Re: Even more of the same

[greg@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Greg O'Rear)]

I just wanted to comment on some of the war between Doug and Andrew and whoever
else:

First, I disagree that any opinion held by a viewer (or listener) of art is
valueless.  Suppose Kate had said in an interview somewhere, "Oh, _Breathing_?
I hated that song."  Do I then feel that my own opinion that it is a good song
is valueless now?  You two sparring partners seem to fail to realize one
important fact: the two of you are in a special position, being able to actually
speak with an artist you admire about her work.  I would love to ask Kate
questions about her work, as I would like to interview John Lennon, Escher,
Socrates.  You must realize that the vast majority of artists in all fields of
endeavor left their work as their only testament, and those living are not as
available, usually, as Kate seems to have been.  Therefore, I tend to side
with Doug on this one; while Kate may have intended one thing, if I perceive
an additional meaning, why is this bad or incorrect?  I have written some
poetry which made sense to me only after I reread it.  While I was composing
it, I had no idea what it was about.  So, I admit the possibility of Kate
being able to accept the idea that certain interpretations, while not intended,
may be just as valid as her original intentions.

Second, making and distributing copies of the Kate tape is, _I believe_,
illegal.  Whether or not it is understandable is another question, and quite
beside the point.  IED wonders how to solve the problem of all these Kate fans
wanting the songs, but not wishing them to pay bootleggers' prices.  Well,
this fan (for one) would not have known of the material's existence if IED
had not brought it to my (our) attention on this newsgroup.  Maybe the best
way to keep hordes of fans from wanting illegal material is simply to exercise
some restraint in telling them (us) about it.  I appreciate the lists of known
Kate stuff, but that's different to actually saying where we can get
a(n illegal) copy.

IED, back off from crucifying Doug over his past mistakes (be kind to them?),
since he has, apparently, admitted that his behavior during the interview in
question was less than admirable.  To me, it is his conduct of the interview,
not the subject matter, that I find fault with (for which I accept his
disavowal).

This newsgroup exhibits a certain amount of "subject matter in-breeding":
there is little new to discuss about Kate, therefore old and/or obscure
stuff is dredged up, with every hint and inflection a subject of wild
controversy.  Kate's just this woman, OK?  She happens to be good (if slow)
at what she does, but she is by no means perfect, or a model of what a
real artist should be.  She's just doing what she does in her own way.
Most of it I like, some of it I love, some of it I hate.  I don't think
Kate wants us all to love everything she does and worship her.  An artist
does what an artist does because they have to, because they want to, and
if people like it, well that's a bonus.  Calm down, guys.  Leave the poor
woman (and each other) alone; rabid fandom is a scary thing, for the artist
as well as the fan.
--

Greg O'Rear
University of Florida
greg@beach.cis.ufl.edu