A Fresh Cup of English Tea by Jonathon Coombs

                I know this title is very confusing, as I am not writing about a restaurant. I am talking about the Boston Symphony Orchestra, which I saw on the 19^th of March this year. The reason I have the title that I do is that I don’t drink English tea, I hardly drink tea. So the performance for me… really wasn’t my cup of tea. That doesn’t mean it was poorly performed, it just means I have a hard time extending myself beyond my preferred genre of music. Let me explain, with a bit of history of myself with music and then I’ll get to the performance.

                Until the time I was six (I think, may have been earlier may have been later) I didn’t like music. At least, I didn’t pay it much mind. Then, my father bought the American Idiot album by Green Day. That was the first time I really enjoyed music and wanted to hear it. Later on my brother and I got the video game Rock Band, which showcases songs from, obviously, the rock genre. Then I picked up the viola, a stringed instrument and I played in my school orchestra. That is when I started to listen to a bit of classical music. Then I picked up the trumpet and played in band, while simultaneously playing in the orchestra. This gave me a foundation in big band and jazz pieces. However, through all of this I still prefer rock music, from its punk, alternative, and metal, which caused me to pick up guitar.

                Now that you know where I’m coming from you’ll understand this paragraph. So if you read one sentence of the last paragraph and thought that it had nothing to do with the review you are wrong. Anyway, the music is performed beautifully. I haven’t listened to many Mozart performances but I feel this was a standout performance among them. The conductor kept a lively energy, being constantly engaged and using his whole body to conduct. The musicians played amazingly, understanding the music and using that to their advantage. Through the concert there were many parts where quiet instruments took the melody, so the louder instruments had to reduce their volume quite a bit. That was one downside to where I was seated, during those sections I heard the melody only. However, I didn’t enjoy it as much as I wanted to. I didn’t despise it, nor do I think it was bad. This is just the type of music I would rather hear when I am sitting on a bus doing nothing than go to a concert to listen to.

                So… you are wondering if I recommend it. Otherwise there is no reason to read this review. Unless it’s you mom, in which case hi mom. But the rest of you… or maybe dad to. Hi dad. Anyway, if you enjoy orchestral music to a point where you want to see it live and can tell the difference between different conductors take on pieces, then go see this you will love it. However, to other people, if you do not enjoy Classical music then don’t see it. This is a case that is completely down to personal preference, so don’t let a guy on a blog like me tell you what to think.

                Rating: A clever punchline delivered to people who haven’t heard the first part of the joke. It is enjoyable, but in my case I was the wrong crowd to appreciate it.

A Single Tear by Jonathon Coombs

                Have you ever had a moment where you know something sad is about to happen so your eyes begin to water before anything has happened? Well, that’s what happened to me on the 18^th of March this year while viewing Big Fish in the Speakeasy theatre. I know the part I teared up on was a bit cliché, but it still touched me. Don’t worry, I’m not going to spoil anything in this review.

                Big Fish, in the nature of its title, deals with a struggle of knowing a person who makes up tales of their accomplishments. This is the conflict that carries the plot of the story, with the main character Will trying to find out who his father Edward really is. In my obviously professional opinion, it is a story that hits incredibly close to home. I find enjoyment from telling stories and entertaining the people around me. So I saw myself in the Edward character, as I know the feeling of wanting to tell incredible stories instead of things that actually happened.

