MisK.

[IED0DXM%OAC.UCLA.EDU@mitvma.mit.edu]

 To: Love-Hounds
 From: Andrew Marvick
 Subject: MisK.

     First, many thanks to all those Love-Hounds who have e-mailed IED
to sanction the use of whatever part of their tape-order money remains
for the roses-and-ivy gift. Your generosity is much appreciated.
     Love-Hounds veteran Joe Turner turned up in L.A. yesterday, much
to IED's surprise and delight. The two philo-canines enjoyed an evening
of Kate-bushological discourse and McChicken sandwiches, and IED learned
firsthand the extent of Joe's (and Larry DeLuca's) respective but equally
vast musical talents, as well as one or two interesting (though not,
perhaps, entirely convincing) points about the secret messages in
_WYW/oMe_.
     Welcome to Love-Hounds, Jason. Don't worry about the odd jargon
spoken here--it's not really "Kate-ese", only Love-Hounds' own peculiar
dialect. Non-KompuTerized fans do not speak it, either, and they are
no less fans for that.
     "What the heck is 'Katemas'?", you ask. Katemas is Love-Hounds'
term for Kate's birthday: July 30, 1958. You'll notice a good deal of
quasi- or pseudo-religious allusion peppering Love-Hounds' discussion
of Our Blessed SubjeKT. It is made (more or less) in jest.
     L-Hs have a tradition (of sorts) of celebrating this sanKTified
date, although it's never yet really caught on on the West Coast. IED
is hoping that Tracy Roberts's suggestion will spark a change there.
     On quite a different subject, Doug MacGowan has made some very
compelling and provocative new points about Kate's themes:

 >  To change the subject again, I have noticed (especially in the very
 >early works of Kate that IED recently transcribed), a very unusual
 >point of view that seems to show itself in the majority of Kate's
 >works.  It's so unique that I can't quite think of the right word for
 >it, but the closest that I can come is "victim." Maybe the word is
 >powerlessness.
 >  This is apparent in many of her songs dealing with relationships: she
 >would run up that hill *if* she could; the actor can't save himself
 >in _Wow_; Mrs. Houdini stands powerless, watching the magician die;
 >the girl has no ability to choose what's happening and who she picks
 >in _Canasta_.

     This is a very interesting thesis, and IED cannot deny that
Doug gives strong examples to support it. It's a mystery, since Kate
does not, in fact, believe that people are, strictly speaking, "victims"
of fate, or helpless beings. Her philosophy, if it can be called that,
is that we _can_ affect our fate through our attitude. But she doesn't
mean by this that there is any supernatural force at work. She has
made it clear in interviews that what she means is that _if_ we are able
to view our environment in a positive light--if we can succeed in
transforming our "negative energies", or attitudes, into positive ones,
through the exercise of our _will_--then that very positive attitude
will have an effect on our environment, hence on our personal destiny.
She has been quick to stress that if such an attitude can be maintained,
then _even_ if tragedy should befall us, we will be better able to
deal with that tragedy, and thus our fate will be more hopeful.
     Therefore, it's very interesting that Doug notices a theme of
hopelessness running through Kate's work. Kate has said at least twice
that she always wants to include at least some note of _hope_ in her
work. But IED believes she was referring more to her albums in a general
sense, rather than to each individual song. Also, she insists
that _The_Ninth_Wave_ ends on a note of hope for the future (the heroine
does _NOT_ die at any time in that work, and that's FINAL, Joe!). This
attitude is not always readily apparent in the songs, and Doug MacGowan
makes a very valid point, IED thinks. It's a puzzle, but IED would just
like to remind everyone that Kate is _not_ writing autobiographically
in these songs. When she assumes the pessimistic, forlorn attitude of
the fetus in _Breathing_, or the even more pathetic aspect of the mother
in _Army_Dreamers_, she is _not_ trying to express her own _personal_
attitude or opinion. In this respect Kate Bush is quite different from
99.9% of the artists writing songs today. Kate tends to take on the
personalities and to share the attitudes and opinions of the characters
who narrate the various songs she composes. She does _not_ (for the most
part) mean to _endorse_ those characters' attitudes and opinions, although
she might happen to agree with some of them. Rather, she simply responds to
those characters' situations as she believes they would respond: her
capacity for _empathy_ seems to be one of her greatest gifts and inspirations.
     Given this fact, it's not necessarily a contradiction of her own
philosophy that a certain number of her songs seem to explore the theme
of helplessness or hopelessness. Such emotions are of great concern
to her, and it's almost inevitable that she should be moved to try to
express them in her music. IED believes, however, that her ultimate
and overriding message is a positive one.

-- Andrew Marvick