Re: Tori--What do you really think?

[as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (andrew david simchik)]

In <9212100522.AA02152@syrinx.umd.edu> jeffy@syrinx.umd.edu writes:



>>My personal views are that Tori is *at least* as talented, original, and
>>brilliant as Kate Herself.

>I honestly don't understand how you can say this on the basis of one album.
>It's entirely possible that Tori wrote herself out on this album and used
>up her best ideas.  It's also possible that she was in a phase in her life
>in which she was able to express her passions and emotions with a musical
>eloquence which she will never recapture.  Many say KaTe is doing that
>now, writing such banal songs as "Between a Man and a Woman" (a song I 
>happen to like).  Of course, this is 5 albums and 12 years later.

Well, consider the fact that...okay, the opinion (mine) that LE is a much
more *perfect* album than anything Kate has ever done.  Yes, perhaps she
wrote herself out on this album.  So what?  Quality, *not* quantity, is what
makes genius.  Ten good albums do not necessarily surpass two great albums. 
No, in my opinion, ten good albums equal two great albums.  That's why I say
"at least"--when we hear more of Tori, we'll know whether she can do it
again.

>I think that _Little Earthquakes_ is a far more impressive debut than
>_The Kick Inside_.  But what about the age difference between the artists
>at the time of their (solo) debuts?  And what sort of music was KaTe
>producing by the time she was Tori's age-o'-debut?  _Never For Ever_?
>_The Dreaming_?  (how old *is* Tori, anyway?).  Does this mean that in the
>span of 5 years time Tori will be releasing albums that make TD seem
>boring and lackluster?  I sort of doubt it.  I'd love to be proven wrong.

Age makes no difference whatsoever.  Experience does.  I definitely agree
that LE is more impressive than TKI; I don't know about NFE.  I'm not sure
how old Tori is; early twenties is all I know (and it may be late twenties,
even).  However, don't overlook the fact that I don't think Tori's music is
really comparable to Kate's in quite that way.
 
>>This is because there are times when I'm not in
>>the mood to listen to Kate, but I cannot recall any times when I haven't
>>been in the mood to listen to Tori.

>Enjoyment of music is mostly subjective, but there is a strong hint of
>objectivity that can be applied.  I recognize that Bach was a brilliant
>composer (and keyboardist, by all accounts...;-) but I'm not often inspired 
>to pull out a Bach CD and catch some fugues.  At this stage in your life,
>you're more apt to pull out LE than a Kate Bush album.  This may and
>probably will change--not necessarily toward Kate Bush, but away from
>Tori Amos and _Little Earthquakes_.

I'm inspired to pull out a Bach CD and catch fugues quite often, in fact. 
However, I agree that enjoyment of music is entirely subjective...I have
albums by artists who I find utterly lacking in musical quality, but I still
enjoy listening to them.  That's not exactly what I meant by the above,
though.  I agree that I'll probably lean even more than I do now toward Kate
when I'm older, since Tori's stuff is so youthful and *now*, but the reason
I find myself listening to more of Tori is musical rather than lyrical.

>I'm always in the mood for Happy Rhodes.  I can listen to her music over

And the more I hear about her, the more I want to listen for myself.  I
really need to hit the CD store and see what all the fuss is about!

>    
>>Tori also pleases me with her albums more; granted, there's only one album 
>>so far 

>What a screwed up statement.  The basic idea is that you like the sum of

Why, thank you.  I'm a screwed up kind of guy.

>LE more than the sum of any particular Kate Bush album.  Fine.  Groovy.
>I think there are several albums as good as if not better than any Kate
>Bush album.  I consider Paul Simon's _Graceland_ to be one of the most
>perfect albums of all time.  But to say that Paul Simon pleases me
>more with his albums than KaTe does, not only when I haven't heard them
>all, but also implying that I'm including the ones he hasn't even
>written yet is patently absurd.

You're absolutely right.  Apologies.


>>making up in musical invention what she lacks [...]

>Ah, but ability (and creativity) on piano are not everything.  KaTe uses
>such an incredible variety of instruments and sounds in her arrangements
>that she more than makes up for any slight in her piano abilities.
>Tori's arrangements just don't seem all that original.  Maybe it's not her
>fault, just like TKI wasn't KaTe's fault.  But I really don't think Tori
>has demonstrated a total capacity for musical invention higher than KaTe's,
>merely a better ability to write on/play piano.

Well, I have to disagree here.  I think Tori's arrangements were the first
thing that drew me to her...LE's sound is so fresh and appropriate that even
if her arrangements aren't original they sure as hell sound that way.  Again
we have the quality vs. quantity thing; if you set me down with a Fairlight
and all the resources at Kate's command, I think I could probably dish out
some pretty amazing stuff too.  Let's face it; when you're working with
non-traditional instruments, you can make things sound really inventive. 
It's harder to sound original on piano; Tori does it, Kate doesn't.  I
wonder just what Tori would come up with if she had Kate's set of sounds to
work with.


>Jeff


>-- 
>|Jeffrey C. Burka                | "Show what you are / Be strong, be true  |
>|                                |  Time for you to / Be who you are."      |
>|jeffy@syrinx.umd.edu            |                         --Happy Rhodes   |

Drewcifer

P.S.  Thanks, your insights have been most helpful.
-- 
***************************************************************************
** Andrew David Simchik, registered Scorpio ************* SCHNOPIA! *******
***************************************************************************
as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu