Blog powered by Typepad

« A Tuesday Funny - God, I'm good to you! | Main | A tiny trickle of blood briefly sullied the white halls of Congress »

Thursday, 09 May 2013

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Off topic, Duffers, but I would welcome your expert luvvie view. This David Tennant chap: I've just watched him in The Politician's Husband where I thought him poor. He was rather wooden, his accent wandered all over the place, and he was comfortably outacted by his co-star and by a child actor. I'd previously seen him in Broadchurch, a farrago of a soap opera posing as a 'tec story, in which he was just flat.

Yet people talk of him as the coming man. Why?

Well, I've just wasted 3 minutes of my time reading all that bumf and looked at the pictures.
Rubbish, and that's an end to it!

I hate to say it but both groups amply illustrate to me why 'state funding' of the arts should cease, across the board.

Whilst I'm sure 'the experts' will be able to wax lyrically (but only if they get paid for it) about some imagined subtleties we mere mortals cannot see - I agree with Andra. (I think you agree too, but still wonder why you don't view the pronouncements of musical 'experts' in the same light - you really believe they hear things you do not when no two can agree amongst themselves what it is they claim to be hearing?).

For my sins I view the 'best' art being produced today as being that done for pleasure by amateurs, and by those belittled as illustrators and graphic artists, both beyond the pale to the elites.

I wonder how much of this 'stuff' would be produced if it was funded solely by whether someone would pay for it, and I'm including 'the experts' in the equation since they only ever spend other peoples money, never their own.

"your expert luvvie view" What a very shrewd judge you are, DM, and how wise of you to ask my opinion! To be serious, as far as Tennant goes I'm afraid he does nothing for me although I have never seen him live. The few things I have seen him in have been poor productions in which nobody stood a chance. For example, I watched half an hour of "The Politician's Wife" and switched off! It was unsubtle, unrealistic and unbelievable. Also, and it's not his fault, poor chap, but Tennant has eyes like a terrier's blx and his stare puts me off!

"all that bumf"!!! Madam, I'll have you know that this is one of the most elegantly written blogs in Blogdom. As for the pictures, yes, they are not all of a high standard but some of them are good, for example the Persian man under a tree which I feature above is, I think, rather beautiful.

Able, I absolutely agree that state funding should cease immediately. However, I disagree with your opinion that one should always and forever be the final judge on a work of art. Critics, like second-hand car salesmen and, dare I say it, nurses, come with the usual mix of vice and virtue but the best can open your eyes and ears and suddenly present you with a vista you had completely missed. Here's an example. When I directed Measure for Measure I read as many critics as I could find. The last one of all was an ardent American feminist (yeeeees, quite!) who had written a book on women in Shakespeare. I doubted whether I would reach Chapter II but in fact I finished it all and I have never looked at that play the same way since! She opened my eyes. So, my advice is, don't abandon your principles but don't be afraid to let go of your prejudices!

Prejudices? I hope not.

I don't dismiss their opinions, but neither do I class them as having some special insight or that their opinions are somehow more valid (better) than everyone elses.

I understand your meaning, but I think I've learnt more from listening to fellow everyday viewers/listeners than any self-styled (and remember, most are nothing more than that) critics.

The comments to this entry are closed.