More Madonna vs. Kate from .misc

[ed@das.llnl.gov (Edward Suranyi)]

Here's more on the Madonna vs. Kate thread in rec.music.misc.
By the way, in that same newsgroup Jon Drukman has been 
discussing Kate's "backwards-forwards" lyrics, quite interestingly.

Ed
ed@das.llnl.gov
---------------------------------------------------------------

Article 49994 of rec.music.misc:
Path: lll-winken!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!samsung!emory!mephisto!rutgers!cmcl2!sbcs!sbgrad12!rmiller
From: rmiller@sbgrad12.cs.sunysb.edu (Robert Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.music.misc
Subject: Something other than...Re: MADONNA on MTV [all day] Wed, Aug. 1
Message-ID: <1990Aug1.183415.13471@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Date: 1 Aug 90 18:34:15 GMT
References: <JP5$A4^@rpi.edu> <65592@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV>
Sender: usenet@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Usenet poster)
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Lines: 63

In article <65592@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> loren@tristan.UUCP (Loren Petrich) writes:

>For Madonna detractors out there: please don't flame me. I'd like to
>hear about some of your favorite singer / songwriter /
>performance-artist / conceptualists.

Okay, see below.

>There is a whole newsgroup, rec.music.gaffa, devoted to Kate Bush and
>related subjects, and I think that Madonna and Kate Bush have a heck
>of a lot in common. I have long suspected that Kate Bush is the
>Madonna of the alternative-rock set; if you think that comparison is
>unwarranted, please explain why in reasoned, non-flaming words.

The comparison is incredibly unwarranted for the following reasons:

1.  Kate Bush makes an album every couple of years or so and then spends
her time outside of the recording studio in seclusion.  She gives 
interviews to those who want them, but for the most part prefers to live
a private life.  She does not promote herself, hype herself, or do
or say something controversial for the sake of cheap publicity (which I
maintain Madonna does, and nothing I've seen her convinces me otherwise).
She has never used her music to sell (or attempt to sell) a product.
To my knowledge she has never made a movie, but if she did she would
certainly be there as an actress and not as a pop idol.  She has not
shown any desire to be a pop idol, or even to be well known.  She wants
to make music the way she wants to and is not terribly concerned about
how well it's received.  Such concerns would not affect her music in
any case.  Compare and contrast with Madonna.  Their approaches to their
music are totally different.

2.  Kate Bush writes innovative music.  Her music uses meters and 
chord progressions which, although they are not always pleasant to my
ear, are unique to her musical style.  Her music has more in common
with Andrew Lloyd Webber's better music than to anything I've heard
from Madonna.  Madonna, although one of the better performers of
dance music (which coming from me is damning with faint praise), uses
standard meters, key changes, and instrumentation.  There is no
musical element in any Madonna song that I know that I would consider
innovative or original.  Their music is totally different.

3.  Kate Bush writes lyrics that are nothing like the lyrics Madonna
sings (and I'm still not clear as to what extent Madonna creates her
own material, but that is not relevant here.  I'll assume that Madonna's
songs are written by Madonna for the sake of argument).  Kate's lyrics
border on the bizarre.  She writes in what I would guess to be a very
stream of consciousness fasion, with the result that her imagery is
almost indecipherable.  In fact, I attribute the fact that her following
is small but incredibly loyal to this fact.  Her lyrics are so personal
that they resonate very deeply with some people.  She also has the
widest lyrical range of any songwriter I'm familiar with.  Nothing that
she could write about would surprise me.  Madonna, on the other hand,
writes lyrics which are based around mostly one topic (sex) and are
very straightforward.  In spite of the controversial nature of some
of her lyrics, her songs tend to be bland and uninteresting.  They
certainly don't engage my mind or my heart.  Their lyrics are 
totally different.

Given that they are so dissimilar, I wonder what it is that you
think they have in common?

Robert
rmiller@sbcs.sunysb.edu


Article 50004 of rec.music.misc:
Path: lll-winken!ncis.tis.llnl.gov!helios.ee.lbl.gov!ucsd!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!cmcl2!sbcs!sbgrad12!rmiller
From: rmiller@sbgrad12.cs.sunysb.edu (Robert Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.music.misc
Subject: Re: Something other than...Re: MADONNA on MTV [all day] Wed, Aug. 1
Message-ID: <1990Aug1.204835.14972@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Date: 1 Aug 90 20:48:35 GMT
References: <JP5$A4^@rpi.edu> <65592@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <1990Aug1.183415.13471@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Sender: usenet@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Usenet poster)
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Lines: 24
X-Local-Date: 1 Aug 90 13:48:35 PDT

In article <1990Aug1.183415.13471@sbcs.sunysb.edu> rmiller@sbgrad12.cs.sunysb.edu (Robert Miller) writes:

	[Discussion of Kate Bush's lyrical style deleted.]

>Madonna, on the other hand,
>writes lyrics which are based around mostly one topic (sex) and are
>very straightforward.  In spite of the controversial nature of some
>of her lyrics, her songs tend to be bland and uninteresting.  They
>certainly don't engage my mind or my heart.  Their lyrics are 
>totally different.

I was a bit harsh here, and I've just been called to task about it.
I did not mean to imply that Madonna did not write personal lyrics.
I don't know if she does or doesn't, since the only Madonna songs I
know are the ones that get played on the radio, i.e. the hits.  Still,
any comparison of Madonna's lyrics with Kate Bush's would have to 
conclude that there are no similarities, beyond the fact that they both
write in English.

By the way, I'm not a Kate Bush fan.  I find her music a bit theatrical
and off-the-wall for my taste, but I know enough about it to know it 
is not like Madonna's.

Robert