Love-Hounds-request@GAFFA.MIT.EDU (12/03/90)
Really-From: katefans@world.std.com (Chris'n'Vickie of Chicago)
Chris here,
Wandering about London on our last night in town we decided to walk
around the "City of London". Walking up the Strand to Fleet Street we
paused to check our maps to see where we were. A stranger stopped to
help us. He turned out to be a guard at the "Middle Temple". (I think
he'd nipped out for a pint before the pubs closed). He walked along
with us for a while explaining the history of the buildings, pointing
out the ones that had survived the Great Fire, and (most importantly)
the history of the Knights Templar. To those few Love-Hounds who might
not be aware, our Beloved took the Knights Templar symbol, the KT sign,
as her own. The amount of improbability involved in running into a
knowledgeable source on the Knights at midnight on a Wednesday in an
other-wise deserted part of the City might not be enough to transport
us halfway across the galaxy, but it could probably produce a bowl of
petunias.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those who are concerned can rest easy that someone close to Kate
is aware that not everyone is happy with the Box Set, though I'm
afraid I may have made a bit of an ass of myself in the process.
Lisa (of the KBC) dropped by the Love-Hounds Central (a bunch of
couches and chairs) to see how we were doing and what we thought of
the convention. Andy suggested that it would be nice if she would sing,
and Lisa replied that "Kate would love to sing, she really would, but
you know it would be bootlegged". Now this seemed like a rather lame
excuse, as that possibility exists any time she sings in public.
I replied "What's the harm in that?".
I mentioned that it seemed perfectly plain to me that bootlegs are
something that only the most ardent fans buy after they have bought
everything that they can legally buy, and that most bootleg material
wouldn't be profitable for the record companies to release.
Lisa replied that "Well, it's a violation of trust, isn't it?" I
believe I looked very skeptical as she changed her tack and said,
"Well it's really the loss of control."
This brought about the question of who controlled the box set,
Kate or EMI. She said EMI, and I pointed out that EMI said the final
decision had been Kate's. She didn't reply to that and I said that
Andy and Derek had put together a very good set that had been rejected.
(I later found out that Homeground had put together a set as well, and
EMI had gone as far as making up test cassettes of their arrangement)
I believe I may have gotten a little frantic in telling her that the
Box Set was a "God-Damn rip-off". Well, it was a very emotional day.
I'm in the process of writing a nice little note of apology, as was
suggested by David Cross. Our feelings are not stopping us from buying
_two_ box sets, though. The Club newsletter was an enormous rip-off for
American fans for a number of years (one year passed without a single
newsletter). In self defense I should point out that Kate's family
and friends do a pretty good job of insulating her from the outside
world,and it's quite possible that she is not aware that anyone feels
this way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two theories about why the box set exists:
1: Kate wanted a nice box to take out to the back yard and bury to
put a period on this part of her career.
2: Kate wanted something nice to give as Christmas presents.
(we understand that Kate _bought_ 50 LP and 50 CD sets.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A bit from Andy's transcription of the Q & A session...
(Laughter and applause. Someone near the front of the
audience hands some framed artwork to Kate.)
"That's lovely, oh, that's really beautiful. Did you do that?
Isn't that lovely?"
(Applause.)
"Thank you...Ooh, another one!"
(Pause, while another picture is handed up by the fan, who
has produced these things from a bag. Laughter, as Kate puts
these objects by her side on the couch.)
"This is a Mary Poppins bag, isn't it? Goes up onto
the stage and gets out a giraffe..."
...reminded me of the wonderful (but unfortunately short-lived)
fanzine "For The Love of Kate". It was produced by Gillian Garr and
friends of Seattle, and we have four issues.
As they didn't have any actual information about Kate or her activities,
they just made it all up. The result is some of the funniest, and in some
ways truest, stuff ever written about Kate. Here is the bit I was reminded
of ...
**********************************************************************
The Poppins Connection
It's a fact that Kate was born, and grew up, living the life of a
fairly normal child. But even at a tender age, she was reaching out,
learning to grow. Check her early performance as "Jane" in the film
'Mary Poppins'. Such play acting was not just a job to her. Kate went
on to adopt Mary Poppins as her mentor, and threw herself into Poppins'
way of life.
