Some thoughts...
Chris Williams
I've been meaning to post it, but the only time I think about
it when I use the laptop while riding the train between Chicago
and Kansas City. I also worried about the length. But as the
recent bunch of Digests have contained very long and barely
topical posts, I felt better about posting something long and
(IMO anyway) topical.
I'm finally posting it. As it's a reply to something that
happened quite some time ago (in real world, if not in Kate,
terms), I'm including the original posting from back in May
first.
**************************************************
First, it's been a long time since I last posted, or even
answered my e-mail. Apologies to everyone, but I have a job
with a 2 hour commute each way and I spend every weekend working
on the apartment in preparation for Katemas (write to Vickie for
details vickie at wwa dot com.)
I've been writing this during breaks at work, so if it's
overlong and rambling, please forgive me; I have a lot I want
to get off my chest. I'm hoping to provoke some discussion,
as things have become too quiet here lately.
*******************************************************
Well, the "Kate vs. Tori" thing has arisen again in
Love-Hounds. It arises so often in the Tori Amos newsgroup
That they have established it as a regular "season". It's so
silly...as if the world cannot handle two piano playing females.
It reminds me of the film "Highlander" - "There can be only ONE!"
Why? Why can there be only one?
I don't think anyone can seriously question my dedication as
a Kate fan, and I've been a Tori fan since "Little Earthquakes",
(we owned "Y Kant Tori Read" long before LE was released, and
Vickie devoted over 20 hours waiting in line for the Chicago
pre-tour show) so I feel fairly comfortable saying this:
The antipathy some Kate fans towards Tori's success is
jealousy. They apparently feel that she's "stolen" the attention
and success that is Kate's rightful due.
Tori has gotten her recent attention and success due to a
number of factors:
First and most importantly, she damn well WORKS for it!
Since Little Earthquakes was released, Tori's played more
than 600 concerts. She's gone from playing a tiny Chicago club
like Shuba's (150 seats) to huge arenas like the Rosemont
Horizon. Kate has played, um, how many? None, since the
"Tour of Life" nearly 20 years ago. I'd say 20 years is more
than enough time to recuperate. The longer Kate stays away from
the stage, the harder it will be for her to get back on it.
Second, Tori does tons of interviews.
She's accessible and open, usually giving thoughtful (if
occasionally weird) answers to what must be the same questions
over and over again. Kate, in contrast, is amazingly evasive.
If an interviewer isn't lucky enough to be the first person to
ask the question, they'll either get a very polite evasion or
exactly the same canned answer as the last five interviewers.
Third, Tori releases new albums on some sort of regular basis.
Some will say about Kate's work habits "you can't rush art!"
Read some back issues of the KBC newsletter and Homeground. One
thing will become apparent. She really doesn't take five years
to make an album. She takes a year or so off to "recharge her
batteries"...and might take a long vacation in the middle of
the production. But the actual time spent writing and recording
the album is less than two years. Call me a heartless slave-
driving bastard, but most folks don't get a year's sabbatical
for every couple of years of work, nor do they need it.
Fourth, Tori has had to struggle to get her success.
Not to be cruel, but a couple of years playing Holiday Inns
might have done Kate's work habits a world of good. Getting
signed and having a huge success right out of the gate may have
been a poor preparation for the rigors of a long career. (Note:
the KT Bush band doesn't count, as that was after she was
signed.)
(Mind you; I'm not saying that they are equivalent. Kate
is far more talented (IMO) than Tori. Kate's lyrics can be an
intriguing puzzle, but most lyrics on Tori's last few albums
make about as much sense as early Cocteau Twins.)
But considered *strictly* from the perspective of the
"business" portion of the phrase "music business", Tori seems
to have a grasp of some fundamental truths that Kate either
lacks, or won't admit apply to her:
1: You build a fan base with touring.
Touring gains two vital sources of fans; those brought to
the show by existing fans (it's easier to get someone to sit in
a hall for two hours than to get them to devote the same
intensity to listening to a CD of an artist with whom they
are not familiar); and radio airplay generated by the opportunity
for personal contact between the artist and the station
personnel. Tori visits radio stations in every city she can,
every tour. Kate will drop in on a couple in stations in New York
and Toronto in the week or two she seems willing to devote to
"selling" her creation. Guess who gets more airplay.
2: People want to know something about the person behind the music.
You may say "Kate deserves her privacy!", but the existence of
Love-Hounds, the web sites and the fanzines shows that we all
share a desire to know something about the impulse behind the
creation.
As far as I know the *only* US TV interview Kate did to promote
"The Red Shoes" was "The Jerry Bryant Show" here in Chicago.
