From: John Bell <John_Bell-AT-emerson.edu>
Subject: PUPT: Mamet, Blair Thomas and N Y Times stupidity
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2002 09:16:16 -0400 


The description of Blair Thomas's work sounds fascinating.  Blair's
inventiveness and willingness to engage in abstraction; to experiment, in
other works, make his work exciting.

Mamet's "revelation" about the missing third seems less interesting to me.
It's always been the case that, for example in puppet sculpture, there has
to be something missing in the face, something that is only completed by the
movement of the puppet (which differentiates puppet sculpture from
stationary sculpture).  Look at the way Mamet disparages "performance art"
in the Times article: he's exactly opposed to the kinds of innovation in
visual theater which Blair's work represents.  

The review of Blair Thomas's performance points out the need for intelligent
thinking about performance with objects.  A recent New York Times article by
Bruce Weber about Iranian Ta'ziyeh performance compared the head of a lion
puppet used in the show to a Muppet, which has to be one of the stupidest
comparisons I've read so far in press accounts of puppet theater.  Here's a
tradition (Ta'ziyeh) which is profound, beautiful, and many centuries old,
and whose intense, spiritual, martyr plays reflect basic human emotions.
The fact that a writer for the Times can only connect the puppetry of this
theater to American television puppetry of the late twentieth century is
astoundingly lame.  We puppeteers all know that puppet traditions do not
begin and end with the fine work of Jim Henson and his associates.  And in
fact, the carved wooden heads of Ta'ziyeh puppet lions have nothing to do
with the aesthetics of Muppet fur, moveable mouths, and the sly verbal wit
of Muppet characters.
  The Times's lack of intelligence about traditional Islamic theater, and
its lack of a framework by which to judge puppet theater is a marker of how
dangerous American cultural solipsism has become.
  Hurray for Blair Thomas for trying encourage us to see differently.  

john bell
great small works 

-----Original Message-----
From: LucretiaG-AT-aol.com
To: puptcrit-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Sent: 8/3/2002 8:16 AM
Subject: PUPT: re: robert's disappointment re Mamet

Is that it?!  Where is Robert's discussion?  how disappointing that all
we 
get is his disappointment!!~
I wonder how many -as I did- printed out the "Crabgrass comments" to
reflect 
upon in one's studio (perhaps to surface later...)
debbie



  --- Personal replies to: LucretiaG-AT-aol.com
  --- List replies to:     puptcrit-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
  --- Admin commands to:   majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
  --- Archives at:         http://lists.village.virginia.edu/~spoons


  --- Personal replies to: John Bell <John_Bell-AT-emerson.edu>
  --- List replies to:     puptcrit-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
  --- Admin commands to:   majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
  --- Archives at:         http://lists.village.virginia.edu/~spoons