We're pondering that as we ponder singer-songwriter and worthless Janis Ian.
th of the quote. I hope never to be in her position, or face her choices, just as I hope she will speak out and condemn the atrocities the Burma's military are committing and continue to commit.
I would add this. To people say she should be stripped of her Nobel Peace Prize - did you also call for Mother Teresa to be stripped of hers? In 1979, she said “Today, abortion is the worst evil and the greatest enemy of peace … because if a mother can kill her own child, what will prevent us from killing ourselves, or one another? Nothing.” In her Nobel acceptance speech, she said something very similar.
Abortion is the greatest enemy of peace? Should she posthumously lose the prize because she believed that? Or because she refused to condemn Indira Gandhi's suspension of civil liberties four years before she was awarded the prize - in fact, she condoned it, saying ""People are happier. There are more jobs. There are no strikes." ? I'm not even going to go into baptisms of unconscious patients, or her clear endorsement of Enver Hoxha in Albania.
So...should she be stripped of the prize, albeit posthumously? Did she deserve the prize, or was it just good publicity?
For that matter, was Henry Kissinger worthy? I doubt he would have survived the #MeToo movement now, and he had plenty of blood on his hands - but his award was "For the 1973 Paris agreement intended to bring about a cease-fire in the Vietnam war and a withdrawal of the American forces".
I'm not trying to defend Aung San Suu Kyi's current silence, or her behavior regarding any group. But from what I can see, the Nobel Peace Prize is given for a specific reason, and Aung San Suu Kyi received hers "for her non-violent struggle for democracy and human rights". That she's now (as someone below put it) "gone to the dark side"... does that negate what she did before?
The lens of history, and the lens of time, both inform and destroy. You don't get the Nobel peace prize because of who you are or who you become. You get it because of something you've accomplished. I don't like it, and I detest her silence and her tacit complicity - but I also don't like the idea of stripping someone of an award they merited when it was received. That sets a very dangerous precedent.
IMHO.
I would add this. To people say she should be stripped of her Nobel Peace Prize - did you also call for Mother Teresa to be stripped of hers? In 1979, she said “Today, abortion is the worst evil and the greatest enemy of peace … because if a mother can kill her own child, what will prevent us from killing ourselves, or one another? Nothing.” In her Nobel acceptance speech, she said something very similar.
Abortion is the greatest enemy of peace? Should she posthumously lose the prize because she believed that? Or because she refused to condemn Indira Gandhi's suspension of civil liberties four years before she was awarded the prize - in fact, she condoned it, saying ""People are happier. There are more jobs. There are no strikes." ? I'm not even going to go into baptisms of unconscious patients, or her clear endorsement of Enver Hoxha in Albania.
So...should she be stripped of the prize, albeit posthumously? Did she deserve the prize, or was it just good publicity?
For that matter, was Henry Kissinger worthy? I doubt he would have survived the #MeToo movement now, and he had plenty of blood on his hands - but his award was "For the 1973 Paris agreement intended to bring about a cease-fire in the Vietnam war and a withdrawal of the American forces".
I'm not trying to defend Aung San Suu Kyi's current silence, or her behavior regarding any group. But from what I can see, the Nobel Peace Prize is given for a specific reason, and Aung San Suu Kyi received hers "for her non-violent struggle for democracy and human rights". That she's now (as someone below put it) "gone to the dark side"... does that negate what she did before?
The lens of history, and the lens of time, both inform and destroy. You don't get the Nobel peace prize because of who you are or who you become. You get it because of something you've accomplished. I don't like it, and I detest her silence and her tacit complicity - but I also don't like the idea of stripping someone of an award they merited when it was received. That sets a very dangerous precedent.
IMHO.
That's the lovely Janis Ian, isn't it?
Did you notice that to defend Aung San Suu Kyi, she had to slam Mother Teresa.
She rages against Mother Teresa but only offers one sentence criticizing Henry Kissinger.
Unlike the nun, Henry Kissinger is a War Criminal.
It's funny, isn't it, how our out-and-proud lesbian is always worshiping men?
For example, last June, there was Janis whining that "We haven't produced a Dylan yet."
We haven't found another man yet who can rip off public domain melodies, slap some words to it and pretend to be authentic?
We're with Joni Mitchell, Dylan's over-rated. His works, such as they are, matter very little.
Wait. Joni Mitchell. Oh, yeah, that's a name we never, ever hear Janis Ian utter. Thought she was pro-woman. Why is it that she never mentions Joni -- not in conversations, not in her book.
SOCIETY'S CHILD: MY AUTOBIOGRAPHY is a book of pop music. And various pop musicians get praised: Bruce Springsteen, Kenny Loggins, Leonard Cohen, Frank Zappa, James Brown, Bruce Springsteen . . . Her list of men to include never ends.
Women?
Not so much. She does mention Laura Nyro. To knock her. She mocks her as a weirdo at their mutual high school. The girl "who's name was never called when choosing sides for volleyball" is mocking someone else? Laura "had a repuation for being weird," "she looked like a caricature of Morticia Adams" wait, it gets worse, "with bigger hips." Janis notes Laura was "an amazing songwriter" but "still, she was strange" because, again, Janis is the measure of what is and isn't right.
In her book, Janis gives one woman almost a full page: Barbra Streisand.
