Talk:Kate Bush

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.

Contents 1 Vocal Range 2 Keeping Opinion out of the Article 3 The Dreaming and Hounds of Love 4 Moving 5 Re: use of lyrics 6 New Album? 7 Tabloid reports 8 Removal of images 9 Red Shoes section - POV 10 Never For Ever 11 Missing albums 12 Ne t'enfuis pas 13 Aerial 14 Missing sections 15 Paddy Bush 16 The Dreaming 17 New image licensing 18 Lionheart 19 Categories 20 POV (again!) 21 Silverchair relevance 22 Chart"breaker" 23 Use of surnames 24 Tour dates 25 Seperate articles for albums? 26 Inspiration/Covers 27 Wikitool? 28 Album pages text merge 29 Peer review with an eye to Featured status 30 Nationality? 31 Link Cleanup 32 Inspiration 33 "Deeper Understanding" 34 Duplication? 35 Tour of Life dates - are they necessary? 36 Wireless Radio Microphone 37 Musical Style 38 Is her current residence necessary? 39 POV in the Sensual World article - "Lack of Clarity" 40 SNL modifications 41 Kate Bush Under Review DVD

[edit] Vocal Range

I've just added "citation needed" for the claim she has an "expressive four octave range". Having a four octave range means she can enter tenor and baritone ranges, which she seemingly can't. This reminds me too much of the claim that Mariah Carey has 6 or 8 octaves when in fact she has one and a half. This shouldn't be here if it's not stated or proven in any way. ~ John1987.

She certainly has quite a range - listen to Hammer Horror for instance. -- Beardo 22:25, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay now I'm DYING to know what it is! somebody please find out and source it in the article. (and mentioning that Carey monster here is just so ...YUCK!)  ;>--4.158.201.177 12:00, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

The 4 octave range claim should be returned to 3 octave unless someone can point out specific notes in specific songs to support the claims. Andrew "IED" Marvick's research says:

The initial search having stirred his interest, IED decided to undertake a more thorough survey of Kate's vocal athletics, and his efforts thus far have already necessitated significant emendations to his original posting on the subject.

Although he expressed doubt recently about the possibility of anyone having a true "four-octave range", and claimed that anyway Kate's own range appeared to extend fewer than three full octaves, IED now admits that the second of these assertions was false, and possibly the first, as well. In listening to Kate's first three albums and her 1979 live recordings he discovered two songs in which Kate topped the high C which she sang on the track Don't Push Your Foot on the Heart Brake.

In the Tour of Life performances of Violin Kate capped her vocal with a huge and wonderfully authoritative leap to the E above high C, when she sang the final "Violin!" of the song. Although this pyrotechnical feat is noticeably absent from the later studio recording of Violin, Kate also reached the high E in an earlier studio recording: James and the Cold Gun.

IED has also found that Kate's voice reaches below the low E-flat which he had earlier claimed was Kate's lowest sung note (found on the extended mix of RUTH ). On the Lionheart track Coffee Homeground Kate in fact sings (albeit with some uncertainty and only on a rather minor bass harmony backing-vocal) a low D-flat. This can be heard during the brief bridge leading out of the first chorus of the song into the second set of verses. Kate accompanies the instruments with a series of "la-la-la"s, and these extend, in the lower of Kate's two overdubs, to a definite low D-flat.

The sum total of all this is that, while he earlier stated that Kate's range was two full tones shy of three octaves, he can now announce, after only an incomplete search of her recordings, that her voice extends at least one-and-a-half tones beyond three full octaves. Even though this still leaves Kate's range well short of the legendary four octaves so often ascribed to her, IED would not be surprised to discover, in the course of his continuing research, that Kate has "pushed the envelope" even further.

I don't have the musical knowledge to answer this question. But I can confirm the quality of IED's research.K8 fan 00:02, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

TommasOz changed "3 octave range" to "4 octave range". I changed it to "greater than 3 octave range" to match IED's research. I'd love to see some proof of 4 octaves. It's credible, but this claim requires proof.K8 fan 05:32, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I just measured the vocal range of Happy Rhodes using Seventh String Software's Transcribe program, and Happy's range is just a hair over 3 octaves. 4 octaves is the realm of singers like Yma Sumac.K8 fan 08:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Keeping Opinion out of the Article

Hi, please keep in mind not to write anything that is pure opinion or point of view and only stick to the facts. The people involved in this article thus far have been doing a great job keeping their personal opinions out of the article, but recently people have started adding many comments that lend to more addressing their opinions of songs, and/or drawing conjectured conclusions. This is not an article for a magazine; it is meant to be read as an article in an encyclopedia. Currently I am unable to really go through and address these issues, but as soon as I am able I will. Any help in this would be much appreciated, and ultimately adds to the success of this article. Cheers! Kris

[edit] The Dreaming and Hounds of Love

I realize I may be drifting into point of view territory, but I really think it is important to draw attention to The Dreaming and Hounds of Love. I tried to do it in a way that was objective, but maybe someone else can help me out. Konky2000

I changed the classical guitarist from Jonathan Williams to John Williams. I hope this was correct and if not will look forward to reading why not! :) --Nevilley 06:23, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

---No, you shouldn;t have changed this. Jonathan Williams is a classical guitarist and is different from John Williams the orchestra conductor. I may try and change it back.

To be added: April 20 1979 - Died this day, Billy Duffy, lighting director, was killed in a accident during a Kate Bush concert, in Southampton, England. 21 year old Duffy fell twenty feet through an open trap door on the stage. Kate Bush held a benefit concert on 12 May, with Peter Gabriel and Steve Harley at London’s Hmmersmith Odeon for his family. Off to work right now, will weave it in later. Someone else feel free to add if they are so inclined. Martin TB 08:43, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Done it Martin TB 19:54, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Actually, Bill Duffield died during rehearsals for the tour, not during a concert. K8 fan 07:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey Konky2000 -

Have you read gaffa.org?[1] Just in regards to 'The Ninth Wave', I'm pretty sure there's stuff in there about how it's related to the Tennyson poem. I'll try and see if I can find it. :) Twinstar 16:22, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes I love gaffa.org. I hope I haven't inadvertantly copied anything from there. I'm thrilled to see that everyone helped out not only on The Dreaming and Hounds of Love, but all her other albums as well! Konky2000

I don't think it's possible to write about Kate Bush without quoting Gaffa.org. It's down as I write this, but I have a backup copy posted here: Gaffaweb emergency backup Andrew Marvick wrote:

The "ninth wave" reference is not found in Tennyson's "Holy Grail". Although it is from the "Idylls", it is part of "The Coming of Arthur". The false reference was a mistake which Kate did discover before the release of the first edition of the album, but which she could not prevail upon the printers to correct. Later pressings incorporate the correction. According to one interviewer, she was very distressed by the error.

