|
Bill Marrazzo’s paycheck
Re “What price Public TV?” by Dan Rottenberg (Editor’s Notebook)—
I agreed in toto re Bill Marrazzo and his bonanza. Our production company, Longshore Films, had a documentary called Boardwalk, about the Wildwood Boardwalk, shown on WHYY TV. In dealing with the station I always had the feeling that it was so clubby and inbred that outside ideas had little or no chance of penetrating. Plus the film was originally shown as part of WHYY’s fund-raiser, and I know people who sent money and never received their gift copy. Sloppy and smug is how I’d characterize them.
They do seem to like Jerry Blavat, though, which is a step in the right direction.
Bob Ingram
Burleigh, N.J.
November 19, 2008
I watch WHYY-TV regularly. You made a few good points. But the Sawallisch tribute this past September that you mentioned should not be confused with “On Canvas,” the local arts series that WHYY launched last spring. it’s really a good show. Check it out.
Mike Smith
Fairmount
November 19, 2008
The controversy regarding Marrazzo’s pay is a storm at sea. In other words, a diversion. Back on land, the darker problem is WHYY’s overall funding, including the charade that it’s a “public” outlet.
Let’s get real. Over the years, what was once considered “public” radio and TV have morphed into another commercial conglomerate. Witness the stealth ads that appear with almost as much frequency as those on for-profit stations. (”Manny’s used car dealership is a proud supporter,” etc. Yeah, sure.)
Not only is WHYY not public (apart from those suckers in the public who donate), it suffers from a kind of Soviet-style blandness. This is the consequence of not trying to defy its paymasters in Washington. These, of course, thanks to Bush (yes, another Bush intrigue), are political hacks who.... well, you know.
True public broadcasting should be funded by a tax (à la the BBC). Those upset about Marrazzo’s salary should really be complaining of WHYY’s con job that hoodwinks the public into pouring money into an empty vessel.
Richard Carreño
Center City
November 19, 2008
Fan mail
A few months ago I discovered Broad Street Review when I took over as marketing director of Vox Ama Deus. Your talent with the written word is something to which we all can aspire. I am consistently amazed by the logical flow of your articles in articulating your points, as well as the succinct yet buoyant flair you bring to the stories you tell. Keep it coming.
Michael Hayden
Marketing director
Vox Ama Deus
Gladwyne, Pa.
November 19, 2008
The Barnes move
I don’t think any newspaper has seriously considered the issue of who is going to support the Barnes Foundation’s building in Philadelphia. It’s highly likely that the Barnes will be a serious drain on the cultural budget of the city and the state and will siphon off charitable money from other cultural institutions— and for what? To move paintings five miles and destroy an institution eligible for National Historic Landmark status because Ed Rendell and Ray Perelman think it’s a good idea for Philadelphia’s tourist industry?
Nancy Herman
Merion, Pa.
November 4, 2008
Philip Roth’s Indignation
Re “What Philip Roth knows about me,” by Ted Hechtman—
This is a beautiful response, and I bet shorter and more insightful than Updike’s in whatever upcoming issue of the New Yorker. Roth’s magic, like Oprah’s and Obama’s, transcends race and religion by letting us all in.
In a very different genre, Deepak Chopra’s Life After Death is brave enough to describe the strange and increasingly surreal landscape of our impending dotage!
Margaret Chew Barringer
Narberth, Pa.
November 12, 2008
While reading Indignation I had the feeling that I was truly reading a novel that was one of Phillip Roth’s best works. Its brevity was remarkable, considering Roth’s penchant for lengthy descriptive sentences. It proves, I imagine, that sometimes you can make a profound statement on life’s adventures and misadventures without long, drawn-out commentary.
Indignation was a fabulous piece of writing and one of my favorites of Roth’s works.
Arnold Bank
Flourtown, Pa.
November 12, 2008
Enough about Philip Roth already. When is someone going to review our own editor’s new book, Death of a Gunfighter? The Wall Street Journal (Nov. 11) was favorable, so let’s see what BSR thinks.
