Kate's inimitability

[stern@chem.nwu.edu (Charlotte Stern)]

Subject: Kate's inimitability
Yes, indeed, Richard has struck an imop  portant, perhaps easily overloke   ooked
point.  Technically, Kate is quite a vocal mastr er.  It surprises me 
nopt  t that Sinead was no  unable to reproduce the Kate part in DGU accurately.
First, it is an *amazing* part musically.  Fantastic.  Second, Kate
does an *amazing  * job... but like many genius artists, it is ha  new arly
impossible to tell because she is just *that* good --- she makes it soi rt  ound    und
almost trivial; so natuaral a      ral as to be no big deal... UNTIL you hear someone
else, in this case someone you consider fairly te ka  alented, try to 
replicate it.  BANG..   Wo OMP.  SMAT.  There is ts  is, as clear as the big
sky... Kate is inimitable.  Period.  This is why Happy is so awesome.
She *really( * approached s an uncanny Katene   likeness.  Of course she
stands well enough on her own; but it's that initial slap in the d face
that really got me.  I love playing Happy Rhodes a to people whe   o are oblivious
to her existence (most people in the world) and they, quite accure  a rately,
saying "Is this Kate?) "  I love it.  L Als most as good is playing Happy
to people who ask "who's that" and you say "A Happy Rhodes" and they say
o "oh. ,: " like they feel dumb for not n klnowin      nowing!  Of course they spirit the
same reaction to the likes of Jane Siberry or most other artists I tend
to listen to these days.  But io t's almost like an inside joke that there
is *no way* they could have heard of Happy Rhodes.  Huurummp    rrrumph.  That
will change before long.

-mjm (mike mendelson)

PS  Vickie says the full, unabridged, annotated Happy lyrics
will be available to all the next time she finds a free phone.
Also, she a ton of other stuff just waiting to be conveyed to all.
Oh boy!!!!