K8 fan 07:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

As Gaffaweb has been down for a week, I've added a link to my backup copy of Gaffa.orgK8 fan 01:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

As Gaffa.org has returned, I have deleted the link to the backup copy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by K8 fan (talk • contribs) 21:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Moving

Is Moving really about the female orgasm? Evidence here [2] suggests that it isn't... I commented it for now.

[edit] Re: use of lyrics

Although I support the deletion of lyrics from the caption of the Dreaming cover reproduction because they don't really fit there, my understanding is that lyrics, though copyright, may be quoted in minimal form -- a line here or there. Otherwise one could get into copyright problems if you quote a line of a song that has become vernacular, i.e. "Come on baby, light my fire" or some such. Thoughts? Official policy? 23skidoo 03:55, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New Album?

HMV Japan has the release date for the 26th October as a two-disc album and Rolling Stone magazine has the release date for 8th November. Does anyone have any more information?

I don't know about the Japanese release (maybe it's a greatest hits collection), but I'm adding the Rolling Stone report to the main article. 23skidoo 16:12, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tabloid reports

I removed the statement "There were also unconfirmed reports that she had suffered a nervous breakdown" from the article, which person who originally added it has seen fit to re-enter. Apart from the mirrors of Wikipedia articles mentioning, multiplying, and magnifying the prominence of the tale, a Google search for Kate Bush "nervous breakdown" reveals many reports of such a thing in regard to Peter Gabriel, Roy Harper, and Sinéad O'Connor, but none for Bush that I have yet found.

I too have read a mention of this in a major music magazine; it was reporting on the story existing in what many refer to as the "Fleet street rags". I have also seen such major music magazines echo reports that she had shot up to over 400 lbs, and others that Elvis Presley, Jim Morrison and Adolf Hitler are all indeed alive and in hiding. Are we compelled to consider all the reports that might appear second or third hand and originating in the tabloids as "encyclopedic" information that must be included in Wikipedia articles? ~ Achilles † 19:34, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

The handle is 23skidoo and I'm right here. If it's published by reputable press - and the music magazines like Rolling STone qualify like it or not - then it is notable enough to be noted. And the article I saw included an interview with her and was a "where is she now" type of thing (and no I cannot recall if she said anything; I believe the interview was an old one). So in fact, unless you can provide an article in a non-"Fleet Street Rag" (a very POV term I might add) that confirms the opposite is true, then the answer to your question is Yes, it is worth noting. And if it is unconfirmed, then it should be noted as such. I don't go around making this stuff up and if you read what I original placed you'll see I made sure to include the term unconfirmed and place it within its proper context that she had all but disappeared from the public eye over the last decade. 23skidoo 19:56, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

I would not insist on an absolute confirmation of all rumors before mention is made of them, but I would hold that unless normally reliable sources actually indicate that reports of a personal or private nature about someone have a strong likelihood of being genuine, it is not worthy of significant mention, let alone placement in a prominent and much duplicated encyclopedia article. ~ Achilles † 21:24, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Rolling Stone is not a reliable source on Kate. They reported on Kate's appearance at the Prince's Trust Royal Gala concert, and claimed that "...her top fell down, exposing the top of Kate Bush". Anyone who has seen the video can confirm that, while first one strap, then the other, of her spaghetti-style top broke, she managed to hold her top up and no additional skin was exposed at any point. And she didn't miss a note. Tragically, Rolling Stone sometimes follows the old dictum that "When the lie sells better than the truth, print the lie". K8 fan 23:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

from clementsk@hotmail.com -- i remember hearing that kate was dealing with a nervous breakdown around 1996 or 1997. it was reported on an english gossip television show. there were also reports of her "ballooning up," ( i think that was the way they said it. ) in any case, it was all in regards to her disappearance, and i think that since it was the media who was saying these things about her, it does stand to reason that we should include it in this article, if only simply to give the public feeling about kate bush's disappearance.

hi. found some reports about Kate's state of mind in the mid 90s. "May: In the May 1997 Kate Bush Club newsletter Kate responds to recent tabloid rubbish which claims she'd gone mad, called herself Catherine Earnshaw, has become a recluse etc,etc.....This always seems to happen when Kate is out of the public eye for a while. Kate says:

"Hi everyone, thanks for all your letters. Just thought I'd let you know I've had a lovely break away from work. I feel energised and I'm just starting to write again (early days yet so please don't hold your breath). I thought I should dispel a few press rumours. I have not gone mad. I have not changed my name, if Rolf Harris is going to be on the next album, I haven't thought of it yet. I am well and happy and yes, the artist formerly known as Kate Bush is still Kate Bush and is alive and kicking! I hope you're all well and thanks yet again for your continued warmth and support, with lots of love, Kate Bush"

i found it at this website: http://www.katebushnews.com/leaving.htm i think that's enough to say that if kate was reponding to it, then the rumours were at least loud enough for her to finally make a statement about them.

I believe I read an interview with her in Q Magazine a couple years ago in which Kate Bush herself confirmed that for a few years in the mid-90's she was in a very bad state. While I don't believe she said she had a 'nervous breakdown' she did confirm that her emotional state was responsible for her public absense for such a long period. Konky2000

I think this recent statement says a great deal upon this matter:

"Y'know, I'm a very strong person and I think that's why actually I find it really infuriating when I read, 'She had a nervous breakdown' or 'She's not very mentally stable, just a weak, frail little creature'." ~ Kate Bush, from an interview in MOJO magazine (due out on 3 November 2005) and quoted in The Guardian (28 October 2005)

I can agree with her entirely. It is appalling and extremely aggravating the degrees people will go to ridicule, deride, and condemn anything or anyone that won't fit into their neat little pigeon-holes and categories. I also find it amusing that her first single from Aerial pokes a bit of fun at all the Elvis-is-alive myths and rumours that so many people are fond of. ~ Achilles † 00:26, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of images

What is rmvd, I liked that image for the article??? - Anonymous editor

The images that were deleted were apparently deemed to be copyright violations because whomever originally uploaded them failed to provide sufficient proof that they could be used under fair use rules. Album covers, publicity photos, screenshots and photos to which you own the copyright are pretty much all that can be used for an article such as this. 23skidoo 02:31, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Red Shoes section - POV

There is an awful lot of POV in this article, especially in the Red Shoes section. If I have time later this weekend I'm going to do a copy edit and remove much of it, but maybe someone else wants to give it a go before me. Example of POV is the talk about the "maybe she wanted to cast off her own Red Shoes", etc. We can't say stuff like that, but it's OK to quote someone who does. 23skidoo 07:06, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree, and please do dive in if you get time. This article is obviously brimming with subjective opinion and commentary, obviously written by someone who is a fan. We need to be more objective in a neutral encyclopedia article, and at least cite the opinions of others. — Matt Crypto 21:18, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Never For Ever

I hope no-one minds - I just added something about the French version of 'Never For Ever' at the bottom :) Twinstar 16:24, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

I removed the following statement:

"It was her first album to reach the top of the charts. In fact, she was the first woman ever to have a Number One album."

