... Comedian Conversation Falls Flat at 92nd Street Y. (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
I would think a conversation about art would have been quite interesting. It would have been nice if the reporter had provided some details of what Solomon and Martin actually said to each other.
I would side with Solomon and Martin this time. I saw Martin interviewed on Charlie Rose last week, and all they talked about was art, and it was very interesting.
ReplyDeleteI think people expected Martin to do his old comedy routine. This was all about expectations that people have that trip them up. They demand one thing and get upset when you give them something else. As Solomon said, they never told her what they really wanted. So I don't blame her for any of this.
Refunding the ticket price is pretty insulting to all involved. It speaks to the demand that We Must Be Entertained, rather than provoked into thought. You'd think that of all institutions the 92 St. Y would know better, having hosted billions of poetry readings, etc.
I think you're right, Art. I introduced Geoffrey Hill at the 92d Street Y once and the audience knew what they were there for and appreciated what they got.
ReplyDeleteExpecting the New York Times to criticize one of their own? Here's a report that suggests that it's Solomon. (I've met Martin Schneider, and the guy doesn't bullshit.)
ReplyDeletehttp://emdashes.com/2010/11/steve-martin-and-deborah-solom.php
Historically, she's been a hostile and terrible interviewer.
Well, I take Ed's comments seriously, because he's there on the scene, and I trust his judgment. So the plot thickens.
ReplyDeleteI have additional info that I can't disclose. Let's just say that people shouldn't be so quick to conclude about what happened if (a) they weren't there and (b) the conversation isn't available for us to listen to.
ReplyDeleteYet if Martin said he liked Solomon and thought she was a good interviewer, I don't think that can't be just ignored, either.
ReplyDeleteIn absence of other knowledge, what else can one do? Don't blame me for forming an opinion based on data as presented; blame the reporting.
Addendum:
ReplyDeleteAnd regardless of who's right and who's wrong, and whether or not this was good or bad reporting—certainly none of it will matter in 100 years—it remains a disturbing and potentially insulting move (insulting to the arts, if not the people directly involved) on the part of the 92nd St. Y to refund the ticket prices. Is that something else that we can't really know about? Again, in absence of information, what are we to suppose?
I get really irritated sometimes when people say they have inside info that they cannot reveal. Well so what? Why even bother to mention it, except to be in the right and prove everyone else wrong? What good does that do? This sort of thing often comes across as the attitude of the elite against the unwashed ignorant peasants, and really has nothing to do with the matter at hand. And it looks really really arrogant at times.
I mean no offense, Ed, to you personally, but perhaps you can see why that really only stirs the pot instead of settling the matter.
More here:
ReplyDeletehttp://emdashes.com/2010/12/more-on-martin-and-solomon-and.php
The NPR report cited by Martin Schneider in that post was clearly irresponsible journalism. The only way to settle this matter is to keep stirring the pot until the actual conversation is released and people can decide for themselves. It is irresponsible for journalists to smear the reputation of the 92nd Street Y when they haven't even examined the source material or they weren't there. That's what's going on right now, Art. And that's the danger of putting your chips in only one narrative.
Also, Art, I could care less if you're "irritated" about the fact that I'm trying to respect people's privacy. Clearly, you don't understand the function of journalism, which is to communicate new and accurate information to the public. That requires respect and trust and sifting through data. The idea of protecting a source, or attempting to corroborate a piece of information through several sources, may seem doughty to you. But I don't rat people out. And it's important for bumpkins like you to understand the need to get things right instead of idly speculating on events that you did not attend and that you are unfit to comment upon.
ReplyDelete