Yes it was very clever, and remarkably representative, L, once you penetrated what was going on in that little girly sing-song. Proved a sensational teaching aid.
B
> On 22 Nov 2014, at 3:45 am, Lawrence Upton <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I am never forget watching Kate Bush singing Wuthering heights whenever I
> could because I found it rewarding to do so, though that had little to do
> with music; but I was often working long hours and didnt even then keep up
> with what was going on. I was only vaguely aware of follow ups
> Some time later I was rather dismissive of my girlfriend's daughters
> enthusiasm for Ms Bush. I really can't get back into that state of mind but
> I had very good verbal control over my backside.... Many years later I paid
> attention to Kate Bush. While I did not go out and buy stuff etc I was
> struck by how inventive and witty she is; and I now rate her rather highly
>
>
> L
>
>
>
>> On 21 November 2014 16:23, Douglas Barbour <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Well, Ive become less of a Doors fan over the years (sorry Bill).
>>
>> Yes, to what Sheila does with the lyric tradition, Tim, 'experimental
>> lyric' is good; I call it 'anti-lyric' as well....
>>
>> At the moment, among recent bands, I really like JJ Grey &Mofro (organ
>> fine there too), & otherwise don't hear as much of the young bands, was
>> only really taken back in the 90s by the still great Cowboy Junkies...
>>
>> You know, it's hard to remember clearly just who I listened to the most
>> back then: Beatles, of course, the Stones, the Byrds, Dylan, & then as they
>> came along, Young, Cohen, Mitchell, Brown, the Band, Janis, the Allmans
>> (more than the Dead, whom I now am getting into, this late) & on.
>>
>> All while deep into jazz, & also modern (mostly) classical.
>>
>> So, of course, I enjoyed the Doors, a bit, but they didn't hold my ears
>> the way many others did. And some I missed until they were well into their
>> careers & then realized, oh yeah, they're good, too. How you get into the
>> ones you choose is ambiguous, random, often wholly contingent...
>>
>> Doug
>> On Nov 21, 2014, at 7:59 AM, Tim Allen <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Sheila and Doug and Bill. I only thought of it later, but actually,
>> at the time I wasn't such a Doors fan as many, my appreciation came a few
>> years after. I didn't like what I considered to be Morrison's posing and
>> rock-star image etc - my favourite American band then was definitely the
>> Byrds. Really started listening to the Doors because of the great organ and
>> realised at some point that Morrison was for real.
>>>
>>> Oh, mentioned you a few times recently Sheila on the Britpo list where a
>> discussion has been going on about lyric. I suggested that your poetry was
>> an example of experimental lyric, if there was such a thing.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Tim A.
>>>
>>>> On 20 Nov 2014, at 17:43, Sheila Murphy wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Tim, your observations about the Stones and the Doors ring true with
>> me. I
>>>> heard that husky voice of Jim's on the car radio the other day and all
>> the
>>>> words just went through me, despite the ironic distancing that was
>>>> positioned in his mode of delivery. You've said this perfectly. sheila
>>>
>>
>> Douglas Barbour
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> Recent publications: (With Sheila E Murphy) Continuations & Continuation 2
>> (UofAPress).
>> Recording Dates (Rubicon Press).
>>
>> that we are only
>> as we find out we are
>>
>> Charles Olson
>>
>
|