Bourne Ruthrauff
Center City
November 12, 2008
Non-racist Obama limericks
Your Obama limericks (Editor’s Notebook) aren’t racist per se, but there is a raft of deeply and maliciously racist Obama jokes polluting the Internet and society at large. Many of them have their birth in law firms, which says something about that profession.
Bob Ingram
Burleigh, N.J.
November 12, 2008
There once was an editor Dan
Who kidded the winner who ran
In the race to be prez
But the old prof, he says,
Some of your lines do not scan.
Gerald Weales
University City
November 12, 2008
Those are just great! They scan perfectly, the rhymes are witty and at times astonishing. Just marvelous.
Dan Coren
Queen Village
November 12, 2008
You reactionaries obviously don’t see that this misty moment requires a sensitive poetic form, namely the haiku:
Black-faced white heron
alights on the pond— Cheney in cat-o’-nine-tails!
Rick Soisson
East Falls
November 11, 2008
Glenn Gould vs. Roslyn Tureck
Re “The forgotten virtuoso: Roslyn Tureck,” by Dan Coren—
I was fortunate to attend a recital by Tureck, who was most impressive and grand in her gown and boa. (I can’t remember if she played wearing it. Where does one put it, in the bench?) She played all the Goldberg Variations, lots of Preludes and Fugues, the Italian Concerto, and then took requests, saying, “Anything at all— I know all of Bach’s music by heart.” Whether it was a stage trick or not, it had the enormous impact it was meant to.
I never forgot her harpsichord-like approach to the Italian Concerto, using the piano as if it had registrations. Gould? Never liked him, hated listening to him, thought he was somewhat ridiculous, if also brilliant. Tureck kept performing long after he quit, so I think she did all right in the long run.
But I’m afraid that neither of them compare to the original: Wanda Landowska. On harpsichord or piano, she was extraordinary. I’ve never heard better Beethoven, Mozart or Haydn, on piano or harpsichord, not to mention the pure genius of Landowska’s harpsichord playing.
The only player I’ve heard come close to her was Igor Kipnis, who was pretty terrific. She is not forgotten, but every musician should study her closely. She taught me so much that she completed my training as a harpist. I know that Sharon Isbin did extensive coaching with Tureck and learned a lot from her. I would like to see someone pursue such a career— not in Bach, but in Handel and other composers.
Saul Davis
Center City
November 16, 2008
The Met’s Dr. Atomic
Glad to see Steve Cohen’s review of the Met’s Doctor Atomic at the cinema. I got to see this at The Bridge near Penn, which had much better sound and video quality than the Regal Cinema in Delaware. Unfortunately all coming Met shows at The Bridge are sold out of decent seats!
Despite the annoying woman eating her lunch loudly in a nearby seat, the powerful parts of the opera did come through. I think the ending of Act 1 is so much above most of the opera that it hints at what John Adams could do with more dramatic material. The opera was way too long, weighted down by its very limited timeframe ("We’re gonna explode the bomb! What’s the weather? Oh no, the weather is bad! Will we end the war? Will we end the world!")
Unlike my friend, who thought the final ending suspenseful and dramatic, I found it long and tedious. I liked the music, but just sitting and waiting for the bomb to go off reminded me of the Parsifal I saw in Houston directed by Robert Wilson. I think one set piece took 20 minutes to slowly make its way from upstage to downstage right in that highly praised interminable production.
I agree with Steve Cohen’s assessment of the "romance" subplot. Not much there, sadly, despite some nice sexy moves and good voices. Still Gerald Finley’s Oppenheimer was quite a performance, and worth the price of admission.
I hope to see the DVD of the Sellars version; I hope it is more exciting.
Ron Ozer
Arden, Del.
November 12, 2008
The case for impeachment
Re “Bush: The final days,” by Robert Zaller—
I believe that Bush has committed acts that merit impeachment and conviction. But there are approximately 75 days until the inauguration of President Obama. The Republicans still have 49 seats in the Senate and 199 seats in the House. The process consists of two steps. The House votes to impeach. The Senate tries the case. Does Robert Zaller really believe that it is a proper use of legislative time to even attempt the process?