Jerry is this large, affable hippie who produces this show
apparently as a very expensive hobby...he makes his living
producing radio spots and spends it on the TV show. He traveled
to New York to interview Kate and practically got freezer burn
from her. It's not as if Jerry is a tough interviewer - I suspect
Sony set up the interview because he's known for puffball
questions, loose style and putting people at ease. But Kate shut
him down in a way I've never seen before. I ran into him at a
Tori Amos concert a couple of years later and he was still
confused, and a bit hurt by the reception he got. On the other
hand, to judge from the interviews he's done with Tori, they got
on wonderfully well.
For instance: we do not know for sure if Kate and Del are
still together or not. This is *vital* to understanding a song
like "You're The One I Want". How much of an imposition is it to
get a simple yes or no to a question that is posed by the song?
If she doesn't expect personal questions, she should consider
sticking with fantasy material. She says that she only wants to
talk about the music, but then deflects all questions about the
inspirations for the songs, except for the ones that are clearly
based on a film or book. If you're going to put your life into
your work, expect questions about your life.
3: Fans need an outlet for fannish impulses.
The KBC is gone...and has been effectively dead for years
during its "self-address stamped envelope" stage (how do you do
that between countries, anyway? Try getting an "International
Reply Coupon"...just try.) Kate has effectively cut off the her
only remaining avenue of communication to her fans, leaving us to
try to read between the lines of the increasingly rare
interviews, that only appear in the time immediately following
an album.
I don't believe Kate has access to e-mail, nor would I want
her to for reasons I've covered before. But she doubtless has
a fax machine. I don't believe she can imagine how much good she
could do by taking a piece of stationary and scribbling a quick
"Hi! The album is coming along well, I'm working with..." letter
and faxing it to one or more of the fanzines (and may I also
suggest someone who could scan the fax and put it onto a web
site?) Instead we suffer through *years* of hazy, vague
information. A while ago I mis-reported some information based
on a rumor...nothing major, but enough to embarrass myself. But
in the absence of *any* new information, with no way to confirm
or deny rumors, misinformation will spread.
Over the years Vickie and I have been actively involved in
fannish activity (conventions, video distribution, web site
construction, etc.) we've known a few big fans that have since
become "former Kate fans". I may be going out on a limb here, but
one possible explanation is that they felt that their love was
not returned.
Yeah, yeah...we don't have any right to expect anything from
Kate but her music...but every sentient being wants to be
acknowledged. In the absence of any response, people either drift
away or can become embittered. Personally, I believe part of the
poor reception of "The Red Shoes" had more to do with Kate's lack
of promotion and her distance (those sunglasses she wore in
various interviews) than the actual songs.
Long ago, she went out of her way to acknowledge her fans, and
promote her music. But the last substantial promotional work she
was the multiple TV appearances for "The Dreaming". "Running Up
That Hill" reached the Top 40 in the US, pretty much as a fluke.
If she had been willing to do some actual promotion, some US TV
performances and traveling to LA instead of just New York, she
could have had the US top ten hit that she's apparently always
wanted. (Yes, I know the charts are bogus, but Kate has often
talked about chart success and I don't recall a single instance
of her saying that she would prefer a smaller audience for her
work.) A US TV appearance would allow her to get her feet wet,
and do something, however small, to reward the fans. (We're some
of her biggest US fans, but the idea of buying a pair of
full-price, last minute plane tickets to fly to the UK to see
her perform a single song on a show like "Wogan" is nuts.)
This is pure speculation, but the label switch in the US may
have been prompted by her lack of promotional effort. According
to reports at the time, EMI-America "forgot" to renew her
contract, allowing her to entertain offers from other record
companies. It seems unlikely that a large record company ever
forgets anything to do with a contract; contracts are their
life-blood. (Insert vampire metaphor here.) It seems somewhat
more likely that it was a face-saving cover story. It can't be
easier to deal with two competing record companies than with one
multinational. The move from EMI-America to Columbia doesn't seem
to make much sense.
Anyway...I've gone on long enough. I have my own explanation
for her actions, and I've posted about it before. Suffice to say,
if Kate wants Tori's level of success, she'd have to damn well
exert Tori's level of effort. Until the day she does, any
complaints about their relative levels of success I'll view
as ignorant carping.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I've had a few very positive responses from my "All this nonsense..."
posting (both publically and privately). I also received a few negative
responses, some thoughtful and well-considered, and a couple that
indicated the respondent hadn't actually read the original posting.
