Kate Bush and gender id
Doug Alan
> [From: j...@osiris.UUCP (Jody Patilla)]
> Dear Douglanessa,
>
> (With an opportunity like that I just couldn't resist ! :-)
>
> Actually, you've made a number of self-references which made it
> fairly clear that you're male (or at least think you are !).
Have I? I don't recall doing such a thing. Are you sure you just
aren't being sexist?
> But anyway, about Kate Bush. We have all but one of her albums,
> including the American compilation (which is what I was thinking of
> as a more recent album than "The Dreaming", primarily because
> several cuts are re-mixed in a way as to greatly change their
> sound).
I don't think it fair at all to call the "Kate Bush" EP a more recent
Kate Bush album, since Kate Bush had nothing to do with it. Also,
*everything* on the EP *was* previously available. The only songs
that are different from the album versions of the songs are "James And
The Cold Gun", which appeared on the "Kate Bush On Stage" live EP, and
"Un Baiser D'Enfant" which appeared as the B-side of the "Ne T'Enfuis
Pas" single. ("Ne T'Enfuis Pas" is of "The Dreaming" period, but was
probably left off of the album because it's too commercial to fit in
with "The Dreaming".)
> I am not terribly impressed by any of them. My impression of alot of
> her stuff is that it sounds as if she just found this great new toy,
> the Fairlight CMI, and she's just bound and determined to make every
> kind of strange noise she possibly can with it.
The only album you can be talking about is "The Dreaming", because
that is the only album where she does anything really strange with
sounds and the only album where she plays a Fairlight. Her previous
albums (especially "The Kick Inside" and "Lionheart") are all much
more 'normal' in their instrumentation.
You sound a lot more like your describing Jean-Michel Jarre's new
album "Zoolook" or Laurie Anderson (though she plays a Synclavier --
and both these people are excellent) because Kate Bush really doesn't
use her Fairlight to make very strange sounds. She uses the presets
on the Fairlight and uses it to sample sound effects (like the the
bird flapping at the end of the song "The Dreaming"). To my ear,
normal accoustic piano (and of course voice) is the most prominent
instrument on "The Dreaming". One of the strangest sounding songs on
the album "Pull Out The Pin" has no synthesizer or Fairlight in it at
all. The weird sounds on "The Dreaming" were created with strange
accoustic instruments like the digeridu, Kate and others doing strange
things with their voices, tapes of sounds heard around. Most of the
other weird sounds were created by putting voice, guitar, etc.,
through harmonizers, flangers, compressors, delays, etc. But these
are hardly new toys -- people have been using them since the sixties.
In any case, Kate Bush was not just trying to make every kind of weird
noise she could -- she wasn't just playing with new toys. She puts a
lot of effort into making the sounds complement perfectly the mood of
the music and the words. I think she's done a flawless job.
In my opinion, the sounds used in making music are just as important
as any other component of the music. Some of the music I like (this
doesn't describe anything by Kate Bush) doesn't even contain anything
you could really call a melody or rhythm or harmony. Some of it is
just a sequence of sounds. I don't think it fair of you to criticize
Kate Bush for trying to do something artistic with the sounds used in
the music.
Now, as I perceive it, on "The Dreaming" the music and the arrangement
of the different sounds, not the sounds themselves, are what is really
strange. Strange and wonderful. I admit that on the first or second
listen, it is very difficult to assimilate the music completely and
understand it, since it is so strange and so much is going on. Thus,
because on the first couple listenings, the music is somewhat
inaccessible, what leaves the biggest impression is the strangeness of
the sounds. I think that if you give it some more listens, you will
find that the music is indeed exceedingly interesting and the strange
sounds perfectly complement the strange music.
> This often results in music that is either mechanistic or coy. Not
> that i have anything against strange noises or whatever (I like
> Harry Partch for example, and you don't find much stranger noises
> than his); my complaint does not have to do with her *type* of
> music, but what she does with it.
I have nothing against music that sounds mechanistic (in limited
doses). Kraftwerk, etc., are great. But I beg to differ about
anything on any Kate Bush album sounding mechanistic. Kate Bush
doesn't even like normal synthesizers any more because she doesn't
like mechanistic sounding music.
"I must admit I'm now much less interested in synthesizers,
especially since the Fairlight CMI. I just find a lot of the
sounds that perhaps before were interesting a little too
machine-like. What attracts me to the Fairlight is its
ability to create very human, animal, emotional sounds that
don't actually sound like a machine. I think in a way that's
what I've been waiting for." -- Kate Bush
About the music sounding "coy" (i.e. "affectedly shy"?). I'm not sure
what you mean by this. Shy? Kate Bush may be shy, but in her music
she pours her heart out. Affected? I feel nothing but deep honesty
from all of her music. Kate Bush is just weird down to the core.
