NY Times Journalist's "Body Shaming" in 'Smokey Joe's Cafe' Review — Page 3

In this Age of Offense, I frankly admit that I find it hard to keep up with all the things that offend people. I know some folks who are offended by the presence of bicycles on the streets of New York. So I suppose the philosophy I'm tending to adapt is "By all means, be offended, talk about it, but it may be best not to expect me to fall into step with your expectations."

Updated On: 7/24/18 at 08:25 AM

It seems people love to blame the current generation or a modern way of thinking as if it hasn't always been considered in poor taste to comment on a woman's weight. That's just basic decency. The comment should have been made without noting the actor's size.

I wish more people on this forum had empathy.

As a reaction to the last 2 posters, I think the reaction of this actress it is a little too much exploiting the victim role and wanting to receive empathy.

Her reaction has nothing to do with what the journalist actually said. It's completely out of line.

It reminds me of certain groups of people wanting to take down the show America's next top model with "not every person in the world looks like the contestants, so it's not fair for all people" as an argument. Everything will always offend somebody. We can not erase everything.

Updated On: 7/24/18 at 09:59 AM

Still better than your 1 note reactions.

And the 1 note victim role fans for that matter.

Updated On: 7/24/18 at 10:04 AM

My favorite assertion in this thread is that Liza Minnelli and Madeline Kahn are paragons of stability in the face of the pressures of this business and the horrible comments made about them in the press. I mean...

John Simon is a hateful critic. I was in a cast (there were only five of us) and he wrote 'It's a cast bereft of talent and looks.' So...not only were we bad, we were ugly. Nothing makes me happier than the fact that his career has gone the way of the dodo. And when he has finally left this earth, I'll say 'Death...go ahead and be a little proud today.'

Okay so the NYT hired or assigned a writer that isn't necessarily sensitive or tactful. Yes the wonderful performer is large - as if that needed to be pointed out unless you are blind, in which case, after reading the review, even the blind now know this fact. It doesn't need to be pointed out, she knows she is large, and so does the audience. What does need to be pointed out is that the costume designer is untalented and unskilled at adapting styles to fit every body type and adapt the look them to compliment the performer and keep the general look that has been agreed upon. For a performer, any criticism about or surrounding their performance or appearance is taken immediately to heart whether it is a direct comment on their talent or not - that's the performer "Id". Meanwhile, what is truly lazy is the director and/or producer not demanding a better look and design - "Oh well, what can you do with a fat performer other than this? There body get's in the way." A real designer's job is to design a look and adapt those imperfections that come with the talent and make the best of it." It is the same thing when wigs are put on a large female performer that doesn't balance her body, unless it is meant to be ugly or funny, because otherwise it is a tragedy and so often you see wig designers on broadway and opera guilty of that laziness. So, the valuable lesson here is for the future that this performer must insist upon the best from others when she performs in a show, be it fellow actor or designer and accept nothing less, because she brings only her best. Crying all night solves nothing except emotional release, and her anger really should be to the musical creative team for allowing such an easy criticism to take away from her performance, not the critic. Criticizing the critics creative or journalistic writing talents are left for others in that field to be determined. If everyone boycotted or screamed every time a critic remarked upon personal appearance in a show, film or opera.....please. If you really want to see a critic go after a performer, I suggest you look back at Frank Rich's critique of "Secret Garden," I am sure Mr. MP can relate.

Critics have judged actors by their appearance since forever and it has always been wrong. Even positive comments. If you've worked on a show and had it happen, it's always glaringly obvious how inappropriate it is - in fact, sometimes it's even more obvious when it is positive.

As for the argument it was actually a criticism of the design, that goes out the window when the critic proffers a better costume as being the one worn by a thinner cast member.

And let's remember critics at the Times are paid. And they receive free tickets. So being "sensitive" is least thing they could be. They're being paid by their editors and in-kind by the production for their writing ability. The standard for them should be high.

A Director said: "Yes, the comments are "body shaming." As for the further explanation from Laura Collins-Hughes, perhaps she miswrote. Did she attend the Donald Trump School For Theatre Reviewing? I read other reviews and no other critic had a problem with the costumes!

As for some of the postings on this thread, I could give a rat's ass about what John Simon wrote years ago. <>.

I don't give a rat's ass about comments by French Designers or what clothes Lane Bryant and others are selling now. The comments have nothing to do with costume designs!

OlBlueEyes, you don't know a thing about Alysha Umphress' health and if she is or isn't overweight, <>! <>!"

