KaT-echism? No, KaT-aclysm!

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

[From the Love-Hounds Lost and Found...  -- |>oug]

> From: gregr@basser.oz (Gregory John Ryan)
> Subject: Shelleyan Orphan

> There was a recent mention of a British duo known as Shelleyan Orphan
> with a release called "Helleborine" on Rough Trade.  I would
> appreciate any information readers may have on these musicians as I've
> not heard of them before, and if Danny Thompson plays bass for them
> then I think I should.

    Thompson fans should hear his work on the Dolphin Brothers's
(Jansen/ Barbieri's) album "Catch the Fall", esp. his solo on "Host to
the Holy".  "Helleborine" is out on CD as a UK product. IED doesn't
have the CD cat.  no., but the U.S. number is Columbia/Rough Trade
#BFC 40545.

     Shelleyan Orphan are principally a duo: Caroline Crawley and
Jemaur Tayle, who co-wrote all the tracks on the album.  The other
musicians who appear on the album are all acoustic instrumentalists
who worked on the album but are not actually members of the band. The
complete line-up is as follows:

Producer: Haydn Bendall for Transparency
Remixer: Mike Pela, Crawley/Tayle
Writers: Caroline Crawley/Jemaur Tayle
Vocals: Crawley/Tayle
Violin: Bernard Partridge
Additional Violin: Richard Tomes
Viola: Ian Jewel
Cello: Steven Orton
Oboe: Thomas Davey
Flute: Elma Cole
English Horn: Nicky Holland
Clarinet: Prudence Whittaker
Bassoon: Nicholas Hunter
Harp: Ruth Holden
Harpsichord, piano: Andrew Powell
Double bass: Danny Thompson
Percussion: Stuart Elliot
Tamboura, Mandolin, Sturmento da Porca: Paddy Bush

>    "What the hell is GAFFA?"
>
>      [    According to Kate, "Gaffa" is gaffer's tape (aka "duct tape")
>    -- |>oug ]

> Andy and Dave, IED's advice is that you take the above answer with a
> grain of salt. Kate responded positively to the suggestion that
> "Gaffa" referred to "gaffer's tape", but this is clearly not the only
> meaning of the word to her. It's all very peculiar and mysterious,
> which is just the way she wants it.
>
      [    So why is it that if |>oug says Kate is alluding to more
>    than she will admit, IED says that is popycock, but then IED
>    presents his own unfounded theories as undeniable truth?
    -- |>oug ]

     IED can see the apparent inconsistency, Doug, but in fact the
analogy you draw is false. IED gave no alternative theory about the
possible meaning of the word "Gaffa" in Kate's song.  Therefore, he
could hardly have presented any such theory as "undeniable truth"!
You, in your interview with Kate, presented novel and highly specific
interpretations of "Hounds of Love", "Burning Bridge" and "Get Out Of
My House", among others.  In almost every case Kate went out of her
way to contradict you very firmly. In regard to the meaning of the
word "Gaffa", however, Kate has never made the slightest suggestion
that the connection between the word "Gaffa" and "gaffer's tape" was
the only connection possible. On the contrary, her references to this
song have always been unusually vague in comparison with her very
explicit and detailed explanations of most of the other songs on the
album.  Finally, the simple conclusion that "Gaffa" means "gaffer's
tape" fails utterly to explain why the word is distorted in this
unusual way. It isn't the slightest bit unreasonable, therefore, to
advise that listeners hesitate before accepting your definition as the
only one possible -- which is all IED ever suggested.

