Re: KaTe imitators

[larry@csccat.cs.com (Larry Spence)]

In article <25397@well.sf.ca.us> padraigm@well.UUCP (Patrick McFarland) writes:
>
>First, as to the JaNe Siberry's wannabeism, 

How cool... "JaNe" as a takeoff on "KaTe" in an argument as to why she's not
a Kate wannabe.  Aren't you missing a smiley there? %)

>although I love certain of
>her songs, On the Beach, in particular, and I feel that no amount of
>criticism can take away the originality of these pieces, I can see how
>JaNe's material could be taken for imitation, and I think THAT is just
>the fear that results from hearing ANY woman express her TRUE views..

Uh, I missed something here, how did you get to that conclusion?  If I think
that Jane (er, JaNe) is a little Kate-derived, ergo I _fear her expression
of her views_?  What are you folks on the WELL smoking nowadays? %)  If
you'll recall, I posted a big-two-thumbs-up reviewette of Diamanda Galas'
latest release, which is nothing but 75 minutes of "viewpoint expression." %) 
Compared to _that_, Jane is pretty sugar-coated, don't you think?

>Secondly, as re Happy Rhoades, I love her music, and I think I can explain
>this misunderstanding:  KaTe grew up in an evironment where
>one was forced into self-reliance. 

Huh?  My incomplete knowledge of Kate's life is that her family was not
poor, and that she got an advance from EMI and plenty of support for her
artistic development when she was a teenager.  She worked very hard, but
was hardly a starving artist type.

>It is a happy accident of karma that
>this divine spirit was practically ordained to become a musical virtuosity
>of the highest order. 

I thought the whole thing about karma was that it's _not_ accidental?  Did
you get the above line from a Yanni or Kitaro press release or something? %)

>Happy had no such fortunate soil.  As anyone in the
>U.S. can attest, the artistic climate (as the political climate) caters to
>conformism, and I admire the (superhuman, actually) effort she has had to
>exert to accurately express her own Art. 

I've only heard one Happy song so far, so I can't say about "superhuman
effort," but I agree with your comments about the current climate.

>If it relies on KaTe's rather
>heavily, well so be it - I myself rely on a goddess.

First you say she's fighting against conformism to express her own art
(uh, Art), but then it's OK if she "relies heavily" on the work of Kate?  Non
sequitur alert!

BTW, KERA (Dallas public radio) played a Happy tune last night.  I don't
recall the title, but the lyrics mentioned Phobos repeatedly.  It was pretty
good, but definitely recalled a slightly Kate-ish backing track with Joni
Mitchell singing through an octave divider (hoo boy, I hear the flamethrowers
being started up now! %).  The evening DJ, Liza Richardson, just eats stuff 
like this up, so I would expect her to give Happy decent airplay.

>"A thousand slimy things lived on, and so did I"-STC

Yeah, well, Sam Coleridge was smoking opium...

>"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro"-HST

Known propensity for ether binges...

>"If it's worth doing, it's worth overdoing"-Me

Maybe, but these overblown "Female Singer/Deity X is the embodiment of artistic
purity" foamings serve to make me, for one, very skeptical.  There is such a
thing as hyping something so much that people get unrealistic expectations,
y'know!  That's doing the artist a disservice, IMHO.

-- 
Larry Spence
larry@csccat.cs.com
..{uunet,texsun,cs.utexas.edu,decwrl}!csccat!larry