Hi, I'm Finally Resubscribed!

[DSearch@aol.com]

Howdy all,

Finally able to make some time again to get caught up on things.  Besides,
with the outpouring of help I received in response to my TWW Box Set
questions (yes, I know, that final report will be posted shortly) and all the
fuss about the new Kate-topia collection, it was too costly to stay away much
longer!

stev0@zuni.chaco.com (stev0) posts:

>kateknight@aol.com (KateKnight) sputters as much as his tiny brain is
allowed:

To quote a recent poster, I must've missed the smiley.  KaTe would never
approve of personal attacks.  You pea brain. :)

>Excuse me?  I assume you hated TLTCTC because of lack of car chases,
>but those of us with IQs above 50 realized that the film is an example
>of utter genius.  

I have an IQ above 50.  And I certainly missed the car chases. But not as
much as the scantily clad girls.  I think all music videos should be shot at
that castle Michael Palin wanders into in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

>Yes, I didn't understand - or even appreciate - it at
>first, but after several repeated viewings I HAVE SEEN THE LIGHT.
>
>The key is repeated viewings and discussion with other rabid KateFans(tm),
>Especially IED and KLN, in my case.

Well, perhaps someone would be kind enough to direct me to some sort of
document -- a brief review, say -- discussing the film's finer points.  That
is, besides gross self-indulgence and tedium.  Also, as much as she pleases
my eyes, Kate is not much of an actress.  Her performance looks forced and
unnatural.

I can't believe I'm alone on this.  Surely there are some Lovehounds out
there who really enjoy (most of) Kate's recordings, like and admire her as a
person -- or at least the parts she's let us see -- but don't necessarily
worship at her altar.  

A blind and uncritical positive response to anything a particular individual
offers -- be it the latest excursions of a recording artist or the ramblings
of a crackpot world leader -- is mindless.  Loyalty isn't the issue.  The
issue is exercising one's powers of intelligent discrimination (i.e. as in
the example of the UK recording artist who was huge in her own country but a
cult figure in the US because she made a judgment call against peforming on
an American stage.  IOW, she *decided* that touring America just because
every other pop star in the world did it doesn't mean it's *always* right for
*everyone*.).

If you don't believe in forming critical opinions or making distinctions
(i.e. gee, TKI is one heckuva consistent album, Lionheart isn't quite as
strong, Army Dreamers is an interesting video, Experiment IV a bit
pretentious), where do you draw the line?  What if Kate decides to market
vials of her sweat under the guise of artistic expression?  Can Kate still do
no wrong?  What if she decides she's not just a singer-songwriter and flm
director, she's also a painter?  They'll be great paintings just because
they're hers?  And if she moves on to write books, design buildings, build
cities....???

Personally, I have no problem with people for whom Kate is nothing special.
 Not every artist strikes a chord in every listener.  (Some of my friends are
aghast I can't even stomach Jimmy Buffet.)  Nor do I have a problem with
people who consider Kate a goddess who can do no wrong -- it just strikes me
as a brain-dead practice to behave that way in *any* context.

But I do admit it's beyond me why those in the latter camp insist in coming
down so hard on those of us who are merely fans and not fanatics.  If Kate
herself would have no problem with such people, why should KateHeads?  Are
you KH's out there maintaining that the example Kate sets in terms of
character, grace, and poise is applicable to everything in life -- that is,
everything except critical or negative reactions to her creative output?

Perhaps we ought to write to Kate and see how she feels about this strange
phenomenon.... <g>

-- David Reff :)
   Dallas, TX