[joe-frank-list] Kate?

Harold Johnson harold.johnson at gmail.com
Sun May 1 09:28:22 PDT 2005

Do we really need to return to the conversation about "Kate"?  I
understand Steve here is just now exploring this subject, and that's
his prerogative, but personally I'd rather participate in a discussion
about Joe's *current* work.

Don't mind me; go ahead and talk about Kate to your heart's
content...I know it's a fascinating subject...

Harold J.

On 5/1/05, Steve Schneider <steve at theavocadopapers.com> wrote:
> Well -- I guess I should qualify what I said about my uneasiness
> referring to Joe Frank as "Joe": I realize that it's a convention on
> lists like these to refer to the subject of the list by his or her first
> name, and that that doesn't necessarily imply a familiarity that isn't
> there.  So I don't mean to suggest that anyone on this list is doing
> that.  Maybe it's particularly tricky with a "subject" such as J.F.,
> since one might be inclined after listening to dozens and dozens of his
> shows -- and particularly Karma-like shows -- to think that one "knows"
> him, since the shows are, at least seemingly, so personal in nature.
> Anyway: Kate: anyone?  No takers?  K, whether there are or not, here's
> another question to ponder, and it doesn't require speculation about
> someone's personal life: what do you think is J.F.'s feeling about Jack
> Kornfield?  As far as I know -- and I could be wrong -- J.K.'s first
> appearance on a J.F. show is in the first Karma program.  I SWEAR that
> J.F. put a laugh track over that first appearance (yes, there is often
> audience laughter in K's segments, but this was more overt, and the
> laughter was at particularly inappropriate moments), and I proceeded,
> through a few more Karma shows, to think that J.F. had included the J.K.
> "reflections" as an example of a futile worldview.  But that doesn't
> seem to be the case at all.
> The only time I've even ever heard J.F. refer to the J.K. segments was
> in an interview: he says something about his shows being "religious" in
> the sense that it contrasts the sacred and the profane (note: that's a
> paraphrase).  With the sacred represented by Kornfield's lectures and
> the profane represented by "normal" people such as J.F., Debi Mae West,
> and L. Block just dealing with life's struggles as best they can.  I
> have to say, personally, that I find the Kornfield lectures to be my
> least favorite parts of the shows in which they appear; I hesitate,
> though, to fast-forward through them because the artist who created
> these shows put them there and I feel that I should therefore listen to
> them.  But I find the other stuff -- the phone calls with L.B., D.M.W.,
> J.F.'s mother, D. Rafkin, and others; the first-person narrations of the
> latest Kate drama; the reminiscences of things like the NYC blackout;
> etc. -- to be much more entertaining, interesting, enlightening,
> relevant, etc.
> Would love to know others' thoughts on this topic.  And the Kate topic.
> Call me a gossip-monger; I don't think I am being one (although I will
> admit to a certain amount of gut-level curiosity).
> -- Steve.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: joe-frank-list-bounces at armory.com
> [mailto:joe-frank-list-bounces at armory.com] On Behalf Of Harold Johnson
> Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 9:25 PM
> To: Joe Frank Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [joe-frank-list] Kate?
> Importance: Low
> Hi Steve,
> I haven't posted to this group a whole lot either, though I've been
> watching it off and on for a few years.  I'm glad to see you've posted,
> especially since you seem to have taken the time to post a well-thought,
> intelligent and considerate post.
> So here's my thoughts: I don't believe there are any particular rules
> here; I would expect the common sense protocols common on many online
> forums.  In other words, respect your neighbor, etc.  Though I'd imagine
> many of us hold Joe Frank - or at the very least, his art - at high
> esteem, but I'm not about to say I worship him (yet; though if he starts
> a religion, I don't know, LOL).
> I find it funny that you say you're not quite comfortable referring to
> him as "Joe" yet; I've often had the same feeling.  When I refer to him
> here or on one of my blogs - let's say I'm writing some commentary about
> storytelling artists or something - I'm inclined to refer to the man by
> his full name, too.  I believe it's because I don't wish to be perceived
> as one of those nutjobs who talks about a celebrity/artist/whomever as
> if they *really* know her.  (I'm not referring to any of you posting to
> this list - except for you, of course, Larry Block.  That's a joke,
> LOL.)
> Example: Following is a link to some commentary I recently posted in
> which I mentioned Joe Frank; you'll, however, that I *crossed the
> line* and referred to him by his forename:
> http://www.somethingthathappened.com/2005/04/hi-reed-i-want-to-express-t
> o-you-how.html
> That's all I have to say for now.  I'm off to watch an episode of
> Deadwood I picked up at Goodwill; I hear this show's pretty decent.
> Harold J. Johnson
> _______________________________________________
> Joe Frank Mailing List
> joe-frank-list at armory.com
> http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list

More information about the joe-frank-list mailing list