fbpx

News

Kate Bush removes Rolf Harris from the 2018 remaster of her album Aerial

Kate Bush has removed the vocal contribution of disgraced Australian entertainer Rolf Harris from the newly remastered edition of 2005 album Aerial.

Harris played the role of ‘the painter’ on the conceptual side two of Aerial, known as A Sky Of Honey and contributed a spoken word section on ‘An Architect’s Dream’ as well as actually singing on ‘The Painter’s Link’. On the 2018 remastered edition, these parts are replaced by what sounds very much like Kate’s son Bertie (Albert McIntosh), who indeed took this role when Kate performed A Sky Of Honey in its entirety, as part of 2014 live show Before The Dawn.

Rolf Harris also features on Kate’s 1982 album The Dreaming. He plays didgeridoo on the title track. That performance appears to be intact on the 2018 remaster.

There had been some debate on SDE as to whether Kate would make any changes to the recording and having heard the audio, we can confirm that it has definitely happened. It also means that the tracks in question will have been remixed, not just remastered and indeed Bertie sings much more on ‘The Painter’s Link’ than Rolf did, and the ending of that song now sounds very different as it segues into Sunset, with Kate’s vocals much more in the background than there were before.

Fans tend to not like artists messing with their albums, but one can argue that this was a special case. Has Kate done the right thing? In 2014 Harris was found guilty of 12 counts of indecent assault. SDE reached out to Kate’s representatives about these changes and received a simple ‘no comment’.

Kate’s remasters are released in two phases, starting next week on 16 November and then again on 30 November 2018.

Box Set Promotions

Compare prices and pre-order

Kate Bush

CD box # 1 - 7CD The Kick Inside to The Red Shoes

Currency:

Compare prices and pre-order

Kate Bush

CD box # 2 - 11CD Aerial to Before The Dawn + rarities discs

Currency:

Compare prices and pre-order

Kate Bush

Vinyl box 1 - a kick inside, never for ever, lionheart, The dreaming

Currency:

Compare prices and pre-order

Kate Bush

Vinyl box 2 - Hounds of Love, The Sensual World, The Red Shoes

Currency:

Compare prices and pre-order

Kate Bush

Vinyl box 3 - Aerial, 50 Words For Snow, Director's Cut

Currency:

Compare prices and pre-order

Kate Bush

Vinyl box 4 - 12 inch mixes, The Other Side 1, The Other Side 2, In Others Words

Currency:



Kate Bush Remastered Vinyl Box 1

The Kick Inside (1978)
Lionheart (1978)
Never For Ever (1980)
The Dreaming (1982)

Kate Bush Remastered Vinyl Box 2

Hounds of Love (1985)
The Sensual World (1989)
The Red Shoes (1993).

Kate Bush Remastered Vinyl Box 3

Aerial (2005)
Director’s Cut (2011)
50 Words For Snow (2011)

Kate Bush Remastered Vinyl Box 4

12″ Mixes
The Other Side 1 (B-sides)
The Other Side 2 (B-sides continued)
In Others’ Words (covers)

Kate Bush Remastered CD box 1

The Kick Inside (1978)
Lionheart (1978)
Never For Ever (1980)
The Dreaming (1982)
Hounds of Love (1985)
The Sensual World (1989)
The Red Shoes (1993).

Kate Bush Remastered: CD box 2

Aerial (2005)
Director’s Cut (2011)
50 Words For Snow (2011)
Before The Dawn (2016)
12″ Mixes
The Other Side 1 (B-sides)
The Other Side 2 (B-sides continued)
In Others’ Words (covers)

What’s in the rarities discs:

12” MIXES

  1. Running Up That Hill (A Deal With God)
  2. The Big Sky (Meteorological Mix)
  3. Cloudbusting (The Orgonon Mix)
  4. Hounds Of Love (Alternative Mix)
  5. Experiment IV (Extended Mix)