I don't object to this, but I think a statement like this needs to specify which 'chart' it was on and which chart Kate Bush was the first woman to have a Number One album on. As soon as someone can get that information, incorporate it into the sentence and add it back in. Konky2000

I put it back in since it IS her first number one album (look at the discography), and she is the first woman to have a number one album on the British charts (unfortunately there's no online verification of this other than fan sites, but it is in reputable books. Does that count?) Stev0

This statement needs to be re-written:

"Never for Ever was the first Kate Bush album to be composed on synthesizers and drum machines (in particular, the Fairlight CMI which was programmed by Richard James Burgess and John L. Walters), her earlier albums being composed on the piano."

This is incorrect. Kate didn't acquire the Fairlight until well into the production of Never For Ever. The strongest evidence of this is the performance of "Babooshka" on the Doctor Hook show. It was mimed to a nearly completed version of the track, but lacked the Fairlight glass smash sounds of the album version. The Dreaming on the other hand was written on drum machines and the Fairlight (particularly the Fairlight's "Page R" rhythm program).K8 fan 21:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Missing albums

I like the section on the individual albums -- but it's missing Kick Inside and Lionheart! 23skidoo 00:49, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Glad to see Kick Inside and Lionheart added. I wonder if we shouldn't also have paragraphs for the compilations The Whole Story and This Woman's Work, too? Certainly The Whole Story is significant as it introduced a lot of people to Bush's work and included the new song Experiment IV. Also, what about the On Stage mini-album and the later (official) Hammersmith disc? 23skidoo 14:44, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for liking my entry on The Kick Inside and Lionheart - my very first (major) edit to a Wikipedia article (I'm also the one who added all the singles to the chart - my very first edit ever on wikipedia). I only recently found out how to comment changes, so please forgive my lack of comments on them! Anyway, I could MAYBE see having The Whole Story there (looking at other musical artists, there doesn't seem to be ANY consistancy at all here). Definitely not On Stage (just an EP, and an out-of-print one, as far as I know, at that). Maybe having the Live at Hammersmith CD listed (but I lower priority than The Whole Story). I'd say the This Woman's Work boxed set is a higher priority than Live at Hammersmith but lower than The Whole Story. Stev0 04:05, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't think the in-print status of an album is relevant. This isn't intended to be a catalogue of current releases. Live on Stage was a major release in its day and IIRC a pretty big seller. Live at Hammersmith is a bit more obscure but it was released by her record company in response to both fan demand and the fact there were so many bootlegs out there anyway. It's a bit more obscure (I've yet to find a copy myself) but certainly worthy of inclusion as well. At the moment my Wikitime is limited otherwise I'd add them myself. 23skidoo 12:40, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

In the Live albums/EP section, it states that the full concert was issued in 1989. That is incorrect. I have the UK edition and the copyright date is 1994. It was released after The Red Shoes as a compact disc and PAL video set. I have corrected the information, but if someone can show me a discography where 1989 is the release date, I'll be happy to change it back.Cloudbusting101

My concern isn't that it's out of print; my concern is that it's "just" an EP. Most charts I've seen rank it with other singles, not other albums (example). Stev0

It may be "just" an EP, but it contained previously unreleased material and it was not used as a promotional tool for an album, which is the usual use for an EP. The term "mini-album" is more appropriate for this release. I have an Alexei Sayle "EP" that runs 45 minutes. 23skidoo 14:41, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

• I like the idea of specifying studio albums, because aside from the Live EP there are also numerous bootlegs of live concerts in circulation as well as a couple of interview albums, too. 23skidoo 00:50, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Actually, besides the EP I was thinking more of The Whole Story, Live at Hammersmith, and This Woman's Work when I changed "Albums" to "Studio Albums", but that's a good idea, too. Maybe Albums should be its own separate page? Stev0

I believe that the original release of Live from Hammersmith Odeon is considered a long play single. That's why it was included in The Single File boxed set, and shows up in the liner notes for The Whole Story as a single. It did do well in the UK charts, I don't know about anywhere else. The later edition of Live at Hammersmith Odeon (with the PAL video) was almost an underground release, but was not released in America. It was only sanctioned by EMI, not Columbia. We may want to mention that it was her first gatefold single (the only other one was "Running Up That Hill." But, if we did that, we might want to cover the various packaging for all of her albums and singles, and God knows there are already a million different sites on the web that have that covered. Cloudbusting101 21:48, 5 October 2005 (UTC) Kris

[edit] Ne t'enfuis pas

The section of Never For Ever suggests that Ne t'en fui pas [NTFP] is a French language version of a song entitled 'Never For Ever'. I have removed the comment as 1) it contradicts Kate's account of writing NTFP (http://children.ofthenight.org/cloudbusting/story/1982.html) scroll almost to the bottom of the page. The relevant section is also copied below, and indicates that KB wrote the song for her own amusement rather than as a translation of a pre-existing track. 2) we have no evidence that there ever was a song called Never For Ever. Hope the majority agree. Chris

From interview:

Besides all the promotional activities, because of the decision to release another single, a b-side had to be written. It is always this way for me: even if things are carefully planned, things always happen at once - and in a big way. I've always loved the idea of singing in a foreign language, and I thought this b-side would be a perfect excuse for doing so.

Really the only language I know enough of to be able to work creatively with is French, so I thought of all the odd words I know, and tried to piece a story together. It's surprising how inspiring it can be to work from a slightly different tangent.

