Kate-echism III.xii.16

[IED0DXM%UCLAMVS.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU]

" S   I   L   L   Y "   ?   !   ?   !   ?

Doug may be right that the line between silliness
and greatness is a fine one, but Kate certainly
never crossed it! (Oh, o.k., maybe she came close
to it once in a while back in the old days...)
But anyone who has really studied the dance/mime
movements from "Suspended in Gaffa", for example, will
want to re-consider. Especially when he/she sees the
French TV version, for which Kate has no stage props
of any kind. Every movement is meaningful; every
word, every syllable, every rhythmic detail in the
recording is reflected in her movements.
Then go back to "Hammersmith" and you'll see that that
kind of detail is there, too, at least in embryonic form.
Alot of her movement has been rejected as "self-indulgent",
and many have said the same of her music. But actually
she is not indulging HERSELF so much as the character
in the song and the demands of the music. She enters
the song's fantasy world during the performance, and
in that world ANYTHING is permitted, so long as it is
found in the song. This is not self-indulgence, but an
indulgence of the art itself.

Incidentally, IED has a question for Doug:
During the MTV interviews, Kate was asked how
many times she'd been to the States, and she
replied that this (the 1985 trip) was her THIRD
time here. Can you explain?

Welcome back, Sue. IED, for one, is glad to see you making a splash
again. I see Wicinski melting away from a stray drop as we speak...

To answer Joe Testa's question, no, IED does not
consume massive quantities of drugs,
although he is frequently
in the throes of
a recent fix
of Kate
Bush,
and
th
i
s
ma
y
acc
ount
for th
e occas
ional la
pse into
odd-shaped
lines of pho
sphour. But
it's noth
ing to
get
abu
sive
about,
now, is it?

-- Andrew