday, April 19 2004 Volume 08 : Number 091 Today's Subjects: ----------------- MM: Re: Re: Re: Re: People Magazine ["hugues" ] MM: RE: People Magazine ["Roy Larsen" ] MM: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: People Magazine ["T. Kercheval" ] MM: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: People Magazine ["hugues" ] MM: Fw: [singer-songwriters] Patty Griffin at the Cain's Ballroom ["Don H] MM: magazines ["Misty B. Cochran" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 08:25:39 +0200 From: "hugues" Subject: MM: Re: Re: Re: Re: People Magazine > Granted, People magazine isn't the pinnacle of music review sources, but if > someone had told Patty after she was dropped by her label and "Silver Bell" > was shelved indefinitely that, in a few years, she'd be getting a new album > mentioned in People, even if it was a lukewarm review, I bet she'd have been > thrilled. She deserves better, of course, but I see the mere MENTION of her > new album in a popular magazine like this a good sign. I totally disagree. "People magazine" must not be a place to look for just because it has much readers. This is not an artist's goal. Until now Patty did what she did with or without them. It's certainly good to be known better, but to be "misknown" by more people isn't a big deal. That's the trouble of big popularity for every artist, and it doesn't give happiness. Hugues ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 00:34:52 -0700 From: "Roy Larsen" Subject: MM: RE: People Magazine I was going to stay out of this, but I can't hold back.... I T ' S P E O P L E M A G A Z I N E F O L K S ! ! ! You pick this rag up to know whom celebrities are sleeping with, the state of their marriages, and what they're wearing. It's a tabloid magazine. Anyone reading this for music advise is NOT going to appreciate Patty's music, so it really doesn't matter what this guy says. His readers will not understand Patty, so there is nothing lost. In fact, his grammar school slight at Patty's parents singing ability should tell you everything you need to know about this magazine's target audience. I'm pretty sure it is one that would not appreciate the depths of Patty's music. In essence, I guess I'm saying that he's really doing People readers a service. He's saying "Don't buy this record, you're too shallow to understand it". For those few readers who can, they're bound to be critical thinkers that are smart enough not to judge a piece of work on one tabloid review. I can't imagine it affecting sales one iota. And even so, I feel Patty doesn't need a spike in sales as much as building a loyal fan base. Somehow, I just don't see that coming from People Magazine readers. My 2 cents.... Peace, Roy _________________________________________________________________ Stop worrying about overloading your inbox - get MSN Hotmail Extra Storage! http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=hotmail/es2&ST=1/go/onm00200362ave/direct/01/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 09:21:28 -0400 From: "T. Kercheval" Subject: MM: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: People Magazine > I totally disagree. "People magazine" must not be a place to look for just > because it has much readers. This is not an artist's goal. Most artists' goals, if they're professional artists and make their living at it, is to get their music heard by as many people as possible. I was never saying at all that People Magazine, in and of itself, should be some artists' "goal" to appear in. No one who cares seriously about music would look to People Magazine as a source for serious music reviews anyway. All I'm saying is, forget about the content of the review for a minute - just the fact that Patty was MENTIONED there is a sign that her popularlity is growing by leaps and bounds, and I think that's a great thing. I know Patty would never compromise herself just for popularity, but I'd also imagine that she wants recognition for her work and, even though it might pay the bills, doesn't want all her best songs known only because other people sang them. After all, nobody does a Patty Griffin song better than Patty Griffin. The fact that she's getting mentioned in these sorts of rags shows that she IS getting recognition. Until now Patty > did what she did with or without them. It's certainly good to be known > better, but to be "misknown" by more people isn't a big deal. That's the > trouble of big popularity for every artist, and it doesn't give happiness. > > Hugues ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 09:53:55 -0400 From: Mike Connell Subject: Re: MM: People Magazine >Granted, People magazine isn't the pinnacle of music review sources, but if >someone had told Patty after she was dropped by her label and "Silver Bell" >was shelved indefinitely that, in a few years, she'd be getting a new album >mentioned in People, even if it was a lukewarm review, I bet she'd have been >thrilled. She deserves better, of course, but I see the mere MENTION of her >new album in a popular magazine like this a good sign. They've reviewed her albums before. Flaming Red (A&M) was the People Magazine Album Of The Week in their July 20, 1998 issue and 1000 Kisses (ATO) got raving reviews in the mag in May 2002. Mike ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 16:54:06 +0200 From: "hugues" Subject: MM: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: People Magazine > Most artists' goals, if they're professional artists and make their living > at it, is to get their music heard by as many people as possible. No. Their goal is to express themselves in the best way as possible. And to not compromise their truth in the market. Then they do their best to be heard, but not at any price. And great artists should feel proud of not being reviewed in People magazine. Mainstream magazines don't give people what they want: they keep them in a lazy lack of culture. They have many readers because it's easier for people to stay lazy and ignorant. If there weren't such despisable magazines and more responsible ones instead, it would let more chances to people to educate their taste in many things, music included. My observation anyway. Hugues ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 20:54:44 -0400 From: "T. Kercheval" Subject: MM: Re: People Magazine > > Most artists' goals, if they're professional artists and make their living > > at it, is to get their music heard by as many people as possible. > > No. Their goal is to express themselves in the best way as possible. And to > not compromise their truth in the market. That's definitely true. I would've been more correct by saying ONE of the goals of a professional artist is to get their music heard by as many people as possible. The most respectable ones certainly do that WHILE remaining true to their own vision. > Then they do their best to be heard, but not at any price. And great artists > should feel proud of not being reviewed in People magazine. I disagree totally with the idea that artists should be "proud" of not being reviewed in a particular magazine. That's just too aloof a statement for me. Sometimes people want to educate themselves with what they read, other times they just want a piece of entertaining tripe, ala People. It's the same way with music - some days you feel like something serious and "important," other times you feel like mindless party music. Both are valid depending on your mood at the time. In any case, I seriously doubt that Patty wants to remain the "secret treasure" of a select and small group of hard core fans. I think it's great that her popularity is growing so much that a magazine like People continues to review her new releases, especially since she's remained so true to her vision of her art with each album and continues to do things her way, which is such a rarity in the music business these days. Obviously, as a Patty fan, I take a lot of issue with some of the points this reviewer made, but I think someone who would be "prone" to liking Patty might still check out the album based on the review in People anyway. I just don't see what the big deal is. I'm just happy "people" are talking about her. And I bet she is, too. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 21:26:31 -0400 From: "Don Henn" Subject: MM: Fw: [singer-songwriters] Patty Griffin at the Cain's Ballroom The Cain's Ballroom in Tulsa, Oklahoma welcomes Patty Griffin to the ballroom on May 22nd, 2004 along with Craig Ross. Tickets go on sale Monday, April 19th, 2004 at all Albertson's, online at www.startickets.com, at Starship Records and Tapes, and by phone at 918-584-2306. For more information, visit: www.cainsballroom.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 22:50:08 -0500 From: "Misty B. Cochran" Subject: MM: magazines hi all, not sure if this has been posted, since i have been out of the country for over a week. i scanned the digests & subject matters... so i apologize if you all know about this already - but patty is on the COVER of no depression & paste magazines this month! there are some beautiful pics in no depression! yay! xo misty ------------------------------ End of mad-mission-digest V8 #91 ********************************