Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-eddie.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!mit-eddie!nessus
From: nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (Doug Alan)
Newsgroups: net.music
Subject: Re: net.music.fans?
Message-ID: <4614@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 6-Jul-85 16:31:11 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.4614
Posted: Sat Jul  6 16:31:11 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 7-Jul-85 06:16:50 EDT
References: <4604@mit-eddie.UUCP> <266@ihdev.UUCP>
Distribution: net.music
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 308
Keywords: Kate Bush

["I leave it open"]

> From: rjv@ihdev.UUCP (ron vaughn)

Wow!  What a flame!

> i assume you are talking about yourself here.  you are a thick-headed
> intolerant asshole, and have proved it many times recently.

Maybe, but at least I don't tell other people to shut up!  I like to
hear all opinions.  But flaming hate mail that has nothing other to say
than "I hate you!  I hate the music you like!  Shut up!" and gives no
reasons, is totally worthless and had no place in a discussion among
supposedly intelligent people.

> when someone comes back and says they don't like KB, you get so upset
> and rant and rave about "awww, did it hurt your widdle delicate ears"

Did I say that when jcp (Jody Patilla) stated her reasons as to why she
didn't like Kate Bush?  No, I just addressed the issues.  But when
someone doesn't present any issues to address and just vomits
predjudiced intollerant stupidity onto the net, I'm going to be a bit
intollerant of that form of expression!

> people are saying stuff like "greatest album ever" about 'the
> dreaming.'  get serious.

I think we all understand here that this is just an opinion, don't we?

> for all we know in 10 years no one (except for a few thousand hold
> outs) will even know who kb is.

Bullshit.  She's had enough popularity to live comfortably off of for
the last eight years, and she's going to make great music for years to
come.  Just the fact that you still find new reviews of "The Dreaming"
popping up every now and then three years after the album was released
shows that it has a lot of staying power.

> she has NOT stood the test of time, so quite acting like
> she has.

What's so goddamn important about standing the test of time?  Are you
one of these cretinous classical music snobs who believe that nothing is
music unless it was written a hundred years ago?  What an assinine
opinion!  Many great artists go completely unrecognized and fade into
obscurity without ever getting the recognition they deserve.

For other artists, it appears that they are going to fade into
obscurity, but something happens and they get wide acclaim.  Would you
have been there when Vincent Van Gogh was painting, and said "Look this
is complete trash!  You've never even sold a painting!  No one except a
few firends even like your paintings!  You haven't stood the test of
time.  Your work is crap compared to Da Vinci!  Why don't you just turn
in your painting knives now, and give the world a break!"

> all of this talk about what a talent she is sounds like "fans"
> dribbling on about madonna.  some kind of irony here, huh?

Bullshit again!  You don't have to work to listen to Madonna!  It's
a totally formulated, predigested product.  It's designed to infect your
mind the way a Pepsi jingle does.  It requires no intelligent thought on
the part of the listener.

Also, who would still be talking about Madonna's music if she had a
three year gap inbetween albums?  No one.  Because her "music" is the
stuff that fads are made out of.

> kb has not stood the test of time AT ALL.  she is, by "greatest album
> ever" standards still a flash in the pan.  come back to me in 10, 20
> years and tell me what she's doing, who's listening to her music.

Is eight years of producing magnificent works "a flash in the pan"?
I've heard songs she wrote when she was twelve, and those were also
magnificent.  That adds on another six years.  14 years already of
producing great music.  I see no reason why I shouldn't expect another
10, 20, 30, etc. years.

And what does how many people listen to someone's music have anything to
do with how good it is?  Absolutely nothing!  Like I said already, great
artists often go unrecognized.  How many people listen to Fred Frith?
Tuxedomoon?  Faust?  Birdsongs of The Mesozoic?  Syd Barret?  Roy
Harper?  All these people are great, and none of them has nearly the
recognition they deserve!

> the bottom line is, put her in a room with her stupid little synth.
> and recording studio or whatever, and then put j.s. bach on the other
> side with a piano.

Kate Bush's main instrument is a piano.  It's the most prominent
instrument (besides vocals) on all her albums, including "The Dreaming".

> then play a little game of "show your stuff".  kb will hit a few keys
> and here synth. will make all kinds of music and she'll sing her
> wonderful deep meaning lyrics and bach will nod his head and
> appreciate and take it in.  what kb has done is about 50% engineering
> --

So what?  Creative use of the studio isn't a valid form of musical
expression?  You're just baring your predjudices for the whole net to
see.