                The singing is well done, as it doesn’t feel forced. In most musicals the singing seems to happen in a different dimension then the rest of the play. Events where characters start coming on stage to sing and then disappearing after it’s done. In Big Fish, there is a reason for each song to be sung and for the people that are singing it to be singing it. Whether a character is telling another a story or is explaining frustration the songs and singing go along very well with the plot. As well, most musicals set a bit of a barrier in my opinion from a character when they are singing and when they are not. To me most musicals- I haven’t seen very many but I’ve acted in quite a few- take a bit of humanity away from a character when they are singing, putting the emphasis and focus on the singing instead of staying in character. In this play the actors remember that they are still being a character when they sing, and put their characters emotions behind the singing to drive it home. Also, a point to make is the instrumentation behind it. I feel sad that the musicians weren’t given more credit other than a mention in the program and a point offstage at the end of the play. The music, in any case, is or should be the crutch that holds up a song. This can be for songs in musicals and songs in general. The music in this play is not only the crutch, but something that begs to be listened to. I had to stop myself from getting lost in the instrumentation because I knew that important plot was happening. You can take that as a god or a bad thing, because while it sounds really good it’s not a good thing that I want to be listening to the music alone.

                I feel like I should mention the set, the props and the quality of the acting. But I won’t. I feel that the others in this Winterim will focus on those aspects more than the music and singing. So I will leave them to write about those, and if they don’t, then I guess you’ll just have to see the play to figure that out.

                Overall, I give this a see. One reason I only say this is really because of the experience I had inside the theatre before the play and with the program. I have never seen so much self-promotion in a theatre before and it felt a little much. Maybe it was just from the somethingith anniversary they had and a special sale they had because of it. It just lasted forever, and I did not appreciate that. So, go see this play if you want something to break the monotony of everyday life and want to see characters that have humanity in them.

                Rating: One tear out of breaking down sobbing in the middle of a theatre. This is a good thing, because you don’t want people to know you cried at it. So one tear is perfect because you transfer all of your emotions through that one tear, and then you can hide it. So see the show.

The Rite… it LEFT Something to be Desired

            See what I did there? Since Rite sounds like the direction right, and left is the opposite… never mind.On March 17, 2015 I saw The Rite performed by SITI Company with Bill T. Jones Dance Company. It was quite the experience… just not the Rite one for me.

I am hilarious.

Anyway, I’ll start with the good. The dance is spectacular, with the ability of the dancers obviously pushed to their limits. The amount of sweat falling off of the dancers faces could have filled an Olympic swimming pool. I guess I won’t limit it to the dancing, all of the movement was incredibly well done. There was one bit where a person was walking on chairs being placed in front of her, when the people holding the chairs lifted them off the ground. As if this wasn’t enough, they turned the chairs sideways, so the person walking on them was walking on a horizontal plane being supported by two people holding her. That is just one example of the extraordinary movement to be found in this piece. As well, the dialog is well said, with good timing as well as good lines. Some lines delve into the nature of humanity, asking the audience why we perceive time as only moving in one direction. It is a very thought provoking experience, and in that aspect it would gain enough of my saliva to run its plumbing for weeks. However, for me there is one major downside.

There is little or no plot. There is nothing to hold the whole thing together, giving the lines little to no reason to be there. The people are just dancing, the actors are just speaking. There are hints to what it may be about, mostly coming from one character. As soon as this character appeared, she broke the fourth wall. Throughout the play she asked the dancers and actors questions of if they knew about the audience, if they wanted to change anything about their current state. These sections hint that the play may be a commentary on acting and theatre, showing the humanity and realization that comes with acting in a play. However, those sections are diluted with a plot that feels crowbarred in. Throughout the play, there is a solder character. He has the first monologue in the play, and some events in the play are catered to him. However, he is never explained, he is just there and has lines. He has problems sure, and it is interesting. I just never understood what he was doing for the play. If they justified his existence somewhere it would have made sense and I would have been completely fine with it. However, even the play addresses the confusion over what its about. The lady that broke the fourth wall had an entire section where she tried to explain what the play was about. Eventually she settled on “It’s about sex. A primal human instinct to be satisfied.” However I think the play had very little to do with that.

I guess the deciding factor of this is whether you like a plot in a play. If you want to see dancing there is certainly a lot of that and it is amazing. However there is no plot.  Think of it like this: My opinion is in a play, the plot is glue to hold all of the movement and dialog up. You can have the finest materials to build a house, perfectly sanded and painted wood, but it won’t stay up if there is no cement to keep it together. So as a play it’s a not that great. If it had been labeled as a dancing experience with dialog instead of a play then I would be much better towards it.

