KT News, plus mailbag

[IED0DXM%OAC.UCLA.EDU@MITVMA.MIT.EDU]

     First, an apology for the prolixity of IED's prose in this
posting, which is even more tiresome than usual. He spent the day in
Victorian studies, and some of that era's style seems to have rubbed
off on him, with unpleasant results.

KT News:
^^^^^^^^
     A copy of the first of two new books about Kate Bush has come
into IED's hands, and it's a surprisingly worthwhile document. Its
outward appearance is not auspicious of interior value. It's a glossy
white paperback book, about 8x12" inches in dimension, featuring a
black and white _HoL_-era publicity shot on the front, and the title
"KATE BUSH WITH LOVE" in large pink letters. On the back cover is a
distressingly silly love missile to Kate and her fans, which vows the
compilers' utter devotion to Katedom in emotional but illiterate
language, the tone and message of which are entirely offset by the
writers' reference to "_Cloudbursting_". (In IED's view, no true Kate
Bush fan would ever commit that particular misspelling, but just about
any money-grubbing bootleg scum would.)
     The compilers, incidentally -- and the publishers, printers etc.
-- are unidentified. In fact, there is no catalogue number, no price
tag, no date or place of publication, no _anything_ that might set a
litigiously minded person on the path of the perpetrators of this
illegal product. For illegal it certainly must be, consisting as it
does exclusively of photo-reproductions of dozens of interviews,
reviews and advertisements of/for Kate's work, dating from ca. 1978 to
about 1986. In most cases the titles of the original publications have
been excised from the facsimiles, although some of the IDs slipped by.
It's obvious from this furtively anonymous presentation that no
permissions were sought to reproduce any of the clippings included in
the new book.
     The layout is relatively professional throughout, although a few
of the photos have been marred by the superimposition of smaller
clippings over their surface. The efforts of the editors have not
extended beyond the performance of these relatively simple
organizational tasks -- no commentary of any kind accompanies the
clippings. This is unfortunate, since by their unedited, unannotated
reproduction all the errors of fact which appeared in the original
articles are preserved now in more permanent form, thus greatly
increasing the likelihood of confusion among novice Kate Bushologists.
     Despite these faults, however, _Kate_Bush_With_Love_ must be
counted a very valuable book. In it are included all three of Harry
Doherty's important pieces from 1978, the Ted Mico interview, the
second Kris Needs _ZigZag_ interview and more than twenty more
articles of nearly equal interest and importance. There are of course
notable omissions, including Peter Swales's indispensible _Musician_
interview and the Tony Myatt _Capital_Radio_ interview, both from
1985.
     Still, any fan who is just discovering Kate in the late 1980s
will be sure to appreciate having a healthy sampling of print
interviews from the earlier part of Kate's career, now that the
originals have become relatively elusive. Considering the collection
as a whole, and in the context of presently available Kate
Bushological scholarly materials, IED can recommend this slim but
informative volume as a worthwhile purchase (approximate U.S. price:
$12.00).

Mailbag:
^^^^^^^^
     Next, a note to Ant of London: Thanks very much, Ant, for your
report of a December release date for Kate's next album.  IED wonders
whether the origin of that announcement was Kate herself or just EMI's
Manchester Street office (which has not given an accurate release date
of a Kate Bush record yet, at least not earlier than two weeks prior
to release). Also, he wonders whether December is to be the release
date of the lead-off single or of the album itself...Anyway, that date
falls (barely) within IED's envelope for an "imminent" release. We
must bear in mind, however, that this is Kate we're talking about: for
her, an announcement of December at this point is like saying "_maybe_
next April."
     |>oug answers IED's query as to whether |>. has any humility at
all, thus:

 >      No, actually I don't.
 >      To maintain that all of Kate's work is of completely equal
 > quality, I think you would have to argue in a way that would lead
 > you to the conclusion that all art is of equal quality.  And that
 > "better" and "worse" are meaningless words when applied to art.
 > Since neither you nor I would be willing to accept this conclusion,
 > I think you better get used to me saying that some of Kate's songs
 > are better than some other of her songs.

     You make a valid point. IED misspoke in saying he thought all of
Kate's mature work was "equally" strong. What he really meant is that
all of Kate's mature work is uniformly strong _enough_ so that any
mere Love-Hound -- |>oug, and certainly IED, included -- would do well
to admit incompetence to judge individual recordings' relative
quality. In fewer words, her work is better than we can judge it to
be. Just as (in someone else's words) "Beethoven's music is better
than it can be played," so Kate's music is better than it can be heard
-- unless it were judged by Kate herself. But |>oug has already
explained that he has _no_ humility, let alone enough humility to see
his essential ineligibility to judge Kate's art; so it's clear that he
will not share IED's more modest attitude.

-- Andrew Marvick