> three keys on her synth, and she has a full horn section backing her up.
> bach will then turn to the piano, and "hit it".  kb's mouth will kind
> of hang open, and if she knows 1/2 as much about music as you bushies
> think she does, she will be in awe of a true, timeless muscian.

I bet she would too!  Kate Bush has a hell of a lot of respect for other
great artists, and has often said that other music she has heard has
totally blown her away.  In classical music, I believe she likes Delius
and Eric Satie best, but I'm sure she has a healthy respect (as any
intelligent person would) for Bach.  And I'm sure that Bach would indeed
totally blow Kate Bush away as a piano player, but so what?  It's not as
instrument players that Kate Bush and Bach are important, but as
composers.  If Kate wrote a piano part that was too difficult for her to
play, she could always hire a better piano player to play the part.

Besides, after they had their piano playing contest, they could have a
singing contest, and Bach's mouth would hang open upon hearing Kate's
perfect four octave voice work its magic.  And then Kate could show Bach
around her studio, and show him all the neat things she could do, and
Bach would say, "Wow!  Could you PLEASE teach me how to use this?"

> **** warning, fundamental truth of the world, important line, pay heed***

Bullshit.  There ain't no fundamental truths of the world!

> SHE WILL NEVER BE AS IMPORTANT OR GOOD OR TALENTED AS BACH.  NEVER.

Bullshit.  She already is as good -- she's better!  But you're correct
that she may never be as important in a historical sense, because she
wasn't born at the right time for that.  People who are born when art is
constrained by certain rules can become hugely important historically,
because they can say "These rules are all bogus" and break them or make
up their own.  Art has gotten to the point these days, where there
aren't many rules left, so it's incredibly difficult to become
historically important. 

Kate Bush is better musically than Bach (do I have to say "in my
opinion" here -- though you definitely seem to have the opinion that
your opinion is fact) because Kate Bush realizes that music should be
emotionally powerful -- that it should affect one powerfully and
directly.  Bach, on the other hand, spent all his time writing his music
for musicians to appreciate, not listeners.  He plays all sorts of cute
little games, like "Oh boy, I can take this melody and play it backwards
at the same time to counterpoint itself, and won't that be neat!  And
look, I can take this one and turn it upside down and backwards and slow
it down by a factor of two and counterpoint it with itself and won't
that be neat!  And look, here I can modulate to this key and then to
that key, and if I do this right, I'll never have to come back to the
home key, and won't that be neat!"  Of course all of this is lost on the
listener who isn't a musician, and this makes his music boring and
sterile.  Of course, to a musician, who can pick this stuff up, it's
probably the greatest thing sinced sliced baloney, but I'm not one of
them.

> come back with the "could bach do what she does??" arguement and i'll
> laugh in your face.  her muscial talent is a subset, a *small* subset
> of a true virtuoso musician.

She doesn't want to be and shouldn't be a virtuoso musician!  That's not
where her talents lie.  They lie in making perfect albums in a studio,
and that's what she does.

> that's just about says it all for me.  what pisses people off is you
> talk about kb on such incredible terms, yet it is nothing more than
> michael jackson fandom with a female jackson.  she is NOT THAT GREAT.

She's creative, intelligent, and original.  She is concerned with doing
something with artistic merit -- not making millions of bucks.  In my
opinion, she does this better than anyone else.  None of this applies to
Michael Jackson.

So, either you think that Michael Jackson, is creative and cares about
doing something artistic rather than making money, which means you're
being pretty stupid, or you think that Kate Bush isn't concerned with
being creative and artistic, which means you're being pretty stupid.

> can't you people understand she has stuck a chord in you (no pun intended)

Isn't that the purpose of art?

> and you are flowering her with praise and praise well beyond her worth??
> she is NOT the most different, unique, new, fresh, inspired,
> wonderfull, "plays her *OWN* music" musician in the world.  she is
> *very* tame and structured (boring??...) compared to a good avant-garde
> jazz musician.

Bullshit!  You just seem to be able to spout more bullshit than it seems
should be able to fit in ten people!  Both structure and violation of
structure are important.  Let's take paintings as a source for analogy.
I think that Dali has made the best painting I've ever seen.  There is a
lot of structure in his paintings, and he's done a lot of twisting and
distorting to those structures.  This is what Kate Bush's music on "The
Dreaming" is like.  If I mapped musical artists onto painters, Kate Bush
would become Dali (at least as far as the music goes -- I don't think
I'd map her lyrics to Dali).  On the other hand, a good avant-garde jazz
musician might be mapped to Jackson Pollack.  Is Dali better than
Pollack or vice-versa?  I like Dali a lot better!  Why?  Because his
paintings strike a chord in me, rather than just being pretty-looking
blobs of paint on a canvas.