THE OTHER SIDE 1

  1. Walk Straight Down The Middle
  2. You Want Alchemy
  3. Be Kind To My Mistakes
  4. Lyra
  5. Under The Ivy
  6. Experiment IV
  7. Ne T’Enfuis Pas
  8. Un Baiser D’Enfant
  9. Burning Bridge
  10. Running Up That Hill (A Deal With God) 2012 Remix

THE OTHER SIDE 2

  1. Home For Christmas
  2. One Last Look Around The House Before We Go
  3. I’m Still Waiting
  4. Warm And Soothing
  5. Show A Little Devotion
  6. Passing Through Air
  7. Humming
  8. Ran Tan Waltz
  9. December Will Be Magic Again
  10. Wuthering Heights (Remix / New Vocal from ‘The Whole Story’)

IN OTHERS’ WORDS

  1. Rocket Man
  2. Sexual Healing
  3. Mná na hÉireann
  4. My Lagan Love
  5. The Man I Love
  6. Brazil (Sam Lowry’s First Dream)
  7. The Handsome Cabin Boy
  8. Lord Of The Reedy River
  9. Candle In The Wind

SuperDeluxeEdition.com helps fans around the world discover physical music and discuss releases. To keep the site free, SDE participates in various affiliate programs, including Amazon and earns from qualifying purchases.

149 Comments

149 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John

Just wondering what is wrong with John Peel and The Who?

Phil Cohen

Also, a segment with Rolf Harris was (at the last minute) replaced by alternate material shortly before Universal Music & Apple Corps released “The Beatles-On Air: Live at The BBC Vol.2”

Tracy

Paul are these remastered box sets limited editions in any way?

vinyl listener

this sort of nonsense is abhorrent but will push the price of originals up even more.

:)

Norman

Although I have no love for a nonce like Harris, this sort of thing will now never end. The BBC not showing any TOTP hosted by Savile. Yet for decades they paid him and covered for him, and doing it now achieves nothing. U2’s ZOO TV Tour featured samples of Hitler Youth (before an anti-Nazi ‘Bullet The Blue Sky)’. Will that also now be banned or wiped? And let’s not even start on certain rock stars in very big bands who have had a thing about liking ’em young. Will it get to a point where Bill Wyman is erased from every Stones recording? Kate is entitled to do as she wishes with her own work, but maybe a precedent will be set? If one artist does it, others will do it. But surely the point of any art is that it’s of its time, good or bad?

Chris Squires

The Irony is that I spent today watching “The Thick of it” Series 01 and Chris Langham was very funny indeed, just as he was on Not the Nine O’Clock news, I wonder how long that will last on Netflix if someone (The Reverend Mrs. Lovejoy maybe?) notices.

It won’t be on the BBC any time soon I guess.

Paul Taylor

Chris, the DVD of the second series of People Like Us was also indefinitely delayed after Chris Langham’s conviction. It did eventually come out once he’d served his sentence and why not; those programmes were hilarious and had early performances from the likes of Robert Webb and Emma Kennedy. You can’t deny these programmes were made and there was more than one actor working on them. Rolf Harris also made an appearance in a later episode of Goodnight Sweetheart but I’m not sure if the sale of those DVDs have been subsequently pulled from sale. Nicholas Lyndhurst sung Two Little Boys in another episode so if they need to erase Harris from those they’ll have a lot of work on their hands

Phil Cohen

Speaking of disgraced D.J. Jimmy Savile, “Ferry Cross The Mersey”, the movie by the 1960’s Liverpool beat group “Gerry & The Pacemakers” will never be screened again, nor will it be released on DVD or Blu-ray because Jimmy Savile appears prominently in the movie. That is the decision of the estate of Neil Aspinal (former Beatles “Roadie” and Apple Corps executive) which owns the film.

Shane

Up next we will artists changing their mudic because they dont like some parts anymore or they are in a different place now. While they have a right to, its opening up the door for other questionable choices. Revisionism should not be permitted. That said, i could not care less about this album and anyway i have it on cd and vinyl

J T

“Revisionism should not be permitted” from an artist?!

