This is the same Martin Bernheimer who refused to give conductor Gerhard Samuel a good review because Samuel not tall, not thin, and of the wrong sexual preference.
I wouldn't give Gerhard Samuel a good review either. He always had his head buried in the score. Half of the time he was confused, the other half of the time he was an asshole.
Surely it's time to replace reviews with full colour pie charts? They're more intelligent, insightful and save us all valuable time. They also avoid the technical gibberish critics employ to show each other they still understand latin/old French (no, really) but know little or nothing about opera. Or life. Or getting out more ...
There's a world of difference between the two reviews, isn't there? Tommassini's could have been 85% written (a rough figure--I'm not consulting the pie chart) in advance. Bernheimer's seems like an actual response to what he heard in the theater. Hats off to him.
Yet nothing was mentioned about the fact that the super who fell had planned the whole thing in advance...Like Napoleon, his coup was intrinsically flawed.
I really miss Mr. Bernheimer's reviews in my local birdcage liner, the Los Angeles Times. He was replaced by the dull Mark Swed who, among other American composers, has his nose so far up John Adam's bunghole he'll never see light again.
There's a story that back in the Peter Hemmings days at the Los Angeles Opera, they'd anxiously wait for MB's reviews; it seems they were sort of terrified of him.
9 Comments:
hm.
This is the same Martin Bernheimer who refused to give conductor Gerhard Samuel a good review because Samuel not tall, not thin, and of the wrong sexual preference.
I wouldn't give Gerhard Samuel a good review either. He always had his head buried in the score. Half of the time he was confused, the other half of the time he was an asshole.
You all need to shut your pie holes.
Surely it's time to replace reviews with full colour pie charts? They're more intelligent, insightful and save us all valuable time. They also avoid the technical gibberish critics employ to show each other they still understand latin/old French (no, really) but know little or nothing about opera. Or life. Or getting out more ...
There's a world of difference between the two reviews, isn't there? Tommassini's could have been 85% written (a rough figure--I'm not consulting the pie chart) in advance. Bernheimer's seems like an actual response to what he heard in the theater. Hats off to him.
with the NYT's proclivity for slide shows, they should start having their music critics mime their reviews.
Yet nothing was mentioned about the fact that the super who fell had planned the whole thing in advance...Like Napoleon, his coup was intrinsically flawed.
http://cultureonthecheap.wordpress.com
I really miss Mr. Bernheimer's reviews in my local birdcage liner, the Los Angeles Times. He was replaced by the dull Mark Swed who, among other American composers, has his nose so far up John Adam's bunghole he'll never see light again.
There's a story that back in the Peter Hemmings days at the Los Angeles Opera, they'd anxiously wait for MB's reviews; it seems they were sort of terrified of him.
Post a Comment
<< Home