Approaching Lavendar
redfer...@my-deja.com
that I've been wondering about for many years.
As you may know, the color lavendar is often used as a symbolic color
by gay people and gay groups. It seems to me that "Approaching
Lavendar," describes a gay experience. Is that correct?
Fern
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Richard Harison
Gord was quite upset when he heard that mentioned as far back as 20 years
ago. It was one of the reasons he chose not to perform the song in
public.
--
All the Best,
Richard Harison
~~~~~~~~~~~
<redfer...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8lv3o9$jom$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Valerie L. Magee
well as another interpretation involving LSD. I don't think either is
correct.
Lightfoot often writes metaphors like this, and his personification of an
inanimate thing (or an animal) as a metaphor for something else can be
found in many of his songs. I think that Lavendar, like Sundown, is
simply a woman.
redfer...@my-deja.com wrote:
> I'm glad to find this group because there is a Gordon Lightfoot song
> that I've been wondering about for many years.
>
> As you may know, the color lavendar is often used as a symbolic color
> by gay people and gay groups. It seems to me that "Approaching
> Lavendar," describes a gay experience. Is that correct?
>
> Fern
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
Regards,
Valerie
Visit my artist web sites - Gordon Lightfoot at
http://gordonlightfoot.com
... and official Michael Jerling site at http://michaeljerling.com
Andy T.
>> Lavendar," describes a gay experience. Is that correct?
No, it's not. Additionally, if I remember correctly, Lightfoot quit performing
the song live after being informed of this interpretation.
andy
Richard Harison
--
All the Best,
Richard Harison
~~~~~~~~~~~
news:20000730193157...@ng-co1.aol.com...
Suzi
Gaynor. (Thanks Sean!) I second Mark's plea for more insight
into GL from Richard.
See Richard, at least two people have read your posts!
-----------------------------------------------------------
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
Ed Mullen
seems a bit out of character for Gordon, even knowing that all of us are many
different characters.
If this is true, and I believe you, Richard, I find it interesting and cannot
help but wonder what he was concerned about. Was he afraid people would
think he's gay? Or, perhaps, he didn't want his song to taken up as an
anthem when he didn't intend it that way. If that's so, it flies in the face
of every interview I've ever heard with him where he comments about the
meaning of songs from a writer's point-of-view. My recollection is that he,
essentially, ascribes to the notion that it's "... in the eye of the
beholder." I know I'm putting words in his mouth but that's what I've come
away with. And if that's how he views it (and it makes sense to me, a poor
and only occasional writer) then I don't understand his upset at how anyone
would interpret any of his work. Oh, sure, it's great when people like it
but I can't imagine he worries too much about specific interpretations
anybody makes. At any rate, it's all very curious to me as it seems a tad
inconsistent with his humane approach to life and people as expressed in his
music and his actions.
But, hey, what do I know? Maybe he just decided one day he didn't like that
darned song anymore!
Peter, Paul, and Mary had a somewhat analogous situation with "Puff The Magic
Dragon." Peter Yarrow has always insisted that it's just a children's song.
Many professional and amateur analysts had a field day trying to prove it was
all about marijuana. But PP&M still sing the song in concert today. With
Moms and Dads and kiddies alike all singing along. I suspect it's because
it's just a wonderful song and it shouldn't be kept in the dark. I think
"Approaching Lavender" is the same. It's too good to be shoved into a closet
(sorry for the gay metaphor). Let people get from it what they will. Isn't
that what it's all about?
About two years ago I posted a poem in this forum. I even told everyone what
it was about (just in case my writing was too obscure). I don't normally do
that - state baldly why I've written something. I always leave it up to the
imagination of the audience. Probably since I many times haven't a clue why
I'm doing whatever I'm doing. Whatever they get from it is ok with me. Even
if it has little to do with what motivated me to create it in the first
place. And, lo and behold, someone (and, Matt Carl, chime in here anytime
you want to and fess up, buddy) took it and put it to music. Quite
beautiful music, I might add. But he wrote me and said that, even though he
knew why I wrote it, read what I had written concerning the subject of the
poem, he found a much different story lying there. And, you know what?
After I heard him sing it, so did I. Now when I sing our song I hear not
only the story I wrote but, also, the story he brought out. I even have my
own special understanding of it which is, thanks to him, very different from
I wrote. Not bad - several songs for the price of one.
