Love-Hounds-request@EDDIE.MIT.EDU.UUCP (03/30/87)
Really-From: IED0DXM%UCLAMVS.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu KT news: Remarkably (and, as usual, stupidly), EMI-America have NOW released "Cloudbusting" as a twelve-inch in the U.S. (The Organon mix). Now, explain this one, folks! The video to "Don't Give Up" may have been delayed (or dropped altogether) by MTV because it is nearly six minutes long, and because nothing at all happens in it. Similarly, the song's length (5:56 even in its seven-inch "edit" form) will make it an almost certain non-charter on U.S. radio. Now, for the mail-bag: Not for the first time, IED finds himself praising Hofmann's latest posting. He agrees with your theory that Kate's voice seems silly (to Americans, mind you) in the context of the (increasingly agressive) music she sings. Ironically, her contribution on Gabriel's "Don't Give Up", now a U.S. single, will probably only alienate many American listeners, since it emphasizes the European "precious" side to her voice -- not a good thing in any case with U.S. listeners -- in a song which was clearly designed to reflect and appeal to American culture (or lack thereof). It is very revealing that Gabriel originally hoped to have Dolly Parton for the female vocal. Both she and Kate share, in some broad category of confessional balladeering, a certain tendency to affectation and exaggerated emotion; but Parton's can be embraced by Americans because of its hick familiarity, whereas Kate's may be rejected by them because of its exotic, or "furrin", touches. However, we'll see. -- Andrew Marvick
Love-Hounds-request@EDDIE.MIT.EDU.UUCP (04/02/87)
Really-From: prs@oliven.ATC.OLIVETTI.COM (Philip Stephens) In article <8703300111.AA19092@EDDIE.MIT.EDU> Love-Hounds writes: [oops, I think that was "really from" IED] > Ironically, her >contribution on Gabriel's "Don't Give Up", now a U.S. single, >will probably only alienate many American listeners, since it >emphasizes the European "precious" side to her voice -- not a good thing >in any case with U.S. listeners -- in a song which was clearly >designed to reflect and appeal to American culture (or lack thereof). What? You *are* kidding, aren't you? Clearly? Reflect? Appeal? None of the above. It struck me as reflecting British depression over high unemployment in Brittain. Not in the US. I didn't think about its style at the time (I was in Brittain on business when the single was released there last Nov or Dec), but as I recall it doesn't sound the least bit designed to *either* reflect or appeal to us Amurikans. (Nor to offend, for that matter). Just a quaint ballad on a topical subject, remarkably gentle considering the topic. >It is very revealing that Gabriel originally hoped to have >Dolly Parton for the female vocal. Both she and Kate share, in >some broad category of confessional balladeering, a certain >tendency to affectation and exaggerated emotion; but Parton's >can be embraced by Americans because of its hick familiarity, >whereas Kate's may be rejected by them because of its exotic, >or "furrin", touches. However, we'll see. Perhaps it is more that DP appealed to him as a motherly (yes, despite all the jokes about her figure's affect on males, I'm refering to her personality) character to sing counterpoint to his character's lament; KT sounds more like the lamenter's sister or wife, but still fits the context of the song: fragile, sharing the humiliation of her brother/ lover/friend, but bravely keeping a stiff upper lip in the uniquely British way. And trying to say that people are more important than things ("You still have us....") Is it just possible that he didn't write the song to appeal to purchasers, but to affect listeners? Perhaps even literally what the title (and the female lyrics) say? Nahhhh.... couldn't be. Idealism is passe' in 1987, especially in this netgroup. By the way, I was shocked that KT would play 2nd fiddle to anyone, until I realized that she carries the message in that duet, not he. Has she collaborated with anyone else I should know about? I'm meaning to pick up some PG tapes now that I've heard (and seen) 2 or 3 samples of his work; anyone else of similar caliber? (no, I'm not interested in musical terrorists and intentionally offensive superpunks, thanks. Don't they deserve a seperate mod group for their equally offensive fans to hang out in???? I'm tired of them trying to slamdance my sensibilities). But enuf of my drivel, more of yours please. > >-- Andrew Marvick - Phil prs@oliveb.UUCP (Phil Stephens) {really oliven} or, if that fails: {get to 'ames' somehow, then}!oliveb!prs Mail welcome, but my mailer seldom cooperates when I try to reply.
Love-Hounds-request@EDDIE.MIT.EDU (04/20/87)
Really-From: IED0DXM%UCLAMVS.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu About the MTV 4-in-a-row request idea, good luck. Do you know how many millions of rotten little 12-year-old Bon Jovi fans are busy scribbling out request postcards to MTV right now? What's the point? See you, folks. Must check all the stores in town to see if Dave's news of the Castaway ST applies on this coast yet. -- Andrew Marvick