25 July 2008
What's Up, Doc? (1972)
Like a musical, a screwball comedy---whenever it comes out well---is inspirational. It emphasises the artificiality of a boundary between a dream and reality. "What's Up, Doc?" has come out well enough.
Women Impressionists: Berthe Morisot, Mary Cassatt, Eva Gonzalès, Marie Bracquemond
(Legion of Honor, 21 June 2008--21 September 2008)
The lack of the sexual appeal of the paintings' subjects leaves a void in the subjects' character. There is something in the look and the poise of women when painted by men that suggests mystery, strength, youth---that sexually charges the women in the paintings. Not so in the paintings by the women impressionists. Instead, the look is blank, the back is slouched. The women in the paintings are exposed, void of the idealisation typically conferred upon them by the hand of a male painter. What is left?
Sometimes the woman's look is blank; sometimes it betrays an emotion: motherly affection (almost a duty), boredom, or longing for the unknown. Does this reflect the limited range of a late ninetieth century woman deprived of education, a woman whose main occupation is a "visitor", a "mother", or a virgin in waiting for a husband? Or is the flatness of women's characters due to the shallow perceptions and abilities of the artists? Probably a little of both can be held responsible.
The femininity of male painters' female subjects does not subtract from the character of the subjects. The femininity accentuates this character. A man is liable to idealise a woman, if only for evolutionary reasons. This idealisation is not limited to the physical. Instead, the physical idealisation often present in paintings serves to accentuate the emotional and intellectual idealisation---if it fails to do so, it becomes pornography.
The exhibition by women impressionists is a valuable study in the way women see women. Not surprisingly, however, the spectacle is surpassed by the way talented men see women and the way women would like to be seen.
The lack of the sexual appeal of the paintings' subjects leaves a void in the subjects' character. There is something in the look and the poise of women when painted by men that suggests mystery, strength, youth---that sexually charges the women in the paintings. Not so in the paintings by the women impressionists. Instead, the look is blank, the back is slouched. The women in the paintings are exposed, void of the idealisation typically conferred upon them by the hand of a male painter. What is left?
Sometimes the woman's look is blank; sometimes it betrays an emotion: motherly affection (almost a duty), boredom, or longing for the unknown. Does this reflect the limited range of a late ninetieth century woman deprived of education, a woman whose main occupation is a "visitor", a "mother", or a virgin in waiting for a husband? Or is the flatness of women's characters due to the shallow perceptions and abilities of the artists? Probably a little of both can be held responsible.
The femininity of male painters' female subjects does not subtract from the character of the subjects. The femininity accentuates this character. A man is liable to idealise a woman, if only for evolutionary reasons. This idealisation is not limited to the physical. Instead, the physical idealisation often present in paintings serves to accentuate the emotional and intellectual idealisation---if it fails to do so, it becomes pornography.
The exhibition by women impressionists is a valuable study in the way women see women. Not surprisingly, however, the spectacle is surpassed by the way talented men see women and the way women would like to be seen.
19 July 2008
Doubt---a parable
(Theatre Works, 19 July 2008)
The entire play is less than the sum of the scenes that it contains. The grotesque fallibility of characters prevents the play from raising moral dilemmas that linger after the curtain drops. To the credit of the actors, however, the grotesque characters are not accompanied by grotesque performances.
Sister James (Kristin Stokes) is prepared to compromise her knowledge of the truth in order to please others and especially be pleased by others. Sister Aloysius (Kimberly King) values the perceived safety of her pupils above their happiness; she also values her mental routines above her happiness. Infantile Father Brendan Flynn (Cassidy Brown) lacks confidence in himself and constantly seeks approval. By the end of the play, everyone, including the prosecutor Sister Aloysius and the plaintiff Father Flynn, are consumed by "doubt," which gives the rise to the title of the play.
Does the hierarchical authority of the church, the "certainties" of religion , and the unconditional approval of god disproportionately attract people who lack self-confidence? the kind of people who populate the play?
The play is at its best if perceived as a series of sketches. The scene with Mrs Muller (Tamiyka White) is a potent one. Not blinded by the black-and-white simplicity often sought for in religion, she is a consequentialist. She realises that most situations in life involve trade-offs. This conflict between consequentialist and deontological views could have constituted a core conflict in the play. Short of changing the subject of the play, removing the ending in which Sister Aloysius suffers from the pangs of doubt would have made the narrative less didactic and left some food for thought for the audience.
The entire play is less than the sum of the scenes that it contains. The grotesque fallibility of characters prevents the play from raising moral dilemmas that linger after the curtain drops. To the credit of the actors, however, the grotesque characters are not accompanied by grotesque performances.
Sister James (Kristin Stokes) is prepared to compromise her knowledge of the truth in order to please others and especially be pleased by others. Sister Aloysius (Kimberly King) values the perceived safety of her pupils above their happiness; she also values her mental routines above her happiness. Infantile Father Brendan Flynn (Cassidy Brown) lacks confidence in himself and constantly seeks approval. By the end of the play, everyone, including the prosecutor Sister Aloysius and the plaintiff Father Flynn, are consumed by "doubt," which gives the rise to the title of the play.
Does the hierarchical authority of the church, the "certainties" of religion , and the unconditional approval of god disproportionately attract people who lack self-confidence? the kind of people who populate the play?
The play is at its best if perceived as a series of sketches. The scene with Mrs Muller (Tamiyka White) is a potent one. Not blinded by the black-and-white simplicity often sought for in religion, she is a consequentialist. She realises that most situations in life involve trade-offs. This conflict between consequentialist and deontological views could have constituted a core conflict in the play. Short of changing the subject of the play, removing the ending in which Sister Aloysius suffers from the pangs of doubt would have made the narrative less didactic and left some food for thought for the audience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
