Is Roberto Alagna a homophobe?
James Jorden
A friend sent me a copy of an interview in the London "Daily
Telegraph" (April 7, 1997) in which Roberto Alagna indulges in what
appears to be homophobic hate speech.
The interviewer quotes to Alagna an unfavorable review the tenor
received from a British critic; Alagna's response is, "That man is a
homosexual."
Oh, yes, he also calls several female detractors "putains".
Is there any update on this story? Has Alagna perhaps apologized for
his homophobic rant? And can anyone in good conscience buy his
recordings or patronize his performances until he does?
--
james jorden
jjo...@ix.netcom.com
http://www.anaserve.com/~parterre
"Without Jews, Gypsies and homosexuals, there is no theater."
-- Mel Brooks in "To Be or Not to Be"
David K
> And can anyone in good conscience buy his
> recordings or patronize his performances until he does?
Sure. Other homophobes could. Thanks for sharing this info. I will know
to stay away from his works.
David K
--
David K
mailto:kaye...@pilot.msu.edu
http://www.msu.edu/user/kayedavi/
___________
\ /
\ /
\ /
\ /
\ /
V
thomas
Yet another reason not to give in to the hype. I wonder how his wife reacted to the
article - I heard he called his female critics "prostitutes"! I can see he intends to
BULLY the general public into buying his CDs . Or maybe he just doesn't realize the PR
tactics used by Madonna and Prince just don't work w. opera singers. In anycase, my
collection is and will always be Alagna-Free....
Thomas
James Jorden
thomas wrote:
> Or maybe he just doesn't realize the PR
> tactics used by Madonna and Prince just don't work w. opera singers.
the equivalent of Freni or Domingo in the operatic field. Does anyone
seriously expect the Alagnas to be around in 10 years, let alone 30?
And, of course, Madonna and Prince (heterosexuals both) are known as gay
icons and have legions of gay fans.
Perhaps a better parallel would be between Mr. Alagna and the "immortal"
Andrew "Dice" Clay.
David K
> Yet another reason not to give in to the hype. I wonder how his wife
reacted to the
> article - I heard he called his female critics "prostitutes"! I can see
he intends to
realize the PR
anycase, my
> collection is and will always be Alagna-Free....
Sorry to break the news to you, but Madonna wouldn't say such a thing. She
realizes that a large portion of her greatest fan are gay men.
So Alagna is homophobic and very phallocentric. As someone who often
helps people deal with such issues (I am a facilitator for a support group
for gay and bi men), I feel he has some feelings he needs to deal with.
thomas
David K wrote:
>
> Sorry to break the news to you, but Madonna wouldn't say such a thing. She
> realizes that a large portion of her greatest fan are gay men.
> So Alagna is homophobic and very phallocentric. As someone who often
> helps people deal with such issues (I am a facilitator for a support group
> for gay and bi men), I feel he has some feelings he needs to deal with.
>
> David K
>
> --
> David K
> mailto:kaye...@pilot.msu.edu
> http://www.msu.edu/user/kayedavi/
Please...I do know this. I presently have more respect for the Material Girl than I do
for Alagna. I was merely drawing a parallel between her shock tactics and Alagna's
brazenness rather than to the actual content of their remarks. Nothing more.
My intentions were good, so please resist the urge to flame.....
Thomas
Sarah Hollis
And some of you thought I was overeacting to Alagna's Alfredo Kraus
comment! I quite vociferously told all of you that his unprofessional,
ignorant attitude made it impossible for me to listen to him even if
he had a voice I would want to. This latest round doesn't suprise me
at all.(Maybe he really wanted to play football instead of sing.) I
know, as some of you pointed out, a singers personal beliefs or
attitudes shouldn't affect one's hearing of them, but you know....I
disagree. As I've said, it's one thing to be pompous, arrogant,etc.,
who cares about that, but it's quite another to be hostile. I just
don't see how attitudes like that are compatible such a glorious art
form capable of such extreme beauty and emotional depth. Maybe it's
naive, but I would think being able to participate in such an
experience would be a humbling one.
Deep sigh.
Ok, I'm stepping down now.
Sarah
P.S. Let's all ignore him and maybe he'll go away.
j...@nospam.com~address/below
I don't know what he is, but he certainly acts like a "kaweeeeeeeeeeeen"!
In article <336444...@ppq.com>, thomas <th...@ppq.com> wrote:
> David K wrote:
> >
> > > And can anyone in good conscience buy his
> > > recordings or patronize his performances until he does?
> >
> > Sure. Other homophobes could. Thanks for sharing this info. I will know
> > to stay away from his works.
> >
> > David K
> >
> > --
> > David K
> > mailto:kaye...@pilot.msu.edu
> > http://www.msu.edu/user/kayedavi/
> >
> > ___________
> > \ /
> > \ /
> > \ /
> > \ /
> > \ /
> > V
>
> Yet another reason not to give in to the hype. I wonder how his wife
reacted to the
> article - I heard he called his female critics "prostitutes"! I can see
he intends to
> BULLY the general public into buying his CDs . Or maybe he just doesn't
realize the PR
> tactics used by Madonna and Prince just don't work w. opera singers. In
anycase, my
> collection is and will always be Alagna-Free....
>
> Thomas
Mallardo7
Before condemning Alagna for his alledged opinions let's remember the
source of this interview - the British press. As someone who has lived
and worked in England I can assure you that the truth is often the last
consideration where newspapers are concerned. There are so many papers in
a constant battle for circulation that literally anything goes. Quotes
are taken out of context, no attributions are made, you name it.
Whatever Alagna did or did not say, no English paper below the Times and
Guardian can be considered a reliable source.
Parz...@webtv.net
Personally, I would consider not listening to Alagna because he dislikes
someone's sexual preferences to be the same as not listening to Wagner
because he was anti-semetic; I separate the art from the man. I could
care less what his personal opinions are.
Wer ist der Gral?
Kalliban
You miss the point here, Mr. P. If you or I comment on someone's
sexual preferences, it goes no further than the four walls. When an
individual of international fame makes the same comment it
reverberates throughout the world, possibly with disastrous effects.
I'm sure you have said things you never would have said had you known
millions of ears were listening. Wagner's comments were made when
anti-semetism was standard procedure and could make no difference in
the entrenched negative attitude towards jews; as a product of his
time one could say he didn't know any better. Alagna's comments come
at a time when society is poised between the old attitudes towards
homosexuality and a new spirit of tolerance. Any comment from a public
figure could help tip the scales one way or another. At the least,
Alagna is guilty of stupidity and, I suspect, already regrets his
statements.
Kalliban
>
>
Sara Freeman
In <3364b...@204.188.94.5> ti...@backdoor.com (AstroJack) writes:
>
>Parz...@webtv.net wrote:
>
>>Personally, I would consider not listening to Alagna because he
dislikes
>>someone's sexual preferences to be the same as not listening to
Wagner
>>because he was anti-semetic; I separate the art from the man. I
could
>>care less what his personal opinions are.
>
>>
>>Wer ist der Gral?
>>
>>
>
>you would you patronize his business?
>Singing is Mr. Alagna's business.
>I've not heard him sing, so I might listen to him on the radio, but
>I'm not going to buy records or tickets that put my money into the
>pockets of someone who insults myself, my family, or my friends.
>
>He is entitled to whatever opinions he likes, and that may have
>litttle bearing on his performance. But (1) acting is a large part of
>the opera singer's craft, and bigotry severely impairs an actor's
>range; and (2) there is still a horrifying ominpresence of homophobic
>violence which is encouraged by homophobic language. Yes, Mr. Alagna
>has a right to say what he likes, and people of good conscience have a
>right (if not a duty) to say that such opinions are reprehensible.
>
>At a family reunion this last weekend I met cousins who were, black,
>latino, asian, white, gay, lesbian, straight, all different ages,
>sexes, sizes, colors, religions. (And that's his side of the family.
>My side is just as diverse.) So yes, any racist, ageist, sexist,
>homophobic, anti-semitic, or other bigoted crack is an insult to my
>family. I do take all kinds of bigotry very personally, and respond
>accordingly.
>
>Of course, the bottom line for Mr. Alagna is that if he writes off his
>critics as queers and whores, he is simply incapable of accepting
>criticism so he is severely limiting his own potential as a performer.
>Like so many bigots he reveals himself as a vicious ego-centric, so
>how could he possibly understand the feelings and passions required of
>his craft? How could he be any more than a third rate singer?
>
>
>
>
I never thought that Alagna was worthy of my spending my money on one
of his CDs, but after hearing all this politically correct rot, the
next time I get near one of his recordings I am going to buy it.
--
Don't boycott the Vienna Philharmonic . . . boycott K-Mart
. . oh, and be sure to eat at Wendy's at least once a week.
Jan Arell
In article <19970428142...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
mall...@aol.com says...
SNIP>
>Whatever Alagna did or did not say, no English paper below the Times and
>Guardian can be considered a reliable source.
>
I would like to include The Independent and Daily Telegraph to that list,
papers that I as a foreign news reporter read almost daily. And wasn´t
this a Daily Telegraph interview ("Electronic Telegraph" on the web).
Jan Arell
(Excuse me for extending an opera-discussion into a non-opera one)
Parz...@webtv.net
One wonders just what it is Mr. Alagna finds so reprehensibile about the
critic in question; does he think because of the man's sexual conduct (
which I assume is performed in private without Mr. Alagna being
compelled to watch) he cannot correctly assess his performance? This
raises the question of when is a man a homosexual; is it when he is
engaged in homosexual sex, or is it when he is reviewing an opera: does
one act have bearing on another. Is homosexuality an action or a state
of being? Or both? ( I have no answers) If you are a celibate
homosexual are you a homosexual? If you are a celibate heterosexual are
you a heterosexual, for that matter ( maybe a Heaven's Gater?); is it
the act that confirms your sexuality (if so, what does what one does in
bed have to do with being a critic) or is it something else. Perhaps Mr.
