dirac

Of course I agree. I also see no reason to think most of them don't. Protest can be kneejerk, but acceptance can be passive. Thoughtful engagement, of course, is the ideal. I’m afraid we’ll have to agree to disagree to some extent. I think there are instances of such protests that were, shall we say, ill advised and did not show the protesters in the best possible light. Acceptance can be characterized as passivity, or as an acknowledgment that it’s a big world with a lot of different views out there. On the subject of thoughtful engagement I'm sure we can all agree.

Yes, very true.

I'd recommend the multivolume biography by Blanche Wiesen Cook. It caused some controversy because Cook declared her belief that Eleanor had had a physical affair with her close friend Lorena Hickok, but although reasonable people can disagree Cook backs up her opinions and isn't sensation-seeking. There's a much older work, Eleanor and Franklin by Joseph P. Lash, a personal friend of Eleanor's, which is chiefly about her and it's a beautiful book with great stories about her childhood and early years. (He wrote a follow up about Eleanor's widowhood that's also worth checking out although it's not as good.) Geoffrey C. Ward's biographies of FDR have more focus on his personal life than other bios of the President and they are worth looking at, as well. Another of Ward's books, Closest Companion: The Unknown Story of the Intimate Relationship Between Franklin Roosevelt and Margaret Suckley, had some information about Eleanor that was new to me (not about her childhood, though) and I would recommend checking that one out, as well. Hope this helps.

Just stepping in to repeat what Alexandra said. I realize that some of you may feel that you were addressed directly and wish to respond accordingly, and that's understandable, but at this point in the thread I think that many who have already posted have made their respective positions clear enough and at some point we must lay down the cudgels. I don't mean that there should be no further posts, but the beating of dead horses should be avoided, to mix my cliched metaphors.

Yes, this was a great feature. I'd recommend finding a hard copy - the photos accompanying the text are wonderful, too.

I don't impute to artists any kind of moral superiority. I just think it's the better part of wisdom for the folks readying the protestations and the tar and feathers to think a bit. My two cents. I think most of us can agree on that.

As Ray noted earlier in the thread, 'Did William Forsythe Invent the Modern Ballerina' was the title given the interview, not a very helpful one, as Ray also noted. The interview does bring up a variety of aesthetic questions, worth exploring. (Lucy Johns may well have intended to ask the question as she gave the same title to the topic, but it's hard to say.)

They can, certainly. The risk is that they may wind up looking intolerant, foolish, and on the wrong side of history. You place your bet and take your chance. Thanks, Mashinka. I can't pass any sort of judgment without having seen the piece myself, but it is certainly fair to ask the question about work you find deeply disturbing.

Thank you for telling us about them, Pamela. Sounds exciting!

Thank you for that mental image, Simon.

Thanks, richard53dog. Sounds like a memorable performance.

Morality, perhaps not. Propriety, yes. I would say that the sense of what is decent and seemly to be presented and discussed in public has changed. It gets harder and harder to shock anyone and artists trying for such an effect have to go further and further. I think that in the long run this greater openness is a Good Thing, but I also understand why Nanarina feels that way. It sounds similar to that of Andres Serrano, whose work caused a serious fuss here in the States awhile back.

I agree. I love the way Pavarotti sings 'Non piangere Liu' on record, although I don't believe he ever did a full evening Calaf and it's a good thing for his voice he never tried.

Thanks for reviving this thread, miliosr. I like your Sketches of Spain idea. Who to choreograph?

If de Frutos wants to try getting on the hierarchy's nerves I don't see why he shouldn't. Those faithful parishioners adhere to a rich, powerful, and authoritarian institution that is not diffident about wielding its influence. De Frutos is angry at the Church, not at them, and as you note there is a distinction between the two. As Patrick notes, this sort of thing has been going on for about two thousand years, and the Church seems to be managing. I think we're all agreed that Frutos has the right to put it out there, if he can talk somebody into it, and we have the right to praise, criticize, protest, or just not go. I might agree with you if the piece reflected the anti-'Romanism' that was once prevalent here in the United States, but de Frutos seems to have another beef entirely.

I do see what you mean, and I don't want to send the thread too far afield, but part of the definition of snuff film as commonly used is that it is a movie made for circulation. Murderers have filmed murders, I believe, but it's not the same thing. I mentioned it only to clarify matters for those relatively unfamiliar with the term and to make sure we didn't spend too much time discussing hypothetical views of the nonexistent, to borrow a phrase.

Well, he's forthright about his motivation, anyway. If I believed in censorship this piece as described would be a tempting target, but. I do understand how you feel, Nanarina (referring to Nanarina's earlier post, which I'm not quoting). It's certainly not what I come to a dance performance for.

They would disapprove, I expect. I note for the record that 'snuff films' as the term is commonly used and understood are generally believed to be a variety of urban myth and legend. I quite agree.

Thanks, innopac. I haven't seen it but it certainly sounds good. I really like Noiret.

True. And his production of Shakepeare's 'Romeo and Juliet' was revolutionary at the time.

I do see what you mean, but for me a closer analogy to ballet on DVD is watching an orchestra perform on television and watching it live. Recordings are far better than that. Technology doesn't always improve everything, and then again sometimes it does help.

Respectfully, Patrick, isn't 'degraded' a little harsh? It's true that recordings generally are made for music that was originally intended for a live audience, but I would hesitate to call a carefully crafted recording with a great cast made with attention and care for the music a degradation of that music - on the contrary.

A new article on the state of play at the company, from The New York Observer. Comments?

I would agree with this, and to me Benjamin seems fascinated with the medium's possibilities. That's true for me, as well (regarding my experience listening to classical music). I've heard many more operas on recordings than I will ever be able to do in performance. There is something special in a live performance (if it's good; nothing special in mediocre ones, IMO), but I also appreciate the intimate pleasures of listening to a great performance at home. Solti's Ring was the first Ring I ever heard, and those old recordings are theatrically exciting as well as musically so - I was thrilled by them.

His productions have declined in quality as they increased in ornateness. The word 'vulgar' comes to mind. (I admit the word also came to mind after reading accounts of some of Bondy's special touches. There are many varieties of coarseness.)