The tune came straight away, and I filled in all the lines that I had no proper words for with pseudo-French sounds. Luckily Patrick, who worked on Lionheart with us in Superbear [Studios, in france] was staying with Paddy to work on some tracks, so, between him and a friend Vivienne, we worked out the complete lyrics, and Ne T'enfuis pas was put to tape. Csm1701 13:46, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Just by way of a point of trivia, NTFP was released in Canada as a single, the A-side to "Dreamtime" which was an instrumental version of "The Dreaming" that was one of the few tracks not included in the box set. I have a copy in my collection. 23skidoo 12:37, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

It was also released in France with a French language version of the song, "The Infant Kiss (from Never for Ever)" as the b-side. Both songs are great. I love how moody NTFP is. I also really like "Dreamtime" doesn't totally correspond to "The Dreaming." It's a little longer and there are vocals in the instrumental version which aren't heard in the original version.

That was from me. oops. Cloudbusting101 20:50, 7 October 2005 (UTC) Kris

Note that the correct song title is Ne t'enfuis pas. Official releases in France and Canada got it right, though some British ones made the (much-reproduced) error. There is no possible deliberate reason for writing Ne t'en fui pas. It is likely a confusion with "Ne t'en fais pas", which means "don't worry about it". -- Justinbb 07:24, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aerial

Rather than adding a tracklist and all that other information under Aerial -- when nothing like that exists for the other albums -- wouldn't it be better to simply create a separate article? I believe separate articles already exist for all of Kate's albums anyway. 23skidoo 14:39, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

I was just about to say the exact same thing. Right now there's a stub for Aerial - it can be fleshed out a bit more now. Also, when it's more than just a stub don't forget to edit The Red Shoes page to update the chronology! Stev0

Great minds think alike. I wonder if any online reviews and the like are going to start turning up? I know Elvis fans apparently like the references in King of the Mountain but I've yet to hear anyone state whether it (or the album) is actually any good. 23skidoo 18:35, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

I went ahead and threw together an Aerial page - Question: How does one edit the discography box?

Go to Template:Kate Bush Discography and just edit it as you would an article. The changes will appear on every page with the template tag. 23skidoo 18:55, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

On the tracklisting, one editor thinks "Pi" should be linked to the article about the number. Another editor (oh, alright, me) thinks it shouldn't. Anyone else have any opinions one way or the other? See the Aerial discussion page to see both sides. Stev0 22:15, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

As much as I hate to bring this up, I don't think the new images are licensed to EMI Records or Sony. They were first used in an Italian newspaper website and were apparently taken by fashion photographer, Trevor Leighton. In that case, they probably belong to him, and he probably owns the copyright. Before we leave them up permanently, we might want to check that EMI is using them as official publicity stills. Cloudbusting101 21:41, 5 October 2005 (UTC)Kris

I have seen them used on several web sites now, always listed as 'new publicity photos', tho admitedly without confirming that EMI owns the shots. The pix were sent to me in the understanding they were officially sanctioned promo photos. Trevor Leighton may well have been commissioned to take the shots, but it does not follow that he owns them. Feel free to remove the photos, but their widesperad and sudden appearance all over the 'net suggests to me that they're official. Will remove reference to EMI on photo descriptions, just so as not to tick anyone off. Csm1701 22:14, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

[Kate Bush News and Information] (a usually reliable site) labels them "publicity photos". I didn't see them used in any news article using Google News, but I assume they really are OK-to-use publicity photos. Stev0 02:18, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Check related thread below for update.

[edit] Missing sections

"See also", "References" and possibly "Further Reading" sections need adding to this article. — Wackymacs 14:15, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Paddy Bush

Does anyone else think that the references to Paddy Bush's participation on each of her albums as being a bit overkill? He is mentioned on each album page along with the other musicians. Is there really a need to mention him in the synapsis of each record on the main artist page? This is an article on Kate Bush, not Paddy Bush. Cloudbusting

Maybe someone has done some cutting already, but I don't see any references to Paddy in the album section beyond his involvement in The Kick Inside, which is understandable, and his listing among the musicians, which is only proper. He's probably notable enough on his own to warrant his own article, I agree there. 23skidoo 00:39, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Dreaming

""Leave It Open" speaks of the need to acknowledge and express the darker sides of one's personality. The latter was inspired by the murder of John Lennon ("my door was never locked/Until one day a trigger come cocking")" I've never heard that before. Could someone clear this up? Where did Kate say this?~~

It's an educated guess (taken from gaffa.org); I personally think it makes sense, but if it should be taken out, go for it. Stev0 22:44, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New image licensing

The new, recent image is great, but although a promophoto license tag is included on the image page, given Wiki's current zero-tolerence policy towards copyrighted images I fear it might not be enough. Besides just saying "a larger version of a publicity shot" (or whatever) the image description should state that the image is copyrighted by, er, whatever her record company is now. I'd hate to see the image deleted on a technicality. 23skidoo 04:18, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Please see above (the section titled "Aerial") where we've already discussed the photos. I posted the pix - they are in use all over the web on respected web sites. The photo I received had no copyright info, just said "for promotional use only". If you're worried, please feel free to track down the copyright info - I regret I haven't the time. Csm1701 08:25, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

I have to admit, I haven't seen any reference to EMI or Kate owning the images. I think they've been licensed through Trevor Leighton and should be replaced by an image we know is actually from EMI. Why not the cover of the Whole Story, seeing as that doesn't show up anywhere else in the article? Cloudbuster101 (I don't know why suddenly I can't sign what I write.)

If the image has been circulated as a promo, then I see no reason why there should be a problem. I just wanted to make sure the bases were covered as this article already lost several excellent images because of uncertainty over copyright status. 23skidoo 03:04, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

So we can finally put this to rest!!! I'm so excited, I got the "King of the Mountain" single and guess what picture is on it!!! That's right! The one that's posted! So the caption needs to now say, "taken from the inlay of the single, "King of the Mountain," or something to that affect. -- Cloudbusting101~~

The image was posted as being a publicity still because that is what it was issued as. There seems to be no point in now saying it's an inlay photo. `(What if it turns up next week on a advertising poster on the Tokyo underground? Would we change the description again?) Saying it's taken from the inlay for KOTM is also untrue. Please just stop fretting over what is a non-issue. 83.217.190.69 23:32, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

It's only a non-issue until another administrator deletes the image. Right now it should be safe, but I said the same thing about some other images at Star Trek and elsewhere that got tossed. I'm not exaggerating when I say the owners of Wikipedia have gotten really strict. I myself have all but stopped uploading images as a result. 23skidoo 23:57, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

The fact that it is, in fact, in the inlay for the single of "King of the Mountain" validates the fact that it is a publicity photograph, and therefore clear to be used on this site. We weren't arguing about it, we were making sure it wouldn't be taken down in a matter of days. And it is in the inlay of the single "King of the Mountain," unless I've received a truly rare printing error.Cloudbusting101 11:03, 14 November 2005