Alagna believes, as a great deal of people do, that homosexuality
equates to being feminine (i.e. unmanly) and therefore a homosexual's
view are jaundiced? ( in respect to judging a "man's performance") In
short: what doesn't he like about homosexuals that makes him speak
against this (homosexual?) critic. The newest politically correct term
is Homophobic, but most of the people like Mr. Alagna who dislike
homosexuals are not afraid of them: they hate or dislike them. This is
not usually fear. I believe the term was coined because of men's
aversion to being thought of being "afraid" of anything; the implication
is that, being "unsure" of their own sexuality, these men fear what they
might be themselves. This is most likely sophistry (e.g.- I don't like
cats; I am not afraid of them , nor do I fear that I have latent feline
tendencies: I just don't like 'em); just as Kaliban wrote re: Wagner >as
a product of his times he didn't know any better< most anti-homosexual
feeling is probably ingrained in our culture, as anti-semitism was in
Germany. Consider Shakespeare in Troilous and Cressida: "A woman
impudent and mannish grown/Is not more loathed than an effeminate man/
In time of action." Mankind's history is full of anti- homosexual
feelings. I merely state that I expect to see and hear nincompoopery
from artists. If I admire their talent, it has little bearing on my
assessment of that. To me to do otherwise is like Hitler ignoring
Mahler.
Kaliban wrote >Wagner's comments were made when anti-semetism was
standard procedure and could make no difference in the entreched
negative attitude toward jews<
Doesn't mean he wasn't a numbskull; and that, conversely,
dosen't mean he wasn't a great composer. ( my point in all this)
Can we seperate the artist from the man? Should we? Although I've
tried to present an opposing point of view, I'm just being curmudgeonly;
personally I dont know; I just don't know.....
Wer ist der Gral?
Dan Ford
Why settle for half-measures? Why not pile all his CDs in front of the
Rathaus and burn them?
- Dan / http://www.cris.com/~danford
(To reply to me, remove the ** from my return address)
Brian Newhouse
In article <01bc53b8$b2e6f6a0$b809...@kayedavimsu.edu>, "David K"
<kaye...@pilot.msu.edu> wrote:
> > Yet another reason not to give in to the hype. I wonder how his wife
> reacted to the
> > article - I heard he called his female critics "prostitutes"! I can see
> he intends to
> > BULLY the general public into buying his CDs . Or maybe he just doesn't
> realize the PR
> > tactics used by Madonna and Prince just don't work w. opera singers. In
> anycase, my
> > collection is and will always be Alagna-Free....
>
> Sorry to break the news to you, but Madonna wouldn't say such a thing. She
> realizes that a large portion of her greatest fan are gay men.
What thomas was probably referring to was not so much homophobic
statements per se (and neither Madonna nor Prince have been known for
homophobic statements) as the habit among certain pop stars and other
publicity hounds of making loud sweeping impolite statements about
anything and everything that enters their pointy little heads, whether
they know or care anything about it or not, and hostile and insulting
comments about everybody that treats them with less than complete
deference...gee, sounds like the stereotypical prima donna, doesn't it?
but trashier language.
--
Brian Newhouse
newh...@mail.crisp.net
AstroJack
j...@nospam.com~address/below
Kewl, Sara, eat at Wendy's every day and you too can win a triple bypass
like the Wendy boss.
That food is poison. How did you get me started on this non operatic
tangeant? Buy whatyou want!
In article <5k2e19$r...@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>,
fre...@ix.netcom.com(Sara Freeman) wrote:
> In <3364b...@204.188.94.5> ti...@backdoor.com (AstroJack) writes:
> >
Parz...@webtv.net
David K wrote > I dont know about you, >but I have a sexual orientation
all of the >time.
That's why I posed the question. If that is the case and being a
homosexual is who the critic IS, rather than what he does, then it
probably has some bearing on his view point and hence his criticisms. A
man eating a hot dog is only an Hot-dog-eater while he is eating a hot
dog; an Eskimo is an Eskimo, is an Eskimo; no matter what he does.
This being the case: Mr. Alagna's statement that the critic was a
"homosexual" ,implying that the critique was jaundice does have some
validity - so would a statement that the critc was black, jewish white,
etc. We are none of us entirely objective. Who we are colors our
opinions. So (I assume) Mr. Alagna felt the critic's view were colored
by his sexual orientation. This is not unheard of, any more than your
statement that:
>Actually, up until now, I have been >avoiding Wagner for that reason.
My >father lived through the holocaust, and >told me never buy Wagner.
I consider my personal views of Syberberg's film version of Parsifal to
be an example of this: The subject of greatest iritation to me about
this work was the (to me) annoyingly effeminate portrayal of Parsifal by
Michael Kutter - even the female Parsifal - Karen Krick seem more manly
to me. I contrast Siegfried Jerusalem manly portrayal in the Met's
version at the of Act II when he announces "Du weist wo du mich
weiderfinden kannst." with Kutter's weak, languishing stance and am
fill with dismay. But is this because of my personal prejudices due to
my heterosexual orientation? Will I automatically denounce feminine
performances from men? - perhaps so; but to point is we ALL have these
different prejudices - who decides with are "politically correct"? . So
my prediliction for Wagner probably comes from the fact that I view his
musical dramas as manly, and indeed view the German out look as being
male oriented. I recall reading Wagner's autobiography where he wrote:
"Thus, I tried this also with Mozart's Don Giovanni, without being able
to get much out of it, particularly because the Italian text in the
piano transcript placed the music in a frivolous light, much of it
seemed to me trifling and UNMANLY. ( I remember that whenever my sister
sang Zerlina's areetta 'Barri,batti,ben Masetto' the music repelled me,
as it seemed so mawkish and EFFEMINATE.)" - my emphasis.
I laughed when I read this because this is how I felt about Carmen -
was I right?: only to myself; and thats how or objectivity interferes
with our analysis. So clearly, like Wagner, because of my prejudices,
(and we ALL have them), I tend to like or dislike performances based on
them. The thing is,_ I_ am aware of it, and I include this fact when I
tell people why I like or dislike a work or performance - does the
critic in question? does Mr. Alagna? Should they or anyone need to; we
should all be aware the personal prejudice colors our opinions and take
critiques cum grano. By the way, I probably won't listen to Alagna
unless he starts singing Wagner, anyway. I can understand the concept
of a homosexual boycotting a person who hates them out of hand; you see
no need to give him YOUR money.
Wer ist der Gral?
David K
Parz...@webtv.net wrote in article
<5k2krv$nm3$1...@newsd-106.bryant.webtv.net>...
>
> One wonders just what it is Mr. Alagna finds so reprehensibile about the
> critic in question; does he think because of the man's sexual conduct (
> which I assume is performed in private without Mr. Alagna being
> compelled to watch) he cannot correctly assess his performance?
So homosexuality is a bedroom issue? Wouldn't that then imply that
heterosexuality is also a bedroom issue. Please, do not walk down the
street holding hands with your opposite sex partner, flaunting your
sexuality. Please take off your wedding ring. It is a display of your
lifestyle. Remove those pictures of your opposite sex spouse from your
desk at work. Heterosexuality - what goes on in the bedroom, behind closed
doors, should remain just that - behind closed doors.
> This
> raises the question of when is a man a homosexual; is it when he is
> engaged in homosexual sex, or is it when he is reviewing an opera:
I don't know about you, but I have a sexual orientation all the time.
> does one act have bearing on another.
I am quite enraged that all operas are heterosexual, and hence
heterosexist, but that has no bearing on my critique of the performers.
> Is homosexuality an action or a state
> of being? Or both?
I vote for a state.
> ( I have no answers) If you are a celibate
> homosexual are you a homosexual?
I knew my sexual orientation long before I ever had sex. If a person had
no sexuality before they ever had sex, then what compells them to have sex
in the first place?
> If you are a celibate heterosexual are
> you a heterosexual, for that matter ( maybe a Heaven's Gater?); is it
> the act that confirms your sexuality (if so, what does what one does in
> bed have to do with being a critic) or is it something else.
No act or certificate makes us official. I don't need to constantly hear
my heart beat to know that I am alive.
> Perhaps Mr.
> Alagna believes, as a great deal of people do, that homosexuality
> equates to being feminine (i.e. unmanly) and therefore a homosexual's
> view are jaundiced? ( in respect to judging a "man's performance")
So that makes him not only homophobic, but also phallocentric.
> In
> short: what doesn't he like about homosexuals that makes him speak
> against this (homosexual?) critic. The newest politically correct term
> is Homophobic, but most of the people like Mr. Alagna who dislike
> homosexuals are not afraid of them: they hate or dislike them. This is
> not usually fear. I believe the term was coined because of men's
> aversion to being thought of being "afraid" of anything; the implication
> is that, being "unsure" of their own sexuality, these men fear what they
> might be themselves. This is most likely sophistry (e.g.- I don't like
> cats; I am not afraid of them , nor do I fear that I have latent feline
> tendencies: I just don't like 'em); just as Kaliban wrote re: Wagner >as
> a product of his times he didn't know any better< most anti-homosexual
> feeling is probably ingrained in our culture, as anti-semitism was in
> Germany.
As is racism, phallocentrism, and ablism. However, these matters are being
addressed. People have had sufficient time and exposure to change their
beliefs and practices. They have no excuse for not doing it by now.
> Kaliban wrote >Wagner's comments were made when anti-semetism was
> standard procedure and could make no difference in the entreched
> negative attitude toward jews<
Actually, up until now, I have been avoiding Wagner for that very reason.
My father lived throught the Holocaust, and told me never to buy anything
by Wagner.
> Doesn't mean he wasn't a numbskull; and that, conversely,
> dosen't mean he wasn't a great composer. ( my point in all this)
>
> Can we seperate the artist from the man? Should we?
I believe we shouldn't. For me, it is a question of were my money goes. I
will not conciously feed my hard earned money to profit an individual is
homophobic, and so advancing homophobia.
In addition, though this may be totally off the subject, if you have
questions regarding sexual orientation, please feel free to private email
me. I volunteer on panels that go around to university classes to discuss
sexual orientation and gender identity, and facilitate a support group for
gay and bi men.
Michael Black
Sheesh, I'm looking and looking, but somehow I can't find the opera
topics...
--
(To respond to me, simply take out the 2 *'s on the reply)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Black, Youngstown, Ohio
Michael Black's Opera House-------http://www.stairway.bc.ca/bjorling/
Youngstown Opera Guild------------http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/2088/
Dana Opera Society----------------http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/6530/
Jussi Rules!!!
James C. Kaufman
Mallardo7 (mall...@aol.com) wrote:
: Before condemning Alagna for his alledged opinions let's remember the
: source of this interview - the British press. As someone who has lived
: and worked in England I can assure you that the truth is often the last
: consideration where newspapers are concerned. There are so many papers in
: a constant battle for circulation that literally anything goes. Quotes
: are taken out of context, no attributions are made, you name it.
