IED0DXM%UCLAMVS.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA (08/13/86)
Organization: >I'll bE Damned. now that doug is having a katemas partY three >thOUsand miles away, how come theRe is noThing from oUR biggest kb >faNatic this side of the mississippi river? > >fu-sheng >l.a., ca Message(s) received and point taken, Fu-Sheng. Attention, all Western-based Love-Hounds: As a point of honour, efforts must be made by the better half of the pack to match Nessus's recent demonstration of Bush Bashing. Therefore, IED would like to give a little party for So-Cal Love-Hounds at his house in West Los Angeles, but first he would really like to know how many L-Hs such an occasion might attract. Doug, could you let him know if there are three of us or thirty out here? Greatly appreciated. IED has a nice venue, but one drawback: since this sort of affair usually centers around a video screen, IED would like to set the date of the party sometime after August 29, by which time he will have a house to himself, and will probably have been able to procure a 20XBR. As for the party itself, video will be the word of the day. IED is equipped with Beta Hi-fi (and 8mm), but not with VHS, so if anyone out here can provide one for the evening, the atmosphere will be much improved. Also, who might want to help with the refreshments? And of course, we'll have show-and-tell time for collectors. STOP PRESS: Inside the latest issue of Billboard Magazine there is a new FULL-PAGE announcement about a "SPECIAL SCREENING of KATE BUSH's 'RUNNING UP THAT HILL' video on MTV", Wednesday night, 9:00 Eastern, 6:00 Pacific. (Problem is, IED forgot to check whether they meant this week or next -- the issue is dated a week ahead. Woops! Sorry.) >I don't really understand why it's arrogance. Say that you have just >been *HIT OVER THE HEAD* with good luck. You naturally enough, want >to tell people, not necessarily to cause jealousy, but simply because >it's a *good thing*. >Suppose furthermore that it's not an exclusive sort of luck (like >winning a million dollars), but something that can be shared with >other people without depriving yourself (more like winning a money >tree--something that's completely unlimited in its scope). Wouldn't >you be some kind of a genuine creep to keep that to yourself--when >telling other people would do them good, and you no harm? >You may disagree that religion has these benefits--but please understand >that from the point of view of the other person, talking about their >new interest is the right thing to do. > AMBAR Well, Ambar, you've made an interesting comment. There are three reasons IED has for deploring the recent announcement in Break-Through about using the magazine as a mouthpiece for Christian dogma. The first is simple: the subject is about as closely related to Kate Bush as, say, the subject of dinner etiquette. This is not to imply that Kate Bush should never be discussed in the same breath as either organized religion or place-settings; only that regular and prolonged -- and dogmatic -- association of KB with either of the latter subjects would be silly. The second reason is that sudden converts to religious ideological structures tend -- admittedly this is a generalization -- tend to forget that their personal enthusiasms are not necessarily shared by others. Kate Bush fans subscribe to Break-Through for, among other things, a feeling of belonging within a community of people who share their enthusiasm. It is arrogant to take unfair advantage of the publication's captive audience for the purposes of disseminating tracts about a single, highly structured and largely irrelevant ideological system. It is offensive to IED to find that, simply by being a Kate Bush fan, he has become fair game for purveyors of a religious ideology which he wants nothing to do with. The third reason is more personal. IED has had it up to here with organized religion in the North American media. It seems to him that most if not all of the most abominable new forces of sensorship and the suppression of basic freedoms are allied with, or even sponsored by, various extremist Christian groups. Break-Through was one of the steadily declining number of oases that provided a bit of security from the stormy ocean of the Moral Majority's Campaign for Conventionality. IED mourns the loss of that security. Have you considered, by the way, that if all this continues, Kate Bush's "Not This Time" and "Do Bears...?" will likely be forced to bear labels that brand them as obscene? And after those two, what next -- "Breathing"?
Love-Hounds-request@EDDIE.MIT.EDU.UUCP (03/15/87)
Really-From: allynh%miro@berkeley.edu (Allyn Hardyck)
Well, Greg, looks like I wouldn't have had to come down to LA anyway...
. . . .
For interested SF area readers, yes, 9 3 Current 9 3 is coming,
. .
to IAO Core's performance space at 455 10th St. in SF. Should be in about
two weeks, I'll try to give more details soon. The last time I was there,
it was for an intercontinental performance run by Christine Ambrosia here
and John Balance in London, and that connection was apparently how the
upcoming show was arranged.
allyn