Music Monday: 15 Minutes With Bat for Lashes

Photo from Picasa using a Creative Commons license.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Natasha Khan might be a warrior on stage, but she didn’t look much like her musical persona, Bat For Lashes, when we met her on a dusty access road backstage at Outside Lands. Absent were the circles of glittery eye-shadow, pastiche ’80s outfits and feathered headdresses. Khan is known almost as much for her style as for the haunting lyrics and etheral voice that distinguish her sophomore album, Two Suns. Adorned in a simple red dress and brown moccasins with just a hint of blue and gold around her eyes, the singer/songwriter sipped tea and chatted about touring with Radiohead, building buzz in the States, and life after the Big Apple—not to mention magic carpets, emerald cities and the Freudian psychology of Steven Spielberg.

Mother Jones: Is this what you’ll be wearing on stage?

Natasha Khan: No, but I want to be comfortable because with festivals it gets quite sunny. It’s not so hot which is good. When we played Lollapalooza, it was like 96 degrees and I was wearing full, like, a sparkly leotard and it was a bit much. So I might wear something a bit more comfortable but I’m not sure yet.

MJ: You went from New York City to Joshua Tree National Park on this album. Why?

NK: I wanted to be somewhere that was just really the opposite of New York. [In Joshua Tree] I set about creating my mythology, I suppose. The duality of the landscapes definitely influenced different sounds in the music. It’s almost different fairytales. It felt like the desert and the earth and the nature were connnected to the esoteric, spiritual aspects of the record and the more tribal sounds. New York was very much to do with escapism and, like, disillusionment—being subterranian and dark and the sparkely escapist sort of elements which are more to do with numbing yourself. I started to think of this fable: The album is kind of like I go across to New York, to this City made of glass and emeralds. It’s me going through that journey.

MJ: Did you read a lot of fairy tales growing up?

NK: Yeah. My dad was very much a storyteller. He grew up in Pakistan, and being religious I think he had a lot of that moral kind of children’s stories, with moral endings. Stories about the jungle and about kings and about magic flying carpets like all that beautiful stuff. And also growing up in the English countryside, there’s like The Secret Garden, and Roald Dahl and The Witches. When I was little I would go around seeing if I saw ladies with gloves on and see if they look like they were wearing a wig. And then as I grew older, I got attracted to musicians and people who tell stories, like Nick Cave and PJ Harvey or Bjork, with her Icelandic follktale elements.

MJ: What are you working on now?

NK: I’m in a giving-out phase at the moment. When you’re making music it’s a very selfish, kind of an amazing thing to do. You spend 12 hours a day doing like, working on tiny minute details and collecting sounds. You get tears in your eyes when things sound beautiful and it’s such a nourishing thing to do. And then suddenly it flips completely the other way and you have to be generous and selfless. You almost feel that you’re not really alive in some sense except when you’re singing. You just feel like your body’s telling you to hide under a duvet or somewhere and not come out, or just scream at people. It feels like you have to be a warrior to push through.

MJ: How are you enjoying the festival?

NK: This festival I’m really happy about, because I love Golden Gate park and I love the surrounding countryside. It makes me feel more rejuvenated than drained. But there’s some big huge corporate festivals that are literally like my worst nightmare. Just zillions of people with, like, super loud techno and everyone’s fucked up on drugs and everything is concrete. I don’t quite enjoy that.

MJ: You said you get a lot of your inspiration from reading and research. What are you reading now?

NK: I’m reading about the science fiction films of Steven Spielberg. It’s basically like Freudean psychoanalysis of his films.

MJ: Why’s that?

NK: Just because I love E.T. and them, and I looked on the Internet and just found something I’d like to read about that. Anyone can do that. I think we should do that more ofiten. If you see a subject, something you like, investigate it.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate