|
Beatles impersonators
In his review of Rain: The Beatles Experience, Jim Rutter remarks that “two of the Beatles…. are gone, and a third (Ringo) is no longer touring.” Actually, Ringo Starr does still tour with his All-Star Band. He has announced that he will in fact tour with them this year. He last toured with them in 2006. So he’s only taken off one year.
Charles Uebele
Drexel Hill, Pa.
January 23, 2008
Higdon’s Concerto 4-3
Re “Swooped away by Higdon’s mountain hawk,”—
What a great review! The vividness and enthusiasm of Lewis Whittington’s writing is almost enough to overcome my regret at not being there myself. What a contrast to Peter Dobrin’s dour account in the January 12 Inquirer, which patronized Jennifer Higdon and, of course, included the obligatory anti-Eschenbach diatribe.
Dan Coren
Queen Village
January 15, 2008
I could not agree more with Lewis Whittington’s excitement over the Higdon/Time for Three concerto. It was wonderful to experience the spontaneous eruption of cheers from a full house that included many young people. It was also reassuring to know that great young musicians like Time for Three are shaping the musical world of the future.
Phil Korb
Center City
January 16, 2008
For So the Children Come
Re Tom Purdom’s review of For So the Children Come—
I performed with Voces Novae et Antiquae on this concert. I am very gratified that Mr. Purdom was moved by the work. However, the focus of the article was praise solely for the poet and the composer.
There is another entity involved without whom the work of the poet and composer would have remained on the page, only to be read. The ensemble Voces Novae et Antiquae and its director Robert A.M. Ross brought the work to life so that it could be heard.
The hearing of the piece is what moved Mr. Purdom. Simply reading it surely would not have had the same effect; yet he made little to no mention of the ensemble and no mention of the director. Did they have nothing to do with Mr. Purdom’s realization of the power and beauty of this piece? I don’t believe so.
Corbin Abernathy
Frankford
January 16, 2008
Editor’s note: To read Tom Purdom’s response, click here.
Editor’s comment: Abernathy’s complaint, while understandable, reminds me of the time a veggie activist asked McDonald’s founder Ray Kroc to add vegetarian items to his menu. "But I don’t like vegetables," Kroc replied. "I like hamburgers. If you like vegetables, start your own restaurant, and more power to you." Broad Street Review is conceived as a forum where arts connoisseurs and critics can talk about what they’d like to discuss, not what others would like them to discuss.
The Fantasticks
Re Steve Cohen’s review of The Fantasticks at the Kimmel—
My mind is boggled to read a statement such as "The material lets (the cast) down.” This is first-rate material and one of the most legendary and well-put-together pieces of all time! If you are saying the cast is better than the material, I doubt that two high school students and a local actor/director are anywhere near the quality of such a legendary musical.
Could they have written a song such as "Try To Remember," which is known worldwide?
The locally beloved director Tony Braithwaite may be enjoyable to local audiences, but where is his time on Broadway?
Roger Ricker
Main Line
January 17, 2008
I thought Joe Mallon was terrific as El Gallo. His voice was great; his acting was wonderful. I also thought Eileen Cella as The Girl was superb.
Meg Walters
Haverford, Pa.
January 16, 2008
The Rape of Europa (and the Barnes too?)
Amen! to Robert Zaller’s "The Rape of Europa— and the Barnes.”
In addition to his well-stated position that much of the beauty and value of the Barnes’s art is expressed and enhanced by its intended and (now) traditional location, I offer this:
The beauty of the Philadelphia region is that residents and visitors alike can’t travel very far throughout it without tripping over some natural or heritage or cultural gem. Why, then, try to stack as many of those as possible into Philadelphia proper?
The Parkway is graced with architectural beauty as well as the Art Museum and Rodin Museum and numerous other attractions making it a wonderful urban public space. The rest of the city is adorned with excellent galleries and museums too numerous to mention. Let the suburbs retain their Michener and Berman and Brandywine River museums, and so many more— and the Barnes. And let those in close proximity to each, or eager to explore the entire region’s wondrous facets, enjoy the environments in which they were intended to glow.
