German Spring Fun

I've been pondering some issues to write about, and regretting that I've decided not to go to Europe this summer, particularly Germany. So in honor of the moment, here are some amusing vids.

A tale of two reviews

Subtitle: Didi and Gogo are not Kirk and Spock or why read the New Yorker?

My recent post about "interpretive criticism" caused a tiny tempest in a teapot on a local blog. It was never about the critics' opinions per se. (Nor did anyone really respond to mine.) But there was, perhaps, a simpler way to make my point:

I just read two recent, big-publication reviews. Both contain equal helpings of positive and negative. Both are thoughtful and fun to read. Both give context. But their respective tones are completely different.

One makes sure you never have to go near the film that is it's subject: in other words, it tells you just what to think, implying that thinking the right thing is as good as being there. The review takes the place of the film. In fact, it's entertainment in it's own right. And it's fairly cheap entertainment at that.

The other review (of a play production) inspires the reader to go to the play -- indeed to take interest in experiencing the theatre generally -- in spite of the production's perceptively enumerated shortcomings. I'd rather have dinner with this guy--and then go to the theatre with him. This kind of review is actually more inspiring to read if you can't actually see the thing being reviewed. You can better imagine what it might be like, instead of being told.

While I'm at it, the subject of reviewing the reviewers is popping up on the other side of the pond as well, right here.

There is one thing I do object to even more than a aggressively interpretive review: the reader's opinion that it's a critic's job is to tell him if something is "worth the money." I can tell you right now, it is never worth the money. If you have extra cash lying around, try spending it on this. (Or this.)

Couldn't resist

Hatch batch

The recent HATCHfest in Asheville, North Carolina was

"the first international mentoring festival for the creative and media arts communities. This festival is a celebration that springs naturally from the HATCH mission: To provide mentorship, education, inspiration and recognition to the next generation of creative innovators."

The festival was organized by discipline: architecture, design/tech, film, journalism, music and photography. Asheville is a conducive environment for this kind stimulation and mentoring. I am disappointed, however, that theatre was not on the HATCHfest organizers' list of disciplines. In addition to a vigorous exchange of ideas, part of HATCHfest's raison d'etre seems to be business networking. But beyond America's commercially obsessed borders (and within its fringe), theatre artists are much more likely to be woven into the creative fabric of their cultural networks. Many of world's young theatre companies are on the forefront of creative innovations -- innovations whose paradigms those in the more lucrative media could profitably pilfer...

Could a future HATCHfest include the likes of Robert LaPage, Pina Bausch, Elevator Repair Service, Tectonic, etc., just to name a few? Even on the more superficial level, do the organizers know that Sam Mendes got his first film gig (American Beauty) after Spielberg saw his theatrical production of Cabaret?

In Toronto, another "hatch" festival, HATCHLab, includes the iconoclastic theatre company, Stan's Cafe. and an installation show called Of All The People In The World, which I attended in NYC last year.