In a very thoughtful post, Kakki wrote (largely in defense of Joni, and
please forgive my failure to repeat the entire earlier contexts within which
these remarks were addressed):
"I don't know MG, it seems she has had this challenge to call herself a
feminist thrust in her face for years and maybe she has become exasperated
with repeatedly addressing it. I agree her words written on the flat
dimension of the page sound more dismissive than what we would expect of
her. In many past interviews she has articulated her views on the subject
more thoughtfully."
I agree with this concept very strongly. First, I have found that one can
rarely completely trust what one reads in the press or sees and hears on
other media. And even if the quote was both accurate and presented in
context, I think it rather obviously means that she does not consider herself
- and would prefer that others not consider her - one who is obsessed with
the issue or aligned with the more radical views of the politically visible
leaders of the movement. It is human nature that those most obsessed with an
issue - and in many cases most fanatical - gravitate to positions of
leadership in said areas (wherein they often fail to fairly represent the
more moderate views of most others who believe in the basic cause). Moreover,
they often misrepresent conditions, abuse statistics (worse than damned lies)
and attribute their own radical views to the entire membership. It is ironic
that those who are so poorly represented (or misrepresented) so often fail to
decry the misrepresentations of the self-acclaimed leadership, but instead
lash out at those who would criticize said leaders' misrepresentations. "The
best lack conviction, given some time to think, and the worst are full of
passion without mercy......... We are all hopelessly oppressed cowards". As
for herself, my sense is that she often makes generalizations - some
stereotypical in nature - that are by their nature politically incorrect in
the current social environment. Inevitable. She is a keenly observant person,
whose stock in trade is identifiying things (situations, foibles, virtues,
feelings) common to her and us all, and sharing them - even the warts -
through her art. That's part of who she is. It is bound occasionally to show
up in interviews as well as in her art. If we can't handle the truth,
well......
"I have also sometimes cringed when she has appeared to diss other female
artists because it just seems mean".
Yes. There is a tinge of bitterness (perhaps more than a tinge there) of a
type that is unbecoming when it appears in the greats. It is not as though
Joni is unrecognized at this point. The majority of the smartest, most gifted
and most sensitive artists, critics and fans have recognized her as their
"favorite child" (and I do not mean favorite daughter) - she would do best to
wear that with a quiet, peaceful pride. (Far better for John Mellenkamp to
assert "I do not want to sound mean, but there is only one female artist"
than for her to do so). It is not possible to claim both that audience and
the broader masses - which would she rather have ? Too many years of being
underappreciated may have taken a toll - I trust she will grow out of that
(if she has not already).
"Then again, some interviewers have
wanted her to lump her in with artists like Madonna. Nothing against
Madonna, but can you blame her for wanting to dissassociate herself from
Madonna's artistic visions? "Case of You" simply doesn't compare to "Like a
Virgin" and there's no point trying to lump them together in one big generic
female singer songwriter pigeonhole."
Come on.... not a real interviewer.
"There's the problem. Most people don't objectively think of a generic and
innocuous dictionary definition when they hear the term "feminist" or any
other label. They see it through their own interpretation and perspective.
I can just see Joni calling herself a feminist and then having the various
factions of feminism attacking her for not being a "true" feminist.I've
always thought of her as a humanist and an individualist. But, as
colin pointed out, even calling herself a humanist
is fraught with misinterpretation because in England and also in parts of
the U.S. it is equated with athiesm. Joni's not an athiest so those who now
claim the term "humanist" would probably take her to task for appropriating
"their" term."
Bravo ! (And the lesson may be 'better to disavow than to avow')
"Marcel also made a good point that if she affiliates with a particular
label, then the politically active gatekeepers of that label would probably
pressure her to be appearing at their events and perhaps taking on certain
aspects of their agenda to which she may disagree. What a hassle, really,
and I don't think any of us would want to be put in such a position
ourselves."
I think she already has been so imposed upon, many times, for many causes,
some of them wrong (e.g., Hurricane).
"I've always maintained that she has done her part in advancing
the best and truest aspects of humanism, feminism and liberalism and I don't
think she owes anyone more."
Hear, Hear, Kakki !!
Bob S.