Paul Decker
Bryn Mawr, Pa.
January 9, 2008
Absurd logic. The paintings in the Barnes were not created for the Barnes nor for a suburban home in Montgomery County. They were works of art, created by artists who desired to convey their worldview to as large an audience as possible. To keep those works of arts sequestered for the few with means to view them is antithetical to their creation.
Leonardo did not paint the Mona Lisa for the Louvre; it is a wonderful place to see it, but it’s not part of the place (as contrasted with Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel ceiling). This art of the Barnes is to be shared, not cloistered.
Matthew A. White
Center City
January 9, 2008
Robert Zaller writes movingly of The Rape of Europa. But let us not sentimentalize who we are. The movie tells one story and shows another. The story we’re told is of the Nazis’ effort to collect the great art of the museums of Europe, even if it meant laying waste to "alien” cultures. Hitler and his colleagues believed, after all, that a great culture required the great art of others.
And the other story? What we are shown are those industrious, ingenious and, yes, brave curators who stored and hid their collections from the invaders. And yet, as they crated and shipped The Winged Victory of Samothrace, we are reminded of the imperialism of the 19th and 20th Centuries, an imperialism that celebrated the collectors of England and France, not to mention the nouveau riches of America, who collected the great art of other cultures— Greece, Rome, China, South America and all points east, west, south and north— so that their citizens could see it close to home.
Each culture builds its civilization, it appears, out of the wreckage of the last.
And of the effort to move the Barnes Museum, which Mr. Zaller references as an example of rape and plunder? “Great art is,” he writes “as deeply sensitive to its location— to the time and place that define it as a production of the human spirit.” I did not know that Renoir, Van Gogh, Rubens et al lived and painted in Merion.
What we learn– whether watching The Rape of Europa or considering a discussion of Barnes himself, his museum, and the economics of “the great move”– is that civilization belongs to those who have the money, the might or are the last ones standing to tell the story.
Neil Kleinman
Fairmount
January 9, 2008
Bravo!
Andrew Kevorkian
West Philadelphia
January 9, 2008
And of course Zaller didn\’t even mention the confiscation of art created by the German people— such as the great works of Wissel, Schmutzler, and Mackensen. (No, \’m not referring to the garbage that toured major museums as part of the “degenerate art” exhibit a couple decades ago).
All of this art is hidden in DOD archives in Washington, D.C. They don’t want the American people to see this— afraid we might actually like it or, even worse, might see the Germans as human, as people.
Tom Blair
Philadelphia
January 9, 2009
In my judgment, Judge Ott, although a fine and learned jurist, erred as a matter of law (“abused his discretion”) in granting the petition for leave to move the Barnes collection to Philadelphia.
I continue to hope that the Barnes collection will remain where it is.
That having been said, and acknowledging that I too, like Robert Zaller, have had my moments of pique over this matter, to call those responsible for the move “cultural barbarians” and to associate them with the actions of Adolph Hitler and Hermann Goering serves no good purpose.
Even if the association were in some way warranted by the facts, as I believe it clearly is not, no one on whose authority the fate of the Barnes collection rests is going to be convinced by such rhetoric. In all likelihood they will, rather, be repulsed and assume that in fact there is no meritorious argument, in law or policy, for keeping the collection where it is.
Dan Larkin
Merion, Pa.
January 9, 2008
Editor’s note: The writer is a lawyer who has published articles on, and litigated, questions of the kind at issue in the Barnes Collection dispute.
Antonio Mancini
Re Andrew Mangravite’s review of Antonio Mancini at the Art Museum—
Why is Mancini only to be discussed because he was “crazy” or because he was relatively obscure? His work is exquisite. It is all only further proof that recognition in the art world is not necessarily because of merit. It’s often the luck of the draw.
How sad that Mancini has not been celebrated. How many others will continue in obscurity? Philadelphia is filled with wonderful artists whose work never sees the light of day. Perhaps the Art Museum can expose them before they too are dead and gone.
