Re: Where there's smoke, there's flaming.

[undrtoad@ix.netcom.com (P. Dale Campbell )]

I replied to this via email before I knew Chris posted this to r.m.g,
so...

I wrote (who cares where?):
> Yes, I've seen the video...

In <199510040543.AAA14856@solar.sky.net> chrisw@miso.wwa.com
(Chris Williams) writes: 
>    We all develop our own stories in the absence of a
video...sometimes
> they are even better. But the video was storyboarded by Kate, and
reflects
> her intentions.

I accept that those were her intentions with the video (even though she
appears post-birth-canal later in the video), but that does not
*really*
tell us what she meant when she composed the song.  The baby could have
been born during the story.

>    But if you view "breathing" as "taking oxygon in" the fetus *does*
> "breath" in sustanance from the mother.
If that is one's view, you could make that argument, yes.  But I
believe
biologists would say "fish do not breath".  The act of taking breath is
such a fundamental concept in the song ("out in out in..."), it is
hard for me to take it *that* figuratively.  But I concede that this
*could* be Kate's intention.

Still, for invoking horror, I couldn't hope to match the image of
breathing the smoke from your mother's body.  And I am SURE Kate
intended this song to be a horror story.

Today I shall consult _Cloudbusting_, as I am sure Stuart will do, to
see what Kate has to say.

--
The UnderToad, (pDaleCampbell, pdCampbell@goodyear.com)
___
 |    "How can anybody be enlightened?
 |/       Truth is after all so poorly lit."
 |\