|
Philadelphia architecture
Some observations about Patrick Hazard’s essay, “The AIA slights Philadelphia architecture“—
I don’t think one should read the AIA list as being of "good" buildings, but rather of popular ones-- not at all the same thing. That’s why the only residences on the list are quasi-public buildings like Biltmore or Fallingwater.
I thought Philadelphia was well represented. I’m not sure I agree that the Rodin Museum and the Barnes really qualify as either memorable or even important (Barnes is nice but not great, and it’s an obscure museum, for most people).
Giurgola, in hindsight, gets weaker and weaker. Eventually, he will disappear altogether.
Basically, I think the public got it right on Philly. 30th Street Station is great, so is the Art Museum, so is Penn’s Furness Library. I personally don’t like city hall, but it certainly defines the city.
On Louis Kahn— I don’t think he can complain. He was never a popular architect, And didn’t want to be. In fact, he scorned public taste. So now he must live with his legacy.
Another architect who refused to "pander" to the public was Mies, and he doesn’t appear on the list at all!
P.S. I would credit Horace Trumbauer with the Art Museum.
Witold Rybczynski
University of Pennsylvania
April 11, 2007
Patrick Hazard replies: Professor Rybczynski is right that ithe AIA list was a ballot on popular rather than excellent buildings. That is why I cited the Barnes and the Rodin. (That so important a voice as former Penn Professor Cret is totally lost seems to me cultural amnesia, engendered by the parochialism of Modenism, with its childish bias again the Beaux Arts.)
As for Romaldo Aldo Giurgola, we’ll see: I was stunned by the beauty of his Parliament Building in Canberra when I visited it in 1988, shortly after it opened. That neither Kahn nor Mies pandered to the public or their architectual peers surely has nothing to do with their ultimate value. Their final reputation is for architecture critics to decide.
Re the AIA Top 150 List: Talk about an edifice complex! I guess that in a day and age when Frank Gehry’s microclimate-creating megaliths are the rage, size is all that matters to the AIA (Empire State Building, Golden Gate Bridge, National Cathedral). Either that, or given the number of national monuments on the top ten list, AIA voters are trying to position themselves favorably for the next big government contract!
Tom Keels
Wyndmoor, Pa.
April 26, 2007
A poet contemplates Thomas Chimes
Re "Thomas Chimes: A poet chimes in"—
It’s great to see Broad Street Review branching out into poetry, most especially so with my always-erudite yet earthy good friend Vince Rinella.
Bob Lisa
San Francisco, Cal.
April 26, 2007
Imagine! An honest-to-God poem in the BSR! A poet named Rinella and a painter named Chimes. I’d never heard of either before. But it makes me want to see some Chimes and read more Rinella. But I have to assume transcending Matisse in Vence is hyperbolic. On my visit there, I was so moved, I almost returned to Catholicism! (Art at times can even be dangerous.)
Patrick D. Hazard
Weimar, Germany
April 25, 2007
Caroline, or Change: A black perspective
I went to see Caroline, or Change, and though I was completely blown away by individual performances, the play/musical itself did not move me an inch. I was so stumped by the reviews I just read by Lewis Whittington and Steve Cohen.
Trust me, I wasn’t the only one. I am a woman of color, and I went with a group of people who were all African-American, and none of them liked the play/musical.
Don’t get me wrong— we all loved the acting, but the story did nothing for us. We wanted to support the show because African-Americans rarely get a chance to perform in anything in Philadelphia, unless it’s the role of a maid, housekeeper, or if it’s Black History Month and they’re performing in an old play that’s been done a million times before, so, we were pleased to come out and support the show for that reason alone.
C. Morales
Philadelphia
April 18, 2007
When Something Wonderful Ends
I completely agree with Dan Rottenberg’s thoughts on When Something Wonderful Ends. I wanted out after the first five minutes. I was bored and insulted. The best thing that happened during the play was that I fell asleep. A little ashamed of myself for not walking out— I’m much too civilized and tolerant.
Lou Coffey
Center City
April 20, 2007
Vox Ama Deus sings Verdi’s Requiem
Tom Purdom’s review of the Vox Amadeus Good Friday concert was written so well and to the point in every detail that I felt I had attended the performance (which unfortunately I had not). Thank you.
Rosemarie Gaeffke
Bala Cynwyd, Pa.
April 23, 2007
How ironic! On Friday night, I sang in the University of Pennsylvania’s performance of the same piece. I had no idea that we had been so recently preceded by the performance Tom covered, and in fact had never heard of Vox Ama Deus.
Needless to say, the Penn performance was of great emotional significance to me, especially so as it became an actual requiem for the slain Virginia Tech students. Aside from my involvement, I think the performance was also a spectacular one. Did anyone who reads this website attend? If you did, I’d love to hear your reaction(s).