Only once in my lifetime did it exhibit work of accomplished Philadelphia artists. Perhaps the magnificent paintings of Mancini teach us a lesson.
Joan Myerson Shrager
Elkins Park, Pa.
January 9, 2008
Why I dance
Re ”The power of dancers,” by Jaamil Olawale Kosoko—
Rarely do I respond to articles, but I felt compelled to weigh in on the author’s very profound thoughts. I was reminded, throughout my reading, of the words of Kahlil Gibran in The Prophet: “Only when you drink from the river of silence shall you indeed sing. And when you have reached the mountain tops, then you shall begin to climb, And when the earth shall claim your limbs, then shall you truly dance.”
I find that dancing is the medium between life and death. The energy created by dance can offset the very depths of non-movement, ennui and impotence in creating life’s force in motion. Perhaps it is dance that pierces the veil of apathy, dissonance, and marching in place.
Dance is most certainly an expression that captures the rhythm of life, and transcends words and concepts, such as war, hate, prejudice, pain, ignorance, depression, failure, poverty, apathy. Dance is analogous to prayer, don’t you think? In my opinion, to dance is to move with the rhythm of the ocean, the heartbeat, the solar system’s day and night response to breath. It is the solution to the riddle of “who, what, when, where, why, and how?” To dance!
Nancy W. Morgan
East Falls
January 3, 2008
Great to hear the voice of performing artists and not just those of the audience “critics” offering their observations. Encourage more artists to submit their writing from all disciplines.
Jonathan Stein
Center City
January 2, 2008
Jaamil’s article, “Why I Dance,” was refreshing, passionate. It stimulated further questions, such as: Why do many dancers feel the need to justify their existence? Do lawyers, doctors, business people constantly question their existence, their calling, their vocation? Why do we dancers continually challenge our place in society?
Jaamil speaks of the war, yet we are surrounded by a closer war in a place dubbed “Killadelphia.” Since the crack of dawn, mankind danced because dance is vital, necessary, a primal response to the world. Through dance, mankind connected to forces (states, and places) beyond what is comprehensible.
I dance because I must.
Anne-Marie Mulgrew
Anne-Marie Mulgrew and Dancers Co.
South Philadelphia
January 9, 2008
Ballet dancers as role models
I am a dancer with the Pennsylvania Ballet, writing in response to Jim Rutter’s article, “Ballet dancers as role models.” All too often we are left to wonder if our work is truly appreciated. Mr. Rutter’s article let us know that it is. Thank you.
Jonathan Stiles
Society Hill
January 16, 2008
Musical gobbledygook
In ”Why can’t musicians speak English?,” Dan Coren asks, “Where is Bernard Jacobson, the Orchestra’s former musicologist, when you need him?”
While living in Seattle, Mr. Jacobson still provides wonderful program notes for The Chamber Orchestra of Philadelphia.
Richard A. Doran
Director of Marketing
The Chamber Orchestra of Philadelphia
Center City
January 2, 2008
Coren’s reference to Bernard Jacobson helping to decipher musical terms is laughable. We all must surely remember that Jacobson’s program notes were so impregnable that we used to read them aloud to each other in hopes of getting a glimmer about what he was talking about. In his essays he would put clips directly from the score and try in vain to describe them, probably oblivious to the fact that less than one person in 10,000 can read music anyway.
Rod Goodwin
Center City
January 2, 2008
Quite aside from thanking Dan Coren for his friendly allusion to me, I’d like to congratulate him on a very well written piece, and on all the good points he makes about music and musical terminology.
I’m reminded of an experience I had years ago, attending a pre-concert discussion in London. Talking about a Mozart quartet, the composer Peter Maxwell Davies described how the music began by “stating a pitch.” I remember remarking to a friend sitting next to me, “Does he mean, ‘playing a note?’ “
Ah, well— jargon is a very useful way of camouflaging lack of meaning.
Bernard Jacobson
Bremerton, Wash.