Most of the history of music, art and drama has been about making changes major and minor to works major and minor by the original artist and subsequent composers, arrangers, adaptors and/or artists down across years, decades and centuries, because “they don’t like some parts anymore or they are in a different place.” That’s what art and music IS.

How exactly do you propose we as a society go about “not permitting” artists their free expression? Shall we codify this into law and send the feds, or should we just make them live in fear of public retribution so we’re all the authoritarians?

Bar the door on “questionable choices” in art and entertainment. Oh-kay. But only after the horse has left the barn, huh?

Nothing Kate Bush is doing here impacts the countless thousands of copies of her album that have long since been sold into the marketplace and continue to circulate. We’re not talking about giving the Mona Lisa a boob job and lipstick, we’re not talking about lopping erections off totems and we’re not talking about blowing up Buddha statues, we’re talking about a re-release of a latter-day Kate Bush album with one minor guest vocalist replaced.

Every other month I hear someone complaining about when is Twitter going to allow the editing of Tweets—which WOULD equate to revisionist history—and yet every time an artist re-releases a revised edition of their work all hell breaks loose. People have a strange idea about intellectual property and free speech.

And “i could not care less about this album and anyway i have it on cd and vinyl,” at once taking credit for past success and denying participation in future, an odd sort of cudgel wielded against her: To what end? Certainly some artists risk losing their platform when they stray too far from what fans will support. I smile every time I read here of a reissue that fan reaction has made more complete. Many artists see their work as being not just collaborations with other musicians, and producers (and executives), but with fans’ likes and wants. Yet gratuitous comments like this seem to want to have the effect of taking the joyful purchase out of being an artist.

At least as many people here coming out against the innocent woman as against the guilty man, wanting to force her album to carry the scarlet letter of his vocals in perpetuity. “Just a little bit of history repeating.” Oh, but not that we really care.

Michael

Paul – as you have had a chance to listen to the remasters can I just ask re. Bertie’s vocals on Aerial. Is this the same as Before the Dawn i.e. where Bertie says “P**s off” (twice). Or are the vocals at least faithful to the 2005 Aerial and remain the same? I’m not against swearing usually but just felt these BtD additions were not needed and spoilt the Painters link somewhat

Chris2

Exactly my feelings, Paul. I even go a little bit further: I like his performance on the BTD Album. It was alright, it was live, there you go. But on Aerial it is just horrible. Kitsch and full of fake emotion. Like a bad musical singer. I really question Kates quality control here. I have nothing against changing a singer on a record, especially with this backround. But this performance in my opinion is just bad. And it troubles me for things to come that Kate obviously aimed for this because he can do better as BTD proves.

Cormac

It has been removed because he would get a percentage, she would have been generous at the time (as quoted by Mick Karn), The Dreaming would have been a one off payment from EMI do his performance remains. People have quoted that Page and other rock stars have dated children but tge difference in this case is that Harris was charged, either way I’m glad he’s gone.

Rob

I’m assuming preview links were sent out early for reviewers. How do the remasters sound Paul? Are they very different?

X

I find it really interesting to notice how people can get their feathers ruffled about something so mundane. “Oh, it’s HER work, so she can do whatever she wants to do eith it!” vs. “Oh, it’s not as if she could do this without warning us buyers!”… well, let me tell you, EVERYBODY is right. The people who think she’s God and is allowed to do whatever she wants just because she exista and also the ones who demand respect for the fans and consumers. Fact is, while you waste your precious time discussing this, it’s already been done, and I’m sure she couldn’t care less about our opinions. As annoying as people who write “She can do whatever she wants, you’re not allowed to complain” (newsflash: everybody IS allowed to complain about anything that bothers them) or those who write “She should’ve asked for our permission” (newsflash: NO, she shouldn’t), it actually amounts to nothing. So, enjoy the music in whatever form that pleases you most, choose a different soundtrack for this particular moment, elect to remain in silence, complain about whatever annoys you, or not… endless possibilities – Ms. Bush certainly doesn’t care.