Some Love-Hounds claimed that Kate isn't interested in commercial
success. Sorry, but this just isn't true. I can show you any number of
quotes from Kate talking about the charts, her position on them and
marketing her music. Admittedly, they might not be recent, but due to
the scarcity of interviews of late, it's hardly an obvious question to
ask. Many things that appear "fairly obvious" are not so. But contra wise,
I have yet to see a single statement from Kate supporting the claim that
she would prefer to have a *smaller* audience for her music. If
Kate reduces the amount of promotion she does by a factor as large
as that between her last two albums, she'll soon achieve a level that
will make J. D. Salinger look like a publicity hound.
I'm glad I'm not the one who has to try to sell Kate's music to
the American public, in the absence of any effort on her part. Can
you imagine the poor schmoe at Columbia assigned to promote Kate's
next record?
"OK - a 50 city US tour..."
"No, she doesn't tour."
"At all?"
"Not for 20 years."
"Sheesh. Alright - how about personal appearances?"
"Only New York - maybe."
"What?! Everyone's here in LA!"
"She doesn't like to travel."
"Alright, how about loads of interviews..."
"No good. She'll only want to do one day
for everyone in the country."
"TV?"
"Maybe. But only if she's a personal
friend of the host."
"Oh, Christ! My career is over! (Whimper)"
If she continues on this path, I see her getting dropped by
EMI and Columbia and never releasing *ANYTHING* else. I've seen it
happen. I'm a big Todd Rundgren fan, and he was amazingly productive,
releasing a band album and a solo album and producing several albums
for other artists in the same year. Since his divorce from Warner's,
releases have become few and far between. It's ten times as much work
to release albums independently than through a major label (just ask
Jane Siberry). Kate does not have the drive or the taste for hard work
to go the independent route, and that would be it. No more Kate music
to be released and heard.
Peter D. Fitzgerald-Morris of Homeground wrote a long response
to my post, and I feel compelled to answer in full. The topics
he raises are still valid:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
P.D.FitzGerald-Morris <pd...@isis.softnet.co.uk>:
>>if Kate wants Tori's level of success, she'd have to damn well
>>exert Tori's level of effort.
>Kate's more recent material had a relative lack of commercial success
>because Kate decided she didn't want to promote it very much.
Sadly, I'm not sure that Kate has exactly "decided" to not
promote. I believe her fear decided that for her. See below.
>Its no-one's *fault* (if fault it is) but hers.
Very, very true.
>It certainly isn't down to her record labels, who have been tearing
>their hair out over her failure to act like almost any other recording
>star you could mention. Perhaps Dave might have pursauded her, but EMI
>will have their little boardroom wars. He won't get a chance now (well
>this time round, anyway), and more's the pity.
Someone has to point this out before EMI decides that they've simply
had enough. For us in the US, it would be bad enough for Columbia to
decide that they don't need the frustration of trying to promote
someone with no interest in working to help her own career.
But Peter gets a bit silly here:
>Perhaps the answer is that at this point Kate doesn't actually care whether
>her music is "successful".
She has before. She keeps sending conflicting messages. To my
knowledge, no one has recently asked her. I suspect she wants success,
but is too wrapped up in her own fears to do what is necessary.
>Why should she? Her material needs are more than cared for.
Kate's "material needs" have *never* been in danger, as far as
I can see. I don't know what a physician in private practice makes
in the UK, but I don't believe either Paddy or John have ever held
the sort of jobs that anyone concerned with "material needs" has.
Poet/martial arts instructor and musician/instrument maker? If
Kate Bush had never decided to pursue a career in music she'd still
never be hurting. She'd be a comfortably well-off veterinarian, or
therapist or shop owner or something. But she's not the sort of
person who would blow her inheritance and have to go to work at
McDonald's.
Survival is obviously out as a criteria.
>She doesn't need and doesn't particularly want her ego massaged
>by adoring crowds.
I disagree. Look at the joy Kate expressed in "Kate Bush
On Tour" talking to the interviewer after a show, or how pleased
(and sweetly embarrassed) she was by the reception she got at the
1990 Convention, or the warm way she dealt with everyone at the Tower
Records signing. I've seen "Les Dogs" and "The Line, The Cross and
The Curve"...she's not a good enough actress to have been faking it.
There are always two or more ways to phrase anything. You can
call being on stage with thousands of adoring fans an "ego massage"...
but Kate hopping up and down waving at everyone at the end of
the Hammersmith Odeon video looks (to me) more like the focal point
of a love fest trying to reflect that love back.
>She doesn't want all the crap that goes with celebrity.
How do we know? How could we *possibly* know? I'm engaging in
speculation here, but I'm trying to offer the reasoning behind
each speculation. Has she ever said "I really don't like all the
crap that goes along with being a celebrity"? She's gotten the
perks of being a celebrity...I'm not sure she has the option.
