Comments on: I think that tree a lovely poem shall never

By: Jim Withington

Jim Withington — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 10:42:24 +0000

Scott, thanks for noting that my post was reacting to a similar tone that Radon used.
And yes, we have met, Radon. I was in the poetry workshop with Universes that you seemed to find yourself too experimental for (judging by your reaction). I would agree that the workshop wasn’t as challenging as it could have been, but I also think that wasn’t the point.
I agree that performance artists as a rule need to meet the audience halfway. My problem is in dismissing a performance simply because it doesn’t live up to some “experimental” standard (and I was a bit amused that somehow, a past-her-prime writer is your example of experimental).
I’m not asking for Our Town (or Dr. Seuss, speaking of being patronizing); I’m just asking that we give a performer a chance based on merit, and on the performance they give, and stop trying to equate confusing and obtuse with experimental and good. The way that TBA mixes shows like Quickley’s with something like Jennifer Monson’s dance really gives a broad perspective of time-based art–and I, for one, am glad.

By: Radon

Radon — Sat, 16 Sep 2006 09:57:51 +0000

I appreciate this festival so much. I’m hungry for this kind of work and every year, I come away fired up and inspired. Édouard Lock’s “Amelia,” Lone Twin, Vivarium Studios, David Eckard’s “Podium,” every year there is work that is thrilling for the chances that it takes often spilling outside of its discipline to make new. I just wish that in the realm of the word, spoken, we could seek out work that is equally experimental and rigorous.
Interesting point about Kiki & Herb which everyone universally LOVED. I don’t know if “new” is the right word here, and I think it may obscure the real question which is, should this work be in this festival or should we get K&H into the Schnitzer at some point? I think of this festival as being a home for work that is time-based that doesn’t have a home elsewhere, in traditional theater, in a film festival, etc. To me, work like that of Lone Twin is a good example of work that might not be programmed in a traditional theater festival just as Theo Angell’s film or Vladimir’s Vladmaster performance might not be programmed in a traditional film festival, nor might Locke’s film be shown at a dance festival. So all of this work finds a home at TBA. Does that mean that the cabaret performers who have plenty of other venues for their work should not be included to favor homeless work? Maybe. Or maybe conceiving of the Works as more of an entertainment venue after a day at the fest is the right way to look at it.

By: Scott Millar

Scott Millar — Fri, 15 Sep 2006 15:18:28 +0000

In all fairness to Jim, I think you were a bit “snippy” and “patronizing” in your original post. I do that all the time, so that’s why I noticed.
HOWEVER: I entirely agree with you. It was great to find your post. Now I don’t feel like I am too much of a snob or on the other hand not sophisticated enough to “get” certain performances. I wasn’t fond of LAURIE ANDERSON or SPALDING GRAY PROJECT and don’t plan on attending JERRY QUICKLEY.
But then I think: what about KIKI AND HERB? I loved it, but is it new? I did like seeing it though. Could KIKI AND HERB be my UNIVERSES? Or is this different…?

By: Radon

Radon — Fri, 15 Sep 2006 11:42:23 +0000

Hi Jim,
I don’t believe we’ve met. So when you say, “my friend,” we can only assume you’re being patronizing. Too bad we can’t talk about work without getting snippy.
Why does it have to be new? It has to be new because we are seeing new in dance, in theater, and I want the same in the realm of the spoken word. If good is good enough for you, would a good production of Our Town work for you as the theater component of the Time-Based Art Festival? That’s not the festival PICA has been putting on, nor is it the festival most of us want to see.
The 90s was when the Universes kind of poem performance took off in SF, Chicago, NYC, LA, etc. That’s the time reference I’m making.
I didn’t actually say that inaccessibility=good, but I’m willing to meet a challenging piece halfway. That’s the audience’s role in this festival. By your comment, I guess you’re implying that accessibility=good, so you can take Dr. Suess, and I’ll hold out for Gertrude Stein.

By: Radon

Radon — Fri, 15 Sep 2006 11:41:40 +0000

By: Jim Withington

Jim Withington — Wed, 13 Sep 2006 23:39:19 +0000

why does it have to be new? and who said it was new to time-based art?
sometimes things can simply be GOOD, and their show was. very VERY good, in fact.
inaccessibility=good is a lot older school than the early nineties, my friend….