Kevin from Edinburgh

“And now on Radio 4, it’s time for this week’s edition of ‘The Moral Maze’, which has been extended from 45 minutes to 3 hours in a reflection of the gravity of the morality under discussion. Note that the usual running time will resume next week when the panel asks ‘Can war ever be justified?’”

Kevin

Crivvens, some of the comments here are hilarious. KB has made a personal decision about her own work. I find it an understandable one. For someone so protective about her art, I can see that having the voice of a convicted sex abuser in the middle of it might jar. It certainly jarred for me, listening to it.

YMMV, of course. However, the idea that an artist chosing to remove the vocal of a convicted sex abuser from their work is somehow “political correctness gone mad!” isn’t really a credible one. It’s a personal artistic decision. Anyone is free to make their own artistic choice by insisting on only listening to the old version.

Woodsey Niles

I agree. KB’s personal decision is correct. Removing the vocal of a convicted sex abuser from one’s work is actually the opposite of political correctness as defined by today’s wacky moral standards. Contemporary political correctness would defend the sex abuser as the true victim because he must have had a difficult childhood… or something.

Paul Smart

I’m the opposite of most. I wasn’t going to buy it as I have the original on vinyl but now I know it is different I’m ordering it!

Dave

dear o dear ! Stop The world i wanna get off !

Foxee

Kate Bush can do whatever she pleases with her own work, and the public can react in whichever way they want – that is the whole ethos of an artist’s relationship, through their work, to society – end of.

Having said that, let’s just be bloody thankful that a new studio version of ‘Tawny Moon’ hasn’t been added in……. (SHUDDER!!!!!!!!!)

DJ Salinger

A can’t win situation for Kate, really. Imagine the brickbats if Harris was left on the track. And now read the outrage at her temerity for tinkering with the recording.

Removing his contribution now doesn’t erase him from history (like the Beeb has been at pains to do with Jimmy Savile for instance) but it does represent a moral stance and the artist’s right to do what they choose with their own creation. Either way we live in a world where both versions of ‘Aerial’ exist. Which one we choose to listen to from now on is personal choice.

But I’m inclined to agree with you Paul, a bit more information upfront would’ve been the better way to go with this campaign.

Now: who’s going to propose erasing Elton John’s contribution from ‘Snowed In At Wheeler Street’ on account of him sounding like a pub singer gatecrashing the session? Anyone?

Dave

No situation to win ! It’s a bloody album track for heavens said !!!!!!

Michael

Just want to state that anyone (like myself) who preordered the remastered Aerial would probably have appreciated a heads up on this long before now. It seems a bit 11th hour to be announcing this! I do appreciate why Kate has done it but as I say any fans making preorders for this would have been expecting RH’s contribution to still be there – it was your (and my) choice to order this in full knowledge – personally I just enjoy the music. Having said that what RH did was awful of course and he has been punished for doing so.

Getting back to the music, I really don’t think I want Bertie on my remaster as, like others have expressed, I did not enjoy his contributions on Before the Dawn at all. I wish Kate had firstly given us plenty of notice about this and secondly chosen someone other than Bertie for the replacement vocals.

You may think I’m silly but I’m seriously thinking about cancelling my pre-order as it is not the original Aerial recording. I’ll stick to my CD.

Chris Squires

It’s just confirmed my decision to only buy box set numbers I and IV. And I say that as someone who used to be a completist who wouldn’t think twice about buying Bulgarian issues and Bootleg live albums just to have them.

James Pigg

You must have been born the week after me Paul. I had Archie and Sugar Sugar as my number one single!

On Kate Bush, she has absolutely every right to do what she wants. Personally I never felt comfortable listening to his voice on the track so I am pleased it’s been replaced.

dch

I think it’s a good decision. I wasn’t going to buy the new vinyl of this because I find it annoying to listen to him: too distracting. I hoped she’d do this, she did, I’ve ordered. I’m sure I’m not alone in that view.

