Re: Madonna the Anti-Kate

[woj <woiccare@clutx.clarkson.edu>]

I won't say that I have all the answers, but I do have a few comments
about the KaTe/Madonna dis/similarity.

1) Looking only at the fans on the network is incredibly wrong. There
   are many fans who are not computer freaks or hacks. In fact, I'd 
   say the majority of KaTefans are not. Gaffa is merely a small sub-
   section of KaTefans (and an odd one at that).

2) On the issue of sexuality: yeah, I'd have to agree that KaTe does
   appeal to the "cerebral sexuality" in all of us. But, as you stated
   she also appeals to the primitive side of us to -- by her beauty
   or whatever. As for KaTe being the sex-kitten for post-adolescent
   elitist men, I would say that she is a sex-kitten for post-adoles-
   cents (either sex, as you so gracefully pointed out John) who don't
   find any entertaining value to the sex-kittens of mainstream pop.
   Of course that only applies if you view her as a sex-symbol (hi
   Larry... ;) ).

   Interestingly, a friend of mine who likes to ridicule people asked
   me if I would spend a night with KaTe if she asked me. I replied no.
   Why, though has more to do with my feeling that it is better not to
   know the people whose music you like, because you might find out
   something that will make you hate them. Still, even if I didn't ad-
   here to that rule, I wouldn't. Why then? I couldn't tell you.

3) I really don't feel that KaTe or Madonna "play to their audiences."
   As I've stated before, I like some of Madonna's work, while some of
   it I perceive as trash. This is because I find it non-entertaining,
   not because I find her repulsive (I don't either). Anyways, back to the
   point. I think that both really put a lot of thought into their work
   and do so with themselves in mind. KaTe has stated the why behind
   Deeper Understanding and it has nothing to do with the existance of
   Love-Hounds. Likewise, the material Madonna has done is also spurned
   by what she is inspired by. 

woj