Jim wrote:
> I don't intend to start a flame war (honestly), but I did want >to respond
to some of the more benign, sugar-coated >interpretations of Joni's motives
behind the MOA comment >with my far more critical one.
It's interesting, Jim, that you are concerned about expressing your critical
opinion here, yet you yourself diss the opinions of myself and some others
by calling them "benign" and "sugar-coated".
> I bought MOA when it first arrived, and was immediately >unimpressed with
Joni's attitude towards her audience, as >exhibited in that moment. It left
a bad taste in my mouth >from the beginning. Say what you will about the Van
Gogh >comment, but it comes from a very conceited point of view, >is
delivered with holier-than-thou exasperation, and is most >definitely a "put
down" of the audience.
I guess it's unfortunate that the MOA comment gave you a bad opinion of her.
Steve and I, who were there, have attempted to put it into perspective and
context but I guess that's "sugar-coating" to some people. I give respect
and consideration to your "in-person" experience of the Boston Commons show
and don't say you are slanting what happened there. It works both ways.
You don't have to put down someone else's experience to make room for your
own, you know. We can debate here or express our opinions, hopefully
without disrespecting the person(s) expressing it.
Kakki, not meaning to start a flame war and going to sit in the corner now
