dirac

This article in the UK Times on Mrs. Obama and the arts is quite revealing, although perhaps not quite in the way it intended. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle6350094.ece

I add my thanks for these reviews. Yes, it's hard to listen to taped music once you've seen Paree.....

It's a little like our annual Oscar thread, where we talk about the clothes as well as who won what and why. Old Fashioned, I don't think anyone thought there was something wrong with what you said. We always like to hear from you. That green looked beautiful on Iman, but then so would a burlap bag. Gorgeous woman.

So true, fandeballet. This country has never gotten over viewing the arts as a luxury item.

Thanks, Quiggin. My impression is that Guitry was mainly guilty of socializing and performing - attending parties at the German embassy and making nice with the powers that be. That's not wonderful, but it's also not the same as active collaboration - denouncing friends and neighbors, praising and promoting the regime, etc.

Thanks for the update, toeprints. Oh, well.

Perhaps it isn’t really a question of age? I’m sure Macaulay has probably seen a good deal, but it’s possible to wish to see again works in a style that has gone out of fashion, even if you weren’t around for all of it. Very true. But I think efforts to reach out are of value, especially in getting to children (and adults) who aren’t of a class or income level that attends arts events as a matter of course. Certainly, you can’t educate anyone to enjoy the arts. But at least they will know what is out there. People are really going to see and be seen, for the most part. You do get real fans, too, as you note. I have only seen Benno on video, and as far as I'm concerned he can stay there.

The contenders for the Samuel Johnson prize in non-fiction are announced. http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/may/1...prize-shortlist

Thanks for posting this, innopac. A fun site to browse through.

Thanks for the additional information, Estelle.

Quite so, because it was what I thought, and I don't think it's an unreasonable position. It's a matter of opinion. I also seem to recall at the time the amount was announced that some observers were disappointed because they expected more, so I don’t think I was quite alone. William Ivey, a former head of the NEA who supervised the handling of the arts agenda on the Obama transition team, asked for considerably more than the $50 million. There is no doubt that even that small sum attracted criticism from the usual suspects, but since that criticism was inevitable no matter how minimal the rise in funding, why not ask for more while Congress as a whole was convinced of the need for more spending? Obama has said that he would restore funding to the NEA to the levels reached before the draconian cuts of the Nineties, and such spending could have been justified in terms of the stimulus. It's not really a question of the Congressional Democrats pushing, although some might as individuals. On this particular issue leadership is going to have to come from the White House, because the Democrats as a group will want to avoid what most would doubtless regard as an unnecessary squabble. I think they would back the WH if the administration really wanted to make a point of it, except for some of the Blue Dogs.

Old Fashioned, I’m thinking of Republicans like Olympia Snowe, who voted for NEA funding in 1999 when the Republican majority was intent on cuts. There aren’t many but they’re out there. (There are also many Republicans on the state and local level who favor supporting the arts.) My fear is that the time may already have passed for any big boost. Congress is already spooked about high spending levels, and not without reason, and with the government prosecuting two wars and the financial crisis, I suspect that even Democrats may not be willing to hand out much more to the arts, relatively small though the amounts are.

A great deal of the mostly positive personal publicity Mrs. Obama has received since her husband took office has revolved around the way she looks and dresses. It's a subject she has been happy to talk about. She has been hailed as a new style setter. If it’s all right to for some to compliment her on her looks and style, it’s not clear to me why less positive remarks, as long as they do not veer into nastiness, are unacceptable. You will note that those (like me) who have been less than adoring have also larded our posts with praise. But in any case, I'm not Obama's publicist. If I'm not crazy for the dress, I'll say so.

I don't know if Berry did her own singing in the Dandridge movie, although your mention of it reminds me that Marilyn Horne dubbed Dandridge in Carmen Jones.

We have a Democratic majority now, and there are Republicans who would be receptive to the idea of greater support for the arts, as well. Times are changing.

Hi, vipa. Sinatra has been gone a lot longer than Ray Charles and Johnny Cash, who've both had their biopics, so I guess we can't really say it's too soon. It'll be Scorsese's second go round at casting Ava Gardner - Kate Beckinsale played her in The Aviator.

