Saturday, January 2, 2010
Voted most popular
Now that Obama’s poll numbers are in the pits, how long will it be before some new major military action suddenly pops up? Will it simply be a variation on the ongoing misadventure in Afghanistan or will the head of the Democratic Party want a war all his own? I sincerely hope I’m wrong on this one. Wouldn’t it be nice if the “Larynx from the Loop” didn't disappoint for a change. His list of failures is getting to be a bit too long. Let’s all hope more people aren’t killed for the political expediency of another party.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Amateurs
Over the past few months I’ve had the occasion to witness more than two local area amateur art presentations. At times I have been amused, awed, confused, disappointed, annoyed, and many of the other states in which one finds oneself when presented with performances not advertised as being anyway professional.
Overall they were certainly worth every penny I paid and for the most part were an enjoyable way to spend an evening, sometimes needing to leave the performance itself aside, and concentrate on the social aspects which accompany these mostly under rehearsed presentations.
Which leads to the subjects of criticism, satire, racism, elitism, and free-fire zones.
Let’s start with the definition of a free-fire zone since it is the simplest to explain and where the greatest consensus should be discovered. My standard for a FFZ is simple and elegant. If a performer takes cash money from the public, they may be fired upon at will. As with most things, exceptions abound. Nominal sums collected for charities of one type or another, along with obviously non-professional performers are given a pass. But even if the toll at the door is minimal, if the company makes any claims to being professionals, they may be shot on sight if the infraction demands such punishment.
In short, take my money, expect my wrath if you step onto the stage under prepared.
But we are discussing amateurs. Lovers of the arts. Is it elitism not to criticize their performances? Not at all. If fact it is a far, far better thing to ignore an amateur performance than to employ either a condescending or uncritical eye to such shows.
Racism. Not exactly but try this for a moment. How should sportswriters sum up the Special Olympics? Should they compare the competitors to actual Olympians? Of course not. Should they ink yard by yard coverage of each thrilling race? Maybe if there is a thrill here or there but that’s probably not the best way to go. Or should they simply gloss over the whole event and eventually proclaim that a good time was had by all and everyone enjoyed a day out in the sunshine and fresh air. You can probably guess where I side on this one.
Which leads to another annoyance. There has been a trend of late by professional entertainers to satirize amateur performers and under talented professionals. This is the equivalent of grammar school punks mocking a schoolmate’s lisp. It’s right up there with Special Olympic’s jokes. Where is the art in creating mediocre art in order to mock untalented performers? What pride can be taken in attempting to capture the essence of a failed performance? It’s a race to the bottom.
What these professional entertainers are achieving is the distancing of their audience from the object of their ridicule. In order to be entertained by such rubbish, you have to view these objects as not being like yourself. As being the other. As in “even though I’m a thirteen year-old idiot, at least I’m better than anyone who lisps.” It’s dehumanizing another human being. It’s the old minstrel show. It’s the same technique as racism.
Satire should only be used on objects in need of attack. If you think your amateur theatrical group is in need of attack, you need serious help.
Public criticism should be reserved for those who seek assessment on a professional level. Amateurs perform for the love of the work. Those who mock amateurs are in it, at best, only for the money.
Overall they were certainly worth every penny I paid and for the most part were an enjoyable way to spend an evening, sometimes needing to leave the performance itself aside, and concentrate on the social aspects which accompany these mostly under rehearsed presentations.
Which leads to the subjects of criticism, satire, racism, elitism, and free-fire zones.
Let’s start with the definition of a free-fire zone since it is the simplest to explain and where the greatest consensus should be discovered. My standard for a FFZ is simple and elegant. If a performer takes cash money from the public, they may be fired upon at will. As with most things, exceptions abound. Nominal sums collected for charities of one type or another, along with obviously non-professional performers are given a pass. But even if the toll at the door is minimal, if the company makes any claims to being professionals, they may be shot on sight if the infraction demands such punishment.
In short, take my money, expect my wrath if you step onto the stage under prepared.
But we are discussing amateurs. Lovers of the arts. Is it elitism not to criticize their performances? Not at all. If fact it is a far, far better thing to ignore an amateur performance than to employ either a condescending or uncritical eye to such shows.
Racism. Not exactly but try this for a moment. How should sportswriters sum up the Special Olympics? Should they compare the competitors to actual Olympians? Of course not. Should they ink yard by yard coverage of each thrilling race? Maybe if there is a thrill here or there but that’s probably not the best way to go. Or should they simply gloss over the whole event and eventually proclaim that a good time was had by all and everyone enjoyed a day out in the sunshine and fresh air. You can probably guess where I side on this one.
Which leads to another annoyance. There has been a trend of late by professional entertainers to satirize amateur performers and under talented professionals. This is the equivalent of grammar school punks mocking a schoolmate’s lisp. It’s right up there with Special Olympic’s jokes. Where is the art in creating mediocre art in order to mock untalented performers? What pride can be taken in attempting to capture the essence of a failed performance? It’s a race to the bottom.
What these professional entertainers are achieving is the distancing of their audience from the object of their ridicule. In order to be entertained by such rubbish, you have to view these objects as not being like yourself. As being the other. As in “even though I’m a thirteen year-old idiot, at least I’m better than anyone who lisps.” It’s dehumanizing another human being. It’s the old minstrel show. It’s the same technique as racism.
Satire should only be used on objects in need of attack. If you think your amateur theatrical group is in need of attack, you need serious help.
Public criticism should be reserved for those who seek assessment on a professional level. Amateurs perform for the love of the work. Those who mock amateurs are in it, at best, only for the money.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)