[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Finally after a week I have a chance to post a few comments about last week's > NY fest at Judy's Chelsea in NY. I had other plans cancelled, and late in the > week realized I really ought to go and meet some JMDL'ers, so I got in touch > with David Lahm by e-mail, confessed my lateness to and ignorance of the > party plans, etc, but he extended a warm welcome anyway, and I was starting > to feel I would be right at home, and sure, I could bring my guitar even > though I wasn't prepared to play anything formal. I figured it was really > nice of him to go out and rent space in Manhattan for a gathering like this, > so that we could all get together and meet each other and play some on an > informal basis, etc. He must have thought it was pretty cute, and figured > he'd play along with my naivete' by not telling me JC's was his place. So, I > find out when I get there Saturday afternoon, and right off the bat I get to > listen to him play a few songs and oops - no wonder it's his place (or is it > really Judy's - I know they're in this together, but in my family I have > limited rights of ownership) - he's a real musician ! And David's real nice, > and asks me if I plan to play, and I say not really, but if someone wants to > sing California I'll try to put on a JT style accompaniment that I started to > figure out last night, if the timing is right or whatever. So, for the next > six hours I get to meet a bunch of JMDL'ers in person (my first such group - > it was exciting for me to meet you all - especially David, Rose, Sue, > Nikki, Kay (?), Debra and Roberto - another musical talent). I also have the > honor to meet Judy, who has a few opinions of her own, I gather :-), and who > wasn't too interested in the fact that I was a Joni Mitchell fan, but warmed > right up when I mentioned I had enjoyed seeing Peter Allen in a cabaret about > 25 years ago - and then proceeded to remind me where I had seen him (at a > place called Reno Sweeney's, in NY). "How'd you know that" I asked, and she > smiled sweetly (but with perhaps just the slightest hint of deserved > condescension) and replied "well, I am in the business". ;-) And, I really > enjoyed all the music, as well. And at night, there are real patrons as well > as us JMDL'ers, and near the end David nudges Alison up there to sing > California and then tells her that I am going to accompany her on the guitar > (pretty sneaky - I assume Alison thinks David's going to put some pretty > piano line on the song). Anyway, Alison sings the song so well it distracts > me, and I miss about half the notes, I think :-( - yeah, that must have been > why ;-) - but everyone seems to agree with me about what a nice job Alison > did, so there is applause at the end anyway. Alison - if there is a next > time, I promise to get it all right, now that I have finished learning it. > Anyway, you were terrific. > > Which brings me to the other stuff. Sue McNamara (of JMDL guitar TAB creator > fame - great job there by you, Sue, and by the other tab posters - and > "doesn't it feel good" ;-) to get a little public recognition for the really > wonderful job you have done), in an earlier post, said > > "As far as Joni is concerned, if she had said I am not a feminist, I'm a > humanist, it might not have hurt so much, but as much as I love the > woman, Joni is a Joni-ist. Her goal was/is to further the art, so > that didn't leave too much time to support other women (read > competition). Her philosophies seem very power-oriented (in an > individualistic way [dogeatdog]). David Crosby said she was as shy > as Mussolini and Dylan called her a man!! :-) ha ha. She is > definitely not a feminist (in my opinion). " > > Well, I agree and yet I disagree. Joni does appear to be an egoist (there's > that label thing again), by which I mean she has a big ego, and that is not > in my mind's eye a negative. It is, rather, a necessary evil of sorts (sort > of like captialism, in my opinion). It is a driver (not the only one, of > course) of performance, creativity and excellence, but it can be destructive > if allowed to get out of control and dominate. And she knows it. She has > confessed over and over of her wrestling with it, of her struggle for higher > achievement, etc. etc. Need I quote the lines ? I don't think I have to for > this list. However, is that necessarily mutually exclusive with being a > feminist ? Again, this may depend on definitions and semantics, but I don't > think so. Surely the self anointed leaders of the feminist movement have been > egoists - or worse, in my opinion - and talk about a philosophy oriented > toward power ! If feminism is "the doctrine advocating social, political and > all other rights of women equal to those of men" (Random House Unabridged), > then Joni probably is a feminist if that term is defined as 1) one who agrees > with or morally supports the doctrine. If to be a feminist 2) one must be > politically active in support of the doctrine, or must agree with political > extensions of the doctrine - such as separate as well as equal, or better > than equal, or entitled to affirmative action to impose some sort of supposed > statistical equality, or entitled to preferential treatment in the job market > because of such status - then I suppose she is not. When she said she is not, > I suspect she was applying the second definition to the term, rather than the > first. And I suspect that you may have been, too. Anyway, I prefer the first > definition, myself, so that I can pretend to think of myself as a feminist, > despite my aversion to and disassociation with many aspects of the second > definition. Anyway, we all agree that ongoing atrocities against women are > abhorrent - but we seem to be not sufficiently motivated to collectively take > action against it. Is this cowardly or wise ? This may be a more difficult > question than it appears on its face. Is it worth waging war over ? Will > there be more pain, or less in the short run ? In the long run ? That Yeat's > poem variant "Slouching" haunts - 'the best lack conviction, given some time > to think, and the worst are full of passion without mercy". > > Speaking of which, Colin, I agree with you that sex offenders, and others > whose crimes are of such a type that recitivism is likely to be the norm > rather than the exception, need to be locked up and kept away from the rest > of us (not to mention from their earlier victims, if they are still alive). > And there is no reason for you to feel conflicted about this. The criminals > put the rest of us in a position where we must choose from the lesser of two > evils - 1) to allow the perpetrators to go unpunished and/or continue to > terrorize the rest of us, or 2) debase our spirits by locking them up, or > executing them in certain cases, acts we also find abhorrent. Well, I for > one do not think this is a difficult choice. Just a rotten one. its called 'being between a rock and a hrad place'! I agree with what you wrote. The ideal of being able to be forgiving, lvong etc to all is a noble one but first and foremost must always be the protection of the young and vulnerable. Unfortunately, not uppermost in most people's minds. > The answer is > simple - stop committing atrocious crimes. And like you said - be a good > parent.
