Yes, Tchocolatl ~ ". . . back on Boogie Street" for sure. Self-professed in being so ~ now perceived as being "fair game" was my original comment.
Soooooo, step up to the plate with your best proposition? Even, if only implied? "'Open season' on Leonard" was another way, as I recall, that I referred to it several years ago. I'll allow for his, perhaps, having
loved it [the suggestive/complimentary[?]/flattering[?] nature of her questioning, and my simply having read his reactions wrong. Perhaps, they laughed heartily about it as 'old friends,' afterward. Perhaps, with his next album and/or book, she'll be given an "Exclusive" interview
. Neither she nor anyone else got one this time.
"Now . . . leads a person to crumble into little pieces on the carpet" ~ you lost me on that one, Tchoc. You'll have to be more specific.
True, Scandinavia/U.S. = different cultures. Cultural sensitivity as an interviewer. Not a good thing?
Leonard has been the one to keep his private life rather protected; with theories abounding as to the
relationship between his songs
and his private life. Perhaps, the interview might have gone differently had he made a trip back up to Mt. Baldy for it or had it in L.A., rather than in Paris ~ where, as you suggested, Americans get to let down their hair.
I just happen to feel that if someone is known to feel privately regarding their private life, it's respectful to honour that privacy in a televised interview. If I were Scandinavian, I might feel differently, but not sure that I feel that way just because I'm from the U.S. The questions certainly would've passed muster had she been interviewing Howard Stern, who couldn't care less about showing respect to an interviewee.
Perhaps, Stina's never seen the footage from years ago, where a woman 'propositioned' him for the evening and he bypassed it, presumably because he was being filmed and the situation was entirely too blatant for his taste. He also 'laughed'
it off in a very similar way. Perhaps, Stina expected Leonard to jokingly[?]/seriously[?] suggest that he'd need the names and numbers of those girlfriends? The whole thing [along with some other parts] simply seemed gratuitous.
Still agreeing to disagree,
[that oughtta be acceptable, as long as I'm not initiating a letter-to-the-editor campaign, right
?],
Lizzy
[/i]