: Guardian can be considered a reliable source.
This is a really good point -- have these comments/attitudes been found
in other sources as well?
J
David K
I forgot about a few comments a wished to add.
> > One wonders just what it is Mr. Alagna finds so reprehensibile about
the
> > critic in question; does he think because of the man's sexual conduct (
> > which I assume is performed in private without Mr. Alagna being
> > compelled to watch) he cannot correctly assess his performance?
Alagna's use of an ad hominem argument reflects that he can't take
criticism.
> > Is homosexuality an action or a state
> > of being? Or both?
>
> I vote for a state.
I nominate California.
> > ( I have no answers) If you are a celibate
> > homosexual are you a homosexual?
>
> I knew my sexual orientation long before I ever had sex. If a person had
> no sexuality before they ever had sex, then what compells them to have
sex
> in the first place?
>
> > If you are a celibate heterosexual are
> > you a heterosexual, for that matter ( maybe a Heaven's Gater?); is it
> > the act that confirms your sexuality (if so, what does what one does in
> > bed have to do with being a critic) or is it something else.
>
> No act or certificate makes us official. I don't need to constantly hear
> my heart beat to know that I am alive.
>
> > Perhaps Mr.
> > Alagna believes, as a great deal of people do, that homosexuality
> > equates to being feminine (i.e. unmanly) and therefore a homosexual's
> > view are jaundiced? ( in respect to judging a "man's performance")
>
> So that makes him not only homophobic, but also phallocentric.
And quite genderphobic.
Michael Black writes:
> Sheesh, I'm looking and looking, but somehow I can't find the opera
> topics...
Me? Devient? Never.
Jay Taylor
Here, here! As a gay man, I do gladly second this opinion.
Jay Taylor
volt...@alaska.net
>Personally, I would consider not listening to Alagna because he dislikes
>someone's sexual preferences to be the same as not listening to Wagner
>because he was anti-semetic; I separate the art from the man. I could
>care less what his personal opinions are.
--
*************************************************************
Jay Michael Taylor (907) 479-3568 HOME
volt...@alaska.net (907) 455-4638 WORK
http://www.alaska.net/~voltaire/jay
*************************************************************
Marty Silverberg
On Mon, 28 Apr 1997 07:12:55 -0400, James Jorden
<jjo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>thomas wrote:
>> Or maybe he just doesn't realize the PR
>> tactics used by Madonna and Prince just don't work w. opera singers.
>Madonna and Prince have careers that have lasted nearly 15 years now,
>the equivalent of Freni or Domingo in the operatic field. Does anyone
>seriously expect the Alagnas to be around in 10 years, let alone 30?
>
>And, of course, Madonna and Prince (heterosexuals both) are known as gay
>icons and have legions of gay fans.
>
>Perhaps a better parallel would be between Mr. Alagna and the "immortal"
>Andrew "Dice" Clay.
>
>--
>james jorden
>jjo...@ix.netcom.com
>http://www.anaserve.com/~parterre
>
>"Without Jews, Gypsies and homosexuals, there is no theater."
> -- Mel Brooks in "To Be or Not to Be"
Madonna is heterosexual?!?!
James Jorden
Marty Silverberg wrote:
> Madonna is heterosexual?!?!
Apparently.
Meanwhile, I think I was a little hasty comparing Roberto Alagna to
Andrew "Dice" Clay. Upon reflection, I find the pop musician Mr. Alagna
most resembles (in marketing appeal, musical value, career longevity and
other aspects) is obviously ---- Marky Mark.
From now on I shall call Mr. Alagna by his new name: Bobby Bob.
David K
> Upon reflection, I find the pop musician Mr. Alagna
> most resembles (in marketing appeal, musical value, career longevity and
> other aspects) is obviously ---- Marky Mark.
Hmm... It must be a third nipple thing.
thomas
Brian Newhouse wrote:
>
> In article <01bc53b8$b2e6f6a0$b809...@kayedavimsu.edu>, "David K"
> <kaye...@pilot.msu.edu> wrote:
>
> > > Yet another reason not to give in to the hype. I wonder how his wife
> > reacted to the
> > > article - I heard he called his female critics "prostitutes"! I can see
> > he intends to
> > > BULLY the general public into buying his CDs . Or maybe he just doesn't
> > realize the PR
> > > tactics used by Madonna and Prince just don't work w. opera singers. In
> > anycase, my
> > > collection is and will always be Alagna-Free....
> >
> > Sorry to break the news to you, but Madonna wouldn't say such a thing. She
> > realizes that a large portion of her greatest fan are gay men.
>
> What thomas was probably referring to was not so much homophobic
> statements per se (and neither Madonna nor Prince have been known for
> homophobic statements) as the habit among certain pop stars and other
> publicity hounds of making loud sweeping impolite statements about
> anything and everything that enters their pointy little heads, whether
> they know or care anything about it or not, and hostile and insulting
> comments about everybody that treats them with less than complete
> deference...gee, sounds like the stereotypical prima donna, doesn't it?
> but trashier language.
>
> --
> Brian Newhouse
> newh...@mail.crisp.net
Exactly, thanks.
Thomas
AstroJack
Parz...@webtv.net wrote:
>One wonders just what it is Mr. Alagna finds so reprehensibile about the
>critic in question; does he think because of the man's sexual conduct (
>which I assume is performed in private without Mr. Alagna being
>compelled to watch) he cannot correctly assess his performance? This
>raises the question of when is a man a homosexual; is it when he is
>engaged in homosexual sex, or is it when he is reviewing an opera: does
>one act have bearing on another. Is homosexuality an action or a state
>of being? Or both? ( I have no answers)
Complex questions with complex answers, but the easy and simple of it
is that sexuality does indeed inform creativity.
Yet, I suspect that with Alagna the question is not so much the
critic's Kinsey rating, but Mr. Alagna's scapegoating. Rather than
accepting criticism he writes of his critics as fags and whores. This
is crude sexism (and we may quibble over the propriety of the word
"homophobia", but until a better word is coined...) and although it
shows Mr. Alagna's contempt for the people he is scapegoating, and yes
it is sexist, like much bigotry the core of it is that rather than
acknowledge his own shortcomings he blames the messenger for some
perceived shortcoming.
At another time or place Mr. A. could dismiss his critics as Jews,
"nigger lovers", commies, or "politically correct". Fortunately
blatant anti-semitism and racism are no longer fashionable, and I hope
the pendulum is turning on this "politically correct" nonsense.
As one of our correspondents demonstrates here, the people who use
that epithet are incapable of serious thought, reduced to name
calling and the reactive tantrums of a five year old. ("I dont like
his music, but I'm going to buy it anyway just to spite you all!
Nyah!!!")
I will agree that simply refusing to listen to Alagna because of his
idiotic remarks is a bit *de trop*. Actually I am now quite eager to
hear him just to know if he is worth a fraction of all this attention
we are are giving him. But I will not put money in the pockets of
someone who has insulted me.
Perhaps a radio broadcast or a recording from the library...
Veering off topic, David Kaye's "vote for California" reminds me of a
charming old gag:
"They should round all you people up and put you on an island!"
"They, did, Darling! It's called Manhattan!"
Matthew B. Tepper
Sara Freeman wrote:
>
> Oh, in other words, anybody who does not goose step like a good little
> brown shirt behind the political correcters is "incapable of serious
> thought, reduced to name calling and the (sic) reactive tantrums of a
> five year old?" Typical fascist thinking.
Thank you again, Tommy Smothers!
--
Matthew B. Tepper: Web geek, duck admirer, SF reader, Berlioz fan
The only good spammer is a DEAD spammer. $5 REWARD for proof of a
homicide directly relating to the "victim" having been a spammer!
Visit my Berlioz page! http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/berlioz.htm
Paul Padillo
Who the hell cares? Jesus this was an annoying post.
Is Placido faithful to Marta?
Is Hildegard Behrens a nazi?
Is Mignon Dunn a drag queen?
Did Berlioz pick his nose?
Inquiring minds, ah, never mind.
Paul.
Sara Freeman
>calling and the reactive tantrums of a five year old.
Oh, in other words, anybody who does not goose step like a good little
brown shirt behind the political correcters is "incapable of serious
thought, reduced to name calling and the (sic) reactive tantrums of a
five year old?" Typical fascist thinking.
("I dont like
>his music, but I'm going to buy it anyway just to spite you all!
>Nyah!!!")
>
>I will agree that simply refusing to listen to Alagna because of his
>idiotic remarks is a bit *de trop*. Actually I am now quite eager to
>hear him just to know if he is worth a fraction of all this attention
>we are are giving him. But I will not put money in the pockets of
>someone who has insulted me.
>Perhaps a radio broadcast or a recording from the library...
>
>Veering off topic, David Kaye's "vote for California" reminds me of a
>charming old gag:
>
>"They should round all you people up and put you on an island!"
>"They, did, Darling! It's called Manhattan!"
>
>
>
--
Sara Freeman
In <5k3i1v$c88$1...@newsd-101.bryant.webtv.net> Parz...@webtv.net writes:
>
>David K wrote > I dont know about you, >but I have a sexual
orientation
I like you Parzival. I am a true believer in masculinity.
I feel the same way about that crazy Parsifal. I bought it for Robert
Lloyd.
Liz Matthews
Marty Silverberg <mart...@ix.netcom.com> wrote
> Madonna is heterosexual?!?!
I hope so--she would certainly give dykes a bad name...
Martha Brummett
Denver CO
James Jorden
Sara Freeman wrote:
> Oh, in other words, anybody who does not goose step like a good little
> brown shirt behind the political correcters is "incapable of serious
> thought, reduced to name calling and the (sic) reactive tantrums of a
> five year old?" Typical fascist thinking.
Is this the return of Teanga?
Mark Penney
In article <5k3i1v$c88$1...@newsd-101.bryant.webtv.net>, Parz...@webtv.net
wrote:
>If that is the case and being a
>homosexual is who the critic IS, rather than what he does, then it
>probably has some bearing on his view point and hence his criticisms.
Of course it has some bearing, in some way. But . . .
>This being the case: Mr. Alagna's statement that the critic was a
>"homosexual" ,implying that the critique was jaundice does have some
>validity
This statement, on the other hand, misses the whole point of this thread:
Mr. Alagna dismissed offhand his critic's comments with the statement "He's
a homosexual." No reasons given why that statement was supposed to be
relevant. Because none are really possible.