I finally found an article that uses one of the pictures in question: NME; something called Teen Today uses another photo from the same session. Neither story has a copyright notice for the photo. NME is too mainstream to go around stealing photos - and I assume if they can't get a free-to-use publicity photo, they won't use one (note the absense of one on their Rage Against the Machine and Madonna pages, to pick two big artists at random who it would not be hard to find a photo of). I think this proves they're generic publicity photos. Stev0 03:15, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

May I respectfully suggest that this issue is using up more debate than it requires. Even if the image has some copyright problem (and it seems not to) and even if it gets removed (there's no sign of that happening) we can always put up something in its place. Let's keep this in persepctive - it's just a jpeg on a web page, not a matter of life and death! :-) Csm1701 07:23, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm not very good at changing the images, but I have some objections about the new image up here. 1) why did the one that was up there get removed? We sorted out the legality of it and everyone was pleased with it, and 2) the caption of the image is totally incorrect. Kate never had a single for "Under the Ivy," it was the b-side of "Running Up that Hill" and that image wasn't used on it. Could someone please change it back to the current pub. image from "King of the Mountain?" Thanks. {{User:Cloudbusting101|Cloudbusting101]] 30 December 2005 (UTC)

The sentiment behind the new (less license-upsetting) image is that it better captures her divine creativity during the height of her career -- perfect for this sort of biographical and discographical article. igarvey 31 December 2005 (UTC)

BTW if by some chance the newest image runs into licensing problems, I have a copy of the book The Secret World of Kate Bush which uses the same photo on its cover so if necessary a scan of the book cover can be substituted under fair use. 23skidoo 03:29, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I noticed something about only using images from singles or albums on wikipedia recently. That's more concern. The image was used in the booklet for THIS WOMAN'S WORK boxed set. I suppose we could justify it that way. Personally, I think the new headshots are more appropriate though. Cloudbusting101 10:08, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

The change in image is dreadful. The current one is out of date, neither more nor less open to challenge re copyright and the claim that it represents Kate at the height of her 'divine creativity' is pure POV (and there are many here who would argue that her recent work is way more 'divine'!). Cloudbustin101 reasonably asked why the previous pic got removed. So far nobody has given a decent answer. As the change seems entirely to be based on one editor's POV, with no decent logic behind it, I am going to reinstate the pic I originally uploaded. It's a pub shot, used extensively, has no lehgal problems and represents Bush as she is now. I'd ask that it is not replaced without a proper discussion taking place on this page. 09:31, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

... actually, forget it. It'd only get changed back again by the guy with his 'divine creativity' fetish. What's the point? 83.217.190.69 09:36, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I thought nobody was questioning the legality of the photo anymore. I agree the photo should be changed back to the more current one. But even if we keep the image that's there now, the caption should be fixed (The Singles File was a boxed set of 7" 45s, when one thinks "album" one thinks one 12" 33 1/3). Stev0 18:30, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't think anyone's questioning the legality of the image, but rather the appropriateness. However, for it to be 'legal,' it must be correctly labelled, and was initially captioned as an image from her single, "Under the Ivy," which seeing as "Under the Ivy" was never a single, negates its legality. Neither was it the cover of "The Single File," as the cover for "The Single File" was a close-up of the ivy featured on the back of her "The Dreaming" album. Someone else pointed out that it was used as the cover of "The Secret History of Kate Bush," and also appears in the booklet for the "This Woman's Work" Boxed Set.

I state again that I think the more recent shots of Bush are much more appropriate. If Bush were dead, we could go back through her images and choose one that represents her career as a whole. But she is not dead, and it is more appropriate to showcase a more recent image. cloudbusting101 16:17, 13 January 2006 (PST)

Personally it doesn't matter to me what image is used, just so long as it is properly sourced otherwise it'll have a short lifespan because the copyright police will speedy delete it. Incidentally exactly what constitutes proper sourcing is beyond me. An image I uploaded for the Sheena Easton article was marked for speedy deletion even though it contained all the proper information and sourcing. So go figure. 23skidoo 01:43, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion: Look at other similar images that have been on Wikipedia awhile (ie, that no one has a problem with at all) for popular artists. See how those images are labeled, and copy that labelling exactly (with appropriate edits of names, dates, etc). Since apparently nobody has a problem with the legality, only the labelling, this should do the trick. By the way, when I said "current image" in my above comment, I meant "the one taken which shows how Kate currently looks", not "the image that is currently on the page".Stev0 04:42, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Not a bad suggestion at all -- though my Easton image was uploaded about a year ago and no one seemed to have an issue with it. (For the record, the image wasn't speedied because I added more text to the edit summary and removed the speedy tag as I felt there was sufficient information and no one objected. Not that this would work in every case. From an aesthetic POV, I'm not that fond of the "ivy head" photo and would prefer either a recent promo shot or something like the cover of The Whole Story or The Dreaming. But that's just me. 23skidoo 04:55, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I just had to delete the Sheena Easton image I mentioned because (and I am not exaggerating) I could not provide a mailing address or phone number of the publicist that issued the photo back in 1981. Whoever uploaded the ivy photo -- you better do some research or it's gonna be deleted eventually, too. Me, at this point if someone suggested eliminating all images from Wikipedia, I'd vote in favor: it's too much of a pain in the butt these days. 23skidoo 19:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Seeing as the general consensus is to change the current image back to the previous one, anyone want to jump on that? I don't know how, otherwise I would. And by the way, the caption is still incorrect.