I don't think it's fair to other recording artists for Kate
to expect to continue to receive the support and promotion that
could better expended on people who want to succeed. There is
a lot to dislike about the "music industry", but if it wasn't
for the work of the promotional people most of us would not
have had opportunity to discover her. I first heard her on
"Saturday Night Live", and someone had to do a bit of work
to get her on that show. The people who did that get paid,
and they could have worked to get another of their artists
on the show. Both EMI and Columbia have finite resources, and
at some point either or both companies may decide that she is
just not worth the bother.
>She's been there.
I'd say, she's still there. She produces music and attempts to
get it heard by as many people as possible. That's the deal. If
she wants to have her music heard she has to promote it. No
promotion, few sales.
>Perhaps she does her music, in so far as that is a
>priority in her life, for herself, in response to an inner drive. She may
>actually have other important things to do which are none of our business.
Perhaps we would find this easier to accept if we had the faintest
idea what these other, possibly more important things are. We don't
need details, but to know that she has *some* outlet for her creativity
would ease the long periods between albums.
Peter, I've known you for a long time, but I can't believe you're saying
this. I think we both agree that Kate Bush music is vitally important.
I find it difficult to believe that someone with a muse like Kate's could
ever consider music to be less important than some other part of her life.
Music has been there for her entire life. Some performers are "rock stars"
while others are "musicians". Kate (and Tori) are musicians. They make
music.
>If we want to be fans, that is our choice. Why should we expect anyone to be
>grateful to us.
There *are* two sides to this bargain between Kate and her listeners.
If she wants to make music to put on a shelf, for no one to listen to,
then she can have a one-way relationship. But the minute she puts
it out there for a listening public, people are going to respond.
Not gratitude. Simple acknowledgment is enough. The acknowledgement
we *used* to receive, or even some small portion of it, would have so
much positive response.
We have no way of knowing whether or not Kate even likes having
*fans* anymore.
>We get our own return from our fan activities - and in the
>period between Kate's albums there are plenty of other things to do, music
>to listen to, films to see, books to read, and even computer games to play.
So do we. You pour your efforts into producing Homeground, an
amazing effort especially in light how little response you've
apparently received from the Bush camp. We are engaged in Gaffaweb,
tape trees and other efforts. But Homeground would obviously
benefit from a new influx of Kate photos, or some news to report
more substantial than rumor. My proposal that Kate should fax an
occasional letter to her fans is a very modest one.
Kate's fan base has been reduced by attrition to a much smaller
group of people - possibly one too small to remain healthy.
While the vast majority of Kate fans we have known are wonderful
people, we've known a couple of unstable personalities. With
no feedback at all from Kate, her fan base will eventually be
reduced to the sort of people who can continue to be interested in
someone long after that person has ceased to return that affection.
Just beyond that point is the distinction between a "fan" and a
"fanatic", and it's not a healthy place.
Some have suggested that Kate's music couldn't be toured. According
to reports before The Red Shoes was released, the more traditional
structure of that album was intended specifically to enable her to
tour it. Vickie and I recently saw Lorrenna McKennit, and with 8
musicians and a pair of digital mixing boards and a pile of MIDI
controlled audio devices, she was able to *exactly* re-create her
music and the complex aural environment it exists in on stage. Whether
or not this is a good idea is a matter for debate, but this example
showed me that even the most complex of Kate's pieces of music
could be done on stage. (It helped that Lorrena had some of Kate's
musicians, like bassist Danny "Pull Out The Pin" Thompson with her.)
The sharp-eared have noticed rumblings before each album about
Kate touring. Once, a friend at Chicago's Jam Productions reported
after "The Sensual World" that "Kate's people" had contacted Jam
about Chicago venues. Lindsey Kemp told a reporter that Kate had
talked to him about a tour at the time of "The Red Shoes". Jim
Henson's Creature Shop was supposedly working on something for a tour.
And most recently, Kate was reportedly looking at European venues.
(Only a cad would mention the promise of a tour at the 1990 Convention.)
So...Kate has intended to tour, has made tour-like noises, has
spoken to others about touring...so why hasn't she toured? She's
offered various excuses, of various levels of credibility. But
the truest-sounding one came from a fan, rather than Kate herself.
I was chatting with this Love-Hound on Marco's Java chat room on
the regular Sunday chat, and he had mentioned attending a Wogan
show (I believe). Kate was standing on the stage in the dark before
the show moved to her song, and she noticed their Convention
t-shirts. She managed a bit of whispered chat with them. Kate
was reportedly terrified, and was calmed a bit by having someone
to sing to, and the fan said that she looked directly at them
the majority of the time.
