nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (Doug Alan) (08/16/85)
["The gorgon-headed scandal sheet presents its daily bite"] In keeping with tradition, much of the British music press has totally trashed Kate Bush yet again. I'd been told that much of the British music press has never thought much of Kate Bush, but had never seen any of the reviews except for little tiny pieces. None of this prepared me for the reviews of "Running Up That Hill" that appeared in the August 10th issues of the music weeklies. On the lyric sheet for Roy Harper's newest album "Whatever Happened to Jugula?" there is a note saying something like "If you work for the music press, you might as well just throw this piece of paper in the gutter. It will be totally lost on you anway." At the time I read this note, I didn't understand why Roy Harper had such bitter feelings towards the British music press, because I just couldn't believe that anyone could say much bad about such a wonderful musician as Roy, but after recently seeing some of the diarrhea that they call "reviews" in England, I can completely understand his viewpoint now. People who hate Kate Bush might want to savour these reviews, but I can't fathom how anyone could write a review like the following, which is by Helen Fitzgerald of Melody Maker (Hey, Jim Hofmann, you'll probably find this review "interesting", but sad...): Does Kate buy Beauty Without Cruelty lipgloss? Are her nipples real? Does she wax or shave her legs? I mean, is this lady real? What sorcery does she possess that turns normal, reasoning anti-sexist men into slavering, rampant and primitive devotees who'd trample their grandmothers for one glimpse of her nether regions? It's okay Barry, I've turned the record off now, down boy, down I say. Is it the voice (yeuch), her cute balletic pirouettes or that little girl lost expression that so easily stirs this bestial transformation? This woman is either a witch or a hallelujah merchant, though either way she's precocious, dated and dull. This record is dismally uninteresting, she caterwauls something about making a deal with God -- ho hum. In olden times they burned people at the stake for less than this. How could anyone call such an unjustified hateful attack, a review? I've seen bad reviews of records I like in U.S. magazines, and though that doesn't usually make me very happy, I've never seen anything like this! What does it take to become a music reviewer in England? Do you have to be an arrogant, snide twit with an IQ of 3 who is awed at your own non-existent self-worth? Do you have to be able to make vile, vicious and unsubstantiated personal attacks at honest and sincere artists, just because you don't like their music? How could anyone with a human soul say such things about about someone who makes an honest and sincere artistic effort, even if they did have no talent? How come such a large percentage of the world's finest musicians come from a country where the music press is a bunch of assholes? In any case, Helen dear, you seemed to have ignored the fact that just as many of Kate's devoted fans are female as male, so I think it's clear who's the sexist! People should have their writing hand amputated for less than your crimes. The NME wasn't quite so hostile. It's just clear that the reviewer is excedingly stupid. He, William Leith says Nice to see you looking so well after your holiday, Kate, and nice to see it hasn't dampened your ambition any. Just listen to this: "If I conly could/ I'd make a deal with God/ And I'd get him to swap our places." The rest is what you'd imagine, really -- the voice continues to get deeper as the lyrics get shallower. Tuneful, though. Shallow lyrics?!?!? Kate Bush hasn't had a shallow thought in her entire life. But go ahead William -- defame that which you just have no chance of comprehending. Or, William, maybe you're just jealous that poetry Kate Bush wrote at the age of ten is an achievement orders of magnitude greater than you will ever reach at the pinnacle of your pathetic life. At least you think the music is okay, which is probably the nicest thing the NME has ever said about Kate Bush. Not every song lyric ever written by Kate Bush is a flawless masterpiece. There are a few here and there previous to "The Dreaming" that I think could be improved a little, but the vast majority of her lyrics are stunningly good -- as good as lyrics ever get, and this describes everything she's done since "The Dreaming". I saw the lyrics to "Running Up That Hill" long before I heard the song, and they just blew me away. They're perfect. I'm actually somewhat disappointed by the music to "Running Up That Hill" -- it's really good, but it doesn't stand up to the standards Kate set on "The Dreaming". It doesn't have the rich complexity and infinitely layered detail that characterizes "The Dreaming". This is probably the fault of The British music press which called "The Dreaming" over-produced, incomprehensible, and too complicated. How could all this rejection not have an effect on Kate's work? Record Mirror is really a joke. Damon Rochefort writes that he likes the song, but put the review under his "Terrible" column because he doesn't like the picture sleeve! I may be the most narrow-minded person in the world, but I can usually see other people's point of view. In this case I'm afraid I can't. Especially when it's written badly all over her back and shoulders. But the single's nice. Well after all this abuse, I figured I couldn't find anything worse by reading through the rest of the rags. But as if all the previous wasn't enough, not only do I find a defamation of Robert Frip (anyone involved with these rags doesn't even deserve to see his name!), but I find a review of Toyah's new album in