chris@world.std.COM (Chris'n'Vickie of Kansas City) (12/20/89)
Hello, Chris here. First a review from "Hi-Fi News and Record Review"
(the British publication) the Dec. issue.
Kate Bush
The Sensual World
EMI CDP 7930 7 82
At a private playback party which Kate Bush held earlier this summer, the
audience of friends and colleagues was stunned into silence by the end of
the first tape. Among those present was Nigel Kennedy, who plays on the
album, and the Trio Bulgarka, there to here what Kate had done with their
vocals. Kate looked genuinely surprised at the strength of everyones
reaction, but she does have an uncanny ability to move the soul. "Sensual
World" may not have the obvious singles and instant appeal of "The Hounds
Of Love" but it washes over you like a great wave. Some tracks, like
"Rocket's Tale" include some surprisingly heavy guitar from Dave Gilmour-
the man who introduced her to EMI. Other tracks are haunted by Davy
Spillane's Uillean Pipes. The mixture of old and new works perfectly. The
songs are less clearly structured than those on the last album. At times
they seem to meander aimlessly, as with the eerie title track: but Kate
Bush is a remarkable woman and this is a remarkable album. [ A : 1* ]
( "A" is for "Very Good" - their best rating - for recording,
"1" is also for "Very Good" - for performance, with a star
"denotes outstanding quality" )
They also have a nice interview with Nigel Kennedy.
A review from "New Hi-Fi Sound" (also British) Nov. issue:
LP
Kate Bush: The Sensual World
EMI EMD 1010
Although neither a continuous piece, nor obiously conceptual, "The
Sensual World" takes its lead from the vocal and textural experiments on
side two of Kate Bush's last album, "The Hounds Of Love".
To this end she has looked to the folk scene, currently and rather
ironically the best place to find real instrumental innovation these days.
Subsequently employed have been the services of bouzouki player Donal
Lunny (ex member of the superb Bothy Band and last heard on Elvis Costello's
"Spike" LP); Uilleann pipe player Davy Spillane (a prime mover behind Enya's
"Watermark" album); Celtic harp player Alan Stivell; and her own brother
Paddy Bush, who plays mandolin, whips (!) and a variety of obscure wind and
stringed instruments.
She has also used Trio Bulgarka, a group of female Bulgarian singers
whose shrill, wavering tones Bush contrives to imitate, often to rather
embarrasing effect, on parts of the LP.
Such a radical lineup of talent is augmented by violinist Nigel Kennedy
and original Bush mentor, guitarist Dave Gilmour, sounding far sharper than
on recent Pink Floyd work. With these and arrangers like Michael Nyman, it's
little surprise that "The Sensual World" boasts some extreme sounds and ideas.
Nor that at times it fails pretty dramatically.
The title track is quite superb. Opening with a peal of church bells and a
great sweep of multi-layered keyboards, it simply builds and builds over a
relentless, plodding beat. Bush half-chants a lyric that repeats and re-
iterates unconnected lines until they develop into a powerful and erotic
Mantra. The debut single from the album, it repays repeated listenings if
only for wondering at how someone can glue such an expansive arrangement so
securely simply by moaning 'mmh,yes' at the end of each line. Draw your own
conclusions from that one.
"The Fog" is similarly fascinating. Bush compares the shock of first love
to a childhood swimming lesson, her real-life father intoning the haunting
phrase: 'Just put your feet down, child, because you're all grown up now'.
The tune develops from Davy Spillane's solo whistles into a middle section
of quite awesome beauty; Nigel Kennedy's tortuously brilliant fiddle-playing
pierces a great orchestral swell.
The rest of the album, inventive though it may be, never quite matches the
power of these two tracks. Much of the fault lies with the underlying tone of
naivety and rural conservatism which seems to pervade the whole recording.
"Deeper Understanding", a song about a child's obsession with a home com-
puter is as weak and shallow as it's theme is hackneyed. And almost for the
first time ever - on a song entitled "Between A Man And A Woman" - Kate
displays a frighting lack of nous about love and romance. 'It's so hard for
love to stay together,' she sings, 'with the modern western pressures'- she
seems to be witnessing, rather than experiencing, that pressure, however.
Contrast this song with her classic "Running Up That Hill", and it's
easy to wonder whether Kate - the reclusive country girl, a star since her
early teens - gets her ideas from life or from some very good books.
"Never Be Mine" restores some of the faith in her extraordinary talant.