Rather than "time commitments" (HAH!), or the expense, or
fear of travel (she *does* travel, and by air too) or any of a
dozen other excuses, I'm of the opinion that it's simple stage
fright keeping her off the stage.
But that would only keep her off the stage, not account for
her long stretches of non-productivity; the astonishingly long
time it takes her to produce music; and her inability to deal
with interviewers.
The following is entirely conjecture, and is based on
nothing other than observation. If you disagree, fine - I'd be
interested in hearing someone else's explanation that so readily
accounts for every aspect of Kate's behavior.
I believe Kate is suffering from depression.
Moreover, she's suffering from depression in a country that,
for some reason, does not appear to *believe* in depression.
Possibly this is a wild generalization, and I apologize in
advance to anyone I might offend, but the English seem to
believe that one should just "cheer up"...profoundly
ineffective advice to a clinically depressed person (I know
from personal experience). Good people, who would not think
of withholding needed medicine from anyone suffering from a
physical, visibly manifested illness, never-the-less seem to
have a tough time with medicine for mental illnesses. And
this attitude keeps many ill people from getting the help
that could enable them to deal with their lives.
"Life is sad, and so is love"? Have you ever heard a more
depressing statement about life and love? Yes, life *can* be
sad; love *can* be sad. But to unequivocally state that both
*are*? I can only hear these as the words of a seriously
depressed person.
Even Kate's biggest fans cringe at some of her acting
in "The Line, The Cross, & The Curve". But the two believable
moments in the film are the anguish in her face during the
performance of "And So Is Love" and the fear and confusion
displayed in "Lily". Contrast these moments with her amateurish
display of anger ("What the Hell is going on?") and the laughable
"fear and pain" of her pleading with the guardian of the shoes
to cut her feet off. How could she so believably portray emotions
at one moment and so poorly the next, unless she were calling up
the emotional state she was in when she wrote the song...or was
still at that place emotionally?
I do *not* like saying these things. I wouldn't wish this
on Kate, ever. But I've lived with a depressed person, and
for the longest time *neither* of us knew what was going on.
It wasn't until a friend, a person outside of the relationship
pointed it out that we began to have some idea and we were able
to seek help. Often, the worst possible vantage point is from
the inside; Kate probably has no idea what's going on. (Kate's
reported fondness for pot may be an attempt at self-medication.
It is beneficial according to many sufferers of depression).
Lord knows, there have been many episodes in Kate's life
that could trigger a slide into depression. The deaths of
several of her close friends, a member of her band, one of her
dancers, topped off by the loss of her mother, Hannah. Any of
these alone would be enough. Collectively, they could plunge
someone with the slightest emotional vulnerability into a deep
depression.
Again, I do not *like* saying these things, but I feel I
must. I do this in the vague hope that someone with a connection
to Kate might read this, that they'd feel a spark of recognition,
and hopefully try to help her. There's virtually nothing we, as
Love-Hounds can do to help, her separation from us is so complete.
Perhaps someone else has an alternative theory that can do
a better job of tying together all theses factors: Kate's apparent
indifference to her career; her rumored break-up with Del; her
inability to handle the strain of interviews;
Another strange thing is the conflicting rumors about the
state of completion of her next album. The interview with Gilmour
went so far as to name song titles, and implied that he had already
recorded his parts, and the Italian fanzine editors claimed to
interview Kate outside of Abbey Road where she was recording. But
then we get this report from the normally unimpeachable Paul
Gambichini. He said he spoke to her "personal assistant" (why
wouldn't she speak directly to someone she, to judge by their
interviews and radio shows, regards as a friend?) and he says
the album is still only in the writing stages?
My fear is that all these rumors are true - that Gilmour
*did* record parts for two songs and that Kate's next album is
still only in the idea stage...that Kate trashed the work she
had completed on the album. Depression can cause irrational and
destructive behavior, as well as a belief that nothing one does
is "good enough" (not to be mistaken for her normal perfectionism).
If my suppositions are correct, she is afraid of completing
the album, that nothing she can do will ever be "good enough";
and that we'll never hear any more Kate Bush music.
Yes, I know the limb I'm out on here. But my "analysis" of
Kate is roughly equivalent to someone studying the work of
say, Mark Twain, and concluding that he suffered from depression
(or melancholy, as they referred to it then.) I'd like to think
I'm as familiar with Kate Bush's life and work as almost anyone
outside of her family and circle of friends.
Again, for the those who can't be bothered to read closely,
I do NOT want this to be so. I wouldn't wish depression on her.
But I feel obligated to point out what I see in the vague hope
that some how, some way, Kate will get the help I believe she
needs.
Chris Williams