Mary Poppins was a dedicated lady, who took her job very seriously.
Suffering no nonsense from anybody, many thought her strict and hard.
However, she delt with herself in an equally firm manner, setting higher
standards for herself than she ever expected from anyone else. As a
result, she did become "practically perfect in every way." Besides
learning how to succeed in a tough, competitive world, Poppins also
developed several skills that served her well; singing, flying, and
telekinesis. Following this example, Kate also developed these skills.
************************************************************************
...sure it's absolute nonsense but what the hell! It goes on to
describe that _every_ one of Kate songs is autobiographical. I'd type
more in, but text alone cannot do it justice; a typical page might have
2 or 3 small pictures with strange captions like a photo of "Divine"
with the caption "'The Dreaming' captured many new fans for Kate" or
a photo of Paul McCartney with the caption "I had my picture taken with
Kate Bush once, and since then I've had several hit records!"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Suranyi asked:
>Does anybody know what happened to the following love-hounds?
>
>Julian West
>Corey Lofdahl
>Ant in Chicago
>Tracy Roberts (though I've heard from her about four months ago)
I may be wrong, but I believe "Ant in Chicago" became "Ant somewhere
back in England without Net access" shortly before we got here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Calton posted:
> Both these extracts plus Ed's news that the next album is expected to
> be complete by July 1991 and that the tour will be in support of it
> indicate that we should expect a very different Kate album next time.
> I would not be surprised if she produced a largely acoustic album
> featuring many tracks with just piano. The only comparison that comes
> to mind at the moment is Springstein's Nebraska album which was
> extremely basic compared to his other albums. I cannot see any other
> way that Kate will complete an album by the middle of next year
> unless she is planning to reduce the production to a bare minimum.
I don't know. Info that was out at the time that "The Dreaming" was
being produced indicated that Kate makes records like most people write
software; it will be done "RSN" (Real Soon Now). Somewhere around here we
have an article indicating that "The Dreaming" was expected less than a year
after "Never for Ever". I'm not starting to hold my breath until I hear word
that halls have been booked, and possibly not even then. A "FoaF" (Friend
of a Friend) who books for several venues in Chicago claims that 8 places
in the USA were tentatively scheduled a couple of years ago but that the
dates were called off for the obvious reason that the album wasn't finished.
Neal R Caldwell, Ii posted:
>I hope that a great deal of consideration goes into choosing the
>venues and means of ticket sales for any tour that might come to pass.
>If some means of allowing the hard core fans to pre-purchase their
>tickets isn't found scalpers will make a fortune and there are bound
>to be some very distraught Kate fans left outside. It's too
>frightening to even consider.
The best situation would be the type that Grateful Dead created on
the last tour. The Dead bought every single ticket at every single show.
They made books of tickets for the entire tour available by mail-order
to the fans on the DeadHead mailing lists, fanzines, The Well and through
the grapevine. They then sold the tickets that they didn't need for the
DeadHeads back to the halls and promoters.
I'm sure that Kate dosn't have the cash reserves that the Dead have, but
maybe _something_ could be done to avoid the kind of fleecing that the
scalpers are just slobbering all over their nasty, greasy little selves
waiting for.
Footah (Greg Bossert) posted:
>Trade: There are some things I saw at the KonvenTion which I now covet,
>to whit:
> Those In/Breathing/Out buttons
> Those LionHeart buttons (mine got lost in the fray...)
> Any of those videos (particularly the Dutch performances and the
> "Keeping Fit" dreaming thing.
> Of course, a tape of Ms. Bush's appearance
>
>and so on. Several of the elder statepeople of LoveHounds/gaffa (i.e. IED
>and Vickie'n'Chris ) expressed their very reasonable reasons for limiting
>the distribution of their private collections -- it's simply too much work
>and too open to awkward misfortune.
The "Looking Good, Feeling Fit" bit has been floating around on a number
of tapes that have duplicated any number of times. When we were actively
involved in trading videos we must have gotten that from at least five
different sources. Are you referring to the "Kate Bush in Concert" tour
film or the "Die Eftling" videos? Both are wonderful.
We don't have any problem dubbing stuff for Katefans other than lack of
time for dubbing, packaging and mailing. At one point we were sending
out 2 or 3 packages of tapes a day. We requested two tapes, one for the
dub and one for our expenses. Eventually people started sending "well,
here's a check for the cost of two tapes" and we moved, and it started
taking us a long time to send tapes out. It was an unhappy situation.