Julian Hancock

I am still wiping away the tears of laughter that people will pay £200 for a vinyl copy of something that was essentially recorded digitally for a CD.

poptones

I agree with that. The market dictates the value of the item. After all, a vinyl LP is also a piece of art. If it’s rare and many people want the item, price will go up. I bought the album on vinyl for €15 at a Paris store a few months after its release back in 2005. It was on sale. At the time, the market for vinyl was not a big as it is today. Few quantities available but still lots of vinyl LPs were on sale. I remember albo buying U2’s How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb for only €9 at the Virgin Megastpre in Paris at the same time. There was like 15 copies available and even after 3 days they were still available. Today, they wouldn’t last a day if they were available at that price on sale.

No reason to laugh at people who didn’t have the chance to buy those LPs when they were released originally and will have to pay £200 in order to acquire a vinyl copy of the album. These people may laugh harder if the price goes up and commands £400 on the market in a few years.

Stuart

It’s her work, she can do as she pleases

If you don’t like it, then don’t buy it

Drbryant

Kate Bush will make the creative decisions she wants to make. The artist has that right, inherently. Now, if Kate no longer had the rights, and decisions were being made by a record company without consulting her, that would be a very different issue.

memoryboy

I guess I could really care less about all this, I’m just so happy she’s releasing these albums remastered, and the bonus extra stuff.

Hopefully it sounds good. I didn’t read anything about the sound quality of this remaster (but then again it is a remastered album from 2005) so I’m curious to know what the older albums sound like.

But as far as the creepy guy being removed from the recordings from that album… I don’t really care. I also have the original release. So…. now I will have both copies.

Love you Kate!

Guy

I’m gobsmacked at the number of people here complaining about Kate’s decision! In angry response I offer the following:

a) Comparing it to buying / listening to work of musician X, Y or Z who may have committed a crime against women/girls is irrelevant. Notice how all these musicians are men? And that most of you complaining about the change (according to the names you have chosen to post with) are men? Maybe Kate, as a woman, is showing empathy with the women who were Harris’ victims? Perhaps she feels empowered enough to do this following the fantastic #metoo campaign?

b) To remove Harris’ voice from Aerial is absolutely NOT ‘political correctness gone mad’. That is a way overused phrase wheeled out every time someone is confronted by something that challenges their comfortable yet narrow-minded world view (typically that of white, middle class, heterosexual males who will often follow ‘it’s PC gone mad’ with a roll of the eyeballs and ‘what next….?’

c) If you want to knowingly consume art and put money in the pocket of sex offenders in doing so, that’s up to you, it’s on your conscience. I personally avoid doing so.

d) Some are commenting on how they are happy their original vinyl of Aerial might retain or even increase in value. I hope you are comfortable with yourselves at the prospect of making profit from perversion.

e) It’s Kate’s work, she can do what she damn well wants with it. Some things are more important than art. Get over it.

RJS

You sound like a parody of a Guardian reader!

David

on your point c.

So you’ve never watched a Roman Polanski film or listened to a John Peel session? Do you switch off if a Who track comes on or a Chuck Berry song? ETC ETC

And let’s not forget those convicted already are the tip of the iceberg so you’re definitely going to be in for a shock as more ‘artists’ get uncovered for the sick weirdos that they are.

J T

“Do you switch off if a Who track comes on or a Chuck Berry song? ETC ETC”

You do know people switch off when something they don’t like comes on the radio, don’t you? Now add to your awareness of this everyday occurrence that maybe some of these won’t-be listeners dislike those artists as people, or whatever it is you know about the Who that I don’t.

Gangsta rap kind of turned the whole thing on its head, but that used to be the default setting for mainstream society.

Your last point about the tip of the iceberg just seems misanthropic. “Sick” and “weirdo” can be subjective—entertainers’ careers used to hinge on staying in the closet, avoiding divorce, or keeping a pregnancy out of wedlock a secret—but habitually victimizing young children, as I take it to be the case here, is another thing.

“You’re definitely going to be in for a shock” when other artists’ depravity comes to light is gleefully perverse, as your actual point seems to be that people who do find this repugnant should inure themselves to the horror of child sex crimes because passively listening to the radio is cooler than having a moral compass and a second station preset.

Some people are going to switch off Adele. Others are going to switch off a felon. May it ever be thus.

