[Dixielandjazz] Attacks vs. Criticism

[Steve Barbone]

CAVEAT: Folks, please forgive this post answering Bob. I tried to take it
OFF LIST, to no avail. If you are bored to death with "Attacks" vs.
"Criticism", please delete now. Otherwise, enjoy yourself and keep those
cards and letters coming.

Cheers,
Steve Barbone


"Robert S. Ringwald" <robert at ringwald.com>

>> Steve wrote
>> You and I differ on the context of her post. I call it an attack.

>Bob wrote
>I suppose that is what critics do then, attack?

No Bob, that's neither a correct supposition nor what I said.  No doubt some
critics do attack and some don't, but my statement above has nothing to do
with critics. Please read the following carefully. It is the first part of
the original post to which I disagreed:

"I get it now. You make a name for yourself being an  actor, writer and
director then you hire a band of good musicians and go on tour. Then, places
all over book you on your name and RIP OFF THE PUBLIC ALTHOUGH THERE WERE
PLENTY IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WERE CLAPPING EVERY TIME HE FINISHED A SOLO. Is
it just the name?" 

"Rip off" has, as it's primary dictionary definition, "Steal or Rob" and as
a secondary definition, to "cheat", exploit or take advantage of." Thus, to
me, the "opinion" included a PERSONAL ATTACK on the man, and the venues who
booked him, in effect calling them crooks. That is what I object to. Think
of it this way; If I said that Sacramento Jubilee was RIPPING THE PUBLIC OFF
by presenting Bob Ringwald and his band, would you not consider that a
personal attack? Especially since I am neither "The Public, nor do I have
any right to speak for them. Note again according to the post; "there were
plenty in the audience who were clapping every time he finished a solo."
That does not sound like "the public" was being ripped off.


>>Steve wrote: From the
>>very beginning she carped about the way he was dressed. His stage persona,
>>etc.

> Bob answered BTW- she did not "carp" about his stage presence & dress.

Correct. I have already publicly apologized to her and the list for that
error on my part and admit that I blew it by saying that.


>> Steve wrote: Anyone with a  modicum of knowledge about Woody Allen should
>> realize
>> that his normal dress is "Annie Hall" retro of about 30/40 years ago. It
>> is
>> the "uniform with which HIS FANS identify. Same goes for his stage
>> persona.
>> That's who the man is, and HIS FANS love it.


>Bob wrote: Really?  I have never heard any fans speak about loving his stage
>presence &
>dress.  Every comment I have ever heard about his stage presence is that
>they think it is weird.

I'm talking about "his" fans. The ones I talk with who love him, his movies,
and who he is as a person, all seem to identify with his "uniform" also.
They also love his weirdness. That's part of his public persona.

>>Steve wrote: a part of an identity
>>that keeps him famous. Why attack his trademark?

> Bob wrote: It does not keep him famous.  His movies keep him famous.

Bob, if you are going to disagree with what I wrote, please digest what I
wrote in context beforehand: Note your own quote of me above. I said it is A
PART OF his identity that keeps him famous. A PART OF HIS IDENTY. A "PART".

>Bob wrote: Are you saying that critics have the write to criticize musicians
>publicly but fans do not?
>
>> Steve answered: No, I am not saying that. Never have. (Sorry to have to keep
>> repeating that, but what part of "No" did you not understand the first couple
>> of times?)

>Bob then wrote: You say no but then you paraphrase the above statement anyway
>which contradict yourself.

Sorry, but I totally don't understand what you mean there. Here it is again:
I never said; "that critics have the right to criticize musicians publicly
but fans do not." NEVER. What contradictory paraphrasing? You asked the same
question several times and I answered "NO" to it each time.

> Bob wrote: However, if you insist on using the word attack, then, often,
> critics attack performers in print.

>> Steve Answered Yes, of course. I object to that also which I said several
>>times.

>Bob answered So, both fans & critics should only say positive things about
>ones performance, dress and stage presence?

No, I neither said nor implied that. You have wrongly construed "don't do a
personal attack" with "only say positive things". One can certainly give a
negative review WITHOUT RESORTING TO A PERSONAL ATTACK.

>Bob wrote Since I keep asking you to explain your contradictive statements and
>you just keep saying the same thing over & over again, I won't pursue this any
>longer. This will be my final statement.

Thank goodness. I offered to continue this off list but you don't seem to
want to let it die. BTW, I keep saying the same exact thing over and over
because they are not contradictory. You just keep rephrasing your questions.
Pleased write me OFF LIST SO AS NOT TO BORE EVERYONE ELSE and let me know
where you hear a contradiction.

>Judy has every right in the world to say that she went to a concert, paid XX
>amount of money, listened to 5 or 6 tunes, did not like it & left.

Yes indeed she has every right to say that. (BTW 4 tunes)

>Bob wrote: She has every right to give her opinion of the musicianship of the
>person she paid to see.

Yes indeed she has every right to give her opinion of his musicianship.

>Bob wrote: Fans have the right to critacise as do critics.

Yes indeed they have every right to criticize. Anyone who performs in public
opens him/herself to criticism.

>BTW- for the folks on the List who are getting tired of hearing about Woody
>Allen's musical ability, this exchange of e-mails has not been about Woody.
>It has been about the right of Judy,fans & critics to freely give their
>opinions.

I totally agree and have always defended fans and critics rights to say what
they want. However I did ASK that folks neither "PERSONNALY ATTACK" specific
musicians in a public forum, nor "Speak for The Public". That is patently
unfair.

The question here is, and has always been, is it fair for fans/critics to
state that a performer or a venue is RIPPING OFF THE PUBLIC, especially in a
situation where THE PUBLIC by clapping, seemed to be quite satisfied with
what was going on? 

Cheers,
Steve Barbone