January 9, 2008
Critics and freeloaders
Re “Those freeloading critics,” by Dan Rottenberg (Editor’s Notebook)—
My friend and colleague Lew Whittington is an honorable and humble man who does not like to overstep his bounds. But he ought to understand that critics need to see everything we can, whether or not we are writing about it just then. I know that Lew goes to at least as many dance, theater, opera and music concerts as I do—approximately 80 a year. And with what we earn as critics, we could never afford to pay for our seats. Would that our publications would go back to paying for our tickets, but those days are long gone.
That is time spent that we could be doing other things. But as you point out, Dan, we are asked to come and sometimes we go because we feel obligated.
It really is wonderful when about half of the events we attend turn out to be worthwhile and prompt us to try to write about them somewhere. For those of us with regular pulpits, so much the better. But some of us also tuck those programs away and, after having seen a particular company in several different performances over time, we may find an opportunity to write a think piece in an academic quarterly or an overview of the group in a national magazine.
When we review, we may also use those concerts about which we did not write to compare to other works we are seeing. Thus, if we hadn’t seen something similar that was spectacularly well- or poorly done, we might not give a well-enough measured review. While we critique on the ability of the artist to meet his intention, we also compare his dancing, playing, choreography or acting to others we have seen.
Most companies and press people understand this and are very gracious to those of us who serve the arts community in the capacity of critic. They know we are their chroniclers and channelers as well.
Neither Lew nor any of us need apologize for taking up a seat or two. Think how often our articles fill them with paying customers and enlighten potential audiences for future events.
Merilyn Jackson
South Philadelphia
January 4, 2008
Editor’s note: The writer writes on dance and food for the Philadelphia Inquirer and Dance and Pointe magazines.
Thank you so much for clarifying the role of the critic in the arts. A theater, music, visual arts or dance review by a knowledgeable critic gives me a deeper understanding of the work under review plus a better knowledge of its place in the history of the culture as well as an analysis of this particular piece.
When working as a critic, I try to give the reader a better understanding of the art involved in addition to an evaluation of the successful expression of the work. I want to raise questions and hear different opinions. This helps to create a vital climate for the arts; and only the arts will be our heritage to posterity. Everything else will die.
Anne R. Fabbri
Wayne, Pa.
January 2, 2008
As a long time theater practitioner and someone who saw over 100 shows last season and didn’t get paid for it, I wanted to applaud the idea of seeing a production during several times during its run— particularly for those who are getting paid for their opinion.
Stage theater is live— and no matter how rehearsed it is, to keep it alive and immediate there must be some flexibility in the precision. Shows that are so rehearsed that they lose spontaneous response become deadly for an audience. So every night is a new and different show.
I mean, what is the little thrill in watching live theater that you don’t get from watching a recording? It’s the possibility of unpredictability that makes live theatre that much more exciting than seeing spectacularly crafted films. In 30 years of theater going, I’ve seen it all— and I’m talking flubs at the big theaters too, not just the small ones.
A friend and I were judges for the Barrymore Awards last season. After we had submitted our ballots for a show, we would check in with each other. We found that when we saw shows on the same night, we tended to have very similar opinions of the production. But invariably, if we attended the production on different nights, we would disagree on many elements: direction, acting, sound, lights— elements that require a nightly human touch.
Just a few weeks ago, we were discussing Mr. Marmalade, Theatre Exile’s brilliant production of Noah Haidle’s edgy play. We agreed across the board on all the elements...and we’d seen it on different nights. We actually commented on how good a show must be to hit it every night. Of course, we don’t know if that show did hit it every night, but we know it hit it twice!
So, I think the more reviewers and the more nights, the better. As Vagabond Acting Troupe celebrates 15 years of exploring theater, we welcome those who want to explore what it feels like to see a show multiple times during a run. We offer a “return viewer” discount for all audience members to return to see the show (basically, bring a friend back with you and they pay full price but you get to see the show again free).
I haven’t really found that for our small company the reviews do too much in getting an audience, but they do give us a reflection to allow us to learn about our attributes as well as our blemishes
By the way, Broad Street Review has rapidly become my favorite place to read about theater, particularly reviews of current productions.
