>>>Catherine opined: Maybe she's perceived as being too big for her britches, so >people want to cut her down to size. I think this rankles some people all the more >because she's female.>> >>> >>> > >L'il Bird answered: I think it's the same syndrome that has been afflicting dear old >Martha Stewart since the early 90s. > > My day to be a disagreeable son of a bitch [sexist phrase, used as an emphatic ironic joke :-) because if the guy is a jerk it must be his mother the bitch's fault...]
For Martha, I don't think it is because she is a woman that she is getting overly slammed by the feds (which she is). I think it was originally because she has been so damned in our faces perfect all these years and anyone who sets their own self up as just so perfect is going to catch hell when s/he stumbles. There is a part of me that was really happy to see Martha get in trouble because her act was worn out on me a long, long time ago. And trust me, their are certain folks who are delighted to see Martha in the headlines because it keeps the focus off of worldcom, Enron, etc. as well as the political party and politicians that they have given so much money to and have corporate crime problems of their own. I do have an idea that Martha is innocent, a just recently formed idea, that Martha is innocent. It is a technical matter of what she knew and when she knew it and who she tipped off, but she may well be totally innocent. And if that is so, I will be angry that they went after her as a media diversion from the much more significant corporate corporate crime out there. I am not sure about Joni getting criticized more because she is a woman. She is a rock icon, a music icon, and she gets the good and the bad. I cannot agree that every negative review is unfair, unfair to our poor Joni, etc. Balance all the awards given to her against the criticism - she has had plenty of accolades, a tremendous number actually, and plenty of brickbats too as have everyone who is at her level. Gees, Greg Kot, who always writes glowingly of Joni in the Chicago Tribune, recently reviewed Dylan's concert as (paraphrase) finally incorporating some life in the set list. On the same week that it is announced that a statute is being built for her, a few negative reviews in a few papers don't mean shit. And after all, when the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inducts you, is it so damned hard to show up and graciously receive the award? Isn't it a little odd that joni arranges to receive the damned award when she is videotaping a concert to be sold to promote a tour? I love her, but she ain't beyond criticism. In fact, it is her very flaws that probably make her so outstanding an artist because an artist who basks in perfection (a la Martha) has long ago lost touch of real life. Joni is flawed, Joni is real, and that is an extra dimension to the compelling nature of her music. Speaking of the Chicago Trib and Joni, in a recent review of Grace Slick's art show in Chicago, all paintings of rock and rollers, they mentioned all the 60s/very early 70s rock stars and icons that grace has painted portraits of in once category. In the category of Grace painting portraits of current, contemporary artists, Joni was mentioned in that category. Joni still gets plenty of good press too. And of course no one should ever criticize Joni because she NEVER EVER criticizes anyone else, does she???????? Vince the iconoclast