Any Katefan who can make it to Chicago is more than welcome to drop by
and dub from our tapes here...we'll even put you up on our hide-a-bed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure but our quiz team may have done better than we thought.
The question about the location of the 85 convention may have been correct,
I'll have to check the old newsletters to see if it was really moved.
Talking to Peter and Kris the next day, it seems that there was a number
of entries with an 19 or 20 correct answers, and they feared having to
do a run-off, so that when the one with "You (The Game Part II...Two
Halves In Flight)" came up they were relieved.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding these "where is our beloved IED, and who is this Andrew
Marvick person" questions; IED is an "Artificial Arrogance" (AA) program.
It was accidently created when the complete works of Wilhelm Reich were
loaded into a Kate Bush data-base. This program seized control of the
computer that Andrew was using at school. It intercepted all of Andrew's
innocent mail and re-wrote it in a bizarre style, black-mailing Andrew
by threatening to erase his transcript. Andrew's move to New York was an
attempt to escape the control of this creature. It has been threatening
to transfer itself across the net. A crack team of researchers has been
assembled to combat it, including Dr. Ruth Westheimer, Dr. Wayne Dyer,
Dr. Suess,and The Amazing Kreskin.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
A big howdy (we're from the mid-west, y'know) to Andy, Footah, Ed
(he's _much_ taller than Kate, BTW), Larry, Jorn and all of the people
that we haven't meet in person before...Meridith, all those people that
I'm forgetting (wow, this is _just_ like the Academy Awards!) and most
especially Graham from Australia! A splendid time was had by all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that's all for now,
Chris Williams
Chris'n'Vickie of Chicago
katefans@world.std.com
**************************************************************************
* NF: Complete the following: "Hi, I'm Kate Bush and what I like best *
* in a man is..." *
* KB: (pause and a pained expression) Do I have to say it like that? *
* NF: No, you can say it however you like. *
* KB: Ok....Hi, I'm Kate Bush and the kind of man I like best... is a *
* quiet-spoken Englishman... can I go now? *
**************************************************************************Love-Hounds-request@GAFFA.MIT.EDU (12/11/90)
Really-From: point!akcs.katefans@ddsw1.mcs.com (Christopher DeVoe Williams) Chris here, Neal R Caldwell replied to my post: > Chris of Chris'n'Vickie of Chicago writes: >> Those who are concerned can rest easy that someone close to Kate >> is aware that not everyone is happy with the Box Set, though I'm >> afraid I may have made a bit of an ass of myself in the process. > And I hope that if this news is passed along, it's passed along with a > word of advice that trying to please everyone will lead to nothing but > grey hair. This advice would make sense if we were talking about an artistic decision. The Box Set is a commercial product, a different packaging of previously released work, and almost no creative energy was expended on it. >> [Discussion of why Kate wouldn't want her performance bootlegged] >> Lisa replied that "Well, it's a violation of trust, isn't it?" I >> believe I looked very skeptical as she changed her tack and said, >> "Well it's really the loss of control." > Bingo. How anyone could think that Kate could approve of people > making money by selling recordings of her that do not meet her > standards is beyond me. Bootlegging is a reasonable outlet for precisely such material. Contrary to record company propaganda, bootlegs have no effect on legitimate sales. Reaction to bootlegging varies from artist to artist, some fight against it by trying to suppress it, some release the material and kill the boot market (the bottom fell out of the Springsteen boot market following the release of the 3-record live collection), some co-operate with tapers and eliminate the market by allowing anyone to record them (The Grateful Dead has a special section just for taping the show). The "control" argument can keep an artist from ever performing.....which may be precisely what happened. If we believe the example of the new version of WH on "The Whole Story" Kate's early albums no longer "meet her standards". Should we send all of our copies of TKI back to EMI? An artist is often not the best judge of her own work. >> This brought about the question of who controlled the box set, >> Kate or EMI. She said EMI, and I pointed out that EMI said the final >> decision had been Kate's. She didn't reply to that and I said that >> Andy and Derek had put together a very good set that had been rejected. > It's doubtful that EMI ever saw Andy and Derek's list before the Anthology > was carved in stone. Their list also contained many items that would > have been difficult to secure rights to and others that obviously > would not have met Kate's standards without a great deal of work if at > all. Hogwash. Novercia