Nemo

“If you want to knowingly consume art and put money in the pocket of sex offenders in doing so, that’s up to you, it’s on your conscience”

if you are a real KB fan just like me who bought the old copy you already did it. don’t be ridiculous. nobody will buy the old copies. it’s misplaced morality. nobody did know RH acts especially KB. don’t put your own psychological self non confidence on everyone there. it is very offensive.

nevertheless we may very well not agree with the fact that a work of art could be modify. for my own if the author want to to do it I have no problems with that but I understand that some people don’t like it and prefer the work keeps its integrity.

Chris Squires

Guy.
Judgmental much?
I would love to go into detail about why I think you are soooo wrong but I do get Paul’s stance at leaving politics at the door.

I will just say one thing, Kate is not and never has been “that kind of” feminist or she has never uttered as much in any interview. If she classes herself as one I would suggest it is the kind of feminism that was good until single issue politics hijacked it for it’s own means. I make that call from having read just about every interview Kate has ever done. Kate has gone on record many times times to say how she celebrates men and their role in the world and she can see the world from their point of view. Modern feminism, such that you suggest with #metoo, has been reduced to “Men-Bad, Women-Good” with political point scoring and virtue signalling being more important than actually helping people who have suffered and going around complaining to sports arenas for playing Gary Glitter or not buying records with certain people playing on them is as useless as a chocolate teapot. Once feminism goes fundamentalist (and it is going that way) all hope is lost. I don’t think for a second that Kate would ever subscribe to that “with us or against us” nonsense. I will leave others to pick apart the other points.

You have also done what I thought was impossible. You have made me nod in agreement with a post by RJS, that’s some effort.

Stupidactingsmart

He’s right about the political correctness thing though. Whether or not you agree with Bush’s decision, and whther she felt it was an artistic or a moral one, the incident has zero to do with the concept of political correctness.

There’s always the chance it was purely artistic anyway, given he’s still on another track playing didgeredoo, and she’s revised her work before.

gwynogue

Just in time for Christmas…when the shops will all be playing Bing Crosby…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bing_Crosby#Personal_life

Does he make her ‘feel nice’ now?

Will she be removing his name-check from “December Will Be Magic Again”?

Disney Mike

This is art by a living artist. She is free to make whatever changes she wants, for whatever reasons she wants. I know nothing about this guy or his crimes, but I applaud her for making this decision. This is the version of the album she wants to put out now.

If people want to be fragile little snowflakes and whine about revisionism and history, then PLEASE feel free not to ever rethink anything from your own past. Let her do the same.

Garax

Reading through these comments it’s clear that this is not just a difficult subject to find agreement on – but more or less impossible.

My view is that I can’t imagine this was an easy choice for Kate – she seems so precise in how she puts things together.

I know I’ve tended to skip the Rolf tracks. In the main because I find he derails my ability to listen to the music without being pulled out of it by my response to him as a person.

I think for people going ‘why not the dreaming’ – for me it’s simple – it’s not his voice – it’s not Rolf as Rolf guest starring all over a bunch of tracks.

Now – all that said – equally I think Kate has a fairly horrible track record when it comes to tinkering – correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t think she’s improved or even equalled a single thing when she’s gone back. I have a soft spot for Deeper Understanding but that’s a flawed song in the first place so it can take some remoulding.

For anyone who attended BTD or listened to the live album I suspect there is also an inward sigh at the idea of Bertie being let near anything. He’s not going to reach his mothers status within the rock fermament put it that way. Although the first track on 50 Words for Snow is magnificently beautiful and the already mentioned DU I personally like for its sonic pileup – so it’s not an absolute guarantee of cringe – but I rather fear we shall be served up considerable amounts of ham.

FM

Kate’s decision makes total sense to me; I don’t see what the big deal is. But predictably enough, the anti-PC brigade are out in full force, insisting that Kate making her own choices about her own work is somehow some kind of attack on civilization.

Jon

I just don’t get fans who think they have every single right to tell an artist what they can or cannot do with their back catalog. It’s ridiculous. Kate doesn’t owe us anything.