It's first verse - an account of walking home through the burning stubble
and seeing her lover's face 'ghostly in the smoke' - could only be plucked
from real life, and brilliantly underlines the sense of a love lost in the
very moment that it's won. The vocal work of the Trio Bulgarka and the
mournful tones of Spillane's Uilleann pipes combine quite beautifully here.
"The Sensual World" is a highly sophisticated musical tapestry which will
take dozens of listenings to unravel and appreciate. At this stage, though,
it seems to lack the edge and sheer musical power of "The Hounds Of Love",
and depicts an artist, who for all her will to experiment, has become just
a little too introverted and self-obsessed.
Martin Townsend
********************************************************************************
* OPINION WARNING!!! OPINION WARNING!!! OPINION WARNING!!! OPINION WARNING!!! *
********************************************************************************
* Warning! The following is an opinion! (This warning is provided as a *
* public service for those unable to tell.)*
********************************************************************************
A note re: Drukman; the above review is an example of what is called
"criticism". The reviewer likes some things about the album and dislikes
others. Some of his statements are valid, and the ones that are not are
mostly a result of ignorance. The part about her being "too introverted
and self-obsessed" is an example of what is called "constructive criticism".
It is an arguably valid statement. "Reaching Out is SHIT!", while
arguable (as has been demonstrated ad infinitum), is not what could be
"constructive" even by the the most desperate critic. Calling something
"Shit" is an example of verbel bankruptcy. Some people on .gaffa have stated
that they like Drukman's typing (I just can't dignify it as _writing_).
My own thoughts are that these folks just like to see him goad IED, so
IED will get amusingly irritated. These folks probably appreciate the
Three Stooges too. Drukman can't possibly be as big a jerk as he seems
to be, as it is doubtful anyone like that could have survived adolecence.
He has stated that the model for his alleged "style" is the british music
press (NME, Melody Maker, Sounds etc., one supposes). I can't imagine a
more worthless and twisted role model than that pile of posers.
I've avoided most direct quotes from Drukman's drivel as any attempt
in the past, by anyone, to quote Drukman, no matter how completely,
has been greeted by cries of "out of context" form him. I've gone
back through past listings and in all cases _I've_ found the quotes have
been well representive of the babble they've been taken from.
Drukman,get a life.
Preferably your own, rather than Julie Burchell's.*
About Drukman's assertation that, if Kate was to make a song with
crunching guitars that could be called "Heavy Metal"...in one of his
attempts to slam "Reachig Out", that such a song would also be "Shit".
It is possible that Kate might, at some point, do a song that could be
called Heavy Metal. Note the presence of Jimmy Bain of "Dio" on "Leave It
Open". I despise HM. However if Kate did HM she would undoubtedly do HM
well. The worst part about all this, is that I'm told that Drukman's
intent is allegedly "humorous". That is so sad. Not one word of his has
been even slightly funny. I've read past love-hounds postings and have
found many funny things from many people. Not Drukman. Not unless you
find systematic negativeity, hatred and spite rib-tickling.
Well, I've said my piece. I have no intention to participate in a flame
war. Vickie, reading this, has told me that this is probably not a good idea
for a first posting to be like this, but I had to get this out. Drukman has
slammed too many good people for me not to say something as soon as I could.
I've met a lot of Kate fans and generally they've been friendly introverts.
I don't think many of these people could respond to Drukman with the proper
level of vitriol necessary. Any hateful messages directed to me by Drukman
will be ignored. If he'd like to act like a civilized human being, we could
correspond. In his vist to Kansas City, (a mythical place somewhere between
Boston and California) Joe Turner (Hi Joe!) asserted that Jon Drukman is,
in fact, a nice guy. Andy is lucky to have IED as an alter-ego. Pompous?,
Yes. Overbearing?, Maybe so. But it doesn't matter what IED says, as I know
Andy as well. Drukman hasn't given himself an exit. I'll say no more, for
now, on the subject of Drukman. I intend for future postings to much more
constructive. About "red chairs"...can you say ... tautotology? Can you
say ... metaphysical bullshit? Maybe this can be spun off to a new newsgroup
rec.silly.nonsense?
*Julie Burchell: British music writer- see Pete Townsends "Jules & Jules"
and her review of "Never for Ever" entitled "Kate Grates".
********************************************************************************
* Disclaimer: These opinions are my own. They are not necessarly *
* shared by Vickie. And vise-versa. So there. *
********************************************************************************
Opinion over.
