In regards to the whole "BMS forced / Deb taking direction / etc, etc, etc"
argument, Karen Gibson responded with:

> Her feeling was that because she comes from a theatrical background, she 
> feels comfortable being versatile and trying on other "roles", even in her 
> music . When she was given a particular goal or objective to accomplish 
> by the record company, she put herself into and went for it. She enjoyed 
> doing it, but it's probably not what she would have come up with if left 
> to her own devices (which she was on this album)

   Hallelujah!! Perfect answer!
   
   I've been holding my tongue on this for some time, because I have no
personal knowledge of how the music industry works... but I do consider 
myself an expert on commercial and government programming and system
design, since I make a living at it...

   Now, when I signed on with the company that I work for, I came in
with the express understanding that I could do pretty much what I wanted
as long as the final product was acceptable to the company I signed with. 
It doesn't matter if I create the ultimate football game... if I was supposed 
to write a projectile tracking system, I didn't produce what I was contracted 
to write and thus did not do my job...

   "Higher-ups" tell me what the final product should look like and do...
it is up to me to get there. I get to do the job any way I want to,
given two constraints: 1) what it is supposed to do and  2) how long
I have to do it. I get lots of input along the way from coworkers,
evaluators, testers, etc... sometimes people suggest I consult with someone
else on how to achieve certain criteria... and sometimes, given the two
constraints above I have to rely on others advice/familiarity with a problem 
to get results that are satisfactory to the higher-ups.

   I consider myself an artist, of sorts. I write code for a living.
To most people, that might not seem artistic... but consider: I am bound
by formal rules, which I can change or modify with some effort, (the syntax 
and logic of programming languages), but within that scope it is my 
creativity, imagination and skill that provide a finished product for other 
people to judge... I'd say (ignoring what was in parentheses) that the same 
definition holds true for writing and creating music... they just have
different kinds of rules. You could extend the same definition to to 
writing prose or poetry.

   Indeed, a study at Berkeley a few years back suggested that people
who had musical and/or English backgrounds were significantly better
programmers than people with math backgrounds, but now I'm off target...

   Anyway, despite the fact that many times the final product isn't what
*I* would want if I was in charge of things, I am always completely
satisfied with *my* work because I put everything I have into doing the
job that people tell me should be done. Of course it is more personally 
rewarding to do an original project from start to finish, than it is to
create a work influenced/conceived by someone else... *BUT* I take just
as much pride in the fact that I did the job well in either case. As long
as I meet the requirements set forth by those judging the work, I have
done a *good* job.

   In the case of BMS, and to some extent AIP can't you say the same thing
of Deborah? She was contracted to use her skills, intelligence and creativity
to produce a product that met certain criteria defined by "higher-ups" at 
Atlantic (or so I was led to believe...) Towards that end she went full tilt
into producing music that met those definitions. It wasn't what she would
have produced if left to her own devices... but thats not what she was
trying to do! 

   I get a great charge out of having to to work under certain constraints,
because while it limits you in some ways, it forces you to grow in others.
Putting everything you have into producing something that meets someone
elses standards (whether you like/dislike those standards or not) is *just*
as valid as doing the same for yourself. Even if the final results aren't
something I particularly like, as long as I produced 'whatever it is' that
the contractor wanted, I have done a good job that I can be proud of.

   Deborah was being influenced by and operating under suggestions from
people who were defining a style or type of music they wanted her to
produce for a given album. There is nothing wrong with that. I have every
confidence that she gave it her all and then some when working on the last
two albums. She was just concentrating more on producing a work that was
being at least partially defined by someone other than herself. No big deal.

   It was still Deborah. She is undoubtedly still proud of her work on the
last two albums which are every bit as good in their own way as the first
two. If you don't like the music, or style, or whatever, thats fine. But don't
think Deborah "sold out" or was "pushed" into it. I know from my own 
experiences that it is very easy to become exited about, and lose yourself
in working towards a goal or product set down by someone else.

   Dont get me wrong... there is a time to put your foot down and say "This
is ridiculous, wrong and I'm not going to be involved in such a ridiculous
waste of time/energy/money/effort." But I dont think it ever came even
remotely close to that...

   Just had to get that out of my system... :)