Re: Kate Bush vs. Tori Amos???

[wagreiner@ucdavis.edu ()]

In article <1993Aug25.155028.28292@netnews.noc.drexel.edu> giamomj@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu (Mike G.) writes:
>
>Re: Kate Bush vs. Tori Amos???
>
>In article <NESSUS.93Aug24141733@twitch.media.mit.edu> Douglas Alan,
>nessus@media.mit.edu writes:
>>Actually, calling something "arty" is usually considered an insult.
>>Therefore if Kate's work is "artier" than Tori's, it would be a point
>>in favor of Tori.  Of course, Kate's work is artier.  It also happens
>>to be better, despite this.
>
>I find your above statment confusing and somewhat contradictory....please
>explain. And how is "arty" an insult?
>

Well, I didn't make the statement, so I certainly am not speaking for the
person who did, but I agree with his general point.  Usually when people
these days describe something as "arty" or "artsy" what they mean is that
is is self-consciously artistic or plain old pretentious.  Kate does, to me
at least, sound a bit self-conscious at time, but I rarely think of her as
pretentious.  Amos does sound a little looser to me.  I like both of them
though.

Wade