Dan Coren
Queen Village
April 21, 2007
Imus: A jerk, but an entertaining jerk
Re Dan Rottenberg’s “What to do about Don Imus” (Editor’s Notebook)—
Writing to you about Imus after Virginia Tech has put the Don Imus incident’s relative importance into perspective is rather late and lame. However, I wanted to let you know how delightfully sane and satisfying your slant is. Unlike you, I have listened to Imus. I used to listen to him as I drove to work from Mount Airy to Jenkintown every morning. I always thought of him as a mix of a court jester and that fellow who used to ride behind the heroes in ancient Rome whispering about how fleeting fame is.
He was, and is, an equal opportunity loudmouth jerk. However, I found him an entertaining loudmouth jerk. And, like you, I resent that someone else has made the decision for me that I shouldn’t be listening to him.
Ted Hechtman
Westbury, N.Y.
April 19, 2007
I couldn’t agree with you more regarding Don Imus. I never saw what the attraction was in Imus. But I always agreed with Bill Douglas’s take that as long as I’m not forced to listen, I also have the right not to listen.
I would add that the problem with the 21st Century seems to be the Frazier Crane line: Is anybody listening? To which the answer is too often: No, we’re trying so hard to be listened to that nobody’s listening.
Joseph Glantz
Levittown, Pa.
April 18, 2007
If Don Imus "focused more attention on [the Rutgers women’s basketball team’s] virtues than any of their supporters could have done," then we should all be begging people like Mr. Imus to slander us. But in fact I do not think that he has focused attention on the Rutgers team’s virtues at all. He has focused attention on a nasty stereotype. It takes mental gymnastics to turn one’s attention to something positive. "Usurious Jew banker," by your argument, focuses attention on Jewish philanthropy perhaps.
You say, respond to Imus’s speech, but you then want to restrict the response. If a shock jock were calling daily for the extermination of the Jews, would attempting to silence this speech by calling for an advertisers’ boycott be wrong?
The history of the 20th century— the cases of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and of course to a lesser degree those of Father Coughlin and Joseph McCarthy— shows that what can be said in public is crucial to what can be done out of public view. I think hate speech laws are misguided, but I fail to see why the broadcast industry’s temporary silencing of Don Imus in response to the voice of the market is something to lament. If the marketplace of ideas and opinions had silenced Hitler, Stalin, and Mao early in their speechifying, I suspect that would have been a net gain for civilization.
Hilary Hinzmann
New York
April 11, 2007
Dan Rottenberg replies: Mein Kampf was a prime example of what I call an early-warning system against bigots. If more people had read Hitler’s book and taken it seriously, the West might have resisted him before he accumulated enough power to kill people.
What if this foul-mouthed mumbling “shock-jock” had said “hooked-nosed kike” or “greasy wop,” etc.— would you and his other white defenders be so sanguine? The late Molly Ivins had it right: When you mock the powerful, it is satire; but when you mock the underdog, minority group member etc., it is hate. I totally disagree with why Bill Maher was kicked off the air, but Imus is indefensible. However, he generates more $$ than Maher did, therefore he will be back. What is truly sickening is the support over the years from journalists and pols for this trash-mouthed slob.
Dr. Richard Meyer
Philadelphia
April 11, 2007
"Silencing speech is no solution.” However, tolerating bad manners and hurtful speech is not a solution either!
Kathy Holtzer
Society Hill
April 11, 2007
I’ve listened to Imus from time to time— although it’s been a few years since I last did— and my impression of him has been that, on the whole, he’s a pretty intelligent guy who possesses the ability to attract interesting, thoughtful guests. A great improvement, I thought, over the nothing-if-not-consistently-boring Howard Stern. But after his recent comments, it’ll be hard to think positively about him ever again.
As you say, nobody’s forced to listen to him. (Although how many folks who normally wouldn’t will pass up the opportunity of following your link?) The question that will determine his future, though, is whether his corporate sponsors and his employers are willing to be associated with him in the future. My guess is, they won’t. I think this will kill his career.
If that’s the result, we can all take comfort that Imus will have as much right to express his opinions as he always has. He can run his own website, rant on the subway, call all his friends, and talk and talk and talk.
Dan Coren
Queen Village
April 11, 2007
I couldn’t agree with you more. You should send this opinion piece to Fox News. To my knowledge, your thoughts come from a slightly different angle from those I’ve heard so far. Especially the idea about revealing the true nature of the speaker.
Bonnie B. Freundlich
Center City
April 11, 2007
Dan Rottenberg replies: Fox News— is that a compliment?
Though I’ve watched Don Imus’s show only sporadically on MSNBC, I’ve usually found him tempering extreme and intolerant positions in others. An example that comes to mind is a time when a visitor was attacking Susan Sarandon, and Imus defended her character and right to her views, though he does not share them. Audiences who remember this side of Imus will turn their anger more against his self-righteous PC attackers than against him.
Colin Wolfe
Haddonfield, N.J.
April 11, 2007
Is not the word “ho” a creation of black rappers, as one of the many offensive words to describe Black women?
Is there any effort afoot to forbid black rappers from using such offensive words? Is there any effort afoot to forbid the playing of these offensive lyrics on the air?