Let's bring you up to speed, Janis is filled with shame (it's in the subtext) so she decides to get involved with a man. On page 192, she marries him. They then decide to have a child. She has a miscarriage. "So," page 193, the Streisand page, she explains, "I decided that in 1979, I'd stay home as much as possible to work on it" -- "it" being getting pregnant and giving birth. Immediately after that sentence, the following lies appear -- and, yes, they are lies:
I had plent of projects at home, more than I could handle. Barbra Streisand called one day. It was odd, talking to someone bigger than life. I picked up the ringing phone, heard a voice say, "Hi, it's me," and immediately knew who it was. That's real fame.
She told me she was doing a remake of A STAR IS BORN, one of my all-time favorite Judy Garland movies, and needed music. Was I interested?
Was I ever! I was thrilled. We spoke about the film for a few minutes, I took some notes, and then she said, "So when you get an idea, call me and we'll talk about it."
I was puzzled and said, Why would I want to do that?
She explained, "So I can have some input."
I was more perplexed, Why would I need input? I'll be writing the songs.
Streisand hesitated, then said, "Well so we can work on them together."
Now I was really confused. Why would I want to work on them together? You're a singer and actress; I'm a songwriter.
I really didn't mean to offend her. It didn't coccur to me that she might want to be in on the writing, might consider herself talented in that area. To me, she was a fantastic singer, and a wonderful actress. I was just a songwriter trying to do my job.
Needless to say, I didn't end up writing the songs. It was a long, long time before I worked on another major film.
Well, first off, she didn't work on that major film. Barbra never hired her to write a song for A STAR IS BORN.
But there's a more confusing issue, isn't there?
Why in the world would Barbra call her in 1979 to write music for A STAR IS BORN?
Does no one else question that?
Maybe it's just us, but we kind of think that a film -- a musical! -- released on December 18, 1976 would need music then. Not three years later.
Call us crazy, but we notice things like that.
Oh, Janis, you little liar, you.
Tino Sargo was only briefly in her life so she should know when she married him (September 17, 1978, if she's forgotten).
Janis writes that after this phone conversation with Barbra Streisand, she had a headache "so I went into Tino's bathroom in search of a Tylenol" only to discover "Valium. Not just a bottle, but bottles and bottles."
Poor Janis. Is she that much of a liar or did drugs and old age just fry her brain?
Because there is no way int he world that Barbra Streisand called her in 1979, three years after A STAR IS BORN was released, to ask her to write songs for the movie.
Poor Janis.
We felt that way when she complains that Tino no longer wanted to have sex with her (page 211). Poor Janis. Of course she's not the problem, in her mind, not even when she types sentences like this, "But when I began timing my cycles and checking my temperature, asking him to perform on schedule, he lost all interest." Imagine that. How shocking, if you're a self-absorbed person like Janis.
Poor Janis. We thought that reading page 205, where she's in Israel and her guide David is also her bodyguard to protect her from . . . those savages. It's the Palestinians but Janis is far too 'refined' to mention the term, isn't she? Maybe it's about time Janis was asked about the Palestinian issue?
Poor Janis. She writes (page 219) about having "very few female role models." She had no one "to pattern myself after as a professional." He role modles, she insists were men like Leonard Cohen.
Leonard Cohen?
His first album came out December 27, 1967. Three months later, Joni Mitchell's SONGS TO A SEAGULL came out. Strange how Janis works overtime to ignore Joni Mitchell. And Laura Nyro's first album? It came out over ten months before Leonard Cohen's first album? She also somehow missed Jackie DeShannon whose first classic album, THIS IS JACKIE DESHANNON, came out in 1965 and was followed by 1966's ARE YOU READY FOR THIS? and 1969's LAUREL CANYON. Or what about Buffy Sainte-Marie who, from 1964 to 1969, released six albums -- including the classics LITTLE WHEEL SPIN AND SPIN, FIRE & FLEET & CANDELIGHT, I'M GONNA BE A COUNTRY GIRL AGAIN and ILLUMINATIONS.
"There was no woman," Janis insists on page 219, "to pattern myself after as a professional." She insists that women didn't play music or write songs. She had to turn to men, like Leonard Cohen, to find her peers.
What a sexist liar. Or, to use Cher's term, c-word.
.
Janis flew on our radar with nonsense like this:
Politically, it’s very difficult right now, because the underbelly has come out in full force -- and the internet hasn’t helped, and Russia hasn’t helped, and the partisanship hasn’t helped. I’m waiting for someone to go, ‘You know what? F**k my party. F**k everything else. I’m for the country.’ Ultimately, I don’t see anybody doing that. I don’t see anybody who just puts country above party. And that’s un-American to me.
Un-American?
You know what's scary? When the victims adopt the language of the oppressors. Janis Ian, of all people, should be the last person to call anyone or anything "un-American."
And her rush to blame Russia may let her fit in -- for a brief moment in time -- with the Hillary Horde but they will only drive away those of us who stood with her in the past.
Janis has ensured she will be forgotten because, as far we're concerned, that bitch is on her own now. Embrace the Russia hysteria while you still can, Janis, it's really all you have left.
Janis Ian makes herself a joke. Kind of like in SOCIETY'S CHILD where she's always the victim. For her to be the victim in real life so many times, she'd have to be really stupid.
And wasn't it really stupid of her to out a Nashville songwriter after whining for years -- decades -- about how THE VILLAGE VOICE outed her? To this day, the woman Janis trashes in her book has not made a statement regarding her own sexuality. How nice -- that's sarcasm -- of Janis to out the woman (as well as the woman her lover leaves her for).