[edit] Lionheart

There was a passage recently added (then recently deleted) saying this "entire album" makes references to the dramatic arts. This passage was correctly deleted (imho, of course), but for the wrong reason. The song "Hammer Horror" does make a reference to Hunchback of Notre Dame through the clever wordplay: "I've got a hunch that you're following/To get your own back on me." However, besides "Hammer Horror" and "Wow" (and maybe "Coffee Homeground" if you include the whole "Arsenic and Old Lace" theme, and the "When you wish upon a star" line from "In Search of Peter Pan"), I can't think of any other references to the dramatic arts on this album. Maybe saying "several songs on this album" instead of "entire album" would be better wording (but even then is a bit of a stretch). Stev0 04:53, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, Kate once said that Coffee Homeground was inspired by a real life incident involving a German (hence Kate's accent) taxi driver who thought he was being poisoned. Csm1701 08:31, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

You are correct (Source: [Cloudbusting] ) - I'm just trying to give the editor who wrote that line about the dramatic arts the most leeway I can. Unfortunately, it's still not enough to justify what he wrote. Stev0 15:56, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Apparently they thought you were wrong, I just removed those statements again. However, there does -seem- to be a theme of the arts at work on the album, Shakespeare in mentioned in "Oh England," E. M. Barrie's play, "Wendy and Peter," "Hunchback of Notre Dame" -- I think that's actually a bit more obvious than you give it credit. On top of the "I've got a hunch..." line, you have, "who knows all the sights of Notre Dame?" I think it's there, but it's POV and analytical. That's the sort of thing where it can be said, "some people think," or likewise, but for the most part, it can't be said that the entire album is about theatre. On the other hand, maybe we should make a list of all the dramatic art she makes reference to." ~~

I'm not the one who deleted the passage in question, I was just agreeing with the deletion. I'll give you "Wendy and Peter" (although when I think of Peter Pan, I think of the Disney version, but that's just me), and I already aknowledged the Hunchback reference (see comment above). A mention could be made of it, but I think the original writer of that statement is seeing more in it than is actually there. While I'm at it, generic question: the article is getting rather long; how much about each album should go on the main article page, and how much should go on each album's individual page? Stev0 14:35, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I think having separate pages for each album would be a good idea. Maybe we should keep it limited to song titles, chart placings, year released, musicians, overlying themes, etc. It's hard to keep everything subjective and just state the facts when so many people are so passionate about Kate. Cloudbusting101

There already is a separate page for each album. I'm not sure what you mean by the above - put that info in the main page, and have the separate page go into more detail, or put that info on the album page itself and just link to it from the main article? Stev0 02:30, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Categories

I like the new Kate Bush category, but why take out most of the old categories? She's still a singer/songwriter, a British singer, etc. Can anyone think of any reason why I shouldn't put these categories back in? Stev0 15:05, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

No. Unless somehow the Kate Bush category has been made a subcat of all these, these categories should be reinstated. I'll let you do the honors. 23skidoo 15:38, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

OK, I took them out of the Kate Bush category and put them back in the main article page. I noticed that all other the artists (eg, David Bowie) are done that way. Stev0 14:28, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] POV (again!)

Does anyone feel that the edits by 82.1.40.174 to various bits of the article are either too inclined towards POV or just (can't quite put my finger on why) not quite right for Wikipedia?

An example: Re The Red Shoes "In retrospect, it should not be surprising that a twelve year wait would follow this album. Kate made it known in interviews that she felt work had come to dominate her life. The title track reflects her desire to be freed from her muse for some time and the album's cover art, which seems to show clouds or snow-capped hills is in fact a much-magnified view of the groove of a record and the red shoes form a stylus, condemned to endlessly spin in the groove."

Seems to me to be a mix of guesswork, opinion with a little fact thrown in.

I don't really want to alter several of his/her edits without some input. 83.217.190.69 08:17, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, the "not surprising part" is definitely POV and has to go. The rest of it appears to be Kate Bush's POV but it needs to be reworked to make this more explicit. Plus the source of the interview needs to be cited if possible. What interviews? If the added description of the cover originates from Kate, then it needs to be specified. If it's an elaboration by the editor, then it has to go per NPOV. 23skidoo 16:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

This entire article reeks of defensive POV. --Dhartung | Talk 05:40, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I think the writers have done a fairly decent job of trying to keep POV out of the article. Instead of just stating that you think the article is POV, please point out specific passages and let us all try and clean it up a bit. Cloudbusting101

I second that. Aside from the couple of things I noted I don't see that much more POV than you'd see in other major-length articles on singers, etc. Point out the shortcomings or be bold and fix them -- worst that could happen is someone reverts the changes in which case it can be discussed here. 23skidoo 19:30, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Silverchair relevance

Daniel Johns of Silverchair was turned onto Bush while recording the band's "Neon Ballroom"- a breakout album in that band's career in terms of sophistication, experimentation and lyrical innovation.

What has this got to do with Kate Bush? Was it her influence that lead to the sophisticiation, experimentation, and lyrical innovation of Neon Ballroom?

On a different topic. In the "AERIAL" section someone wrote that there was a special release of "This Woman's Work" and it shot up the charts. Actually, it was played on a televsion show in the UK and people started downloading it, and it charted in the downloadable charts. That's all. It wasn't a special release at all. I have corrected that statement. Cloudbusting101

[edit] Chart"breaker"

"Aerial" entered the German Album Charts directly at "3" (21.Nov.2005) and is currently still in the Top 20 (place 13 this week).

[edit] Use of surnames

I have to support MattCrypto's view on this. This is an encyclopedia and encyclopedias as well as other formal writing uses the same rule-of-thumb as journalism: full name (plus title or rank if any) on first reference, and then last name only on subsequent references. Exceptions to this are allowed if the article is referring to more than one person with the same last name and even then there are ways around it. It's not considered impolite by any stretch of the imagination, and while you still encounter newspapers that use things like Mr. Smith and Ms. Bush (The Times and the Globe and Mail are the only two I can think of right now), they're generally considered old-fashioned in this regard. Of course the Times and G&M are proof that exceptions exist depending on the editorial preference of a publication, but as far as I know Wikipedia's editorial preference is to use last names. 23skidoo 02:06, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I see your point. There are still references to her as "Kate" in this article, which presumably should be removed. Jbattersby 16:34, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tour dates

Just added an additional date to the Tour Of Life section (13/5/1979), prompted by the rediscovery of my old ticket stub which shows the date and that the show would be filmed. If I recall correctly, this additional concert was one of two (see below) added to the end of the UK leg of the tour to meet demand. And this is where my memory gets hazy. I recall being overjoyed that Kate had added the 13 May show as I'd not been able to get a ticket to any other show, however I also have a memory of a school friend skipping an exam on 14 May so he could get to see her last show at the Odeon. Obviously I am confident of the 13/5/79 gig date, but is my memory playing tricks about the gig the next day? Anyone know for sure? Csm1701 20:49, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Seperate articles for albums?

