Listening to Kate Bush and Wuthering Heights on Chris Evans' show, surely one of the great, original pop songs (do please check out my version in Vile Pervert; The Sequel), I wonder how we would fare were she to be accused of sexual abuse. And then convicted. Absurd? No more ridiculous than my wrongful conviction or Rolf's or any other pop star. I really believe that society which removes Wuthering Heights from the musical history earwaves is in deep trouble. And whilst Jake The Peg or Sun Arise may not be equally creative, they were much loved and highly successful. This absurd censorship has to stop (as the then DG of the BBC told me it would be some years ago). Incredibly damaging to the education of the young.

Meanwhile, I hope her concerts are a huge success.

Good luck tonight Kate - one of the truly great British artistes and I think one of my favourite songs she recorded with my protege Peter Gabriel.

Maybe Rolf was more responsible for his influences?

JK2006 wrote:
Good luck tonight Kate - one of the truly great British artistes and I think one of my favourite songs she recorded with my protege Peter Gabriel.

Reports from tonight are so far fabulous.

Bush enters the stage barefoot with a crowd of backing singers including her 16-year old son Bertie and launches into 'Lily' from the Red Shoes album (superb track) closely followed by Hounds of Love and Running Up That Hill, ovations between every song.

Still to come, the Ninth Wave and Sky of Honey suite of songs, but by tomorrow this post will be superseded by reports and photos everywhere.

Oh, and she looks beautiful.

Roll on tomorrow and then the same 2 weeks later

Well the reviews certainly make me want to go and see/hear/listen!

www.theguardian.com/music/2014/aug/27/ka...dawn-reviews-roundup

K wrote:
Maybe Rolf was more responsible for his influences?




I don't need to tell you jk, that this song was one that Adam and the Ants supposedly ripped off for Prince Charming.

We don't know that Rolf's conviction was unfair. The burden of proof was minimal, but this doesn't mean it was wrong or right.

Any direct personal views of the concert? I may well go though I'm right off gigs these days.

JK2006 wrote:
Any direct personal views of the concert? I may well go though I'm right off gigs these days.

I'm going next Wednesday. I was due to go on the second night, but as I'd not been well recently. But as a huge, long time fan I am not going to miss next week.

Friends who have gone have been completely blown away.

If you do go, don't expect it to be full of hits. It was never going to be anyway.

Full of hits? Ah, you've rather hit my nail on the (hit) head David. I do believe an artiste should feature their best work and, if that includes hits, they should be there. I adored Running Up That Hill, Wow, Man with Child, Wuthering… I'd like them to be there as well as everything else and fear they are not.

And interesting… www.theguardian.com/music/2014/aug/31/ka...official-album-chart

She does a few hits, in all she does 2/3 of the Hounds of Love album, part of which is the suite of songs called The Ninth Wave, about a woman drowning at sea. From everything I've heard, that part of the show is wonderfully dramatic. I believe one critic said that in terms of pop theatricality she hasn't just raised the bar, she's thrown it out the window.

The second half is mainly the second part of 2005's Aerial album, A Sky of Honey, again by all accounts pretty epic.

The reviews from critics and concert goers alike have almost without exception been ecstatic.

I never imagined she'd do Wuthering Heights, and she didn't. I've heard one or two journos trying to suggest that there was almost a walk out because she didn't do anything before 1985, but the reality, or at least accounts from friends as well as reviews, is of multiple standing ovations throughout the show. The closing number is a hit, the wonderful 'Cloudbusting' from Hounds of Love.

Roll on next week!

It is certainly not up to me or anyone else to tell a creative artiste what she should or should not include, just as nobody needed to tell Picasso that red might be better than blue, but I do feel I'd enjoy a show which included all the great tracks. Still - I'm open minded. Just not convinced I'm that intrigued by a show without them.

To the original point about censorship, it is getting way out of hand.
In particular, the BBC and Tony Hall need to be reminded of the 2011 assurance made by Mark Thompson, and made to explain what the game is in no uncertain terms. They are here to serve us, the license fee payer - not "victims", not Slater & Moron and not bullshitting MP's.
The BBC, I am told by an 'insider', have gone as far as to remove whole editions of TOTP from their research database so that even the performances on those editions are no longer available to use for the TOTP2/BBC4 compilations, and they not acquiesce to using any footage of the falsely accused/convicted (Savile, Harris, even DLT) in the context they were made - only slowed down 'horror' excerpts of light entertainment on their tawdry

A truly sinister state of affairs. And if you, like me, had things to hand like editions of Clunk Click & Jim'll Fix It you would see why these shows are banned completely - rewriting recent history is the aim, more than pandering to the idiot masses.

Indeed - my tracks still get removed from Pick of the Pops (the excuse is that not every hit is played); so do Gary Glitter's; so, I'm sure, will all Rolf Harris tracks; we'll have to see how the Cliff saga develops. Should any Michael Jackson songs be removed? After all, an accusation is all that's needed. Rolling Stones? Phil Spector? Which crimes, real or imaginary, proven or suspected, should provoke censorship?

It sounds silly and trivial. It's not. It's crucial. Our music and books and films and entertainment are far more essential to memories than political events or natural tragedies.

Nobody remembers the front page news story about a murder or tax increase from 40 years ago. But everyone remembers Mull of Kintyre (unfortunately).

When stuff gets locked away in this manner that is already, thanks to recordings, in the public domain I am suspicious that we aren't that far away from music and television recording being banned via 'reclassification' - we seem to be in the middle of a crazy social experiment that is all about rewriting history and brainwashing to believe light entertainment of yore equates to something highly sinister.

The entire archive of TOTP (that which still exists) is in the hands of private collectors (even recoveries of wiped shows), I imagine there are also private collections of domestic recordings of Jimmy, Rolf - even you JK! There's even still a sizeable following for Gary Glitter online - and he's been Public Enemy #1 for the past 17 years.
Phil Swern & Tony Blackburn seem to be frightened to play anything related to Gary Glitter - they skip anything by The Glitter Band too (without fail) and their records have no input from the erstwhile 'Leader' whatsoever. If I were John Rossall, Pete Phipps or John Springate I'd be asking them why this is.

JK2006 wrote:
Indeed - my tracks still get removed from Pick of the Pops (the excuse is that not every hit is played); so do Gary Glitter's; so, I'm sure, will all Rolf Harris tracks; we'll have to see how the Cliff saga develops. Should any Michael Jackson songs be removed? After all, an accusation is all that's needed. Rolling Stones? Phil Spector? Which crimes, real or imaginary, proven or suspected, should provoke censorship?

It sounds silly and trivial. It's not. It's crucial. Our music and books and films and entertainment are far more essential to memories than political events or natural tragedies.

Nobody remembers the front page news story about a murder or tax increase from 40 years ago. But everyone remembers Mull of Kintyre (unfortunately).

Why does Elvis still get airplay same with Jerry Lee Lewis ?

Should all copies Lolita be be pulled of the racks and pulped ?