Aileen McCulloch
Executive Artistic Director
Vagabond Acting Troupe
http://www.vagabondactingtroupe.org
Morgantown, Pa.
January 2, 2008
I’m glad my remarks led the way to your essay about the role of arts writers and critics. And I’m glad you red-lighted those groupies and hustlers. Great stuff. But I take exception to your statement that I “imply that critics don’t really contribute much of value.” I hear hissing. Although I feel that critics shouldn’t have any influence on the fate of a production, I have the utmost respect for the critics and their contributions in covering the arts.
Lewis Whittington
Center City
January 2, 2008
For me, the essence of your article lay in the following two sentences:
“Broad Street Review exists, in part, to provide an outlet for people with something to say and no place else to say it. Nobody gets rich writing for us, but they do reach an astute and sophisticated audience.”
My full-time job— writing software— is intellectually demanding. There’s always more to learn, and keeping up with kids fresh out of school, almost young enough to be my grandchildren, gets harder every passing day. But these days, when I wake up in the wee hours, my mind is occupied by questions like “How, in fact, would I explain what an octave is?” or “What the hell is the justification for writing concert reviews anyway?”, not “Why does my program crash?”
I have no illusions about how many people are actually reading my recent Broad Street Review articles on sonata-form. I can’t express enough gratitude to the one or two people who do, but now that Dan Rottenberg has furnished me with the outlet, and now that the floodgates are open, I’d find it hard to stop even if I knew for sure there was nobody there. I write because I need to.
With regard to press tickets— once in awhile I indulge myself and ask for them, but as a rule, doing so makes me very uncomfortable. Partly it’s because I don’t want to feel any sense of obligation, and partly because I don’t regard myself as an actual member of the working press.
Dan Coren
Queen Village
January 3, 2008
To worry about whether your legitimate critics’ seats can bankrupt some actor or theater is a bit silly. It’s like saying the admission of the behemoth football player affected your kid’s chances at Michigan. His spot was in a different category, much like critics’ seats.
Robert Strauss
Haddonfield, N.J.
January 2, 2008
I enjoyed your rumination on critics, and especially the reminiscence about your own stint as a film critic. 1971-83 must have been a golden age if only 80% of commercial films were garbage. It was certainly higher by the time I started reviewing for Seven Arts (1993-94) and the Philadelphia Forum (1996-98).
Robert Zaller
Bala Cynwyd, Pa.
January 2, 2008
The exchange of ideas on this subject is fascinating. One viewpoint that’s missing is that of the press representatives for shows and concerts. I started my career in that capacity. My first job out of college was for a PR firm that had many theatrical clients. My mentor taught me to offer free seats even to writers for neighborhood handouts, and to radio and TV people, whether or not their assignment was theater. His reasoning? To fill empty seats and, simultaneously, to earn the gratitude of writers who, some day, might be in a position to help us. He did not think of writers as freeloaders.
In my current role as a critic, as Merilyn Jackson says, I get more requests to attend than I can accept. Often a company will ask me to please see a show a second time and to bring my family. The impresario hates to have his/her actors perform for a sparse audience. When my schedule permits, I do so, and usually the second performance is enlightening. On occasion I’ve published two reviews of a production. The crucial thing is to be considerate of the producers and their press representatives, and to ask what’s convenient for them.
Steve Cohen
King of Prussia, Pa.
January 19, 2008
Juno
Richard Chaitt’s skimpy review of Juno mentions the dead-on Thank You For Not Smoking wherein Chaitt praises the director for his work without mentioning either the screenwriter or the original novel by Christopher Buckley. Without them, there would be nothing to praise.
Dan Rottenberg mentions in his editorial on critics that there is “unlimited” room in cyberspace for reviews. Would that Mr. Chaitt availed himself of a little more of it; what he has produced is a “Review for Dummies,” at best. Lengthen up, man.
Bob Ingram
Burleigh, N.J.
January 2, 2008
♦
Respond to this Article
|