This article could benefit from having the subsections on the albums made into seperate articles. Each subsection is comprehensive enought to form an articcle. Alan Liefting 03:35, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Oops! I see that there alredy seperate articles. Perhaps the extensive info on the Kate Bush page should be transfered to the album article pages. It would make this page a bit more balanced towards Kate Bush herself. Alan Liefting 03:40, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I mean, we have all those pages for the seperate albums - we might as well use them and get some of the clutter off the main page! Stev0 07:03, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inspiration/Covers

Just canvassing opinion, but does anyone think it worthwhile mentioning other dance artists who have built tracks around samples of Kate's work, a la Utah Saints? I have two such vinyl - Infusion who released a track called 'Running Up That Hill 2003' and Mighty High who released 'Here Again', with a vocal and dub mix built around 'The Man With The Child In His Eyes'. Both of these definitely feature Kate's original recordings. I realise that neither reached the popularity of 'Something Good', and there are probably many more tracks with a similar history, but I definitely think it is a point of interest. Plus, they are still for sale - Google to check it out! Twinstar 20:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Should Stevie Nicks really be listed as someone influenced by Kate? Several of her major works predate Kate's debut album. I don't think she's ever claimed to be influenced by Kate.

[edit] Wikitool?

Is there some sort of tool I can use (other than cutting and pasting the text and doing a global change in another editor) to correct all the Covers titles (ie, changing all the "Wuthering heights" (sic) to "Wuthering Heights")? Stev0 14:08, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Album pages text merge

In an effort to cut down the size of the article and at the same time eliminate redundancy, can anyone think why I shouldn't merge the text of each album with its respective page and delete the text (or at least trim it down considerably) off the main page? Stev0 19:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Good idea. Do it. --mtz206 19:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review with an eye to Featured status

This article is now very thorough and extensive. I would like to propose that it be submitted for peer review with an eye to being granted Featured Article status, but it needs more references.

Could I suggest that we all try to add the inline references which are needed, with an arbitrary deadline of the end of June? We could then review progress and then decide whether it is ready for peer review. - Stevecov 19:15, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

One possible issue with potential Featured Article status is in the "Kate Bush as an inspiration for other artists" lacks any links to the artists mentioned discussing Kate. For instance, someone has tried to add Madonna as being influenced by Kate...but I don't recall Madonna ever saying anything specifically about Kate. Claims should be verified.K8 fan 23:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nationality?

--89.240.143.179 22:38, 15 December 2006 (UTC)==British or English?== We're have a very slow multiperson edit war here. Someone will change all the instances of "English" to "British" (And England to United Kingdom), then a few days later someone will change it back, then a few days later someone else will change it again.

Personally, I don't care (although I slightly favor English since that's more specific), as long as we can agree on what it is. Stev0 07:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, both are correct. And technically, both should be applied. English refers to people born in or living in England while British refers to people born in or living in Great Britain, i.e. England, Scotland, and Wales. Therefore, Bush is both English and British. As a native of the North of England, I've always refered to myself as English within the British Isles and British when outside the country in general. But ideally, the terms are interchangeable, and both should be listed in categories.

actually, British refers to anyone who lives in the united kingdom (even though northern ireland is not part of great britain). nationality of all uk citizens is British. Also, english is not a globally recognised nationality, similarly to the lack of regognition for the existance of the basque and bregton people. therefore, i think she should be listed as british.

Another revert war is going on, this time in the opening paragraph. True, all English singers are British singers by default. To the folks in the pro-British (as opposed to English) camp, I ask: British singers are human by default (with the exceptions of say, Mr. Blobby and Annoying Frog), so why not say "Human singer"? Stev0 15:57, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

This is important because its the first place I've actually read where she was born, and that she is English. Kate Bush and articles about her that I have read call her Irish. What with her brother being called Paddy I presume she is of Irish parentage/ancestry. So calling her English does 'something'. The article needs something in it to clarify how much she is Irish.Merkinsmum 23:03, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I have just checked, and edited. She has an English father and an Irish mother. Which means she may not wish to be called English, despite having been born here. Makes little sense to those outside the UK maybe. But then again, there's more mystique to being Irish/celtic.Merkinsmum 23:03, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

In response to: "Another revert war is going on, this time in the opening paragraph. True, all English singers are British singers by default. To the folks in the pro-British (as opposed to English) camp, I ask: British singers are human by default (with the exceptions of say, Mr. Blobby and Annoying Frog), so why not say "Human singer"? Stev0 15:57, 25 September 2006 (UTC)" - because Wikipedia is an international body, and everyone in the world is a human being, but not everyone in the world is British you blithering merchant of piffle. All English singers are also only English "by default" ergo your own argument has defeated you and we shan't listen to your half-baked codswollop any longer. Huzzah!

Now, now! Manners are paramount, as all good English/British children are taught from infancy. Let us not descend into nasty vitriol like those folks who write on the discussion board of Tori Amos...Ygrasil 02:49, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link Cleanup

A nice job was done with the link cleanup. However, two links I re-added: The HomeGround Magazine + Kate Bush News & Information Forum, since it's the largest and most active Kate forum, and rec.music.gaffa, the oldest Kate forum (and still very active - plus Usenet groups are always a good thing). I took out the link to the VRML site because, as far as I know, nobody uses VRML anymore. Stev0 16:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inspiration

I just alphabetized the list of artists inspired by Kate because random lists are pretty pointless. However, do we really need 40+ artists here? Stev0 04:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I know what you mean. I think it would suffice it to say that many of today's artists consider her an inspiration and leave it at that.

[edit] "Deeper Understanding"

Has Kate Bush referred to this song in interviews or elsewhere as specifically representing the interpretation that is used in this article (reference to a world of the "future") or is it speculation on the part of the author? If the latter is the case, perhaps it would be better left out. AlexMondo 07:06, 23 September 2006 (UTC)AlexMondo

She was talking about the then-present times [3]. Stev0 14:13, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand the dispute. Of course she was inspired by her own times, but the song clearly predicts a later phenomenon ("predicts" does not have to mean she intended such, only that it was alluded to and later occurred). As this is a notable fact (the record was made and a later trend echoed it's story) I really don't get the issue here or why it should be removed. Why is it better to "leave out" a historical set of facts that clearly informs the appreciation of a work of art? I did change the wording a little, hope it is better now.--Tednor 16:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Duplication?

There seems to be some duplication between the album subsections on this page and separate album pages such as The Kick Inside -- maybe the info on each album could be gathered together into one place.

Also, I remember that "Running up that hill" was a pretty big hit on New Wave radio stations in the U.S., and some people probably know Kate Bush from that song, rather than for "Wuthering Heights", but there's relatively little discussion of it on this page... AnonMoos 00:02, 4 October 2006 (UTC) "Running Up That Hill" received top 40 (not "New Wave" per se) radio play upon its release in 1985. Perhaps one of our chart spotting friends can give a reference to support this, but as someone who heard it first hand (and quite a few times) on top 40 station in Madison wI USA (never heard of kate before, and I'll never forget how the song knocked me out) I have put it in. --4.158.201.177 12:16, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tour of Life dates - are they necessary?