Indeed, your interpretation of the remark (as indicating
"jaundiced" opinions, whatever that means) merely furthers a preposterous
stereotype. I, a homosexual, am stronger, have a deeper voice, and have
more hair on my chest than many straight men I know. I'm not effeminate in
any recognizable way. The stereotype that all gay men are effeminate is so
false that it's almost not worth talking about.
>- so would a statement that the critc was black, jewish white,
>etc.
Surely you know better than this, too. If Alagna had said, "Oh, his
opinion doesn't count--he's black," would this sound fair to you?
We are none of us entirely objective. Who we are colors our
>opinions. So (I assume) Mr. Alagna felt the critic's view were colored
>by his sexual orientation.
But simply because his views, or mine, or yours, or anyone else's, are
colored by who the respective person is, does not make them in any way
invalid.
Moreover, if I'm talking about something that has nothing whatever to do
with, say, my sexual orientation, or for that matter my Midwestern
upbringing or my white-maleness or what-have-you, why should those
particular aspects of my personality have anything to do with your
assessment of what I said? Example:
ME: Jane Diva's higher register was a little flat this afternoon.
YOU: Ignore that--Mr. Penney's a homosexual!
Preposterous, no?
--M.
-
Mark Penney mpe...@law.harvard.edu
Mark Penney
In article <336548...@cyberdude.com>,
Michael Black <*bjoerling*@cyberdude.com> wrote:
>Sheesh, I'm looking and looking, but somehow I can't find the opera
>topics...
>
We're talking about opera criticism. Sort of. Indirectly.
Whatever.
--M.
Parz...@webtv.net
Jaundiced: affected with or exhibiting prejudice, often resulting from a
particular experience, social position, etc.: a jaundiced viewpoint.
Webster's Dictionary
Also my assertation that the critic's sexual preference had bearing on
his interpretations was based on a response to my previous post by David
K. I asked is homosexuality a action or a state of being. He replied
he (a homosexual) believed it was a state of being; I suggested that if
it was an action it had little bearing on a critique, but if it was a
state of being, then it had all the bearing other states of being have.
(see my previous post) Also see my previous post regarding my statement
that perhaps _Mr Alagna_ believed effeminacy did not allow an
unJAUNDICED opinion. It is a common belief among the male population
of the wolrd that a great deal of homosexuals are effeminate; this
doesn't mean it's true, but it IS a common belief: perhaps one Mr.
Alagna has. That being the POSSIBLE case, I posed the questions. Often
the the source of the prejudices straight men have against gays is the
intolerence they have toward effeminacy; it is not so much the actions (
which are done in private) but the contempt they have for "sissys" which
is most evident in straight prejudice. "Sissys" can be straight or gay;
in my previous post I expressed contempt and disdain for Syberberg's
Parsifal: this was because I thought the actor who portrayed Parsifal -
Michael Kutter - looked like a "sissy" , no matter what his sexual
orientation was; to hear Reiner Goldberg's Heldentenor coming from what
I perceived to be a "sissy" struck me as incongruous and whole
inappropriate. Perhaps this is because I, like many other men, find
effeminacy contemptible in men, straight or gay. This is not a
question of right or wrong, but one of objectivity; the problem being
that a large group (straight men) having this opinion react negatively
to the group they "perceive" as evincing these characteristics (gay
men); perhaps, as you said, they are wrong, but these prejudices color
all of our opinions even our crtiques of operas.
Wer ist der Gral?
Tony Nazar
If we are going to boycott artists on the basis of political correctness
rather than talent, gangsta rap and the Pearl Jam may fill the vacuum we
create.
I'm not saying Alagna is talented - that's quite another matter. I am
saying his boorish behavior (if true) should have nothing to do with his
stature as a singer.
--
Tony Nazar
AstroJack
fre...@ix.netcom.com(Sara Freeman) wrote:
>>At another time or place Mr. A. could dismiss his critics as Jews,
>>"nigger lovers", commies, or "politically correct". Fortunately
>>blatant anti-semitism and racism are no longer fashionable, and I hope
>>the pendulum is turning on this "politically correct" nonsense.
>>As one of our correspondents demonstrates here, the people who use
>>that epithet are incapable of serious thought, reduced to name
>>calling and the reactive tantrums of a five year old.
>Oh, in other words, anybody who does not goose step like a good little
>brown shirt behind the political correcters is "incapable of serious
>thought, reduced to name calling and the (sic) reactive tantrums of a
>five year old?" Typical fascist thinking.
No, "Typical fascist thinking" is racist, sexist, homophobic, and
responds to reasoned discussion with name calling and vituperation.
If my characterization of your motives is unfair, I invite you to
restate them.
Michael McGivern
Personally, I would not buy an Alagna CD again due to his highly
over-rated ability. If some nobody had made these homophobic
comments, no one would have taken any notice.
The only one I ever hear singing the praises of Alagna, is Alagna
himself.
Michael McGivern
mcgi...@perrysburg.com
Sara Freeman
Like I give a damn what an ASTROLOGIST thinks of me!
James Jorden
Sara Freeman wrote:
> Like I give a damn what an ASTROLOGIST thinks of me!
> --
> Don't boycott the Vienna Philharmonic . . . boycott K-Mart
> . . oh, and be sure to eat at Wendy's at least once a week.
Teanga, I just met a girl named Teanga...
Dubby
AstroJack <ti...@backdoor.com> wrote in article
<3364b...@204.188.94.5>...
> Parz...@webtv.net wrote:
>
> >Personally, I would consider not listening to Alagna because he dislikes
> >someone's sexual preferences to be the same as not listening to Wagner
> >because he was anti-semetic; I separate the art from the man. I could
> >care less what his personal opinions are.
>
> >
> >Wer ist der Gral?
> >
> >
>
Yes, a valid point, but I find it a lot easier to be seduced from political
conviction by Wagner's towering genius than a talentless, whining, pig
faced tenorino (and I aint apologising for that politically incorrect
comparison) dubby
Richard Gillyard
AstroJack wrote:
Actually I am now quite eager to
> hear him just to know if he is worth a fraction of all this attention
> we are are giving him. But I will not put money in the pockets of
> someone who has insulted me.
> Perhaps a radio broadcast or a recording from the library...
He is actually not worth the attention, he is just the lucky recipient
of good management, and an excellent publicity machine. He does not
however have the talent to match all of the hype, actually he is quite
average. But listen to him and formulate your own opinion.
Kentd49183
You go! Kaliban! (see below)
I'm not even closed to convinced that Alagna is a artist of Wagner's
caliber. One's work needs to be pretty darn magnificent to counter vile
personal traits.
kent
Kent
kentd...@aol.com
"...When at times the mob is swayed to carry praise or blame too far/We may chose something like a star/ To stay our minds on/And be staid." Frost
Dan Ford
> No, "Typical fascist thinking" is racist, sexist, homophobic, and
> responds to reasoned discussion with name calling and vituperation.
As exemplified, for example, in the politically correct thought enforced
today on the campus near my home, if not on most American campuses.
My late father-in-law fell into conversation with Elsie Brown, a WWI war
bride, on the demise of the local characters. Elsie replied: "Maybe ve
iss der characters now." (As indeed they were, the pair of them.)
Ve iss der fascists now.
- Dan
Black Heart
Sara Freeman wrote:
>>Oh, in other words, anybody who does not goose step like a good
> little
> >>brown shirt behind the political correcters is "incapable of serious
> >>thought, reduced to name calling and the (sic) reactive tantrums of a
> >>five year old?" Typical fascist thinking.
> >
> >
> >
> --
> Don't boycott the Vienna Philharmonic . . . boycott K-Mart
> . . oh, and be sure to eat at Wendy's at least once a week.
So, taking offense at some Pig Tenor's stupid, insensitive remarks is what's considered
Politically Correct? By showing compassion for the hurt feelings of his targets is
called "Politically Correct"? What the Hell kind of misguided, stupid thoughts go
through that shrivelled 'ol brain of yours, BITCH?
Well wake up an' smell the Coffee, SHITFACE.
Y'know something just occured to me: What if everyone just calls you BITCH from now on
huh? Yeah I can see it now:
" Hey, great review, BITCH......BITCH wrote: "......".......BITCH was asking for
recommendations for TALES OF.....My recommendations, BITCH, are the following.....No,
sorry can't agree with that BITCH......" MAN! What fun we'll all have! OWWWWWW!!!
Hey It's not really an insult, cause that's what you really are, BITCH. That's what I
like to call being POLITICALLY CORRECT.
If ya don't like what I just said... good!..Kiss_My_Ass BITCH. It sure beats what ya
normally do: firing off spiteful drivel to r.m.o. with one finger stuck up your
shrivelled 'ol pussy. GET A LIFE !
If someone called you an "old, shrivelled BITCH who's sole activity is to vegetate by
the 'ol computer, reading r.m.o. with one finger stuck up her pussy"
Sara Freeman
Hey, Miss or Mister Whoever-You-Are, I have been called a bitch many
times and wear the name with great pride.
Michael Black
Black Heart wrote:
>
> So, taking offense at some Pig Tenor's stupid, insensitive remarks is what's considered
> Politically Correct? By showing compassion for the hurt feelings of his targets is
> called "Politically Correct"? What the Hell kind of misguided, stupid thoughts go
> through that shrivelled 'ol brain of yours, BITCH?
>
> Well wake up an' smell the Coffee, SHITFACE.
>
> Y'know something just occured to me: What if everyone just calls you BITCH from now on
> huh? Yeah I can see it now:
> " Hey, great review, BITCH......BITCH wrote: "......".......BITCH was asking for
> recommendations for TALES OF.....My recommendations, BITCH, are the following.....No,
> sorry can't agree with that BITCH......" MAN! What fun we'll all have! OWWWWWW!!!
> Hey It's not really an insult, cause that's what you really are, BITCH. That's what I
> like to call being POLITICALLY CORRECT.
>
> If ya don't like what I just said... good!..Kiss_My_Ass BITCH. It sure beats what ya
> normally do: firing off spiteful drivel to r.m.o. with one finger stuck up your
> shrivelled 'ol pussy. GET A LIFE !
>
> If someone called you an "old, shrivelled BITCH who's sole activity is to vegetate by
> the 'ol computer, reading r.m.o. with one finger stuck up her pussy"
Oh brother! Get a life jerk! If you're going to use that type of
language, at least have the balls to claim it by using a real email
address.
For the record, your server will be notified.
