Kate-echism XXIX.12.ii

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

 To: Love-Hounds
 From: Andrew Marvick (IED)
 Subject: Kate-echism XXIX.12.ii

 > I haven't seen this mentioned yet.  Just who is everybody in the
 > band in the "Love and Anger" video.  I should think this is a chance
 > for us to associate a face with those names we've known for a while.
 > Except for Gilmour, obviously.
 >
 > -- Michael Sullivan          uunet!jarthur.uucp!aqdata!sullivan

     IED has identified them already in Love-Hounds, but for the
sake of latecomers and slackers he will repeat the information. Aside
from Gilmour on electric guitar, the men in the _Love_and_Anger_
video are: John Giblin on bass, Stuart Elliott on drums, Paddy Bush
on valiha (the odd rectangular instrument, which originates from
Madagascar), an unidentified (by IED) keyboardist (all keyboards on
the track were originally played by Kate, and this man is not Kevin
McAlea, Kate's usual keyboard stand-in), and Stewart Avon-Arnold and
Gary Hurst as Kate-carriers (they spend the rest of the video crouching
on the ground on either side of Kate). Stewart and Gary, incidentally,
were Kate's dance partners until 1983. They did not participate in any of
her _Hounds_of_Love_ TV or film performances, so their reappearance, along
with Gilmour's and the Dervishes', makes for a kind of oldtimers' reunion.

     Drukman responds to Neil Calton's posting thus:
 > I am not Dan Quayle (at least I wasn't last time I checked...
 > Besides, if you're so clever, how come the laugh ain't in the video or
 > on the CD or cassette single?
 >
 > -- Jon Drukman

     The accuracy of Neil's Quayle remark is pretty well borne out by
your posting, Drukman. Like Quayle in his ex tempore speeches, you
repeatedly betray an arrogant conviction that you possess some sort of
superior authority (a conviction entirely belied by the facts); and like
Quayle, you tend to spout rash conclusions without any substantive support.
For the second time, Drukman, IED makes the following two points: first,
you _don't_know_ that the laugh isn't part of Kate's video--you only know
that U.S. TV-shows haven't let the video continue through the three seconds
of dead air that would be necessary in order for us to _hear_ the
laugh. Second, the fact that the U.S. label, CBS, chose not to include
the laugh on their promo-CD and "cassingle" means _absolutely_nothing_.
We already know that the very choice of _Love_and_Anger_ as the U.S.
single was made by a bunch of CBS suits who did _not_ consult Kate about
it beforehand--IED reported as much based on information he received
from Alison Shapiro (via Vickie) more than a month ago. The _only_
positive data we have about the placement of the laugh is to
be found in the _British_ edition of the CD. It constitutes the sole
legitimate source of information any of us has to go on. And _it_
connects the laugh with _Love_and_Anger_. Any other supposition at
this stage--whether it should turn out to be correct or not--is made
without any tangible evidence at all.

 >think its important to be critical when listening to Kate. I listen to her
 >music because of it's high quality - not because of ther hair style, or
 >whethera particular radio station plays it... If the quality isn't there (and
 >I agree that TSW is substandard (I'll ditto most of the points made in this
 >article), we should feel free to talk about it and not be afraid to be burned
 >to the crisp in a flame war.
 >
 >-- Steve Tynor

     IED doesn't have any great desire to get involved in more personal
confrontations here, but he must protest about this kind of venemous
tripe. There is no-one in this group who likes Kate's music _because_
it is played on a certain radio station. That is totally untrue and
unfair. IED doesn't listen to the radio at all; and the fact that our
extremely valuable Livermore correspondent does, and that he takes the
trouble to share with us the data which he gleans from that activity,
in no way indicates that radio has _shaped_ his musical preference for
Kate! It's completely gratuitous and spiteful to suggest that it has.
(In fact, the opposite is true: because of Ed's belief in Kate's
music and his extraordinary efforts on the music's behalf, he seems to
have had some success in shaping the attitude of the _radio_ station.)
     As for the hairstyle accusation: you, Steve, are the only
person to have connected the quality of Kate's work with her hair.
No one else had even thought of that idea until now. Your invective is
unjust, inaccurate, foolish and nasty.
     In regard to this idiotic trend among you and your ilk to criticize
a work of art like _The_Sensual_World_ via factually vapid, musically
ignorant and fundamentally boorish insults of both the music and those
who are capable of appreciating it: go right ahead. You convince no one
but yourselves. IED for one sees no hope of elucidating you and your
fellow fickle cynics about the myriad facets of _TSW_'s perfection.
If your ears can't perceive them, IED's words will go unheard, as well.
So go right ahead--continue to embarrass yourselves with your absurd
checklists of alleged "flaws" in _TSW_: you're just whistling away
in the dark void of your own ignorance.

-- Andrew Marvick