Watermill Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 Was anyone else as offended as I was regarding this comment from London Times' Clement Crisp's RB Sleeping Beauty review? (See links Today Tues Mar 11) "Makarova's one dubious innovation is the introduction of a tiny but loathsome cupid who acts briefly as a master of ceremonies. The role is played by a small boy, and, as ever with child performers, I think longingly of how Good King Herod dealt with such pests." I hardly think the Slaughter of the Innocents should be wafting through an emminent (if flatulent) dance critic's mind as he watches children on stage. God knows he doesn't have to like it (although one detects a mammoth mean streak in a man who thinks this of all child performers) but referencing a historically horrific episode of infanticide is surely way out there beyond the bounds of good tatste. Which I thought he had. Watermill Link to comment
Alexandra Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 Oh, he says things like that all the time, Watermill. Perhaps he thinks hating children is part of his curmudeonly charm. (I think there are gentler ways to make the point that the cupid was a mistake.) Link to comment
Ari Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 I don't think you should take Crisp quite so seriously, Watermill. As Alexandra says, it's part of his curmudgeon act, and frankly I enjoy these little asides even when I disagree with them. (I love to see children from a company's school dance onstage with the professionals; it emphasizes continuity, maintenance of tradition, and integrity of style — of course, none of this is true of today's Royal Ballet. ) He challenges the pious verities of life, like "all kiddies are adorable angelic creatures." In December he said that sitting through Nutcrackers was "one more thing to add to the horrors of the season." I enjoyed that. Link to comment
Treefrog Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 I'm with Watermill here. Remarks like "and loathsome" are gratuitous. He made his point that he disapproves of the role. Must he denigrate the child too (for this comment can be taken to apply either to the role or the child, and the child will surely interpret it as the latter)? I also agree that it is never appropriate to write approvingly of infanticide or genocide, even if those "in the know" are willing to wink it off. Try substituting a more recent and familiar despot -- Hitler will do -- and see how it rides. Link to comment
Marc Haegeman Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 Oh, but he is calling on King Herod frequently. Nothing serious -it's British humour . Link to comment
Farrell Fan Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 I'm reminded of W. C. Fields, who hated children AND animals. It wasn't just an act. My wife used to recall that when she was a child and lived on Long Island next door to Fields, he'd come out of his house and throw rocks at her and her playmates. She and I both loved seeing children on the ballet stage -- particularly in the NYCB Coppelia and Midsummer. I don't know how she would have felt about this Cupid, however. Link to comment
Hans Posted March 13, 2003 Share Posted March 13, 2003 I was offended, too. Nobody said it was "curmudgeonly charm" or indeed charm of any sort that caused Johnson to write that the RBS dancers were "disgusting," among other things. Why is there such hatred toward ballet students? If Crisp wanted to criticize the idea of the cupid, he still needn't have called it "loathsome." Whether Crisp likes children or not, Petipa, Bournonville, and Balanchine all used them in their productions, which will certainly outlast him and his reviews. Dislike is no excuse for rudeness, and being a critic does not require that one write one's exact thoughts, especially if doing so would be pointlessly cruel. Link to comment
Mel Johnson Posted March 13, 2003 Share Posted March 13, 2003 Actually, the Fields dislike for children being around was not a dislike for the children themselves, but at a house party in LA during the 30s, where he had many of his friends over with their children, a three-year-old wandered off and was found an hour later, drowned in a little pool near a little gazebo Fields had in a wooded part of his property. The incident so unnerved him that it began his extremely reclusive period. He was nearly as paranoid about trespassers as Irving Berlin. Link to comment
Alexandra Posted March 13, 2003 Share Posted March 13, 2003 I think the difference between Crisp and Johnson's remarks is that the former were intended to be humorous, and Crisp's regular audience would understand that, and Johnson's were not. Link to comment
balletmama Posted March 13, 2003 Share Posted March 13, 2003 That a particular media personality's style is recognized by or familiar to his/her audience does not imply that said style is above reproach. Dr. Laura Schlessinger, for example, makes all sorts of pseudo-witty negative remarks about homosexuals with which her listeners presumably agree and which they even find entertaining. Others, like myself, choose to point out the hostility and inhumanity of such remarks. Link to comment
Leigh Witchel Posted March 13, 2003 Share Posted March 13, 2003 [board Host Beanie on] Okay folks, this is veering dangerously toward invective. We may have also exhausted the topic; I'm not sure we're doing anything more than taking sides at this point. If that's the case, I suggest we move on. [board Host Beanie off] Link to comment
Watermill Posted March 13, 2003 Author Share Posted March 13, 2003 OK, Leigh. I think this might be a case of misunderstanding this particular brand of humor. It just seems to cross the line for me. But you're right: we all get to draw the line wherever we want. And I certainly do appreciate the chance to draw my own personal line in the civil environs of this forum. Although, I must say, the enabling of this type of misopedic (There's a five dollar word for you, Mel!) humor gives me that creepy feeling I get when I stumble upon male locker room jokes directed towards women & gays. Oops, there's that line again! Watermill Link to comment
Recommended Posts