Hounding down that elusive fox

[IED0DXM%UCLAMVS.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA]

>Please run out and grab a copy of the Japanese computer journal "Bit"
>(July 1986 issue) and flip to page 192 for a mention of Love-Hounds.

Where? Huh? Maybe you could just reprint it for those of us who
don't know where to pick up latest copies of Japanese computer
journals? IED now feels particularly ignorant. Japanese? Huh?

>K-T-shirts: Newbury Comics in Harvard Square has the ugly HoL
>t-shirts in red, pale blue, and yellow. YECHH! Even IED must admit
>that the choices of color are a little, well, uh, bad.

IED readily admits it, Joe! Never meant to imply that these
gizmos were particularly attractive. The only really nice one
is the black "It's in the trees..." sweatshirt. Even the "designer"
HoL sweatshirt is a little lame. But t-shirts are not worn for
beauty's sake, are they, rather as cultural (or counter-cultural)
identification devices. As such the US HoL shirt functions
well enough, and it IS kind of cheery. (By the way, you are talking
about the WHITE shirt with three different colors of ink, right? Not
three different colors of t-shirt?)

>In the same vein: My brother is doing the printing of t-shirts for the
>SF-Lover's net digest. I will confer with him about price and cost. It
>would basically cost $10 or so. Probably less. We would need art, tho.
>Any artists out there? Anyone with uncopyrighted pix of KT? (Anyone with
>copyrighted pix of KT that we can get away with printing, even?) Should
>                  ( \/ )
>it be a generic "I \  / Kate Bush" t-shirt, or should it be
>                    \/
>a Love-Hounds t-shirt? Ideas anyone?

PLEASE not a soppy "I heart Kate" shirt -- Dale Somerville already
put out a "Kate is Love" bumper sticker which IED
had to edit for public presentation. Aren't there enough simple KT fan
shirts, anyway? Much preferable is the idea of a Love-Hounds design.
Could you explain what format the design must be in for transference by
silk-screen? Something IED has thought of wistfully in the past is
a design based on the KT monogram (seen in good form branded
into the side of the crate on John Carder Bush's cover for Lionheart),
but written out by hand in
chalk-stick-like printing in a style similar to that in which
"ET" was spelled out in ads for the movie. This has nothing
to do with "ET", you understand, which IED didn't like much, anyway.
But the logo (minus the finger-to-finger image that accompanied
the title) was direct and attractive, and very simple. Also, if drawn
in soft charcoal on rough paper, the silkscreen transfer (in any color)
might look pretty stylish. Needn't be on the front, either.
Maybe just "Love-Hounds" on the front, with a good photo of
Kate, and the logo on the back? Criticism or alternative suggestions?

>By the by, Doug. Kate isn't a god, she's a GODDESS. Unless, of course,
>she's been to Sweden recently for one of THOSE operations, and is now
>Kurt Bush...? Let's just leave it as "major deity"...

Kate a god? Kate a goddess? Huh? What is all this religio-mumbo-jumbo?
Kate as the greatest living human being -- unquestionably. Goes without
saying. Kate as God, in some vague, generic, or aesthetic sense of the
word -- o.k. But Kate as "a god" or goddess? IED just doesn't get it.

>PS. Andrew Marvick - WHERE do you hear them counting off
>beats in the
>beginning of "Watching You Without Me"? I
>distinctly hear "What...Four"
>and then nothing else. (This is listening
>to the CD at LOUD volumes). This
>leads me to believe that the incident is
>NOT a recreated studio moment,
>but is possibly a question... "What for?"
>(Just like someone made me notice
>that the beginning of each episode of
>The Prisoner has #6 answering his own
>question: "Who is Number One?"
>"You are, number six!" It's all in the parsing!)

I'll let Kate answer this one herself (excerpted from
the November '85 interview recently translated and
posted in Love-Hounds by IED; IED's italics just added):

Yves Bigot: On The Dreaming you went to some pains to announce on the
sleeve that this music must be played very loudly. That
amused me at the time.

Kate Bush: In the studio, you heard it really loud. FOR MIXING, WE
HAD TO TURN IT DOWN, TO PAY ATTENTION TO DETAILS, but my
desire was to be totally overwhelmed by the flood of
sound....

It is definitely there, Joe. Keep listening, bars 1 through 8,
"Watching You Without Me".
Count along with the beat from the very first down-beat of
the recording, voicing only the first beat of each bar (that is,
voicing ONE {two-three-four} TWO {two-three-four}, etc.) up to
eight -- the length of the rhythmic introduction of the song.
This is where you heard "What?" Actually, IED believes, it's "What's
that?" The speaker means, "What bar is that?"
At bar four, that same musician calls out "four", just as you said --
but he calls it out on the third, rather than the first beat of that
bar. In other words, he's off beat by half a bar, a very common mistake.
Another musician then confirms the beat, on the FIRST beat
of bar FIVE. IED hears him saying "five" quite clearly.
Following this, you can hear them counting out the
first beats of bars six, seven and eight in unison. As IED admitted
the first time he offered this explanation of the passage, it was
PROBABLY recorded quite early on in the rehearsals, and probably
at the original "demo" stage of recording. However, knowing Kate's
perfectionism, and the classic character of this exchange,
it IS just possible that it was actually a staged re-recording
of an incident similar to many that must have occurred during the
original demo stages of the recording.