More from IED about more from Richard Caldwell about _TSW_

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

 To: Love-Hounds
 From: Andrew Marvick (IED)
 Subject: More from IED about more from Richard Caldwell about _TSW_

   As unhappy as IED is that he is a party to the continuation of the
current controversy over the quality of _TSW_, he must repeat (this
time in response to Richard's latest commentary about Kate, Del and the
album) that Richard's judgements regarding _The_Sensual_World_, as well
as the premises on which he bases those judgements, remain unsubstantiated.
   However convenient it may be for you, Richard, to accept it as "a
given" that _TSW_ is inferior to _Hounds_of_Love_, the claim--unsupported
as it is--remains profoundly unconvincing to this fan. IED does _not_
accept the album's inferiority as a given.
   Ed has pointed out that the critical consensus was _not_ that _TSW_
was inferior to previous albums. On the contrary, most critics--esp.
in the UK, where Kate has usually done worse with the critics than in
the US--couldn't praise the album enough. That leaves us with only
empirical arguments.

 >  I've seen the old "you can't say better or worse" argument enough
 >times to understand what your saying but I just can't agree.  Aesthetic
 >judgements are essential to art.  If we can't make these sorts of
 >judgements how can we even dare to say that Kate is the greatest music
 >artist of our time?  If we say that we can't judge the quality of Kate's
 >works against one another how can we judge them against someone elses or
 >say that they are any better?

   IED is in complete agreement with you here, Richard. Aesthetic judge-
ments _can_ be valid, and necessary, too. IED didn't reject criticism in a
general sense. If you can stomach a reread of IED's posting, you'll see
that his point was two-fold: first, he insisted that a one-word judgement
was scarcely worthwhile when applied to works as rich, intricate and--above
all--_different_ in kind as _HoL_ and _TSW_; second, he challenged you
to offer some evidence for such a judgement, if you had any. IED
agrees with you that there is a place for the judgement of the quality
of works of art. But at least when it involves Kate Bush, IED expects
that any such judgement should be accompanied by at least some quantity
of competent, thorough and well-organized evidence.
   It's one thing to present a strong case, heavy with specific comparisons,
that _Sgt._Pepper's_LHCB_ has greater musical value--or at least more musical
and lyrical content, density and complexity--than _Please_Please_Me_.
It's quite another simply to assert that, say, _Revolver_ is superior to
_Sgt._Pepper_ and expect that everyone will agree because there is "a
consensus" that that's true. (Here, as with _TSW_, there isn't one.)
   Facing a comparison like that, IED would have to answer that there
is a lot of good music in _Revolver_ and a lot of good music in _Sgt.
_Pepper_; but that beyond that further "better-worse" arguments
can only be a waste of time. Whatever qualities one might try to cite
as evidence of the superiority of _Revolver_ over _Sgt._Pepper_
will always be subject to counter-arguments emphasizing other
but perhaps equally valuable virtues in _Sgt._Pepper_ which are
lacking in _Revolver_; and vice versa.
   The same is true of _TSW_ and _HoL_. They are both unique recordings,
unlike any recordings by other artists, deeply personal in subject matter,
musical style, structure, lyrical intricacy, etc. IED supposes it's
possible, theoretically, to list virtues of _Hounds_of_Love_ which
are absent in _The_Sensual_World_. So what? The two albums were
inspired by different stimuli, at different times, with different
aims. Naturally there will be qualities which a listener expecting only
another _HoL_ will lament the absence of in _TSW_. And there are _also_
many qualities in _TSW_--largely those amorphous, indefinable qualities
of melody and instrumental and vocal inflection, and the other intangible
properties which make up the songs' emotional tone--which naturally cannot
be found in _HoL_. So how can anyone actually be sure which is "better"?
   In sum, IED accepts that some aesthetic judgements are worthwhile
and possible--but only when they can be supported by a really convincing
and comprehensive set of specific reasons based on direct A-B comparison.
IED doesn't presume to think that he's qualified to determine--and certainly
not with such an air of certainty as you have displayed--whether _HoL_
or _TSW_ is, on balance, the "better" album. But at least IED has
recognized that to make such a determination requires more than
the false claim that it's "a given".

-- Andrew Marvick