Lange lip synched to Patsy Cline's recordings in Sweet Dreams, and I thought it worked well, primarily because Lange threw herself physically into the 'singing' in a way lip synchers often don't do. Cotillard sang to Piaf's recordings, along with her own vocals and that of an additional singer, as I recall, so it was a sort of vocal gumbo. Doris Day was a real singer and her audience would have expected to hear her voice, so it makes sense that she would not be dubbed with Etting or anyone else. It's a good movie, although Etting seems to have been softer vocally and personally than Day made her. I'm surprised there aren't recordings of Etting around somewhere. Yes, Spacey sang very well in Beyond the Sea, I agree. Jane Froman sang for Susan Hayward when Hayward played her in With a Song in My Heart, although Froman was still young enough that she could dub Hayward instead of using recordings.

Leonardo DiCaprio is on top of Martin Scorsese's wish list to play Sinatra. I don’t understand. There are so many gorgeous Sinatra recordings. Why sit through the movie and not hear any of them? Dub him, for heaven’s sake. DiCaprio's too tall, though. Sinatra was on the short skinny side. It's important.

Oh, my. That was a pretty good one, wasn't it? Thanks, aurora, I took care of it.

Not by everyone. Gore Vidal has quoted both Tudor and Nureyev as having no good to say of the man (“Bad ghost” – Nureyev). Yvette Chauvire has spoken glowingly of him, though. Sounds like we really do need a proper bio to sort through some of this. Thank you for raising the subject, Joseph.

Mrs. Obama’s not a raving beauty like Diana or an unconventional one like Jackie. She’s an attractive middle aged lady with a personal trainer and a highly variable fashion sense. Sometimes the frock is smashing, sometimes she shows up in something that looks like my grandmother’s curtains. You just never know. (Her worst moment, I think, was when she was photographed wearing Jackie’s capri pants.) However, women with hips everywhere look to her as a beacon and a guide. The administration has given every sign that it intends to give support of the arts a lot of prominence, even if some of it may be symbolic. I am bound to point out that this will give them political brownie points with Obama’s core liberal constituency and “a semblance of class” as JFK once put it. Still, it’s a Good Thing and props to Mrs. Obama for showing up and speaking strongly.

Thank you for telling us your impressions, Batsuchan, and welcome to the board. Sometimes a smooch is just a smooch.

I think he meant the first – ‘that the conventionality of the evening’s program belied the First Lady’s contention that arts education develops the ability to think innovatively.’ (You put it better than he did.) I suspect also that Macaulay is afflicted with ObamaLove, a condition which causes the sufferer to greet with hosannas the most unremarkable pronouncements made by the President or his missus. Michelle Obama’s line doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, to me anyway. Arts education doesn’t lead ineluctably to innovative thinkers; it leads to people being better educated about the arts, and they will make of that what they can and will. (Often as not it leads to a greater appreciation of tradition and the past.) He then goes off on a bit of a tangent. I don’t think it’s necessarily such a bad idea, if handled correctly. Galas are supposed to be fun, and you don’t want to have someone lecturing you, but on the other hand it might not be a bad thing to have a few details pointed out that the audience might miss or put the excerpt the audience is about to see in context. Of course, this would also make a long night longer. There is also such a thing as program notes, which the audience can consult during intermissions, with no need for an Ed Sullivan to chivvy them along. Such knowledge can only increase appreciation of the art form, but it’s only truly helpful if the person has already responded to ballet on a more fundamental level, and you don’t need the book learning for that response. Lots of food for discussion here. Thanks for starting the topic, Kathleen.

Shelley, hmm? You’d think someone would do a Byron ballet before Shelley – lots of juicy female roles, drama, tragicomedy, incest – the works. (Shelley got around, too, of course.) Malakhov will be perfectly cast as Shelley, I would think. Not so sure about Caravaggio.

I should have remembered, Horst Koegler reviewed it for danceviewtimes. Sounds a bit Derek Jarman. http://www.danceviewtimes.com/2008/12/wher...crime-meet.html