Anyway, I guess my basic point is: "Approaching Lavender" is a really nice
song. Whether it's about a woman, gay pride, drugs, or flowers (or something
entirely different), it's still a great Gordon Lightfoot song. If he doesn't
like it enough anymore to do it in concert I can understand that. But, to
not do it because of what others might think of it just disappoints me. I
tend to think of Gord as pretty fearless when it comes to his music. After
all, he's kept doing his thing for all these years, commercial or not,
accepted or not, revered or not, laughed at or not, awarded or overlooked,
presumably just keeping true to himself and the rest of us be damned. And I
say, "Good for him." It's a big part of what I love about him. He's a
survivor on his on terms. Rap? Disco? Bubble Gum? Techno? Heavy Metal?
Adult Contemporary? Urban Rock? Labels of any kind? Do any apply? No.
Just "Gordon Lightfoot." He's in a class by himself.
Of course, I suppose the fact that Gord is pretty silent on the topic is a
statement that he has made a conscious decision to let us draw our own
conclusions. Or he's indifferent to this little minor controversy. Or ...
what?
Oh well. I'm listening to "Lavender" now in my headphones. And, for the
life of me, I can't see this one being doomed to not ever again be played
live. Such a shame, Gord. Such a shame.
Ed Mullen
Richard Harison wrote:
> ABSOLUTELY NOT!!
> Gord was quite upset when he heard that mentioned as far back as 20 years
> ago. It was one of the reasons he chose not to perform the song in
> public.
> --
> All the Best,
> Richard Harison
> ~~~~~~~~~~~
> <redfer...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:8lv3o9$jom$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > I'm glad to find this group because there is a Gordon Lightfoot song
> > that I've been wondering about for many years.
> >
> > As you may know, the color lavendar is often used as a symbolic color
> > by gay people and gay groups. It seems to me that "Approaching
> > Lavendar," describes a gay experience. Is that correct?
> >
Mark Westling
been to have been able to work with GL during all those years... I'm SO
jealous!
Would you mind elaborating for us a bit on when you worked with him, what
role you filled, special memories from those days???
Thanks for all the info you've shared with us thus far...
Best regards,
Mark Westling
"Richard Harison" <rNOSPAM...@bmts.com> wrote in message
news:96500324...@Virginia.BMTS.Com...
> Guess nobody reads my posts
> --
> All the Best,
> Richard Harison
> ~~~~~~~~~~~
> "Andy T." <glut...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20000730193157...@ng-co1.aol.com...
> > > It seems to me that "Approaching
> > >> Lavendar," describes a gay experience. Is that correct?
> >
Mark Westling
Thanks for seconding the motion!
Mark
"Suzi" <paradoxin...@juno.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:11493a04...@usw-ex0101-007.remarq.com...
Mark Westling
about this song. As I remember (I'll dig out the tape to verify), Gord
clearly stated the song had nothing to do with the gay movement or anything
gay. I believe he simply said that when he wrote it, it sounded like a
lovely name for a woman...
Regards,
Mark
"Ed Mullen" <ejmu...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:39851DEE...@mindspring.com...
nob...@special-here.com
<ejmu...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>I've heard these stories before. However, it struck me just now that it
>seems a bit out of character for Gordon, even knowing that all of us are many
>different characters.
>
>If this is true, and I believe you, Richard, I find it interesting and cannot
>help but wonder what he was concerned about. Was he afraid people would
>think he's gay? Or, perhaps, he didn't want his song to taken up as an
>anthem when he didn't intend it that way. If that's so, it flies in the face
>of every interview I've ever heard with him where he comments about the
>meaning of songs from a writer's point-of-view. My recollection is that he,
>essentially, ascribes to the notion that it's "... in the eye of the
>beholder." I know I'm putting words in his mouth but that's what I've come
>away with. And if that's how he views it (and it makes sense to me, a poor
>and only occasional writer) then I don't understand his upset at how anyone
>would interpret any of his work. Oh, sure, it's great when people like it
>but I can't imagine he worries too much about specific interpretations
>anybody makes. At any rate, it's all very curious to me as it seems a tad
>inconsistent with his humane approach to life and people as expressed in his
>music and his actions.
>
>But, hey, what do I know? Maybe he just decided one day he didn't like that
>darned song anymore!
I was reading all of the above when I began to think about all the
fuss that was caused by Puff The Magic Dragon. So I was amazed to get
this far in your post to discover that you too remembered the
situation with Peter, Paul and Mary's song. What you describe below is
pretty much like I remember it. If you hadn't of made mention of what
follows below I likely would have.
>Peter, Paul, and Mary had a somewhat analogous situation with "Puff The Magic
>Dragon." Peter Yarrow has always insisted that it's just a children's song.
>Many professional and amateur analysts had a field day trying to prove it was
>all about marijuana. But PP&M still sing the song in concert today. With
>Moms and Dads and kiddies alike all singing along. I suspect it's because
>it's just a wonderful song and it shouldn't be kept in the dark. I think
>"Approaching Lavender" is the same. It's too good to be shoved into a closet
>(sorry for the gay metaphor). Let people get from it what they will. Isn't
>that what it's all about?
