Re: Kate is a liar?

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

COLE0001@DUKEMC.BITNET:
> Kate says one thing.  Fans then either agree with her blindly or they call
> her a liar.  There doesn't seem to be much of a middle ground.  Yet, the
> middle ground is (in my opinion) where the majority of the answer lies.

I have to disagree with you a little bit there. I think that most
fans do not fall into either of those categories. More like, they
either accept KaTe's answer, accept it, but claim that there is
more to it than what she states, or just plain disagree with her.
Nobody's actually called her a liar, but rather, they use that
term since it appears that she misstates her facts sometimes,
when it's probably more a case of mutiple possible answers and
she just chooses the one that suits her at the time...

> Perhaps an example is needed.  The recent gaffa talks seem to be a good
> starting ground.  Kate says gaffa is slang for gaffer's tape.  Seems
> reasonable enough at the outset.  Then people assert that gaffa is some
> sort of veiled reference to Purgatory (or perhaps Hell).  Well, this example
> isn't working as well as I thought it would, then again I'm doing this on
> the fly.  Once again I digress.  The point is, why can't both interpretations
> be equally valid.
 
Your example is quite valid. It demonstrates how KaTe has given a 
meaning for an element of a song and then how others have construed
a meaning for themselves based on their conceptions and perceptions
and their own experiences and their biases. Which is perfectly
fine by me, because, for instance, I would never have thought of
gaffa as a metaphor for purgatory (or hell), which i find to be an
intriguing idea.

Each and every song will have a personal meaning to each and every
listener. Sure KaTe had something in mind when she wrote it, but as
you later state, it will diverge from her original meaning in other's
minds and in her own work!

> So the upshot is that people feel that Kate is being secretive for some
> reason.  Perhaps this is partly the case.  I prefer an alternate solution
> though.  Perhaps Kate doesn't really know what her songs are about.  Okay,
> I've most likely infuriated a couple of people out there by making this
> assertion.  Give me a chance to back it up though.
 
KaTe is a secretive person. She has repeatedly said so and we have 
to accept that. Furthermore, KaTe has also stated that some of her
songs' subjects elude her as well ("Love and Anger" for instance).

I don't think you're going to infuriate anybody with that assertion.

[description of how intentions bifurcate into reality del'd]

Yup - happens to me all the time - even when I'm writing something
factual like a review...never mind poetry which just takes off and 
takes over my hand for the duration of the writing session!

> I can hear all of you screaming for me to get to the point.  Well, here it
> comes.  I think that the above discussion on my short stories could just as
> easily be applied to Kate's songs.  Who can say what actually goes on
> during the creative process.  Kate may have something particular in mind
> when writing a certain song.  Who can say what else might come through in
> the process.
 
Very much the case, but I think that much of what appears in other's
interpretations are creations of their imaginations and experiences,
not KaTe's. The content of a song that is additional to the original
intention is often twined into the original theme in such a way that
the writer will often note it (well, usually). While ocasionally, he/
she might miss something that suddenly worked its way in, most of the
time, it becomes something conscious in the writer's mind. So, inter-
pretations, such as the purgatory one, are really coming from the
listener, not the writer.

> Although I don't believe that we can attribute every character in her songs
> to being representations of Kate, I do believe that the topics she chooses
> to write about do indicate something about her personality.  I don't think
> that I would be going to far out on a limb if I suggested that Kate was
> very empathic.  She obviously has the ability to get inside the heads of
> vastly different characters.  I would point out further examples, but even
> I'm getting tired of the subject by now.  I apologize for the comas which
> many of you have undoubtedly slipped into as a result of my lengthy opinions.
 
Apology accepted. ;)

Extremely empathetic! There are few other singers/writers/anythings
who I feel could fully immerse themselves within as many different
characters and people as KaTe does (she'd be a devilish roleplayer!).

And also, not to be redundant, anything that anyone writes about,
with the seriousness that KaTe puts into her work, must either originate
as part of the writer or make its way into the psyche of the writer
in somehow. It's just not possible for a creative person (or an
uncreative person) to involve themselves in something to that degree
and not be influenced by it - even if the originating source was
themselves!

> By the way, I would love to hear what others have to say on the subject.  I
> concede that my interpretation is not necessarily the only valid one.  In
> fact, I'm sure that it isn't.  Something akin to a gestalt of everyone's
> theory is probably closer to the truth.  Truth is rarely a simple matter.
 
Ah, the matter summed up in one simple statement. You've heard what
I think (and there's more!), but now it's someone else's turn...

woj

ps. can i have that statement "truth is rarely a simple manner" - that's
good!