There are so many important actions the Congress could take to help the average citizen survive the current economic crisis, which is due in no small part to the actions— and inactions— of the Bush administration. Let us use these remaining days to attempt to offset what history will adjudicate as one of the worst presidencies in our history.
Robert S. Cohen, Esq.
Center City
November 5, 2008
Robert Zaller on Bush/Woodward makes all the more meaningful Obama’s victory.
Still, I hate to see a swine skate.
Bob Ingram
Burleigh, NJ.
November 5, 2008
Robert Zaller replies: Congress has at all times no more important duty than to fulfill the sworn responsibility Bush has so egregiously violated: to preserve, protect and defend our Constitution. Even if time were lacking to draft a bill of impeachment (many people have already offered versions of it), an initial investigative committee would still serve the purpose of getting on record the factual basis of an impeachment, and lay the groundwork for a Justice Department proceeding against Citizen Bush for violations of the federal criminal code. The lawless acts of the Bush administration, if unpunished, will serve as a precedent for claims of executive privilege and authority by subsequent presidents.
Mr. Cohen suggests that history will "adjudicate" the matter. I am a professional historian, and unfortunately I lack any judicial powers. Those who do possess them have the responsibility to exert them.
Unusual Acts of Devotion
Re Dan Rottenberg’s review of Unusual Acts of Devotion by Philadelphia Theatre Company—
I saw Unusual Acts of Devotion and liked it. Steve Cohen’s review is well written, accurate (i.e., I agree with it) and says much without revealing plot.
Dan— read Steve’s review.
Bernard B. Cohen
Philadelphia
November 5, 2008
A forgotten black artist
Re “A farewell to ‘African American’ art—
It was interesting to read Anne R. Fabbri’s criticism of Irene Clark’s painting. I have been able to find very little about her after purchasing a mid-century large self-portrait by her in a thrift shop in Chicago. The work Fabbri observed is from around the same time frame. The only other major works I have seen online are The Mansion on Prairie Avenue and the Black Girl Holding a Doll, which most closely resembles the work I have in sizing, which I call Self-Portrait with Daffodils— a very gray muted oblong painting in an artist-painted frame that stirs melancholy in my soul. Sometime I hope to see more of her work in person. Currently the Art Institute of Chicago has her Mansion on Prairie Avenue in storage.
Thanks for furthering my understanding of this neglected mid-century master.
Kenneth Corrigan
Chicago, Ill.
November 9, 2008
Baseball, love and rock ’n roll
To Ted Hechtman, author of ”Baseball, love and rock ’n roll”—
There is enough joy in Mudville to make Bruce Springsteen Commissioner of Baseball.
Keep pitching, bro.
Bob Ingram
Burleigh, N.J.
November 5, 2008
The ‘derivative’ World Series
I would like to compliment Dan Rottenberg on his clever analogy involving financial derivatives and the modern World Series (Editor’s Notebook). The parallels are amusing, and if the current “wild card” set-up did not exist, we certainly wouldn’t be greatly annoyed by the fact of two Florida Marlins championships in very recent memory.
But I’m not sure that the modern arrangement renders the modern World Series win "meaningless." By Dan’s reasoning the Chicago Cubs and Los Angeles Angels should be playing in the World Series, having earned that with their regular seasons. What Dan forgets, I think, is that the modern set-up allows more teams to play meaningful games late in the season, and that "back in the day" there were far more teams— often 60-80% of them— just "playing out the string" as early as August 1. This resulted in games not quite as awful as watching a late-season NBA game between two teams that won’t make the playoffs, but they were close to that.
Then, as now, the championship setup is what it is. As for the cold weather— well, that is annoying, but that’s why they make baseball caps with earmuffs now.
Rick Soisson
East Falls
October 29, 2008
Greed is the answer! That is why the World Series games are held at night— for TV money, of course. Make the season shorter so that the World Series is held at the end of September instead of now!