I say PP&M on a PBS concert several years ago and I believe it was
Yarrow who spoke up about the song just before it was performed. It
was a long time in coming but he finally fired a few shots of his own
at those people (including journalists) who put that fanciful twist to
the lyrics of Puff. Needless to say the appreciative reaction of the
audience demonstrated they were with him.
Yes. Let people interpret the song (Lavendar) in whichever way they
want to. When there are times when some songs have a specific meaning
but end up being misunderstood, maybe then the song needs to be
clarified by the author. Failure to grasp and understand the meaning
of songs happens all the time though. It is also most disappointing
when high profile individuals exploit songs for their own purposes
like one certain person did with Stairway To Heaven by suggesting
hidden satanic messages could be heard when the song was played
backwards. I don't really believe Lavendar is one of those songs that
needs to be explained. Music creates a mood, it's only too bad when
not all people feel the same way when they hear the same song.
Just thought I'd chip in with a comment or two. I enjoyed reading your
post Ed.
Russ
nob...@special-here.com
<ejmu...@mindspring.com> wrote:
snip...
>But, hey, what do I know? Maybe he just decided one day he didn't like that
>darned song anymore!
I was reading all of the above when I began to think about all the
fuss that was caused by Puff The Magic Dragon. So I was amazed to get
this far in your post to discover that you too remembered the
situation with Peter, Paul and Mary's song. What you describe below is
pretty much like I remember it. If you hadn't of made mention of what
follows below I likely would have.
>Peter, Paul, and Mary had a somewhat analogous situation with "Puff The Magic
>Dragon." Peter Yarrow has always insisted that it's just a children's song.
>Many professional and amateur analysts had a field day trying to prove it was
>all about marijuana. But PP&M still sing the song in concert today. With
>Moms and Dads and kiddies alike all singing along. I suspect it's because
>it's just a wonderful song and it shouldn't be kept in the dark. I think
>"Approaching Lavender" is the same. It's too good to be shoved into a closet
>(sorry for the gay metaphor). Let people get from it what they will. Isn't
>that what it's all about?
I say PP&M on a PBS concert several years ago and I believe it was
Valerie L. Magee
Before you assume that people don't read your posts, please understand
that we are all the victims of the vagaries of newsgroups and how well
(or not) our ISPs support them. Your first note to the newsgroup came
through to me fine. Your second did not get my ISP at all (or it lost it
rapidly as I read the newsgroup many times a day). I only know that you
posted again because I see people's reponses. So, for everyone's
benefit, if you don't get any reply or reaction, or if people seem not
to know what you said in some prior message, understand that often a
message gets to some people but not to everyone.
Bill Mulrooney
appreciate your insight. And I hope the rest of this group does not get too
upset with me (a daily lurker) talking for all. Bill
"Mark Westling" <mwes...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:re6h5.25240$5N1.8...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
rwguinn
We don't want true artists (read "unsubsidized") to be put in the same boat as
those "artists" who are forever having to explain WHY the elephant poop, or be
like the ones who look down their noses at those who "aren't capable of
understanding"
If you have to explain a joke-it ain't one, and if I like it, it's art-to me!
Roger
Roswell, NM
nob...@special-here.com wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:34:23 -0700, Ed Mullen
> <ejmu...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> snip...
> >But, hey, what do I know? Maybe he just decided one day he didn't like that
> >darned song anymore!
>
> I was reading all of the above when I began to think about all the
> fuss that was caused by Puff The Magic Dragon. So I was amazed to get
> this far in your post to discover that you too remembered the
> situation with Peter, Paul and Mary's song. What you describe below is
> pretty much like I remember it. If you hadn't of made mention of what
> follows below I likely would have.
>
> >Peter, Paul, and Mary had a somewhat analogous situation with "Puff The Magic
> >Dragon." Peter Yarrow has always insisted that it's just a children's song.
> >Many professional and amateur analysts had a field day trying to prove it was
> >all about marijuana. But PP&M still sing the song in concert today. With
> >Moms and Dads and kiddies alike all singing along. I suspect it's because
> >it's just a wonderful song and it shouldn't be kept in the dark. I think
> >"Approaching Lavender" is the same. It's too good to be shoved into a closet
> >(sorry for the gay metaphor). Let people get from it what they will. Isn't
> >that what it's all about?
>
nob...@special-here.com
wrote:
>Then again-
>We don't want true artists (read "unsubsidized") to be put in the same boat as
>those "artists" who are forever having to explain WHY the elephant poop, or be
>like the ones who look down their noses at those who "aren't capable of
>understanding"
>If you have to explain a joke-it ain't one, and if I like it, it's art-to me!
