I can never decide how I really feel about Cher, do you have that problem too? Actually, I think I'm beginning to quite like her. There's all the obvious stuff: 1) She's truly a "product of the TV eye...packaged by the media," in no other age could "this" exist. (Yet, I'm not so sure that it's all that different than, say, Liz Taylor...pr the old studi(^/star system of the 1930's. And, as David Geffen was there at the crucial point of her coming out, perhaps he can be Irving Thalberg, after all...) 2) Womert supposedly aren't threatened by her (whatever that means) because deep down they think (or so TV Guide tells us) that if they had all that time and money, rr inicurists, pedicurists, dermatologists, makeup artistes, masseurs, hairline experts, wigs, clothes. . . they too, could look like That. Of course they couldn't, but it's an interesting fantasy. 3) Men tell me all the time they don't find her sexy, because she's too cold, or something like that. But I think she is sexy.. .fascinating, anyway. And even though I know she chose it, knew what the gig was when she took it...still, it's interesting to see how she copes, and where she fits.

You may well ask why am I bothering With Cher is this, America's Only Rock 'n' Roll Magazine. Well...you may choose to ignore a medium that is watched by 40 to 50 million people as compared to the 250,000 who make an album go gold... But the fact remains that Cher is the closest thing there is to "rock" regularly on TV...by the very nature of her (aborted as it was) attempt to have rockstars on her show, and the "Marriage." Who else is there? Helen (you should pardon the expression) Reddy?? Having Helen Reddy host a "rock concert" TV shdw is surely something dreamed up by Monty Python.

Cher as half of the teenage sweetheart duo (teenage my ass, wasn't Sonny close to thirty then?) never interested me much. Her bangs were kind of cute, but she always looked so sullen. I never cared much for their "hit" show together, although I suppose I'm as much of a sucker as the next for a comeback story. But his appeal I could neuer understand; and I'll just bet that he had more than a bit to do with all those moustaches Out There.,.

On her own/however, Cher was beginning to become an interesting performed, and I'm sorry that the ratings business has forced her to work with Sonny againShe may not be overly multi-talented (although Gregg told Jaan that she could cook), but she got by okay. While perhaps a bit out of her league when she attempted to sing with someone like Patti Labile, Cher was obviously ecstatic jdoing a ..umber with someone "relevant" — her own age, someone like Bowie. And those Gypsy/Dark Lady songs are always a giggle, all ^hat ECHO so perfect with The Ima^e. Her dancing is sometimes semi-embarrassing, but at least it's not middle-aged funky chicken a la Joan Baez. And I think those Laverne bits are funny.. .she's really a good comedienne. Also; no one can be too skinny as far as I'm concerned, so she gets A + in that department.

The clothes are often ridiculous of course, as in the I-mustn't-be-late-forthe-duchess'-party-hats that she and Labelle wore in their tribute to Elton, but that's part of it. In her way, she's honest; she could no more show up in a t-shirt than could Patti Smith perform wearing hot pink sequins. I think what you see is exactly what you get, People I know who know her and/or have worked with her say she is a) witty, b) bitchy, c) a great gossip and d) Really Like That. All of which is okay by me. I have a feeling that when one of her nails breaks she can laugh, .but when she gets a pimple, now there's a real crisis. And, quite frankly, isn't that the truth?

To talk about fake though, let's look at Sparks. For those of you who don't read the New Musical Express I'll repeat my views. (And for those who do, there's a line here they left out...) It was four years ago when I first saw Sparks in London on Top of the Pops. Richard Robinson, Lenny Kaye and I watched in disbelief on a color TV set in the Portobello Hotel and I recall that Richard and Lenny both — uncharacteristically — wanted to kick in the TV screen. Since then, every time they have performed in New York* I have been out of town. And when I was in London, they were away. I finally caught up with them last month at their Avery Fisher Hall concert where, in all fairness, they performed to a sellout, ecstatic crowd. A crowd, no doubt, who believe that this is a Big British Band. My friends in London say it isn't so, and their fake English accents aren't fooling me. Nor did it fool Geraldine Smith who shouted mid-concert "SHADDUP WITH THAT PHONEY ACCENT, YA CREEPS, GO BACK TO CALIFORNIA!!"

I think these things about Sparks: 1) They should spell their name Sparx. Or maybe Sparxe. 2) For the first time at a rock concert I wondered, what must the guards be thinking?? 3) If Russell Mael must wear riding boots outside his "jodphurs," he shouldn't let the skin show between the boots and the pants when he sits down to rest. 4) I once said a certain group was too arch, and Fran Lebowitz said nothing could be too arch. Sparks is. 5) Ron and Russell Mael are a couple of prissy fruits. With Ray Davies, Bryan Ferry, Orchestra Luna and real Gilbert & Sullivan to listen to, life is just too short for Sparks. 7) Ron Mael makes what he must think are Important European Faces, and this does not appear to be a man who has happy orgasms.

I remember also that Sparks is the group originally called-Halfnelson who my friend, the late Miss Christine, had coached. She told Russell all about Iggy Stooge, lent him her hair curlers and let him wear her clothes. Russell obviously learned those lessons well; he looks very much like Miss Christine. But she definitely had more balls. Come to think of it, so does Cher.