      [	I think that Kate's explanation of the term Gaffa is perfectly
	adequate.  Long before I heard Kate's explanation that Gaffa
	is a term some people use for gaffer's tape (perhaps it is a
	specific brand common in England?) I pictured just via the
	context of the song, that Gaffa was a type of molassis that
	Kate was stuck in.  I also thought that the meaning of the
	song was complete with this interpretation.  Finding out that
	she meant "gaffer's tape", rather than molassis did not change
	the meaning of the song at all.  So I was totally unsurprized
	to find out that Gaffa was gaffer's tape.  What about the song
	is there that cannot be explained perfectly well by the
	molassis / gaffer's tape interpretation -- the one, by the
	way, that Kate herself says is correct. -- |>oug ]

Dave, maybe you didn't mean this, but it sounded like you were
saying that The Stranglers are a heavy metal group. The Stranglers
are not a heavy metal group. The music they were making at the time
that Kate expressed an appreciation of it (ca. 1978) was closely
associated with punk, or at any rate was some form of "new wave".
But of course, you're right that it was very loud, aggressive music
-- what Kate called "male" music.

> I would assume that she works in the studio listening to the tapes
> at a loud volume, and thus writes and mixes her songs so that they
> sound "right" at that volume. Thus the note is there to help the
> listener fully appreciate the album.

> -- MarK T. Ganzer

>        (    Kate has said that music should be listened the way
> it was meant to be listened: LOUD! -- Doug)

More or less. Her actual remarks appear below.  Although IED posted
the entire interview in Love-Hounds, it was some time ago. Kate talked
about this exact subject in the French magazine "Guitares et
Claviers".  As closely translated as IED could manage, here are the
relevant passages:

   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. In any case music, all music, was made to be
   heard at the volume at which it was played, that is to
   say in this case LOUD.

   Y.B.: That album was a difficult one to accept, for the
   uninitiated.

   K.B.: I have no doubt that those who buy singles because they
   like my hits are completely mystified upon hearing the
   albums. But if it comes to that, they should listen to
   it played LOUDLY!...

   Y.B.: Alot of people complain that your music has become too
   complex, inaccessible, exclusive.

   K.B.: People's reactions before any kind of music reflect more
   their own personality than that of the composer. As far
   as my lyrics are concerned, I take a great deal of care;
   they are very oblique and describe situations that are
   not always simple. It's not always easy, but it's necessary
   to make an effort and listen actively, give of oneself.
   But even if nobody understands my stories, to understand
   the music, once more, they must play it LOUD!

> Could some alert Kate aficionado e-mail me the lyrics to "Ne
> T'Enfuis Pas"?  I think I've got the first line at least down, but
> I'd like to try to translate it on my own.  ("Je viens comme un chat
> dans le nuit si noir").

> --Jon Drukman
> "Am I yours?  Are you mine?"

They were originally posted in the Kate Bush Club
Newsletter (# 13). Here they are again:

   Ne T'enfuis pas

   Je viens
   Comme un chat
   Par la nuit si noire.
   Tu attends
   Et je tombe
   Dans tes ailes blanches, la la la
   Et je vole
   Et je coule
   Comme une plume.

   Si les grands yeux de mon Dieu
   Ne me gardaient pas
   Je te volerais.

   Ne t'enfuis pas.
   Tu as des ailes,
   Le pouvoir de me quitter.
   Tu es tombe                      (accent aigu over the 'e' in 'tombe')
   Du ciel comme un ange, la la la
   Et j'ai peur
   Que le ciel te reprenne.

   Je viens
   Comme un chat
   Par la nuit si noire
   Je t'en prie, je t'en prie, je t'en prie, je t'en prie, je t'en prie,
   Ne t'enfuis pas.

> From: Dave Hsu

> IED: c'mon now, give Jeff a break.  I'm sure the both of you have
> more or less the same thing in mind, and this exchange is certainly
> NOT the best way to correct his semantics.  What difference does it
> make whether or not Kate believes that her audience at large would
> find reincarnation to be esoteric or not?  She has always seemed to
> me to be more concerned that we appreciate the quality of the
> imagery and the hard work evident in her music, and less concerned
> about our views on its themes, i.e. suicide, Vietnam, Reich, etc.,
> which are much harder to reach a consensus on.

> -- David Hsu, devoted aKolyTe

You're right, Dave. It was pretty silly of IED to make such a fuss.
Withdrawn and apologized for.

-- Andrew