--
(To respond to me, simply take out the 2 *'s on the reply)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Black, Youngstown, Ohio
Michael Black's Opera House-------http://www.stairway.bc.ca/bjorling/
Youngstown Opera Guild------------http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/2088/
Dana Opera Society----------------http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/6530/
Jussi Rules!!!
James Jorden
Michael Black wrote:
> Oh brother! Get a life jerk! If you're going to use that type of
> language, at least have the balls to claim it by using a real email
> address.
>
> For the record, your server will be notified.
>
Say, Michael, why don't you just whine about his postings on *another*
message board-- one you know he won't be reading? This cowardly tactic
seems to have served you well in the recent past.
Dan Ford
> He is actually not worth the attention, he is just the lucky recipient
> of good management, and an excellent publicity machine. He does not
> however have the talent to match all of the hype, actually he is quite
> average. But listen to him and formulate your own opinion.
(He was also fortunate in his choice of a wife :)
I saw Alagna in Elisir last November, and while it is true that I don't
remember his singing particularly, he was fun to watch, especially since
my only previous exposure to the opera was the tape of pavarotti & battle,
and pav at that time was almost imobilized by his own bulk. alagna lights
up the stage with his active and gymnastics, if not with his singing.
Quite apart from the rather shrill tone of a lot of these postings on
alagna, I think you should appreciate the fact that to a lot of us, opera
is as much a visual experience as it is an auditory(?) one. I enjoyed
seeing alagna on stage, just as I enjoy seeing pav's huge face or
bartoli's splendid cleavage.
Anyhow, the great hoo-ha being accorded to alagna et ux is going to bring
new folks to opera, and that is good.
- Dan / http://www.cris.com/~danford
(To reply to me, remove the ** from my return address)
Bert Johnson
Here's a thought.......
WE LIVE IN AMERICA AND IF SOMEONE WANTS TO BE A HOMOPHOBE ITS THEIR GODDAMN
RIGHT TO BE SO. QUITE YOUR WHINING AND WATCH THE SHOW. YOU PEOPLE MAKE ME
SICK, YOU ARE ALWAYS TOUTING FREE SPEECH UNTIL IT OFFENDS YOU THEN YOU WANT
TO SHUT EVERYBODY UP. GET A LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!
Black Heart <K...@xxx.xxx> wrote in article <336BF6...@xxx.xxx>...
> Sara Freeman wrote:
> >>Oh, in other words, anybody who does not goose step like a good
> > little
> > >>brown shirt behind the political correcters is "incapable of serious
> > >>thought, reduced to name calling and the (sic) reactive tantrums of a
> > >>five year old?" Typical fascist thinking.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > Like I give a damn what an ASTROLOGIST thinks of me!
> > --
> > Don't boycott the Vienna Philharmonic . . . boycott K-Mart
> > . . oh, and be sure to eat at Wendy's at least once a week.
>
>
>
James Jorden
Bert Johnson wrote:
>
> Here's a thought.......
> WE LIVE IN AMERICA AND IF SOMEONE WANTS TO BE A HOMOPHOBE ITS THEIR
> GODDAMN RIGHT TO BE SO. QUITE YOUR WHINING AND WATCH THE SHOW. YOU
> PEOPLE MAKE ME SICK, YOU ARE ALWAYS TOUTING FREE SPEECH UNTIL IT
> OFFENDS YOU THEN YOU WANT TO SHUT EVERYBODY UP. GET A > LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!
I took a moment to reread "Black Heart"'s rather Rabelaisian original
posting (which Mr. Johnson was considerate enough to quote in its
entirety) and I do not see that "Black Heart" in any way suggested that
Ms. Freeman not be allowed to speak.
"Black Heart" was merely exercising (quite vigorously, in fact) his own
freedom, perhaps realizing (even before Mr. Johnson so kindly reminded
us of that fact) that we do indeed "LIVE IN AMERICA".
It is to be hoped that "Black Heart", Ms. Freeman, Mr. Johnson and the
rest of us may be permitted to continue speaking our diverse minds
freely, despite Mr. Johnson's strident and badly-spelled admonitions --
and, of course, despite Michael Black's recent threats to tattle to
"Black Heart"'s ISP.
In closing, here's a thought for *you*, Mr. Johnson: Get a "shift" key.
sueg...@muscanet.com
In article <336BF6...@xxx.xxx>,
Black Heart <K...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
>
> So, taking offense at some Pig Tenor's stupid, insensitive remarks is what's
considered
> Politically Correct? By showing compassion for the hurt feelings of his
targets is
> called "Politically Correct"? What the Hell kind of misguided, stupid
thoughts go
> through that shrivelled 'ol brain of yours, BITCH?
>
>
Blackheart,
I cheered your first 2 sentences, but after that you sunk to Sara
Freeman's level - way below it, in fact. I know, you're paying her back
in kind, but that technique never works. It just reinforces your
target's opinion of your general jerkiness. That kind of people never
realize that they've been offensive themselves. You're just giving
ammunition to people who say that people who are concerned about the
rights and feelings of people who aren't in the high-status group are a
horrible thing called "politically correct" - or "nigger-lover" or
"women's-libber" and other insults that are supposed to scare you into
their camp.
As for those people who whine, "I can't say anything!" they don't mean
they go to jail if they say it, they just mean that they can't say it
without somebody expressing opposing opinions. I'll grant that the
opponents of "political correctness" have a right to say what they think,
but I've got just as much right to say when I find their statements
offensive. And I find the statements of both you and Sara Freeman
offensive.
Suzanne Sarlette
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Dan Ford
> WE LIVE IN AMERICA AND IF SOMEONE WANTS TO BE A HOMOPHOBE ITS THEIR
Piano, piano :)
Mark Penney
In article <Pine.OSF.3.91a.97050...@christa.unh.edu>,
Dan Ford <df@**christa.unh.edu> wrote:
>(He was also fortunate in his choice of a wife :)
This raises an off-topic typography question, about which I've been
curious for a while: When you have a parenthetical comment that you wish
to end with a "smiley," does the close-parenth for the mouth also serve as
the close-parenth for the parenthetical, as it does here? Or should it
instead be:
(He was also fortunate in his choice of a wife :) )
Neither rendering looks quite right to me. Any thoughts?
(Perhaps I'm thinking too hard.)
Brian Newhouse
In article <Pine.OSF.3.91a.97050...@christa.unh.edu>,
Dan Ford <df@**christa.unh.edu> wrote re: Bobby Bob in Elisir:
> Anyhow, the great hoo-ha being accorded to alagna et ux is going to bring
> new folks to opera, and that is good.
>
I wonder about that, actually. People always say that about
celebrity-type hype, but it strikes me that lifesize posters in bus stops,
breathless profiles in glossy magazines, and the like really don't mean
much of anything if you don't know something about what the celebrity in
question does in the first place. Somebody looking at Bobby Bob's hype
who knows nothing about opera is most probably going to think: "Roberto
Alagna?...Hmm, looks kinda cute...does he sing or something?", and walk
away. That person is probably not going to be stimulated to buy tickets
to Alagna's next run of performances or Alagna's latest CD; rather, s/he
will enter his name into that stock of obscure celebrity names we all
carry around with us, as meaningless to that person as, say, "Toni
Braxton"* is to me.
Where that sort of hype does help, it seems to me, is with the marginal
operatic audience--the Three Tenors audience--who have some idea of what
opera is and can even whistle some of the tunes but don't really have an
interest all-encompassing enough to really keep up.
The sort of hype that might have a better chance of attracting a
non-operatic audience, on the other hand, would be one that actually gives
people an idea of what opera sounds like; and you can't get that from
glossy paper or posterboard. Talk shows seem to be the most obvious
example--Johnny Carson used to have opera singers on surprisingly often,
complete with aria.
*(Though there is something a little weird about the latest
African-American pop diva bearing a similar name to jazz avant-gardist
Anthony Braxton; it's as if a German pop diva were to emerge named Karla
Stockhausen <grin>)
--
Brian Newhouse
newh...@mail.crisp.net
Brian Newhouse
> In article <336BF6...@xxx.xxx>,
> Black Heart <K...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> >
> > So, taking offense at some Pig Tenor's stupid, insensitive remarks is what's
> considered
> > Politically Correct? By showing compassion for the hurt feelings of his
> targets is
> > called "Politically Correct"? What the Hell kind of misguided, stupid
> thoughts go
> > through that shrivelled 'ol brain of yours, BITCH?
Before this verbal slugfest degenerates any further--in which case Suzanne
Sarlette's last sentence strikes me as the only sensible response--keep in
mind what we're quarreling over. Bobby Bob's griping that a less than
adulatory critic is a "homosexual" (and his female critics "prostitutes",
don't forget) would hardly be considered a reasoned critique of
homosexuality even by the none too exacting standards of a devoutly
pro-family conservative. I mean, this is trash talk we're dealing with
here; in a different time, or with a different set of prejudices, he might
have dismissed that critic as a "commie" or a "neocon" or a "Freemason" or
a "Bible-belter", but it still would have been trash talk. It's just the
usual story of the smartass celebrity seeing how much bad behavior her/his
public will tolerate. Oh, well, at least Bobby Bob has yet to trash any
hotel rooms <grin>...
--
Brian Newhouse
newh...@mail.crisp.net
John Lynch
Mark Penney wrote:
> (He was also fortunate in his choice of a wife :))
He or his wife has a double chin. Down with smileys!
--
John Lynch
James Jorden
John Lynch wrote:
> He or his wife has a double chin. Down with smileys!
Mme. Milanov, your voice was like silver tonight!
No, it vas more like gold ;)))
John Lynch
James Jorden wrote:
>
> John Lynch wrote:
>
> > He or his wife has a double chin. Down with smileys!
>
> Mme. Milanov, your voice was like silver tonight!
>
> No, it vas more like gold ;)))
Touche, Chames!
AstroJack
Dan Ford <df@**christa.unh.edu> wrote:
>I saw Alagna in Elisir last November, and while it is true that I don't
>remember his singing particularly, he was fun to watch, especially since
>my only previous exposure to the opera was the tape of pavarotti & battle,
>and pav at that time was almost imobilized by his own bulk. alagna lights
>up the stage with his active and gymnastics, if not with his singing.
Then Ishall hope to see him on TV...
>Quite apart from the rather shrill tone of a lot of these postings on
>alagna, I think you should appreciate the fact that to a lot of us, opera
>is as much a visual experience as it is an auditory(?) one. I enjoyed
>seeing alagna on stage, just as I enjoy seeing pav's huge face or
>bartoli's splendid cleavage.