NME. "Great!" thinks I! If the NME doesn't like Kate Bush, I'm sure they'll have fun tearing apart Toyah. Not only do they do that, but they do so by saying that she's almost as bad as Kate Bush! How can Kate stand to live in a country where they abuse her so! Sometimes (a very very few times) I'm proud to be an American. The U.S. music press adored "The Dreaming". Maybe Kate should move here. Peter Gabriel too -- from what I've heard, the British music press doesn't like him much either. Maybe it's a good sign that the British reviewers don't like "Running Up That Hill". After all, this is what they said five years ago about "Breathing", which is one of the very best songs ever created: Painful mix of vocal hysterics, phoney operatics, and slimming club workouts... -- Gary Bushell, Sounds Post-apocalypse blues sees Bush wisping like a mutant infant... if BBC light entertainment turn her down she can always sing back-up on Panorama... -- Chris Brown, Melody Maker And I don't think this is anything to wtite home about. The feathery mystical Bush formula is put to work once again... -- Philip Hall, Record Mirror This last one, totally ignores the fact that "Breathing" was totally unlike anything else she had ever done, and was a complete artistic break-through. To end on a slightly happier note, at least there was one positive review of "Running Up That Hill". Edwin Pouncey of Sounds: Didn't sound like much when played on the office toaster, but now I've got it home I've found myself seduced by the sheer strangeness of Ms Bush's dramatic return. What dreams she must have. All in all, though, it makes you wonder sometimes why artists even bother trying. "Is there so much hate for the ones we love" Doug Alan nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (or ARPA)
merchant@dartvax.UUCP (Peter Merchant) (08/17/85)
> How could anyone call such an unjustified hateful attack, a review? > I've seen bad reviews of records I like in U.S. magazines, and though > that doesn't usually make me very happy, I've never seen anything like > this! What does it take to become a music reviewer in England? Do you > have to be an arrogant, snide twit with an IQ of 3 who is awed at your > own non-existent self-worth? Do you have to be able to make vile, > vicious and unsubstantiated personal attacks at honest and sincere > artists, just because you don't like their music? How could anyone with > a human soul say such things about about someone who makes an honest and > sincere artistic effort, even if they did have no talent? How come such > a large percentage of the world's finest musicians come from a country > where the music press is a bunch of assholes? > > Doug Alan Oh, I don't know, Doug. I'm not a Kate Bush fan, although this is through ignorance than anything else. However, I have seen many personal attacks on Madonna and their like in this newsgroup. People who say all sorts of nasty things about a performer just because she shows off her belly-button, has a high voice, or has "sold-out". C'mon, Doug! No one is immune from nasty remarks. Just read the newsgroup for a little while and listen to some of the people here. They're not even getting paid for their music reviews and they'll be really vicious! -- "Not content with that Peter Merchant with our hands behind our backs we'll pull Jesus from a hat! Get into that! Get into that!"
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (08/18/85)
> I've seen bad reviews of records I like in U.S. magazines, and though > that doesn't usually make me very happy, I've never seen anything like > this! What does it take to become a music reviewer in England? Do you > have to be an arrogant, snide twit with an IQ of 3 who is awed at your > own non-existent self-worth? In America, the difference is that they don't have those stringent IQ requirements. It doesn't even have to be THAT high. I would think a thrashing from the British press is a positive boon for any artist. I remember how they used to trash progrock groups to death even before they all got senile and longwinded (while they were still making good music), then the punks (they only hooked onto Joy Division after Curtis' death because they sensed the oncoming cult). -- Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen. Rich Rosen pyuxd!rlr
jeffw@tekecs.UUCP (Jeff Winslow) (08/19/85)
> by Helen Fitzgerald of Melody Maker (Hey, Jim Hofmann, you'll > probably find this review "interesting", but sad...): > > Does Kate buy Beauty Without Cruelty lipgloss? Are her nipples > real? Does she wax or shave her legs? I mean, is this lady > real? What sorcery does she possess that turns normal, > reasoning anti-sexist men into slavering, rampant and primitive > devotees who'd trample their grandmothers for one glimpse of her > nether regions? It's okay Barry, I've turned the record off > now, down boy, down I say. Is it the voice (yeuch), her cute > balletic pirouettes or that little girl lost expression that so > easily stirs this bestial transformation? This woman is either > a witch or a hallelujah merchant, though either way she's > precocious, dated and dull. This record is dismally > uninteresting, she caterwauls something about making a deal with > God -- ho hum. > > In olden times they burned people at the stake for less than > this. > > How could anyone call such an unjustified hateful attack, a review? If it's any comfort to you, Doug, I'm still trying to figure out how someone can be both precocious (~ ahead of her time) and dated (~ behind her time) at the same time. And even if she were, it's hard to imagine such a paradoxical combination being dull. Perhaps Ms. Fitzgerald has a random review generator online. Those who can, do. Those who can't, become critics. who is Kate Bush, anyway? :-) Jeff Winslow