Rating: Sony getting hacked again and again. It’s a good company and they do a lot of hard work, they just get criticized for having bad marketing and PR.

Rich Getting Richer… by Jonathan Coombs

                You know how the rest of the saying goes. After visiting the Clark Museum in Williamstown on March 17, 2015, I am ready to say that the rich do indeed get richer. I get this from the museums history, which was conveniently provided on the bottom floor. Anyway, on to the review.

                If you are familiar with my reviews, I want you to think back to my review of the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum. If you aren’t I’ll wait for you to read it. … … … … … Ok your back. So remember my rant of the piano? Well guess what. This museum has a piano. However, they allow people to occasionally play it, so that’s better. Still, an instruments ONLY purpose is to be played, no matter how beautiful it is. This piano has Greek words and letters written on the top of it. There are treble and alto clefs drawn around the side, and the ends of the treble clefs spiral out of control like a coiled wire. There is a painting of people playing instruments facing the pianist, just in case the musician decides they are bored with looking at the music. To the sides of that painting are smaller paintings of string basses and cellos. I quite enjoyed looking at this piano, but I wish I could have seen someone play it.

                A piece within the museum I would like to talk about is Boulevard Rochechooan by Camille Pissarro. This piece shows a street of France, from a view of heightened elevation. Camille shows people going through a midmorning routine, being driven by horse-drawn carriages to buying items from a store.  The piece has a midmorning glow about it, giving it a feeling of waking up. I won’t go into much detail to describe it because there is a picture of it along with this review. The piece does a good job showing the relaxing chaos that welcomes everyone at the beginning of the day. Think about it, you wake up and get busy into your normal routine. You step outside to go to your car or bike or however you get to work. There is a calming moment before you start your travel, isn’t there? Or am I just incredibly insane? Anyway, I quite like this piece.

                Overall, the museum is good. There is one niggle I have with it. There is a board of its history in the basement. It shows how the family was rich before the museum was built. This puts a bad taste in my mouth, as going to the museum is supporting a rich family buying art that everyone could enjoy. It would take too long to explain my philosophy of it. Overall, see it if you have time and money.

                Rating: 8 Big Macs out of 10, you feel embarrassed to admit that you like it, as it is fattening and may not be supportive of your own moral compass.

Must Have Missed A Memo by Jonathan Coombs

                There is no need for a clever introduction on this one. That, and I can’t think of one. Anyway, The Colored Museum is showing in Boston this week, and sets out with the ambition to talk about social issues surrounding racism and prejudice. I only wish that it wasn’t as confusing as Shakespeare. I will discuss that now.

                Prior to arriving at the theatre, I was told that the Colored Museum is a satire and will make me uncomfortable when I laugh. I heard this and thought “Sign me up!” I enjoy being made uncomfortable, as it is a great way to know my own faults and step outside my comfort zone. So I prepared for 90 minutes of serious and insulting humor. However, the only thing I felt was insulted was my intelligence. The play opens with its best scene of a stewardess on a plane. Relating the plane to a slave ship, she instructs the audience on how to properly attach their shackles and tells everyone not to rebel. It shines through the fact that the crowd feels slightly responsible for what had happened. However, the play goes down in quality very quickly. All the acts after it don’t make me feel guilty or make me think about anything. All it made me think of is how the play could have been improved.

                Another thing. Maybe I missed a memo or something that is causing me to not feel much for the production. If there is something I missed, some hidden joke or a point of reading between the lines, then forgive me. But to me the production would have been impressive if it was written, acted, and directed by college students. That is the sort of quality that came out of it, some bad lines, some over and under acting, and a bad overall direction. If the play wanted to make a statement it never got there. And for some reason the people I’ve talked to don’t say this. They kind of stammer around it saying it was funny here or serious there. Is it because people are afraid they will be marked as racist if they don’t believe it was very good? Is that it? Cause its annoying that I seem to be the only one that doesn’t believe its slightly ok. It’s just not very good. I wish they did something to make their message clearer. If I knew what the message was then I could state how well they worked to communicate it. But I left the theatre without knowing what the message is or even the purpose of the play.