An entire section devoted to just the list of places where she toured - right on the main page? Seems somewhat pointless. 2_of_8 04:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd say yes, only because she only ever gave one tour. If she ever tours again, then I agree it would be pointless. Stev0 19:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wireless Radio Microphone

Someone has noted that a citation is needed for the claim "Bush was the first ever singer to use a wireless radio microphone on stage" in the Overview section. This information is confirmed on the following website: http://www.netglimse.com/celebs/pages/kate_bush/index.shtml. I know that's not the most ideal source, but should I go ahead and add the citation to the article for the time being?

76.168.253.250 22:59, 12 January 2007 (UTC)Frank

Kate discussed the radio headset microphone with Philippe Badhorn in the French version of "Rolling Stone" magazine.

Philippe Badhorn: Is it true the head microphone was invented for you? To allow you to dance when singing during this tour?
Kate Bush: Yes. A sound technician came along with this idea. I advised him to patent it. He answered: “how to patent this makeshift job made out of a coat-hanger?”.

But in an earlier interview, on the BBC program "Nationwide" Kate described how she had asked for something "...like a telephonist's headset". The initial idea appears to have been Kate's and the engineering by her sound engineer. I've not been able to find his name - I'll have to check my tour program. He was interviewed in "Nationwide" and had a Scotch accent.

Interviewer: How are you going to mic Kate so she can sing and dance at the same time?
Scottish sound engineer: With a very small microphone. A small mic, on a boom arm (gestures from his ear to his mouth)

In a radio interview, possibly by Mark Radcliffe, Kate and the interviewer were laughing about the millions that could have been made by patenting the performance headset microphone.

Other performers had experimented with alternative microphone mountings, notably Todd Rundgren and his band Utopia had modified paper-clip style booklights, the lamps removed and replaced with microphones, clipped to the lapels of their jackets. But Kate was the first to mount it to a headset.K8 fan 20:07, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I've added the link to the French Rolling Stone interview as verification.K8 fan 04:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Musical Style

From the article:

In terms of genre, Bush is clearly part of the same British progressive rock movement that also gave rise to Genesis and Pink Floyd, although her musical style is a later manifestation of this school.

The American music magazine "Trouser Press" (I believe) reviewed "The Dreaming" and described it thus: "...what 'Progressive Rock' would have sounded like had it actually progressed.".K8 fan 21:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is her current residence necessary?

A recent revision specifies the very tiny village she lives in. Is this strictly necessary? K8 fan 23:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I do not think the mentioning the recent storm mishap is necessary but her moving to this remote location fueled a lot of incorrect "recluse" press speculation during the twelve years between albums. Also Wikipedia correctly or incorrectly does put in celebrities addresses. I was shocked to see the addresses of President Bush's daughters place of residence listed. 69.114.117.103 07:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC) (Ed Kollin)

Yes, but they have the Secret Service.K8 fan 05:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

And people in the public spotlight may or may not hire security. Ms. Bush’s place of residence is very public knowledge. A good argument could be made that it should not be but that is not for Wikipedia to decide. The only relevance here is does that information need to be included in order to have a full biographical summary. Another consideration is how "living biographies" deal with this topic. 69.114.117.103 09:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC) (Ed Kollin)

[edit] POV in the Sensual World article - "Lack of Clarity"

Isn't the comment that analogue overdubbing gives Sensual World a 'lack of clarity' a POV? The phrase 'a warmth not felt on some subsequent digital recordings' would be the opposing POV (that is to say, mine!). How about substituting something like analogue overdubbing creates a sound "considered by some to lack clarity, by others to possess a warmth missing from more precise digital recordings", with a link to Analog sound vs. digital sound ? --PRL1973 12:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PRL1973 (talk • contribs) 12:12, 20 February 2007 (UTC).

I've added a link to a review of the album in the audiophile magazine "The Absolute Sound" that focuses almost exclusively, and negatively, on the sound quality of this album.K8 fan 14:03, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SNL modifications

Just changed the wording a bit to tske out POV. The basic info IE she appeared and but not on the syndicated/video remains 69.114.117.103 04:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC) (Ed Kollin)

Actually, this is not definitive. Kate's appearance has been repeated. MTV Europe has shown the complete show. Also, NBC has been showing "classic" episodes in the slot following new ones. The Eric Idle/Kate episode has been repeated at least twice.K8 fan 14:48, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Speaking of USA TV appearances do you know when and how often the Hammersmith Odean concert was broadcast on USA Network's Nightflight? I was a fan beforehand but clearly remember watching it on my 19 inch screen and getting increasing chills running down my spine. I also remember her being referred to as "The English Songbird" during that period of time but see minimal reference to that nickname on the net. 69.114.117.103 06:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC) (Ed Kollin)

No idea, though I remembered it being played fairly frequently. The producer of Night Flight, Cynthia Freedland, was definitely a fan (and should have conducted the notorious interview herself). Her production company had three shows on the USA network at one time, Night Flight, Heartlight City and Radio 1990, and Hammersmith Odean was a good way of filling 90 of the 3 or 4 hours they had.K8 fan 03:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Might be wrong as this was 25 years ago but I do think they only played part of the concert maybe a half hour. I remember "Wow","Babooska","Wuthering Heights", Her coming out of the "egg". Most of it is on you tube and "Feel It","L'Amour looks like you" and many others do not look familiar. The best thing about seeing it on Night Flight was as you probably know that it was an accident. She was to preform on the Queen Elizabeth but it was a no go due to mechanical issues so EMI distributed this film. Without that film Kate probably would be another "Where are they now" nostalgia question to me. There was just so much going on musically in that era she kind of got lost at the time. 69.114.117.103 06:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC) (Ed Kollin)

Yeah, EMI-America sent copies of "Hammersmith Odean" around as a "Video Tour". The QEII thing was never that clear, but my memory is that she was just going to travel via the QEII to the USA, not perform on the ship.K8 fan 07:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Here is a youtube link to the infamous "Live at 5" interview. The QE2 as well as the video are discussed. You are right in that it is unclear if she was to preform on board the ship [4] Edkollin 06:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Um...yeah...that's my upload.K8 fan 06:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kate Bush Under Review DVD

Article should mention that the DVD is available on YouTube and if what I have read is correct that EMI and Kate did not approve or endorse the DVD Edkollin 21:23, 24 March 2007 (UTC)