If it will help to head off any squawking over that I'll confess that
Sam Ramey's chest also brightens the opera stage. Yes, the acting and
the visuals are indeed important. (When I saw "the Rake's Progress"
the undisputed star of that production was David Hockney.)
>Anyhow, the great hoo-ha being accorded to alagna et ux is going to bring
>new folks to opera, and that is good.
I just hope they're better behaved in the Opera House and can control
their coprolalia there.
Erik L
I'm unlikely to buy his recordings not because he is homophobic, but
simply because he is an overly-hyped mediocre flash in the pan.
Erik
Jan Arell
In article <336BF6...@xxx.xxx>, K...@xxx.xxx says...
(a couple of snips)
>
BITCH?
>
SHITFACE.
BITCH BITCH......BITCH .......BITCH BITCH......" BITCH. 'ol pussy.
pussy"
>
And why do you hide behind an anonymous address? There are words for
people like you too.
Jan Arell
jan....@gp.se
Paul Padillo
putting my 2c in). Alagna is young. He has a naturally lovely voice,
with mediocre technique. Again, he is young. Maybe brash, maybe a
little stupid (I know very few people who aren't a little stupid, self
included). One of the lovely things about growing older is the
possibility of learning. I hope he learns, because there is, I believe,
some talent there & it'd be a pity to not learn to develop and use it.
A flash in the pan? Time will tell, but I think it's a bit premature to
give that verdict now.
Paul.
j...@nospam.com~
Well said, Paul, I like the "stupid" part.
In article <336EC3...@ix.netcom.com>, Paul Padillo
<gpad...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
--
Email to <jfu...@unix.asb.com> IGNORE SPAM FREE HEADER
BacchusMN
Mark, how about:
(He was also fortunate in his choice of a wife) :)
IMHO, the smiley face does not belong as a part of the parens.
Don't think too hard on this, OK?
James Jorden
BacchusMN wrote:
>
> Mark, how about:
>
> (He was also fortunate in his choice of a wife) :)
>
Actually, now the emoticon looks like Richard Tucker in his bad rug.
) :)
maybe sorta kinda.
Dan Ford
I celebrated Rosa Ponselle's centenary by buying a Prima Voce disk, no. 3
of a series of Ponselle recordings. Much to my surprise it had on it "My
Old Kentucky Home" and some other sentimental songs of the time. And I was
a tad startled to be reminded that the opening lines (as Ponselle sang
them) are:
"The sun shines bright in my old Kentucky home;
"'Tis summer; the darkies are gay . . ."
I don't suppose this is much sung at recitals these days :)
James Jorden
solovoice wrote:
> I recall seeing a vintage piece of sheet music from Show Boat, the "Ol
> Man River" in my grandmother's music cabinet. It seems that the
> original opening used the famous Mark Furman "N" word. "N... all work
> on the Mississppi, N....all work while the white folks play..." Never
> heard it performed that way!!!
It is in fact performed that way on the EMI recording conducted by John
McGlinn. I recall reading somewhere that he was hesitant to used these
lyrics, favoring the softer "Colored folks work on the Mississipi..."
until Eartha Kitt encouraged him to use the original. As the lines are
sung by black stevedores as a sort of protest against their harsh
working conditions, they are perhaps appropriate in their bitter
hardness and shock value.
But in the recent Hal Prince Broadway production of "Showboat", I
believe the N-word was eliminated. It's still an extremely "loaded"
word, and I know that as a white guy I would be very diffident about
saying it even "in character."
solovoice
On Sat, 10 May 1997 16:51:08 -0400, Dan Ford <df@**christa.unh.edu>
wrote:
I recall seeing a vintage piece of sheet music from Show Boat, the "Ol
Man River" in my grandmother's music cabinet. It seems that the
original opening used the famous Mark Furman "N" word. "N... all work
on the Mississppi, N....all work while the white folks play..." Never
heard it performed that way!!!
solovoice
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety -- Benjamin Franklin
Paul Padillo
Dan Ford wrote:
> "snip"
>
> "The sun shines bright in my old Kentucky home;
>
> "'Tis summer; the darkies are gay . . ."
>
> I don't suppose this is much sung at recitals these days :)
>
> - Dan / http://www.cris.com/~danford
>
> (To reply to me, remove the ** from my return address)
>
>
>Dan, no, not much. I "can" kinda understand it's fall from
programming. What I don't understand is the changing of the original
text of the opening chorus of "Showboat": "Niggers all work on the
Mississippi..." Unfortunately, in our politically correct time, those
words are, of course not generally sung anymore. It's a pity that we're
so (incorrectly) sensitive because with the original text the song is a
cold, uncomfortable slap of reality set to jaunty, catchy music.
Audiences in early, more genteel times got a more realistic, less sugar
coated prelude to a serious drama & all we get in our supposedly
enlightened time, is a catchy opening chorus. Hats off to the great EMI
recording for restoring the original texts, (and music that has long
since been discarded, but is worthy of listening to).
Paul.
Paul.
Paul Padillo
Tim MacKay
Paul Robeson substituted "Here we all work" for "niggers all work" in
his version of "Ol Man River," it was his version of this song that
I grew up on. Robeson sang it as an anthem of protest and dignity:
not at all authentic to its original context. I believe he also
substituted the phrase "show a little grit and you land in jail" to
the original "get a little drunk ..."
I remember reading in the NY Times when the recording of Showboat was
released that the African American Chorus that had been scheduled to
record withdrew over the issue of being required to sing the word
"nigger", hence the Ambrosians. Miles Krueger aggressively defends
its use in his liner notes, for the sake of authenticity and its
original shock value. So to preserve "authenticity" a British Opera
Chorus of mostly(?) white people sings numbers in dialect written for
a Black Chorus in a Broadway show. It is not the white audience that
gets the "cold, uncomfortable slap of reality." The African American
Chorus who lost the job certainly got such a slap.
Given the numerous revisions and reworkings of Showboat and its songs
by Hammerstein and Kern themselves, I can not see the importance of
preserving the word, unless we wish to perpetuate what came with it
at the time.
John Lynch
Note change of subject heading. Let's keep it that way...please?
Does anyone remember the movie in which "Old man river" was sung on a
Busby Berkeley set by Frank Sinatra dressed in a pure white tail suit?
k...@bway.net
> Does anyone remember the movie in which "Old man river" was sung on a
> Busby Berkeley set by Frank Sinatra dressed in a pure white tail suit?
It was the 1946 film bio of Jerome Kern called TILL THE CLOUDS ROLL BY.
The Sinatra sequence was the finale of the film.
Bob Kosovsky
Student, PhD Program in Music Librarian
Graduate Center Music Division
City University of New York The New York Public Library
rkos...@email.gc.cuny.edu bkos...@nypl.org
Listowner, OPE...@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
Administrivia to: rj...@cunyvm.cuny.edu
------My opinions do not necessarily represent those of my institutions-------
GautierB
I heve never seen such a pack of....
wether M. Alagna is homophobic, likes coffee in the morning or brushes his
teeths with crest is totally irrelevant... He has a great voice and that
is what counts ... I was lucky to see him in paris for a la boheme and
Lucia di lamermmoor and his voice is just phenomenal...
when i hear so say that he cannot listen to some artis because of its
personnality, i wonder how he can listen to opera...
puccini tended to facism towards the end of its life..
wagner was a selfish greeddy egocentric...
strauss remained conductor during the nazi period...
tchaikowsky was a homosexual that got married...
I mean in each composer u can find something that will dis please so,
furtunatlely, some peolple put those issues away which authorized the
development of this wonderful art....
Paul Padillo
human beings, all of us with our own prejudices, faults, and secrets.
When I go to the opera, I don't WANT to know if the singer is
homophobic, homosexual, Greek Orthodox, etc. I just want to know they
can do the role and move me. I've got enough problems of my own without
wanting to hate somebody for something I cannot change, or have no
business knowing.
Paul.
Paul Padillo
spic, kike, etc. (tell me you don't flinch at reading or hearing
them, I'm flinching as I type them) they illlicit undeniably strong
responses in nearly everyone who hears them. Upon hearing these, most
folk (hopefully) get a jolt of discomfort, unease, what have you.
Language is a powerful thing, and just because some words are not
pretty, or their intended meaning IS to disturb, does not mean the words
have no proper usage. Such words invoke a powerful message that does
not escape notice. I still believe the use of the "N" word, in the
opening of Showboat is the most proper. Most of my African-American
friends will use that word, even in "mixed" company. When they do, it's
my white friends who are the ones that become dis-eased. Music, drama,
etc. are arts. I see no difference between imposing a "restricted"
vocabulary on a writer than I do in telling a sculptor, he cannot use a
certain medium, say, marble. Art isn't necessarily always about making
us feel good, but it is usually about trying to elicit a response from
us; make us feel something. On the EMI recording, in the privacy of my
own home, when I played it for the very first time, I DID get such a
jolt, and feeling of unease, even though I was alone in the house.
Paul.
James Jorden
Paul Padillo wrote:
> >Thank, you. More or less what I've been saying all along. We're all
> human beings, all of us with our own prejudices, faults, and secrets.
> When I go to the opera, I don't WANT to know if the singer is
> homophobic, homosexual, Greek Orthodox, etc. I just want to know they
> can do the role and move me. I've got enough problems of my own
> without wanting to hate somebody for something I cannot change, or
> have no business knowing.
Paul, I am so 100% behind you on the "language" issue that I wish I
could agree with you on this one. But I really can't.
Alagna's statement was not made in private and overheard; he spoke *on
the record* and then presumably approved his direct quotations. In
other words, he conciously used the word "homosexual" to smear the
reputation of someone who unfavorably criticized his singing. That's
just ugly. It's hate, pure and simple.
No one has suggested that Alagna's alleged homophobia makes his singing
any less moving or entertaining. What I have suggested is that it is
within the power of members of his audience to choose not to buy his
records or tickets to his performances until he offers an apology or an
explanation of this statement.
No one has told anyone what to think or what to do. All we who
disapprove Alagna's actions are asking is that you consider these
statements and then decide whether you want to give him your financial
support.
Paul Padillo
>
> Paul, I am so 100% behind you on the "language" issue that I wish I
> could agree with you on this one. But I really can't.