                I may be over exaggerating the bad points. Yes it didn’t have a very clear message to me, but refer to the title. I may have missed something along the line, and I don’t have much experience with the subject matter. The play is funny here and there, and there are some well written lines. So, I say go see it if you have nothing to do, or like the feeling of being confused, or have an experience with the subject manner. That’s where I stand.

                Rating: 7 chocolates out of 10 chocolates, while some people think it’s enough others want more.

Museum of I’m Uncomfortable Arts by Jonathon Coombs

In the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, there are many contemporary and older paintings inside. After visiting the museum on the March 12, 2015, I decided that maybe contemporary art isn’t my thing. I am going to about this for the next few paragraphs, and the time you spend doing that will be time you won’t get back. You may as well just skip to the end, as everything I am about to say is nothing you haven’t heard before.

…

…

Have they gone? I’m sorry for the ruse, but I know that I had to make the beginning look as much of an official review as possible so I could then talk about something completely different. If you are here, either its Mrs. Cooper and Mrs. Mordeno reading this before posting it, or someone reading this on the website if for some reason they actually do post this. Anyway, this is really a review about modern culture and meaning in paintings. For those who weren’t there, I have recently said that I would rather not spend time analyzing a painting for its meaning. I stand by that, but to a certain extent. I never get to finish a thought when I am saying something to a group, so I may as well say everything I want to say right here.

I’ve come to understand that my statement on not wanting to look too deeply into the art for meaning may have been a rub in the wrong direction. I understand that winterim is a time to try new things and to be enriched in the culture. I do fully appreciate the artwork, as it is fantastic and beautiful. I believe that art is made to look beautiful. I also believe that art can have meaning behind it, that’s great. In a museum however, I want to look at the art and think of its beauty. This doesn’t mean I never want to find meaning in paintings and sculptors. There are paintings where I really want to know what it means, or why it was painted in the way it was. Those paintings are always the ones that I find extremely interesting or I greatly enjoy. For me, there is a loss of enjoyment in finding meaning in paintings I don’t have a major interest in. In those cases, looking for meaning in the paintings feels like work. That’s what deciphering a painting I have no real interest in is to me, work. All art is a form of entertainment, and if I find it work to be entertained, is it really entertainment?

So that is what I meant when I said I don’t want to spend time analyzing a painting. For me most paintings are well crafted and done, but I don’t feel connected enough to want to look for meaning. Those paintings are either paintings that have religious implications (oh, how tired I am of religious people trying to shove it down my throat. But that’s a topic for a different day) and in modern paintings. I will now discuss modern paintings, in two sections. One is of photography, one is of abstract paintings.

To discuss photography you have to be familiar with a certain work that I’ve seen recently. Well, seen is a strong word as I was looking at the floor most of the time due to discomfort. I am talking about photographs made by a guy I don’t remember the name of. The photographs were sequences of naked/almost naked people. I detest this in two different ways. One is because it made me uncomfortable, but that’s a personal thing and won’t bother you with. The second is a bit broad, so I’ll explain it before naming it. There has to be a consistency with the modern world. In a group discussion I brought up a point that having these pictures of skinny models was a way that art could give girls low self-esteem, as the way the models were portrayed. Either I did not explain that correctly or no one wanted to answer me directly, because I got the answer of “because it’s not on TV and there is nothing being sold it is ok.” So let me re-explain my point in case it wasn’t clear. Showing these extremely skinny models in a photograph is the exact same as seeing them in a magazine or on television. It is showing girls and women that to be attractive you have to be skinny. What is weird to me is that we tolerate it in a museum saying that its art, but don’t tolerate it in a magazine. I’m not saying that it’s ok in a magazine, and I’m not saying it shouldn’t be ok with the art. My problem with it is the lack of consistency in the modern world. There has to be a standard brought about through all sorts of media, being art or television or news. Make up your mind, which is it, because if it’s not tolerate in one place why is it tolerated in another. So I guess my issue is lack of clarity or continuation of expectations when it comes to media and being offensive. Anyway, with these thoughts running through my head there is no possible way I can find meaning behind it, as all I see are naked people making me uncomfortable.