Nemo

it’s not the point.

Andy Haines

Lots of views for both sides of the “argument”. I doubt I’m going to be able to add anything new on this, but there are many pieces of music out there that have been produced, written, composed, performed, covered, contributed on, duetted on by people who are no longer deemed fit to be called a human being by society regardless of whether they have been found guilty or not. Whilst Rolf Harris may have been convicted of his actions we can’t forget he exists. We have a copy of Two Little Boys. It’s not going to get thrown away as it holds memories that we associate within our family. Good memories. The recent debacle of accusations against Roy Harper were thankfully overturned, but the hatred by some was appalling! Guilty until proven innocent! What KB has done is what she thought best. Whether it’s right or wrong is debatable as we can read here in the comments. For me it’s not the album that was originally released and that may be a deciding factor on repurchase. Should we all be forced to return our original copies for them to be destroyed and replaced by the new version? I’m sure some of you would willingly do so, but others may change their mind!

Kevin

Since I rarely listened to the 2nd disc, I have no opinion one way or the other.

Ian mcjannet

I’m sick to death of political correctness and I’m totally against re writing history…
Changing records…taking down statues it’s all wrong.
History is part of life …get over it and stop butchering original music !!!!!

Chris Lancaster

I’ve got no real view one way or another, but how far does one take this sort of thing? For instance, do you never watch any Miramax film again (such as Pulp Fiction, Shakespeare in Love or The Crying Game) because they were made by Harvey Weinstein’s company (or in some instances produced by Weinstein)? Take back any clothes you ever bought from Top Shop because of Philip Green? Refuse to watch The Thick of It because it starred Chris Langham? Stop listening to The Who? The list is endless.

alan hansen

it seems to me that the question at hand isn’t whether Kate CAN do this bit of revision, but rather SHOULD she have done it. adding more fodder to the conversation: Roman Polanski gets standing ovations in Hollywood and abroad, though statutory rapist he be. and I’m confident that “Rosemary’s Baby” got plenty of views prior to the Halloween holiday. I’ll keep my original cd and likely give the new version its fair day in court.

Gus Campbell

Rolf Harris’ turn as “The Painter” sullies an otherwise beautiful recording. I think of this move as like cleaning a dirty painting – removing the stains of time.

Willy

Remove Rolf, fine. But maybe she should also think about removing The Infant Kiss from Never For Ever. Would anyone else get away with releasing that song?

Andy Haines

It’s inspired by The Innocents. Check it out. It’s not what you think.

Gorecki

And it’s an excellent film anyway – so should be more widely seen.

Nemo

just few words >>> it’s ridiculous

RJS

A lot of talk about royalties but I doubt very much that Harris ever received any. Like a session musician or singer, he most likely received a one off fee or, given that he was a friend of Bush, he probably did it as a favour.

Mike Ellis

It’s more that he would receive recognition, he would still be listed in the credits

Dogfacedboy

Heading off the Daily Mail at the pass isn’t it really? Funnily enough myself and a pal were discussing whether this would happen just last week.

If he was cooler or cred then Rolf would get a pass (it was the 70s etc) but replacing him with nasal Bush Jr – hmmmm. Then again I have an original vinyl press and I think its pretty dull and lifeless so will be interesting to hear what the ‘de-Rolfed’ shellac sounds like

David

It’s Kate’s album she can she whatever she wants. She doesn’t come round to your house when your planning on rearranging your garden and tell you, you can’t change it.

bob

Maybe, but I don’t charge people for looking at my garden…

Carl

There again i am not planning on selling numerous copies of my garden to anyone.

jason

Jerry Lee Lewis still makes records…

I own an original copy of Aerial, and while I don’t think I’ll be parting with it, suggesting that the value jumps because an artist who has participated in criminal acts is part of the project does not do much to enhance the value. It would be like owning racist books just because they might be hard to find and who wants to profit off of someone’s suffering? I think what she has done is fine and just makes me want to own it again since it’s different and it’s not like she changed all the musical parts or anything.