> I suppose a good test would be to see what she could come up with if
> she were forced to rely only on acoustic instruments and no fancy
> engineering in the studio.
Why would that be a good test of anything? Where would Jimmy Hendrix
be without feedback? Without fancy studios, we wouldn't have "Sgt.
Pepper's", etc. But in any case, Kate Bush would certainly pass the
test. All the music for Kate Bush's first two albums was written for
just voice and piano. Latter, most of the songs were rearranged by
the producer (Kate Bush wasn't yet producing her own albums then) or
by her band for more instruments. Most of the songs on her first two
albums do not make any fancy use of the studio, effects, or
synthesizers. Some songs were left as just voice and piano and others
are completely accoustic with other instruments. "Never for Ever"
contains a short but wonderful acappella instrumental called "Night
Scented Stock".
Even on "The Dreaming" there is lots of wonderful accoustic stuff
(mixed in with the other stuff). There's lots of normal piano played
by Kate Bush. There's wonderful digeridu playing by Rolf Harris on
the song "The Dreaming". Planxty (Bill Whelan, Lian O'Flynn, Sean
Keane, and Donnal Lunny) do some absolutely amazing stuff with uillean
pipes, penny whistle, fiddle, and bouzouki on "Night of the Swallow".
The strings in "Houdini" are great. And, of course, Kate Bush's
vocals are just wonderfully haunting, processed or unprocessed,
throughout the album.
> Also, as an aside, I noticed your list of groups and people she says
> have influenced her. There are some name corrections necessary here
> - Everheart Faber is Eberhard Faber, Bossie Band is Bothy Band ...
Thanks for your help here. I do appreciate it. One minor correction
to your corrections: Eberhard Faber is Eberhard Weber. He plays bass
on "Houdini".
> Actually, I did receive a number of letters from folks who supported
> my plea for more and different music in this news group (which was
> the real point of my original note, and Kate Bush was totally
> ancillary to that).
I agree, let's talk about all sorts of music (as long as it's not
formula dreck)! Was a move to discuss Sade and Madonna supposed to be
a move up from discussing Kate Bush and Jethro Tull????
I don't object to your tastes not being such to enjoy Kate Bush, but
calling her "mediocre" is highly objectionable and an insult to my
sensibilities!
> Let's talk more about blues or something..........
Well haven't listened to a whole lot of blues yet. Have gotten a
little bit of jazz: I just got "Of Human Feelings" by Ornette
Coleman. I like it a lot. Am I on the right track or just following
the latest mediocre trend in yuppy music since Andreas Vollenwieder
and Windom Hill?
Was going to check out Miles Davis, but now that he's doing Empty-V
videos complete with computer graphics and is covering songs by
Michael Jackson and Cyndi Lauper, I've decided that he's just too
trendy for me.
I saw Duke Ellington do "Carravan" on Night Flight. It was pretty
good.
Better yet, let's talk about all kinds of music!
Listening right now to "Magnetic Flip" by Birdsongs of the Mesozoic.
What a great album!
Stravinky's "The Rite of Spring" deserves it's reputation. It's the
best piece of music ever written in the classical music genre! (Okay,
I know nothing about classical music (and it isn't even classical --
it's "modern") and am unfit to comment, but so what!)
Fred Frith is a god! So are Roy Harper and Nash the Slash. And Robyn
Hitchcock's album "Black Snake Diamond Role" is the best psychedelic
pop since Syd Barrett was in Pink Floyd. The Dukes of Stratosphear
are pretty good too.
Madonna and Sade along with Steve Perry and others too numerous to
mention (just turn on a top-40 station to get a good list) bite the
big one!
"Don't think it over, it always take you over
And sets your spirit dancing"
Doug Alan
nes...@mit-eddie.UUCP {or ARPA}
Mike Ryan DTN 264-8280 MK01-2/H32
>contains a short but wonderful acappella instrumental called "Night
An a cappella instrumental? Is that anything like John Cage's "4:36"?
Doug Alan
> An acappella instrumental? Is that anything like John Cage's "4:36"?
Well, I will indeed admit that "acappella instrumental" is an oxymoron,
but the piece of music in question contains no lyrics and no other
instruments than human voice -- in a sense it it using human voice as
the instruments to create an instrumental piece of music, so I think
that "acappella instrumental" is a wonderfully descriptive term. What
would you rather call it?
"Moving stranger, does it really matter?
As long as your not afraid to feel"
Doug Alan
nes...@mit-eddie.UUCP (or ARPA)