What was the last production that you directed? The Three Stooges Join The Army? If you’re willing to deny that one can tell if another is overweight by looking at him or her, to support your agenda, nothing much can be done with you.

”Body Shaming” is a fairly new term, but most of what it preaches is just common civility. You don’t point to a guy in public and announce that his nose is huge. You don’t tell a girl that her legs aren’t good enough for her to ever make the chorus, and you don’t call a girl out for being overweight if she’s carrying around an extra ten pounds.

But you go too far when you reassure everyone who is obese that they are fine the way they when they are actually putting themselves at risk for serious health problems that they don’t want any part of.

I’m not addressing this to Umphress because I’ve only seen one photo of her and I don’t think that she is dangerously overweight right now.

As always, just my humble opinion.

behindthescenes2 said: "What does need to be pointed out is that the costume designer is untalented and unskilled at adapting styles to fit every body type and adapt the look them to compliment the performer and keep the general look that has been agreed upon. For a performer, any criticism about or surrounding their performance or appearanceis taken immediately to heart whether it is a direct comment on their talent or not - that's the performer "Id". Meanwhile, what is truly lazy is the director and/or producer not demanding a better look and design - "Oh well, what can you do with a fat performer other than this? There body get's in the way."

This is foolishness. I don't know how "behind the scenes" this poster actually is, but actually, behind the actual scenes, this costume is a collaboration between the designer and the performer, guided by and approved by the director, and signed off on by the producer. But the performer has a key say in what she will and won't wear, and what makes her happy and comfortable to wear so that she can deliver her most confident possible performance. Alejo Vietti is a top designer with many credits for many shows in which he has dressed many men and women of various shapes and sizes, and many of them brilliantly. Say what you want about this performer in this particular costume, but I can guarantee that laziness didn't enter into the equation, nor lack of talent. This was what Ms. Umphress wanted to wear, as conceived and built and altered and revised over time by Mr. Vietti. She even said in her response to Ms. Collins-Hughes, that she thought she looked great in the costume. So let's not be ridiculous.

it isn't foolishness and many, many performers have no say so in the design - it is laziness and inattentiveness and it is obvious when a critic feels compelled to comment upon it. Just because a performer collaborates or says I want to look like this or that, doesn't mean it's in the best interest of the character or the actor - get real. It could be not wanting to be critical in a moment during the design process when it's easier to make the decision and gently guide the actor "the first cut is the deepest" as the song says than these 1000 cuts she experiences now.

behindthescenes2 said: "it isn't foolishness and many, many performers have no say so in the design - it is laziness and inattentiveness and it is obvious when a critic feels compelled to comment upon it. Just because a performer collaborates or says I want to look like this or that, doesn't mean it's in the best interest of the character or the actor - get real. It could be not wanting to be critical in a moment during the design process when it's easier to make the decision and gently guide the actor"the first cut is the deepest" as the song says than these 1000 cuts she experiences now."

Exactly, I wonder what these victim role fans/supporters, who agree with her blaming the journalist actually think of what you describe, and if they realize at all that the biggest part of this is how she approaches this and most of all how the creative team handled in the first place.

Unfortunately my posts got deleted when I pointed that out, and I was wrongly accused of shaming her too, but these people are completely missing the point.

It really is nowadays like when you just scream and be offended, whoever you point out as the black sheep gets the blame. It's ridiculous. The overall situation is so much more than that.

I mean, if she is really standing hand in hand with the costume designer etc, pointing an angry, offended finger to a random journalist, not wanting to see the whole situation, posting it on twitter, receiving lot of praise for your cries and then be content again? I'm sorry, but people like this need a reality check. That's what I meant by my previous post about exploiting the victim role. It really is how the new generation is taught to think and act and it is such a lame and easy way to not have to confront anything in life. It really is avoiding the point of every situation.

What is her goal here? Silencing everybody with a certain opinion about things? Wanting people to lie if the opinion doesn't suit her? Or is it having a talk with the creative team, and try to find out how this could happen and trying to make the right choices?

Or is she actually agreeing with the creative team and costumes and very content with it? And just angry that a journalist mentioned anything about unflattering because she disagrees?

Updated On: 7/24/18 at 03:16 PM

Kad said: "You were more fun when you were trying to tell people that they didn't understand the nuances of Glee."

Thanks! You were never fun unfortunately.

Glee had some wonderfully, well written, interesting scenes about criticism in this business.