Body Count removed Cop Killer from all pressings of that album after it was deemed to incendiary and that was back in 1992. Now Ice-T plays a cop on TV…

Stupidactingsmart

I read the comment about value to mean it would jump due to the original recording being less widely available on an official release, having been altered for the new issue. Not due to Harris’ notoriety.

Kevin

Body Count removed Cop Killer from its album because of the political pressure being applied to Warner Bros. (their label) by the US government and law enforcement organizations. Ice-T figured it wasn’t worth all the hassle. Not the same thing.

Peter Anderson

Always hated Bill Wyman’s drumming But his bass playing wasn’t bad! Funnily enough Lionheart is my favourite Kate album but I won’t mind if she has decided to revisit it as have the original vinyl. :)

daveid76

This is ridiculous though fairly predictable. It’s largely motivated by fear of not doing it and general group-think conformity. Its clearly not enough that he’s done his sentence for the wrongs he committed. There must be no evidence left of any good he did. The guy was a national treasure and hugely popular but now we feel guilty that we liked him and are trying to assuage this guilt by erasing him from the public memory and painting him as a pure villain. Meanwhile Jimmy Saveloy’s laughing his head off in Hell.

Kate Kate Kate

Kate will do anything from keeping the DVD we were promise from being released. All the shows she did please no camcorders or cell phones during my shows. We will have a film crew and make a DVD… Kate goes home sees the DVD ugh I’m so large I’m not releasing this ever. Thanks Kate I been waiting 4 years to see this and I get a multi track recording of the show. Where you really need to see everything.

David M

Get over it. You are not entitled to anything.

Alex22

Rolfs artwork now sells at a much greater price than when he was a free man.
Although being on the secondary market. He doesn’t benefit, but you can lay money on original vinyl copies of Aerial increasing in price and desirability.

Stan Butler

Well my sealed 2005 copy of Ariel should now keep its value with this news, so I”m ok with it.

Michael McA

Obviously a music fan

Stan Butler

Mais oui. I also have a opened vinyl copy and two cd copies. Vinyl copies cost £20 in HMV in 2005. Listened to it many many times, pre Rolf’s conviction and after. Made no difference to the enjoyment. No offence to the lad but I think I’d rather have Rolf on it than Bertie.

Michael McAlister

Glad to hear it! (and apologies for the sarcasm)
I must say I’ve always liked the sound of RH’s voice.

Carl

Is she removing him from Dreamtime as well ?,i think i am right in saying he played Didgeridoo on it.
He is despicable but does revisionism work? its a strange one , Hitlers on the telly all the time mind.

David B

just wondering though . .what next? Will Alice Cooper remove his cover of Rolf’s “Sun Arise” from his “Love it to death”LP, or Joan Jett disown her cover of Gary’s “Do you want to touch me” or Tommy James his cover of “I love you love me love” ??? Actually er no they haven’t ..indeed Joan’s cover was included on her recent film soundtrack .. and don’t forget Oasis pay Gary each time a copy of “Morning Glory”album is sold (check out the credits for their “Hello” ..includes part of Gary’s “Hello hello i’m back again”) .. difficult for Kate though but did anyone remove Jim Gordon (famous session drummer-who killed his 72 year old mother) from their tracks (er Derek & The Dominoes, Nilsson, the Byrds, the Beach Boys “Pet Sounds” no less ..) again the answer is no .. no-one did .. interesting that …

Aidan

It is the artist’s choice what they release and it’s our choice as to whether we buy it.

In this case if it was me I would have made the same decisions as Kate Bush to replace RH’s vocal.

What I think is criminal is to replace it with Bertie’s vocal! … I’m half joking – I found his contribution at the Before The Dawn concert really jarring.

Rik Skyline

Hi Glen, I’ll tell you how I deal with a favourite artist who is convicted of disgusting behaviour – I wouldn’t watch ‘Rolf’s Cartoon Club’ ever again.

Sam

Has there been an official announcement as to whether or not the vinyl box sets will come with free high quality downloads?