By the way, as a former Canadian, the title "World Series" is not correct! Shouldn’t it be "North American Series"? And shouldn’t my hometown of Toronto be in the “North American League”?
Elizabeth Gutman
Society Hill
October 29, 2008
Right on with your take on the World Serious!
A friend once said that everything in America is for sale, and the former "fall classic" has proved no exception. Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio? (Probably to E-Bay).
Bob Ingram
Burleigh, N.J.
October 29, 2008
Dan’s insight that struck me was how derivative life has become. I see it not only on Wall Street and in the World Series, as his thought-provoking article pointed out, but also in text-messaging instead of talking, work-outs on Wii without ever looking away from the screen, pornography instead of personal intimacy, and on and on.
The solution to such social deconstruction of reality is not to build a competing mock-up of reality but to consider what reality really is and then act accordingly. I cannot accept that reality is just what we make of it (I still distinguish between the real and the ideal), but it lessens us as humans when we distance ourselves from real things and real relationships through technological artifice.
At some point we will always have to really confront reality, like the bill collector or uncooperative weather. Then we realize the folly of our fanciful ideas about how to manipulate the future. All we have in regard to the future is hope and trust. Therefore we must be wise in whom we trust and careful in what we hope for. Reality has a way of making us discover how well we do s— for example, when the bill is due and when the rain comes.
Craig R. Tavani
Phoenixville, Pa.
October 29, 2008
What an interesting parallel you draw! However, it leaves out the draw of the right brain. Love is just as hard to understand, describe and often find. Yet, who in their right mind does not yearn for it?
SaraKay Smullens
Center City
October 29, 2008
What a sad article!
Of course, there is no way to defend the intellectual validity of fandom. There is no way for me to defend my love of Mozart, either.
It was indisputably ridiculous for my wife and me to sit in the soaking rain for hours on Monday night. Never mind all the money we’ve spent on our season tickets over the past 20 years. Obviously a stupid use of resources.
I guess, then, that it was equally ridiculous for us to share in the ensuing outburst of euphoria. But there it was. We, and millions of others, did indeed feel all those silly feelings, and they were just as real as any other emotion we’ve ever felt. How can it be bad for a city to be drawn together by an experience like this?
Dan Coren
Queen Village
November 2, 1008
Do me a favor: Slowly reach behind and carefully extract the board from your butt, relax and have some fun.
Your conclusions are somewhat gilded. Omitting the playoffs— a move with which I am inclined to support— would likely have caused the Phillies and the Rays to approach the end of the regular season with appropriately modified strategies, which, in turn, could well, have produced the same results. I’m certain that a variety of opposing arguments on this point could continue ad nauseam.
The important point, however, is that now— at this precise moment in Philadelphia baseball history— is not when this argument needs to be made. Give it a few days; how about next Monday? Then you can exercise your writer’s dispassionateness all you want. But for now, stop trying to be such a frigging buzz kill.
Doug Wild
Center City
October 30, 2008
Bravo!
Bob Liss
San Francisco, Cal.
October 29, 2008
Bravo! Bravo! Bravo!
Andrew Kevorkian
West Philadelphia,
October 29, 2008
What a sour, tone-deaf article. I will stipulate for the record that rooting for a professional sports team, caring deeply about the random bounce of a ball hit by a mercenary, is irrational. But the passion, commitment, pain and joy sure feel like genuine emotions.
Of course it was a greedy, shortsighted, God-awful decision to start that game, and having started it, a downright disgraceful decision to let it continue past the third inning. My fan response was anger at Selig and Major League Baseball, not contempt for baseball.
Baseball redeemed itself to me on Wednesday, when I experienced in person the beauty of the game, and the power and communal bonding of caring about it with all my heart.
Phil Korb
Center City
November 5, 2008
Doctor Atomic at the Met
In regard to Steve Cohen’s commentary about Dr. Atomic, the opera related to the preparation for the atomic bomb:
Would Steve Cohen also begin his critique of Shakespeare’s history plays by commenting on their ”accuracy’? Or Arthur Miller’s witches of Salem? Or Cézanne’s landscapes? Or T.S. Eliot’s poetry?
