Gaffaweb > Love & Anger > 1988-08 > [ Date Index | Thread Index ]
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]


I've known some gerbils who were suspended in Gaffa.

From: Piper/Lovecraft in '88 <8344141@WWU.EDU>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 88 23:54 PST
Subject: I've known some gerbils who were suspended in Gaffa.
Posted-Date: Tue, 13 Sep 88 23:54 PST

From: "Liz Owens, Microcomputer Product Center, 491-3889"
 <BABOOSHKA@nuacc.acns.nwu.edu>
Subject: More on Gaffa and the like....

> IED, if you keep sending me such fulsome compliments, I may
> ask you to bear my children.  You turn my head.

    IED turns my head, too.  (*cough*)

    Seriously, IED, you shouldn't argue with philosophy grads, 'cause
even when you're right, you can't _win_.  Interesting how this Gaffa
thing turned out though.  Better luck next time.

> Subject: Will this appear in L-Hs without |>oug-/\lan-notations?

    Thank you, |>oug, for changing the manner in which you respond to
IED's postings.  It makes reading much more coherent, and you still
get your say.  Keep up the good fights!  As long as you stay on
opposite coasts, no one gets hurt, right?  (Personally I think you are
both psychopathic liars who are conspiring to lead the rest of us
astray.)

> From: munnari!latcs1.oz.au!ang@UUNET.UU.NET (Ang Cheng Chai)
> Subject: Re: WoW

> After seeing the WoW clip for the first time on my newly acquired TWS
> video, I now like it. Never did b4.

    The "Wow" clip is a disservice to Kate in every way.  I absolutely
*love* the Hammersmith-Odeon tape as is.  Why'd they chop it up into
"Wow" sausage, anyhow?  What was (were) the alternate video(s) they
could have used for "Wow"?

> From: "William M. Bumgarner" <wb1j+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU>
> Subject: CD Singles (Marillion, U2, Sinead, Eurythmics, etc...)

> on Sinead O'Connor... ("Mandinka") shows a picture of the cover of
> _The Lion and the Cobra_ with Sinead facing to the right and
> screaming... as I remember it, she was facing the other way with a
> calm look and something written on her hand... any ideas??

>      [ Sure.  The American version of the cover has been watered down
>        to appeal more to the mashed-potatoes that permiate American
>        society.  The cover shown on the import single is probably the
>        original cover that you can get if you can track down an import
>        version of the album.  -- |>oug

Yep, same cover.

>  "I Want Your (Hands on Me)"; three versions of IWY (HoM) performed
> with MC Lyte.  A lot of rap songs.  Dance mix, Street mix, and re
> mix versions.  Also contains "Just Call Me Joe".

    Live "Just Call Me Joe," as deliberately out of tune as when I saw
her in Vancouver BC.

    A comment on what I believe Kate means when she says she means
something by something she says, as opposed to what Kate means by
something she says she means by something she means when she says
something she says:
    When Kate says "Gaffa" is gaffa tape, or when Kate says "mule" is
a stubborn animal, she is hardly clarifying the song.  It's one of
those "different level of interpretation" things.  I don't subscribe
to the deconstructionalist view that whatever the audience thinks is
meant is what it means, regardless of the artist.  I don't, because
that would make a Kate listener a contributor to Kate's art, and thus
be blasphemy.  However, I do think that she deliberately intends for
different interpretations to result from her vague and sometimes
obscure lyrics.  I also believe that on the first level of
interpretation, as in the two aforementioned examples, you could
substitute "gaffa tape" and "stubborn animal" for "Gaffa" and "mule"
respectively, you'd still have a whole world of interpreting before
you.
    The most amazing part of this is her use of multiple meanings.  I
am impressed with multiple-meaning writing.  I am also impressed with
simple and deep interpretation writing.  Kate seems to have perfected
the craft of writing multiple meanings each with their own set of
multiple deeper meanings.
    Though this wasn't my original argument, I have just decided that
the above proves either of the following: (1) Kate Bush is insane, and
can't concentrate on one detail for any length of time; or (2) Kate
Bush is God.  And we know (1) to be false.

                                            LAters.
                                            Paul M Carpentier