>Roger
>Roswell, NM
Fair enough!
Russ
JenRivard
>that we are all the victims of the vagaries of newsgroups and how well
>(or not) our ISPs support them. Your first note to the newsgroup came
>through to me fine. Your second did not get my ISP at all (or it lost it
>rapidly as I read the newsgroup many times a day). I only know that you
>posted again because I see people's reponses.
I'm one of those victims this time. I didn't know you had posted a reply
Richard until Valerie forwarded it to me. I know I read the newsgroup from the
same ISP as Andy. This is the first time that has happened to me, causing me to
wonder what else I have missed?
Jenney
JenRivard
>help but wonder what he was concerned about. Was he afraid people would
>think he's gay? Or, perhaps, he didn't want his song to taken up as an
>anthem when he didn't intend it that way.
I can't recall ever having heard a Lightfoot song used for commercial purposes
or as an anthem for anything. I'm sure that GL has had the opportunity to have
his songs used as "theme songs" countless times, but seems to have chosen not
to. With that in mind perhaps he just didn't want to have his song thought of
or used for anything other than our listening enjoyment.
Jenney
Richard Harison
--
All the Best,
Richard Harison
~~~~~~~~~~~
news:20000801065235...@ng-cn1.aol.com...
char
Tell us more Richard!
Char
Andy T.
>same ISP as Andy. This is the first time that has happened to me, causing me
>to
>wonder what else I have missed?
I don't think we on AOL miss too much, but I also missed Richard's reply to
this question. I only know of it when someone else quoted it. I dont think
AOL misses too many posts though, in the past I've compared what shows up on
Deja.com and Remarq and except for spam, the real posts have seemed to be the
same.
andy
andy
Mcarl4444
>if it has little to do with what motivated me to create it in the first
>place. And, lo and behold, someone (and, Matt Carl, chime in here anytime
>you want to and fess up, buddy) took it and put it to music.
I confess. However, I have to say the words wrote the tune .... You did the
hard part.
This has been an interesting thread. It's funny how even little phrases conjur
up different connotations - a recent thread from Don Q about "puts the collar
on the ones who dare not tell" drew at least 3 or 4 varied meanings. I agree
with you Ed, you are the wordsmith, but I can see why Gord might "abandon" the
song. It's a great tune and I never got that gay message in it at all.
Matt
PS. I never saw Richard's post until it was included in a response either.
dsims7
pictured Lavendar as a very beatiful young woman with a Lavendar
colored flower in her hair.....pretty as a picture....... Now
every time I hear it I'm going to picture Lightfoot hitting on
some gay guy...OH GREAT!! I'm going to have nightmares about
this! Now I need therapy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dave :-)
Silver Heels
Ted
few experiences with LSD myself, what I am left with 30 years later is sharp
images of the colors purple and lavender!
Ted
Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right
order, you can nudge the world a little.- -Tom Stoppard
Talb...@aol.com
I was at a concert in Westbury music Hall in Long Island at about the time
the "Salute" album was coming out. 1993. Gord talked to the audience about
"approaching Lavender". I believe it was in response to a request from the
audience during the part of the show when everyone starts yelling out past
album's songs. He mentioned that he was aware of the color lavender being
the Gay pride color but stated that he wrote the song as "a heterosexual
thing".
Bill
Jusrean
I was also at the WMF show and remember it vividly.It's a great venue,isn't it?
Bill
"......and he saw magnificent perfection
and he thought of himself in balance
and he knew he was"
rogfra...@gmail.com
D Ferguson
> It does cause one to wonder!
> --
> All the Best,
> Richard Harison
> ~~~~~~~~~~~
> "JenRivard" <jenr...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20000801065235...@ng-cn1.aol.com...
> > >Before you assume that people don't read your posts, please understand
> > >that we are all the victims of the vagaries of newsgroups and how well
> > >(or not) our ISPs support them. Your first note to the newsgroup came
> > >through to me fine. Your second did not get my ISP at all (or it lost
> it
> > >rapidly as I read the newsgroup many times a day). I only know that you
> > >posted again because I see people's reponses.
> >
> > I'm one of those victims this time. I didn't know you had posted a reply
> > same ISP as Andy. This is the first time that has happened to me,
> causing me to
> > wonder what else I have missed?
No it doesn't. He wasn't gay. Good grief.
D Ferguson
> I'm glad to find this group because there is a Gordon Lightfoot song
> that I've been wondering about for many years.
> As you may know, the color lavendar is often used as a symbolic color
> by gay people and gay groups. It seems to me that "Approaching
> Lavendar," describes a gay experience. Is that correct?
> Fern
>