Too funny (well at least to me...) Last night I was catching up on a few weeks of New Yorkers, and read Hilton Als' (a theatre critic I agree with more often than not) piece on Porgy and Bess which is also a review, and a sort of defence (specifically to Sondheim) about the new production.
It was in the Style issue which has a number of, by New Yorker standards, really glossy photosgraphs for the articles, and they had that same photo, but without the type. I assumed it was just so, well, glam, to fit into the theme of the Style issue. It seemed ironic though, as Als' admits that previously, he was most familiar with the Otto Preminger film version (which seemed odd to me, as it seems relatively hard to track down). The quote is:
I am most familiar with Otto Premingers bodice-ripping, omen-soaked 1959 film version, starring Sidney Poitier and Dorothy Dandridge, which James Baldwin called grandiose, foolish, and heavy with the stale perfume of self-congratulation."
And, to me, that photo practically screams out exactly what he criticizes the film for being, and praises this production for not being.
The full article is available to non subscribers here:
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2011/09/26/110926crat_atlarge_als?currentPage=1 It's well written and raises some interesting and valid points (it does sound like DuBose's original novel is awfully overwritten, as Als says), although I'm still not convinced by the examples given of making the piece more three dimensional (he seems to have seen the original ending Paulus used), nor the final quote that seems to imply people shouldn't write about a culture or minority they're not a part of, unless that group isn't allowed to do so themselves (which seems odd as Als has spoken a lot about gay writers being able to write straight characters, etc, etc).