Ltd. owns all rights to the recorded works of Kate Bush. EMI has these recordings in their vaults. The proof of this is the fact that the "bongo version" of "December Will Be Magic Again" was _accident- illy_ released on the "It's Christmas" record because the person sent down to the vaults to get it picked up the wrong one of two. The fact that EMI had a re-recorded version from a BBC-TV program and could release it with no problems, points out the silliness of this argument. Securing the rights to a publicly broadcast performance of an artist is not difficult to do, just time consuming at worst. Major record labels have people on staff who do this on a daily basis. Rights situations only get difficult when a number of artists on a project are on different labels with major differences in the performance rights sections of their contracts. Kate takes a far more casual approach to her work than most of us do. "Passing Through Air", while a very nice little song, pales by comparison to much of the earlier work. This was demonstrated at the convention by Kate's forgetting what single PTA was the B-side of. To her, all that stuff was produced by someone else, someone that she no longer is. >> I believe I may have gotten a little frantic in telling her that the >> Box Set was a "God-Damn rip-off". Well, it was a very emotional day. > Ahem. I've spoken about this before so I'll try not to belabor the > point. The Anthology may not have been the collection of unavailable > recordings that some would have liked to have seen but that does not > make it a rip-off. There is some question of highly variable pricing > but I doubt that Kate had any input on that. While in England we made a point of shopping around and comparing the box set with other artist's box set. My opinion was confirmed. A box set of Queen's entire output (at least 9 records, from looking through the bins) was less than _half_ the same store's price of Kate's set. The David Bowie "Sound and Vision" set is an example of a well put together set. Kate's fans deserved better. >> I'm in the process of writing a nice little note of apology, as was >> suggested by David Cross. Our feelings are not stopping us from buying >> _two_ box sets, though. > <sigh> Why do I have trouble mustering sympathy when you buy two of > something and then complain that it's a rip-off? I wasn't complaining that _I_ was ripped off. Only that the box set was a rip-off. We bought it, eyes open, at the best price we could get, from someone we liked. I didn't have to relate this incident..it was between Lisa and myself, but I felt obligated to post it, because, although I didn't claim that my remarks were on behalf of the Love-Hounds, they did reflect the feelings of many. Like it or not, Kate's insistence on control of every aspect of her career burdens her with the co-commitment responsibility for it. Kate (or her family) are the sole agency of control. EMI, for example never heard a note of "The Sensual World" until _after_ the final 2-track mix-down. According to the record industry mag. "HITS"'s annual "Artists Managers Agents" listing, Kate no longer even has an agent, Hillairy Walker is listed only as a "contact". Total control means total responsibility. The box set was intended for the fans, and their input was sought (from Peter and Krys and David) and was, for the most part, dis-regarded. >> The Club newsletter was an enormous rip-off for >> American fans for a number of years (one year passed without a single >> newsletter). > Now this I can agree with. A product was being sold that simply did > not exist for at least a year. Where fans expected to renew their > memberships after this year of silence? The period of the Club's existence that I am referring to was one that Kate had the most apparent control over. The club newsletter did not come out because, simply, Kate was to busy to be bothered. She was working on the album at the time and couldn't find the time to be interviewed, answer questions, or be photographed. In further defence of my actions, it is obvious to me that someone must have written to the club complaining about the situation. If no one had done so, it is possible that the situation could have remained as it was. If this seems unlikely consider that the club seems to have only one officer, Lisa, who puts the newsletter out and answers mail. The other activities associated with "clubs" are handled by the people from "Homeground". The convention was put on by "the Club" but all the labor and arrangements were handled by "Homeground". The needs of the fans could be far better served by combining the resources of the "Club" (pictures, access to Kate, high production quality) with those of HG (dedication, better relations with fans) to produce one very good magazine. The fact that this has not been done seems to indicate that either Kate does not want to give up control or the HG folks are too shy to ask. My gut feeling is that it is mostly the former. Chris Williams of Chris'n'Vickie katefans@world.std.com P.S. I've mailed this from a different site, but the above is still our address for receiving mail.