Gaffaweb >
Love & Anger >
1996-39 >
[ Date Index |
Thread Index ]
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
From: Julian Shaw <julian@dragonfire.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 18:05:05 +0100
Subject: Re: Potty Cathy
To: rec-music-gaffa@nac.no
Distribution: world
Newsgroups: rec.music.gaffa
Organization: Free Thinkers
References: <325ea506.1316478@post.demon.co.uk>
Sender: owner-love-hounds
In article <325ea506.1316478@post.demon.co.uk>, Steve ZPJ <zpj@huskbeat.demon.co.uk> quoted the following from the Sunday Mirror... >Heathcliff! It's me, it's Cathy, I've gone potty. > For those outside the UK who may not know, 'potty' in this context is a slang expression for 'mad'. If I might utilise another slang expression I would just like to say that I think the journalist's opinion is total bollocks. (Non-UK readers: Look it up. :-) ) >It was the song that shot her to stardom in the seventies. But now >Kate Bush's obsession with Wuthering Heights has gone beyond a joke. How come there are no other songs that she has recorded that refer to Wuthering Heights? You would think, logically, that there would be if she was obsessed by it. >Shrill-voice Kate, 38, is living as a virtual recluse ..and she's >taken to calling herself Catherine Earnshaw, the tragic heroine in the >Emily Bronte novel. This may or may not be true, but does this mean that changing names is a definition of madness? Hmmm, interesting. Elton John had better watch out for the men in white coats then. ...and David Bowie, and Cliff Richard, and Michael Caine, and....(etc.) >The once-sexy singer - who has lost her slim, good looks It is quite obvious from the article that the journalist has not seen Kate, much less interviewed her, so how does he know what she looks like? > - has long >admitted Observe the use of language here. 'Admitted' implies that it is something which she prefers to keep secret, whereas 'has often said' would be factual, but doesn't sound dramatic. > she is fascinated by the story of love-crossed Cathy and the >novel's romantic hero, Heathcliff, portrayed by Laurence Olivier in >the 1944 film Wuthering Heights. Well, I'm fascinated by Tolkien's 'Lord of the Rings'. I guess that means that I secretly want to be a hobbit, does it? >And as her career faded, ROFL. This is the best joke I've heard all year. God, what I would give to have a career as 'faded' as hers! > her Wuthering Heights obsession has grown. A >friend said last night; Some friend! > "Kate used to just use the name occasionally, >but it's coming out more and more now. She has even signed herself >Catherine Earnshaw on a voter's register." Really? Well, one thing for sure is that Kate isn't stupid - and it would be pretty stupid to do this as it's illegal to register for voting purposes under an assumed name. So the only way she could have done this legally would be if she had changed her name by deed poll. This is something that can be checked, although whether it's worth bothering or not is debateable. I don't care *what* she calls herself, so long as she is alive, happy, and well. >Wuthering Heights was Kate's first single in 1978. It was Number One >in the charts for four weeks. In it, she uses her legendary >high-pitched voice to sing: "Heathcliff, it's me, it's Cathy, I've >come home." Gasp - some *facts*!..... >The erotic image made her into one of the most drooled-over sex >symbols of the time. Yes, I was wondering when sex would come into it. Sells a lot more papers you see. <sarcasm> Probably not a good idea to mention how popular her music is of course. That's obviously got nothing to do with her worldwide appeal. </sarcasm> >But the GP's daughter now lives her life behind >closed doors. Her 500,000 pound home, just a few miles from where she >was brought up in Bexleyheath, Kent, is shrouded by trees. Yeah, well it would be - it's in the countryside. (Note the use of the word 'shrouded'. Sounds a lot more *mysterious* than saying 'her home has a lot of trees nearby'.) >The huge wooden gates are guarded by security cameras and an intercom >system. Well, she *is* a major, international, well-known, much-loved, recording artist, you know? People in her position *do* have to take precautions against unwanted visitors. (Like prowlers, stalkers, journalists....) >Neighbours say they rarely see or hear the woman Assuming that they *were* actually asked, of course. In any case, if she's a private person then it's not surprising that the neighbours don't see her very often - and who said she was under any obligation to associate with them anyway? > once hailed as the >best British female singer ever. Obviously a printing error here. The word 'once' should read 'still'. > ><END QUOTE> >Steve responded to the article by saying: > >[snip]... Kate has always been a recluse. What happened to her house in >Reading?? >We all know Kate's hate for politics, so couldn't the voter's register >have been a joke to show her dislike for them? >What superstar wouldn't guard their house when they are as >internationally famous as Kate, especially when that house's location >is known by every one of her fans?? I know I would take precautions. >Nobody says the Queen is mad because she has such high security!! :) Quite so. Well said. I was tempted to say only that 'the article appeared in the Sunday Mirror, so what do you expect?', but people outside the UK probably wouldn't appreciate the relevance of this comment. For their benefit it is the Sunday version of a tabloid daily, which - in my opinion - concentrates mainly on gossip and sensationalist reporting. Similar style papers are The Sun and the Daily Star. I don't pay much attention to any of them. Reading between the lines it seems we have one _potential_ fact (that Kate is using a different surname) and a whole heap of speculation. If we accept that the name change is true, we could *all* speculate endlessly as to why, but at the end of the day it's her own business. One would have thought that if an obsession of Wuthering Heights was the reason for changing her name then she would have changed it long before now - after all, the song was released *eighteen* years ago!! When you think about it, there isn't really much of story from the bare 'fact', so my guess is that the journalist asked Kate for an interview and she declined - so he retaliated by writing something bad about her anyway. >-- Anyone who can stay sane in this world must be mad -- I'm inclined to agree. :-) Julian Turnpike evaluation. For Turnpike information, mailto:info@turnpike.com