>
> Alagna's statement was not made in private and overheard; he spoke *on
> the record* and then presumably approved his direct quotations. In
> other words, he conciously used the word "homosexual" to smear the
> reputation of someone who unfavorably criticized his singing. That's
> just ugly. It's hate, pure and simple.
>
> No one has suggested that Alagna's alleged homophobia makes his singing
> any less moving or entertaining. What I have suggested is that it is
> within the power of members of his audience to choose not to buy his
> records or tickets to his performances until he offers an apology or an
> explanation of this statement.
>
> No one has told anyone what to think or what to do. All we who
> disapprove Alagna's actions are asking is that you consider these
> statements and then decide whether you want to give him your financial
> support.
>
> --
> james jorden
> jjo...@ix.netcom.com
> http://www.anaserve.com/~parterre
>
> "Without Jews, Gypsies and homosexuals, there is no theater."
> -- Mel Brooks in "To Be or Not to Be"
>
>
give just a bit more imput on what I've held to previously.
I don't like the idea of boycott, or similar tactics because someone has
a hatred toward a group of people, not unless that individual is, or
has, exhibited criminal behaviour, or is manifesting that hatred in a
violent manner.
Alagna, possesses (for much of what I've heard, particularly in the
French rep.) a lovely, lyrical tenor. That's not to say I haven't heard
some warning signs of trouble to later be caused by poor technique.
He seems to be something of the "pretty idiot" which it seems is how
he likes to present himself before the public. I find his homophobia
annoying and disturbing, but not particularly threatening to anyone,
because when he makes such comments to the press, I don't believe he is
hurting gay people: he's only hurting himself. He may be annoying,
and angering gays and non-homophobic (i.e., normal) straight people, but
that is not necessarily dangerous. Further, any homophobic (i.e.,
abnormal) straight person who would attach any serious meaning to the
words of this poorly educated, uninformed, bumpkin well, should just be
pitied, the poor things.
I will give this some thought and thanks for helping me understand your
point of view.
Paul.
Sarah Hollis
Paul Padillo wrote:
is [snip]
> hurting gay people: he's only hurting himself. He may be annoying,
> and angering gays and non-homophobic (i.e., normal) straight people, but
> that is not necessarily dangerous. Further, any homophobic (i.e.,
> abnormal) straight person who would attach any serious meaning to the
> words of this poorly educated, uninformed, bumpkin well, should just be
> pitied, the poor things.
>
> I will give this some thought and thanks for helping me understand your
> point of view.
>
> Paul.
WARNING: the following has no operatic content whatsoever. Skip now if
you find this offensive.
Ok, now to my point. First, I have a little trouble with your word
choices here Paul. I reread your sentance a few times because at first
I thought you were saying straights were normal, but on rereading I am
now understanding that you are calling non-homophobes "normal" and
homophobes "abnormal". Correct? I'll precede on this premise. I just
have a problem with words like"normal" and abnormal" when it comes to
applying them to feelings, opinions and beliefs. There is no such
thing (IMO) as a "normal" or "abnormal" belief or value. We may think
someone else's values are based on ignorance but that still doesn't
make them "abnormal" or even "wrong". It's just their belief. We can
try to educate somone to be open to new ways of thinking so they can
decide for themselves what values work for them but we cannot make
anyone else think a certain way. This is just a matter of semantics.
Now that I'm done with that I will explain why I think the way I do
on this issue. I won't support Alagna because to me, he seems to be a
reactive, non-thinking, non-problem solving individual. There are far
too many people in the world like this. (You probably have some at
work, the people who stand around bitching about their jobs, the boss
etc., blaming everyone for their unhappiness, not understanding that
they alone are responsible and in control of their mood and their
life.People who are "victims".) Anyway, it's just that this reactive
way of thinking is not helpful to anyone or the planet in general.
It's one of my causes. We all have things that stir us to action, this
is one of mine. Will I protest outside opera halls? No. Will I judge
and look down on anyone that attends an Alagna event? Definately not.
This is my decision. It makes me feel better knowing that I did not
knowingly support someone whose ethics and morals I find negative and
hurtful. The same way I do not wear diamonds because I do not agree
with the ethics of the business cartel that runs the diamond industry.
If someone else wears diamonds fine, they probably have causes to
which I'm oblivious but that they feel very strongly about. The world
is full of negativity, of course I'm not going to boycott or protest
everyone and everything, that's not the point. I do what I can to
satistfy my moral center. If I know a that a local business or person
has screwed people in the past in deals, I won't buy from them, no
matter how nice whatever the product may be. Do they even notice my
lack of patronage, no, probably not, but I sleep better at night. Do I
want them to go bankrupt? No, again, not the point. What I would hope
is that if enough people made similar statements it may get their
attention and provide motivation for some reflection. If someone asks
me what my feelings are, I will gladly explain them, and we can even
have a good rousing debate over them but I do not impose my thinking
on anyone else. Your very polite and honest post asked for why others
would think differently, so I'm responding. I appreciate your wanting
to hear what others think. (I want to know too!) Conflict is a good
thing!
Soapbox talk done. Sorry for the length of this, I enjoyed putting
this all to words though! (Now just don't get me started on organized
religion!;-)
Best respects
Sarah
gpadillo
WARNING: THIS CONTINUES A THREAD SOME MAY WANT TO IGNORE, BUT
SARAH, AT LEAST PLEASE READ!
>
Sarah, thanks for your informative post. I don't mean to sound
defensive, but a need to clarify even further my "normal" reference of
my previous post. Being living, creatures, capable of reproduction,
sexuality "is" a normal thing. It is my understanding we are born with
a natural sexuality. Whether that nature is heterosexual or homosexual
it is our nature nonetheless. This (whatever it is) is normal. (Would
natural be a better word, perhaps?) Hatred is most definitely "NOT"
something we are born with, but rather something I firmly believe is a
learned behaviour. Look at African-American, asian, white, etc.
children in a nursery, and skin color generally has little relevance to
whom they choose as their playmates. That, to me is normal.
Homophobia, although with its "phobia" suffix, made to sound like a
mental disease, is hatred (the learned behaviour) as James said earlier
"pure and simple." Therefore, it is my firm belief that a homophobia is
NOT normal. It is an irrational hatred, perhaps based on fear (or is it
an irrational fear perhaps based on hatred?. I know many wonderful
people who are also homophopes. As wonderful as they are this
irrational fear is truly groundless. I can think of no gay men or
lesbians I know who are out to "get" straight people to convert or who
seek to stalk a harmless straight person as their sexual prey. That
type of thinking can in no way be seen as normal. Ever.
Sorry for the gassyness of the above, but I really wanted to make my
point understood.
Thanks for further clarifying ideas that James earlier spoke to me
about. I've enjoyed your's (and James, and others) lucid and revelatory
posts and though some may be offended by the non-operatic nature of
these particular posts, I think this is a marvelous way to share, relate
to and attempt to understand other people who obviously spend a great
deal of time listening to, writing, singing and talking about opera.
What a great bunch of folk I'm meeting here. Glad I (quite literally)
stumbled into here a couple of months ago.
AstroJack
Paul Padillo <gpad...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>I don't like the idea of boycott, or similar tactics because someone has
>a hatred toward a group of people, not unless that individual is, or
>has, exhibited criminal behaviour, or is manifesting that hatred in a
>violent manner.
Paul --
There's a big difference between a boycott -- an organized campaign to
abstain from buying a product, or in this case patronizing an artist
-- and a personal choice not to suport that artist. I haven't read
any urging not to support Alagna, nor is this forum sufficiently broad
and influential to launch such a campaign. (Although perhaps it could
be used to organize some key individuals to launch a campaign.)
Alagna's public homophobic rhetoric is an insult to me and to other
gay people, and worse...
>He seems to be something of the "pretty idiot" which it seems is how
>he likes to present himself before the public. I find his homophobia
>annoying and disturbing, but not particularly threatening to anyone,
>because when he makes such comments to the press, I don't believe he is
>hurting gay people: he's only hurting himself. He may be annoying,
>and angering gays and non-homophobic (i.e., normal) straight people, but
>that is not necessarily dangerous.
There is considerable violence against gay people. A friend of mine
was recently kidnapped at a bus stop, taken to an isolated park area,
gangraped with a pistol held in his mouth, brutally beaten and left
for dead. My own bashing several years back was not nearly so
vicious, but a gang of teenagers hitting and kicking from all sides,
laughing like it was a game and calling me all the usual names.
Bashing is not unusual. Some friends of mine have been murdered, and
that is not rare either.
Homophobic statements by Alagna and by many others are not harmless.
Were it Alagna alone it probably would be harmless, but such remarks
are common. They normalize the disregard for our basic human rights,
and our very lives.
No, I'm not recommending a boycott against Alagna, but personally I
have no intention of supporting someone who talks that way. I'll
listen to his music as it is broadcast, or borrow a recording from the
library, and judge his music on musical grounds, but until he
apologizes I won't put a penny in his pocket.
RS Elleson
On Wed, 30 Apr 1997, Michael McGivern wrote:
> Personally, I would not buy an Alagna CD again due to his highly
> over-rated ability. If some nobody had made these homophobic
> comments, no one would have taken any notice.
>
> The only one I ever hear singing the praises of Alagna, is Alagna
> himself.
I don't know about you but I can think of a soprano (who shall remain
nameless) who does it rather a lot......
>
>
> Michael McGivern
> mcgi...@perrysburg.com
>
>
E
On 11 May 1997 18:05:49 GMT, gaut...@aol.com (GautierB) wrote:
>I heve never seen such a pack of....
>wether M. Alagna is homophobic, likes coffee in the morning or brushes his
>teeths with crest is totally irrelevant... He has a great voice and that
>is what counts ... I was lucky to see him in paris for a la boheme and
>Lucia di lamermmoor and his voice is just phenomenal...
>when i hear so say that he cannot listen to some artis because of its
>personnality, i wonder how he can listen to opera...
>puccini tended to facism towards the end of its life..
Puccini died before fascism and Mussolini got a full grip on the
Italian nation. If memory serves, Toscanini liked Benito Mussolini in
the beginning.
>wagner was a selfish greeddy egocentric...
Wagner absolutely had all these faults and he would not have been
Wagner without them. He had more faults than you can imagine. He was
short too, not just short of cash - though he rarely in his life had
any money. I would be greedy too once I finally got my hands on some.
He diatribed against jews which you forgot to mention.
Yet I am prostrate before Wagner. Worship him.
>strauss remained conductor during the nazi period...
Ja, ja. A very complicated and bloody period it was too!