Or, is it acceptable for black men to insult black women but to jump on foolish white men who want to be trendy in their language from using these offensive words?
Your final point is well said. The Constitutional right to free speech does not include the obligation to have to listen to someone else’s “free speech.”
Andrew Kevorkian
West Philadelphia
April 11, 2007
Am I sad to see Don Imus leaving the scene? Not really. I’ve seen his show on MSNBC from time to time, and I’ve found him and his cohorts to be a collection of vulgar twits. That goes double for the suck-up pols and media elitists who populate his show.
What with his Stetson, his giddy-up dress and his chewing gum, Imus is nothing more than a tinhorn cowboy chewing his cud. All that’s missing is a cow and branding iron.
But I am sorry to see him go under these circumstances. Shouldn’t Beanie and his African-American rapper posse be held to same offensive speech standard as white celebrities?
That’s not the point. Free speech is.
Richard Carreño
Center City
April 12, 2007
Dan Rottenberg asks, “Why is Christianity, virtually alone among the world’s religions, so preoccupied with the manner of its founder’s death?” It’s a valid question (even without the “virtually”), since a substantial part of the Gospels is concerned with, out of the entire life of Christ, the eight days from Palm Sunday to Easter.
But while Mel Gibson’s film does emphasize the violent manner of his death, more important to Christians is the fact of his death, leading, we believe, to his resurrection. His death and resurrection comprise the actual content of faith for Christians, since this manifests Jesus as the very Son of God.
Documenting in detail the greatest miracle of the life of Jesus— a real resurrection from a real tomb after a real death on a real cross— is not a preoccupation, but the very path of faith for us.
Kile Smith
Northeast Philadelphia
April 11, 2007
Dan Rottenberg replies: Here’s my question: Would the message of Jesus be less valid if he had died a natural death? If Jesus had been electrocuted instead of crucified, would Christians wear miniature electric chairs around their necks?
Dan Rottenberg’s reply to Kile Smith ("If Jesus had been electrocuted instead of crucified, would Christians wear miniature electric chairs around their necks?") was not his sense of humor; it was a well-known line he lifted from Lenny Bruce.
Debra Miller
Fairmount
April 18, 2007
Lucinda Williams
Thank you, Dan Coren, for the paean to Lucinda Williams, who I agree is one of our finest artists.
I too shuttle between the worlds of classical, opera and popular music. Producing concerts in Arden, Del. (see http://www.ardenclub.com if you’re interested), we seek to bring artists of this quality to our hall. Some of my favorites that we’ve managed to bring include Alejandro Escovedo, Dave Alvin, Ollabelle, Greg Brown and Larry Coryell.
I wish we could present Lucinda, but it will never happen— too many know her now. Her live album was a disappointment actually; her voice has lost much of the luster I remember from the amazing shows I saw in the ’90s.
Ron Ozer
Arden, Del.
April 11, 2007
It’s never too late to discover Lucinda Williams. “Side of the Road” is one of my all-time favorite heartbreak anthems— up there with Bonnie Raitt’s “You’ve Been in Love Too Long.” I never tire of it.
Sharon Barr
Mount Airy
April 11, 2007
I’m glad that you’ve found Lucinda to soothe your soul. I’d like to point out that “Which Will,” from Sweet Old World, was written by English folk musician Nick Drake in the early ‘70s. You would do well to explore Nick Drake, as his compositions are both simple and complex at the same time. His acoustic guitar tunings are often his own.
Donna Scheuerle
South Philadelphia
April 11, 2007
To Dan Coren, who mentions my letter in his Lucinda Williams follow-up: For some reason, I get more worked up about Lucinda than about Mozart, maybe because Mozart lived 225 years ago. But rest assured that I read a lot of the content on this website when I have time!
Funny you should mention the Penn’s Landing concert; I was there and was unimpressed; the sound system didn’t work for me that day. That show paled in comparison to one I attended at the TLA a few years earlier.
The live album I mention is Live at the Fillmore (2005), her last major CD release before West. The Austin show was recorded back in 1998, I think, so I’m surprised that one would have been phoned in. Anyway, her voice sounds bad to me on Fillmore and it sounded bad on Letterman last time I saw her, sorry to say— very strained and unmusical. Still, given a chance I would see her tomorrow.
Ron Ozer
Arden, Del.
April 18, 2007
Philomel and Piffaro
Tom Purdom’s review of Philomel and Piffaro spent a lot of time on the scholarship and historical knowledge of the musicians. Their knowledge is commendable. However, one should note that Tom brings to a review a vast store of his own knowledge plus an ability to recall and condense a lot of material that these scholar/musicians gave the audience. His review itself is a work of art in prose.
William Clovis
Center City
April 10, 2007
More or less, I never knew who Tom Purdom really was. I read his reviews with high fascination. Thanks, Tom. You speak with your soul and know how to choose the vocabulary.
Rosemarie Gaeffke
Bala Cynwyd
April 11, 2007
♦
Respond to this Article
|