Chris Williams of,
Chris'n'Vickiescarlett@WATSERV1.WATERLOO.EDU (B. Scarlett) (12/21/89)
In article <8912200826.AA25278@world.std.com> chris@world.std.COM (Chris'n'Vickie of Kansas City) writes: [deleted] > These folks probably appreciate the Three Stooges too. I like the Stooges. [deleted] Lookie here, more drivel being spewed forth by self-righteous KT-zealots. Thanks C'n'V of KC for sharing your opinions with the Net but, we already have more pomp...er interesting IE|>isms than we know what to do with. Oh yeah, here's a big :-) for you. -- Forgive me Father, for I have sinned Scarlett@watserv1 Father it was either me or him, U. of Waterloo Father could we turn back the clock, Waterloo, Canada I never meant to drop the concrete block.
jsd@GAFFA.MIT.EDU (Jon Drukman) (12/23/89)
From: chris@world.std.com (Chris'n'Vickie of Kansas City) > A note re: Drukman; the above review is an example of what is called >"criticism". The reviewer likes some things about the album and dislikes >others. Some of his statements are valid, and the ones that are not are >mostly a result of ignorance. The part about her being "too introverted >and self-obsessed" is an example of what is called "constructive criticism". Is it? What right does this bonehead, who didn't even do enough research to find out that "The Sensual World" (the song) was based on Ulysses by James Joyce, have to criticize Kate's personality? Maybe he should've said the SONGS were too introverted and self-obsessed. Personally I couldn't care less if Kate was a nazi skinhead and tortured gerbils in her spare time. The music is foremost. > It is an arguably valid statement. "Reaching Out is SHIT!", while >arguable (as has been demonstrated ad infinitum), is not what could be >"constructive" even by the the most desperate critic. Calling something >"Shit" is an example of verbel bankruptcy. Some people on .gaffa have stated >that they like Drukman's typing (I just can't dignify it as _writing_). I started out providing a hundred reasons why Reaching Out didn't appeal to me, and I degenerated into merely calling it "shit" when it seemed that anything, no matter how personally reasonable it seemed to me, was getting this response: "your opinions are SHIT!" If you really really want, I'll go into the Gaffan archives and pull out my original critiques of the song. > My own thoughts are that these folks just like to see him goad IED, so >IED will get amusingly irritated. These folks probably appreciate the >Three Stooges too. Drukman can't possibly be as big a jerk as he seems >to be, as it is doubtful anyone like that could have survived adolecence. >He has stated that the model for his alleged "style" is the british music >press (NME, Melody Maker, Sounds etc., one supposes). I can't imagine a >more worthless and twisted role model than that pile of posers. How about Wilhelm Reich? (actually, I shouldn't say that - I kinda like the guy.) Anyways, listen up, my pathetic little fool. While attempting not to descend to my vulgar level, you have walked right into the trap by insulting my ability to cope with the real world. Obviously, it is thee, not me, with the reality-grasping problems. You're right, I'm not as big a jerk as I seem to be, although you might fit the job requirement nicely. I started out a while ago trying to have a reasonable discussion about the flaws that I perceive in Kate's latest offering. A few malcontents seemed to think that this sort of behavior was sacrilege and not to be condoned in a forum allegedly created to discuss this very topic. Eventually, it became very easy to piss off a few people with a few simple, yet powerful, words. I thought everyone was having a good laugh and getting into the spirit of things. If you think the level of abuse currently flying is something, you shoulda been here a few years ago, that's all I can say. As for the British Music Press, they consistently entertain me. So far, you have not. You can add SPY Magazine, Hunter S. Thompson and The Weekly World News to the list of my influences, by the way. > I've avoided most direct quotes from Drukman's drivel as any attempt >in the past, by anyone, to quote Drukman, no matter how completely, >has been greeted by cries of "out of context" form him. I've gone >back through past listings and in all cases _I've_ found the quotes have >been well representive of the babble they've been taken from. > Drukman,get a life. Look, I'm perfectly willing to discuss anything about Kate you'd care to mention in an adult, mature fashion, but if you're going to start spouting vacuous, banal and worst of all, PLAIGIARIZED insults at me, then maybe I should just respond in kind. Nah, I've no wish to be contaminated by your vapidity. > Preferably your own, rather than Julie Burchell's.