Jeff Shapiro
Bala, Pa.
October 29, 2008
Steve Cohen replies: I would not, but there’s a difference between Mr. Shapiro’s examples and Doctor Atomic: This production is staged as a realistic documentary, and the characters are introduced with photos of the real scientists. Therefore, a cautionary admonition is in order. In any case, I wanted to share the unique information I was privileged to receive from those men and women.
How about a word or two about John Adams and the music?
Jane Biberman
Society Hill
November 3, 2008
Editor’s comment: To repeat what I’ve said often before: Broad Street Review is an unconventional forum for arts lovers and critics to say whatever’s on their minds, which may not necessarily be what’s on your mind.
Psalms of a Questionable Nature
Your publication should be embarrassed at the content of Jim Rutter’s review of Nice People Theatre’s Psalms of a Questionable Nature. Rutter didn’t like the script. He really didn’t like the script. OK, we get it. But Rutter’s review went well beyond informing his audience what he did and didn’t like about what he’d seen.
After beginning his piece with the question, “What is it with women playwrights?”, he spends the entire article ripping this playwright apart, before concluding the piece with the idea that, perhaps, male artistic directors don’t produce plays by women because women write like his ex-girlfriends used to argue. Can such rhetoric be seen as anything other than misogynist?
Additionally, Mr. Rutter writes, “Wegrzyn needs medication for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.” Instead of merely suggesting that the play skips around too fast from topic to topic, Mr. Rutter makes a diagnosis of the playwright’s mental/medical condition, based on seeing 75 minutes of her work.
This is pure rudeness. It is offensive to this playwright, and to people who actually do suffer ADHD and know that its symptoms are worse than writing a play that doesn’t please an arrogant critic.
Brian Golden
Artistic Director
Theatre Seven of Chicago
November 2, 2008
Editor’s comment: Marisa Wegrzyn is resident playwright and a founding member of the writer’s theater company.
Come on, Jim. There are just as many crappy male playwrights as female. It’s just that since female playwrights are produced so much less, the crappy ones really stand out. It’s the equivalent of saying you don’t like Tyler Perry, so August Wilson must suck too.
Dismissing all female playwrights on the weakness of one isn’t just lazy, it’s irresponsible-- and the last thing a critic should ever be is irresponsible. There’s too much riding on your opinions.
Wendy Rosenfield
Meadowbrook, Pa.
November 3, 2008
Andras Schiff plays Beethoven
It’s good to see that Robert is back writing his meaty, erudite essays about music. I especially enjoyed this one about Andras Schiff’s all-Beethoven concert. Of course, I disagree with just about everything he says, to wit:
• There is very little that’s daring about the Pathetique Sonata. The contemporary critic Ludwig Gerber, as I recall from my grad school days, said something like, “There’s nothing new here.” If you look at the music of the Czech composers like Dussek, who heavily influenced Beethoven at about this time, you’ll see what Gerber meant.
• The Opus 28 is anything but “bucolic.” It’s one of the most important pieces in Beethoven’s development as a composer, since in the several sonatas immediately preceding it he seems to have flirted with the idea of abandoning sonata-form completely. It’s always been a mystery to me why this work is so seldom performed. There are now recordings of Opus 28 by both Glenn Gould and Schiff available on iTunes, by the way.
• Despite my repeated attempts to enlighten him, Robert stubbornly stands by the idea that Beethoven’s even-numbered symphonies are somehow more lightweight than the odd-numbered ones. Actually, I’m willing to compromise. David Patrick Stearns in the Inquirer put it very well recently: “Beethoven’s even-numbered symphonies… [are] less weighty, statements more about pure music than about civilization.” But the purely musical aspects of the Fourth, Sixth and Eighth are among Beethoven’s craziest and boldest experiments.
All that being said, it’s a pleasure to read a review of such substance.
Dan Coren
Queen Village
November 2, 2008
♦
Respond to this Article
|