> just becuase i don't like her doesn't mean i'm a bubble-gum top 40
> lover.  is this making any sense, alan?

Did I say you were?  I assumed Russel Spense is, because I figured that
anyone who is silly enough to post flaming hate mail to net.music,
without having anything to say, is probably silly enough to be a
bubble-gum top 40 lover.

> we don't mind you liking (lusting, wet-dreaming??) over kb, but at
> least realize you are acting like an ass about it.

Thank you for telling me how I feel about Kate Bush.

> you have given kb something of a bad name now.  when i think of her i
> think of what an asshole you acted like when someone said they didn't
> like her.

Why do you even bother talking to me, if you don't read what I say?  I
wasn't flaming at poor Russ because he dislikes Kate Bush, but because
of the way he expressed himself, and because of the attitude he
expressed towards music he doesn't like.  It's fine with me if you don't
like Kate Bush, as long as you do realize that she's creative and
original, and that in and of itself is a very worthy thing to be.  Like
I said in my reply to Russ, I don't like XTC, but did I tell the people
who recomended XTC to me that I hate them?  No, because XTC is also
creative and original, and I'm very glad that I was exposed to them,
even if I don't like them.  If anything, it's my problem that I don't
appreciate XTC.

> i didn't like her, so i took your comments as coming at me also.

Well, read what I am saying next time.

> can i yell at you for not liking my music now??  huh? huh?  can i be
> an intolerent jerk too??

Go right ahead!  Just don't tell me to shut up, like Russ did!

> can i pick some stuff that "will hurt your tender bushed ears", ears

I doubt if you can find any music that will hurt my tender ears.  I
listen to the likes of Faust, Einsturzende Neubauten, The Residents,
Ornette Coleman, etc., every now and then.  What are you going to hurt
my ears with?

> used to simple melodies and kb's predictable style and "pop" lyrics
> that you probably don't have the slightest idea what she is really
> writing about?

I know what she's writing about.  Please don't project your ignorance
onto me.  Simple melodies???  I can hum Bach (well one voice), but not
Kate Bush, why's that?  Predictable style???  Oh yeah, "The Dreaming" is
just like all her other albums.  It's just like every album ever
recorded.  Right!  Give me a break!  Pop lyrics???  What planet are you
from?

Bullshit!  Bullshit!  And more bullshit!  "The Dreaming" is at least as
complicated as Bach.  I've listened to both too.  Don't give me with
crap!

>> huh? huh?  /* i'm taunting you, doug alan.  i figure you're a child
>> enough to fall for this, we'll see!! */

I guess so!  But then again, growing up is the worst thing you can do!

> summary: come back in 10 years and tell me what kb is up to.  by then
> she will have survived one half second on the big clock of the
> "greatest ablum ever" scale, and will see how she's holding up.  until
> then, realize where she realistically stands in the world of music,

"The Dreaming" will stand up just as well as "Sargent Pepper's".  And
many critics have made that comparison.  It probably won't ever be as
popular, but if "Sargent Pepper's" were to have been released a couple
years ago, instead of 1967, it probably wouldn't have been a huge
financial success either.

> and specifically to you, doug alan, don't act like such a large
> asshole.  go back to being a normal size asshole.

If you're going to do something, you might as well do it in a big way!

> ps:  doug, just to get you upset, i'll let you in on what i said the
> first time someone asked me what i thought of 'the dreaming.'
> "it's....ok.  nothing too exciting.  she is a looker though.  if i
> came by and she were tied to a tree i'd probably cut her free(!!)
> after having my way with her."

Well, now, Ron, that just adds a whole new aura of respectability about
everything you've said!

> that's what i think of kb, and you can rest assured you helped me form
> this opinion of her.

I would like Kate's music just as much if she looked like three leprotic
hipopotomuses.  Her looks are totally irrelevant to her music.  Are you
going to tell me now, that I want to get into Laurie Anderson's, Suzanne
Vega's, and Siouxsie Sioux's pants, and that's why I like them?  Why
don't I like Madonna then?  Why don't I like Lisa Dalbello, then?
(She's even progressive!)  It's clear that you are yet again baring your
predjudices for the whole net to see.


			 "I look into American eyes
			  I see little life"

			  Doug Alan
			   nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (or ARPA)