* > *Julie Burchell: British music writer- see Pete Townsends "Jules & Jules" > and her review of "Never for Ever" entitled "Kate Grates". I've moved your footnote up here because I want to attack this point right away. For one thing, I've heard that Burchell is a nasty little woman, and she sounds like my dream girl, although I haven't read any of her stuff. I tried to find a review of "Never For Ever" called "Kate Grates" but the one I found was written by someone named "Ronnie Gurr," so unless we're dealing with an absolutely monumental printing error, you've got your facts messed up. I suppose the article could have been printed under a pseudonym... Anyway, the review here seems to be mostly positive, although the reviewer says things like "Kate annoys me enough to listen closely, whether that's good or bad I know not." This is a really cool thing to say, in my opinion, because it's exactly the way I feel about TSW, except that I would use the word "disappoints" rather than "annoys." So much potential... >called Heavy Metal. Note the presence of Jimmy Bain of "Dio" on "Leave It >Open". This is a truly ridiculous argument. "Leave it Open" is not a heavy metal song, by any stretch of the imagination. You might as well say that "Experiment IV" is a piece of classical music because the violin solo is played by a fellow who plays classical music! Sloppy thinking such as this is not going to win you any points. >well. The worst part about all this, is that I'm told that Drukman's >intent is allegedly "humorous". That is so sad. Not one word of his >has been even slightly funny. I've read past love-hounds postings and >have found many funny things from many people. Not Drukman. Not >unless you find systematic negativeity, hatred and spite >rib-tickling. You really should learn to lighten up, you'll live longer. I bear no malice to ANYONE on this list. Sometimes the things said anger me, and I respond in an angry fashion. I would say from this venomous poison-pen attack that YOU are the one with "systematic negativity, hatred and spite." Besides, I've seen a few letters (the recent one from Vishal was very well timed! thanks!) that say I'm useful and fun to have around. Maybe you could start a petition? > Well, I've said my piece. I have no intention to participate in a flame >war. Vickie, reading this, has told me that this is probably not a good idea >for a first posting to be like this, but I had to get this out. Drukman has >slammed too many good people for me not to say something as soon as I could. Having no intention to participate in a flame war and then flaming someone violently does not seem very consistent to me. I never slam people. I slam their opinions and thoughts. I can't help it, it's a curse. IED has said that he will violently defend Kate from all mud-slingers, so why don't you go after him for "slamming too many good people"? Is it because that you agree with him, and not me? Hmmm... > I've met a lot of Kate fans and generally they've been friendly introverts. >I don't think many of these people could respond to Drukman with the proper >level of vitriol necessary. Any hateful messages directed to me by Drukman >will be ignored. If he'd like to act like a civilized human being, we could >correspond. In his vist to Kansas City, (a mythical place somewhere between >Boston and California) Joe Turner (Hi Joe!) asserted that Jon Drukman is, >in fact, a nice guy. Andy is lucky to have IED as an alter-ego. Pompous?, >Yes. Overbearing?, Maybe so. But it doesn't matter what IED says, as I know >Andy as well. Drukman hasn't given himself an exit. I'll say no more, for >now, on the subject of Drukman. I'm beginning to think that you're not really the basket case that you have projected throughout this blather. I'm a friendly guy, you oughta try to get to know me before destroying me. I re-assert my willingness to discuss any topic in a reasonable fashion, but if I don't like something (whether it be by Kate or anyone else), I'm not going to sugar- coat my thoughts because someone might disagree with them. As for the "friendly introverts" out there, I will say the exact same thing that IED has been saying over and over: I am infringing NOBODY'S rights. They can respond any way they damn well please, and if they are scared that they might be taken to task for their fuzzy logic, then that is THEIR problem and NOT MINE. The funniest part about your whole ramble (oh dear - I admitted that I found it entertaining - so much for my credibility :-) is that you say that it doesn't matter what IED says because you know Andy. Maybe you should try to get to know Jon before you freak out over what jsd@gaffa has to say. Oh I suppose that's just too much effort. I'm saying stuff you don't agree with, so you attack the person who says it rather than what's been said. (Footnote: IED and Andy are not as close, personalitywise, as me & my mail message personae are. that is to say, I'm not that different from what you see on the net... Maybe a bit cuter...) That's all for now. If you (or anyone else) can overcome your "friendly introversion" enough, get in touch with me. I won't bite. Much. ---------------------------- And now, some fun things from the "Kate Grates" article... "You don't have to be a neurotic, well-to-do airy-fairy dreamer to like Kate Bush but it probably helps." "By no stretch of the imagination could one describe Bush and her music as inspiring... "Never For Ever" sounds like one of the most empty, dull packets of poop one could ever hope to avoid." +---------------------- Is there any ESCAPE from NOISE? ----------------------+ | | |\ | jsd@gaffa.mit.edu | "Suck on this, | | \|on |/rukman | jsd@umass.bitnet | planet of noise bimbo!" | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
henrik@EDDIE.MIT.EDU (Larry DeLuca) (12/24/89)
The problem with heated discussions is that it is entirely too easy to end up defending a point you never intended to make much more strongly than you intended to in the first place. larry...