Strauss (a good German who sneered at jews) never joined the Nazi
Party. Though he did indeed conduct during the Third Reich, as did
Furtwangler, Bohm and Krauss, etc. etc.
Karajan inadvertantly joined the NSDAP twice! Yet he was hyped like
crazy and people bought his records like hotcakes. He was a bloody
Nazi and a homosexual!!!
>tchaikowsky was a homosexual that got married...
(Does this mean Alagna hates him too then?)
>I mean in each composer u can find something that will dis please so,
>furtunatlely, some peolple put those issues away which authorized the
>development of this wonderful art....
But none of the above composers you mention are around now in the
current atmosphere of political correctness (which has gotten out of
control and beyond reason, true) and none ever, at least to my
knowledge, ever berated or slighted homosexuals. Indeed some of them
were homosexuals.
So what! Exactly.
But perhaps Alagna should take a look around him and come to terms
with the fact that a good deal of the support he receives in opera
production and recording are made possible by people he sneers at. Do
you not think they feel insulted and slighted and have reason for any
outrage they might wish to express towards him?
Ken Calascione
Sara Freeman
In
<1C5D92B0DBB3987B.4989C070...@library-proxy.airne
Karajan a homosexual. I hope you meant his as as joke that I don't seem
to be getting.
>>tchaikowsky was a homosexual that got married...
>
>(Does this mean Alagna hates him too then?)
>
>>I mean in each composer u can find something that will dis please so,
>>furtunatlely, some peolple put those issues away which authorized the
>>development of this wonderful art....
>
>But none of the above composers you mention are around now in the
>current atmosphere of political correctness (which has gotten out of
>control and beyond reason, true) and none ever, at least to my
>knowledge, ever berated or slighted homosexuals. Indeed some of them
>were homosexuals.
>So what! Exactly.
>But perhaps Alagna should take a look around him and come to terms
>with the fact that a good deal of the support he receives in opera
>production and recording are made possible by people he sneers at. Do
>you not think they feel insulted and slighted and have reason for any
>outrage they might wish to express towards him?
>
>Ken Calascione
--
Don't boycott the Vienna Philharmonic . . . boycott K-Mart
. . oh, and be sure to eat at Wendy's at least once a week.
Sarah Hollis
Ahh, now I see what your were saying. Thank you for helping me
understand. Just a semantic difference over a point we actually agree
on (you say potatoe, I say potatoes have too much starch in them and
may be contributing to your "gassyness".;-) But seriously I'm glad
you're enjoying all of this I am too. I love discussing and trying to
look at life thru someone else's glasses. I've learned a lot since I
joined on this newsgroup even when I vehemently disagreed with a
person. (Remember the Don as a bad guy thread?) It opened up my eyes
to view points I otherwise would have never thought of. What fun this
all is. Glad others seem to enjoy this aspect of the newsgroup too.
(Alright where's the stirring overture welling up in the background?)
BTW, is anyone else impressed that so far all the responses here have
been sans flames?
Sarah,
thinking positive thoughts
Kalliban
Paul Padillo wrote:
> GautierB wrote:
> >
> > I heve never seen such a pack of....
> > wether M. Alagna is homophobic, likes coffee in the morning or
> brushes his
> > teeths with crest is totally irrelevant... He has a great voice and
> that
> > is what counts ... I was lucky to see him in paris for a la boheme
> and
> > Lucia di lamermmoor and his voice is just phenomenal...
> > when i hear so say that he cannot listen to some artis because of
> its
> > personnality, i wonder how he can listen to opera...
> > puccini tended to facism towards the end of its life..
> > wagner was a selfish greeddy egocentric...
> > strauss remained conductor during the nazi period...
> > tchaikowsky was a homosexual that got married...
> > I mean in each composer u can find something that will dis please
> so,
> > furtunatlely, some peolple put those issues away which authorized
> the
> > development of this wonderful art....
> >
> >
> >Thank, you. More or less what I've been saying all along. We're all
>
> human beings, all of us with our own prejudices, faults, and secrets.
> When I go to the opera, I don't WANT to know if the singer is
> homophobic, homosexual, Greek Orthodox, etc. I just want to know they
>
> can do the role and move me. I've got enough problems of my own
> without
> wanting to hate somebody for something I cannot change, or have no
> business knowing.
>
> Paul.
****************************************************************************** "I've
got enough problems of my own without wanting to hate somebody for
something I cannot change,
or have no business knowing." Sound familiar? You could have heard it
all over Germany after the war.
And here, too, after the McCarthy era. And so it goes....
Kalliban
gpadillo
Paul.
James Jorden
gpadillo wrote:
>
> Kalliban wrote:
****** "I've
> > got enough problems of my own without wanting to hate somebody for
> > something I cannot change,
> > or have no business knowing." Sound familiar? You could have heard it
> > all over Germany after the war.
> > And here, too, after the McCarthy era. And so it goes....
> >So, I'm the equivalent of a nazi/McCarthyite? Thank you.
The reason fanatics like Hitler and Joe McCarthy can gain power and
wreak havoc is that so many people are willing stand back and do
nothing, claiming that what is happening is "something I cannot change
or have no business knowing."
--
"Style is the most important thing in the world. Fashion is the least."
-- Quentin Crisp
paul
Phew! I didn't realize my simple comment (which I stick by, BTW) would
be interpreted by you and others as equating me with a nazi. Jesus,
Christ, folks! I've marched in pride parades, nursed two friends who
died because of AIDS in serious stages of dementia (involving feeding,
bathing, cleaning up their poop & vomit and sleeping on a cot next to
their beds), I do monthly volunteer work at a women's homeless shelter,
I shop for clothes & toys year long for the Christmas parties at
Children's shelters here in DC, etc. I could go on, but none of this is
anybody's business. I'm not looking for a pat on the back, but because
of my "own problems/no business knowing" statement I've received several
shitty e-mails, and am equated as a fuckin' nazi! Amazing. Absoultely
amazing!
OlwenVanB
I know how you feel, Paul. I was called a Nazi
because I was arrogant enough to say I think children
in public schools should be required to learn to read.
I was outraged and insulted for about 5 minutes,
then realized that the people hurling "Nazi!" around
at everyone who disagrees with them aren't going to
be swayed by logic. So fuck 'em, pay no mind.
As for Robert Alagna, I probably won't buy his CDs.
Why support someone who makes the kind of statements
he has when there are so many other lovely voices to
listen to?
----------------------------------------------------------------
James Jorden
Paul:
I did not call you a Nazi.
I said in so many words you are not to be compared to a Nazi.
But Nazis gain power not because many support them, but because many do
not resist them.
All I am saying is that Alagna's ugly statement is indeed "your
business".
James Jorden
OlwenVanB wrote:
>
> I know how you feel, Paul. I was called a Nazi
> because I was arrogant enough to say I think children
> in public schools should be required to learn to read.
And I was called a Nazi because I have a shaved head. Big fucking deal.
Namecalling is not what this is about. Paul is not a Nazi by any
stretch of the imagination. All I said was that extremist hate groups
gain power because ordinary people keep saying the whole issue is "none
of their business."
paul
Kalliban wrote:
>
>
> Mr P, you are either over-reacting or being disingenuous. I no more
> think of you as a nazi or any other kind of extremist than I do
> myself. I was only trying to point out the dangers of a "no ask/no
> see" attitude. What I suspect you meant to convey was that Alagna's
> art is too important to you to give up despite his opinions...a
> situation many have had to wrestle with regarding great artists with
> unsavory reputations. Any other inference was unintended.
> Kalliban
>
>
>Thank's for clarifying. However, I think in my posting I was not over-reacting, and I certainly wasn't being disingenuous. Emotional,
certainly, but from a few e-mails I received, of which I'm doing a favor
of not reciting here, I was admittedly, livid, by how my words were
being interpreted and the implications associated by them. My error was
in not keeping my frustration limited to responding to the E-mails.
Unfortunately, however, some of the e-mails I received had no valid
return addresss, and I felt that posting on the newsgroup from whence my
remarks were taken was, in this instance, warranted.
Neither do I want to convey that Alagna's art is too important to me to
give up. I DON'T like him that much ... I'm not familiar enough with
him to forgive him anything. I loved his Romeo, enjoyed his Alfredo,
and have stated he has a naturally lovely voice. I have been bothered
by his arrogance, and have stated as much. I am appalled by his alleged
homophobia and have stated this as well. However, I wasn't prepared at
the time of my original postings to "write him off" because of anything.
I find it still too early in his career to pass off judgments.
Because of some postings (namely James and Sarah) I've re-thought
Alagna's comments. Initially, I placed no value on Alagna's comments
whatsoever, (other than to think him a moron) but because of James,
Sarah and others' who open-mindedly explained a different logic than
mine, I was able to see more damaging relevance in his statements. Did
it change my mind. Absoultely, but "I" had to come to that conclusion
and only after seeing the issue presented in another light.
I was outraged (admittedly after being overworked & with little rest) to
read words, which seemed to me to be equating me with nazism, etc.
Again, however, I don't believe my post was over-reacting.
Paul.
Sarah Hollis
I guess my comment about "gee, how nice there hasn't been any flaming"
was premature;) I guess I can see the points made about apathy making
someone just as guilty but it's the way in which these things are said
that make the difference. Outright attacks are rarely heard. Glad you
have been inspired to reflect further on your original opinion. It's
the fact that you thought about it that's important, not that you
changed your mind.
Sarah
Hans C Hoff
Has not the time come to discontinue this thread ? . It is not any
longer about opera, not even about an opera singer, but about several
people's reactions to some statements one opera singer once made. Those
statements are not particularly interesting in themselves, and the
source is hardly an authority on anything but singing, so what fuels the
debate are now vested interests which have nothin to do with opera at
all. I believe there must other newsgroups where the debate can continue
within the scope of the group.
HCH
Michael McGivern
I'm sorry, but I think this thread has gone on way too long. I was
under the impression this was an opera group.
I don't agree with what Alagna said either, but this whole thread has
basically been about everyone weighing in with their two cents on the
homophobe issue. Look, consider the source, Alagna has a reputation
as being an arrogant, overrated little twirp. How many people really
take him seriously? I think by going on and on with this discussion,
we have given him way more credibility than is due him.
I agree with Mr. Jordan's opinion that indifference is not the answer
in many cases, however, picking up on every little homophobe issue, I
think ends up having the opposite of its intended effect.
Michael McGivern
mcgi...@perrysburg.com