Secondly, abstract paintings. To be a bit brief on an introduction, it’s not what it used to be. Picasso’s abstract drawings were abstract but had clear distinct meanings behind them. You could tell if he was melancholy or angry at a war. However, in today’s abstract drawings you get the simplest things that anyone could have drawn for any reason. My favorite one of these is a white canvas, about three feet wide, with green triangles drawn. The triangles start large on the sides of the canvas, and connect in the middle where they are much smaller. When I look at this, I know there is no possible way that I can understand any of it. Do the lines represent government and how the only time it agrees on something is when there is barely any government? Does it imply that a romantic relationship requires equal contributions from both sides? There could be any meaning behind it. That is when I give up and decide that there isn’t any meaning, because anyone who would put meaning behind a painting would paint something more than TWO TRIANGLES.

Anyway, to close. I believe that modern art is the worst it has ever been. That doesn’t mean zero effort goes into it, I just mean that it is uninspiring. My stance on this goes beyond visual art, but you get the idea. I’d rather spend time looking at Picasso’s and Venn Goh’s than some guy who drew two triangles on a canvas. I understand that there is little likelihood that this will be put onto the blog. There has to be some layer of censorship, right? I know this skews a little from where I set out, but it is a review of modern art using a few pieces we’ve seen as examples. If you do post this, then title it Rant on Modern Art. I titled it the way I did to sucker you in a bit. Anyway, I better finish up with a way I end my other reviews in case people just skipped to the end.

Yes, I guess go to the museum of fine arts. There is plenty to see there and it is worth time to see. If you bring kids, just make sure to keep them quiet.

Rating: 7 incredible hulks out of 10, because RRRRAAAAGGEEEEEE on. Also there are quite a few rooms painted green. Also because there is a lot of power in 7 hulks, just as there is quite a lot of power in some of the pieces, however not as powerful as 10 hulks because the museum did lack a few things I would have liked to see.

Give ‘em Your Love By Jonathan Coombs

                The ensemble shouldn’t be called the Unloved for long, because the audience completely adores them. The Tristan and Yseult production by Kneehigh is a must see. I’d stop typing this now, but there is a required length. Sooo…. Yeah.

                The cast was amazing, working with the audience as well as each other. There was a very memorable moment where the audience was asked to blow up balloons for the entrance of two characters. Not only was it fun for the audience, but it allowed for an improvised moment between an actor and an audience member. The audience member tied the balloon and was not supposed to. The cast member spoke to her, saying that she clearly tied the balloon. It was a fantastic moment for everyone except her. I could go into detail describing each actor and how well they performed. But all I need to say is as long as you have the money and the means to get to a theatre, there is no reason not to see it.

                Now I’ll just spend a paragraph writing in the point of view of someone who doesn’t like it. Please welcome Paddy the Pessimist.

                Thank you for having me. Oh, how much I hate having fun and generally enjoying life. I saw a kid with an ice cream cone today, so I knocked it out of his hand. Anyway, the play. The cast was too energetic and too good at performing it. The writing had too much comedy and had too much tragedy woven together tighter than a spiders web. Overall the play was just too bad. Bad bad bad. Now excuse me, I have to get myself another spoonful of baby seal.

                There we go. I hope you have an understanding of who would not like the show. I’m sorry if this seems a little slapdash, I just have nothing to say other than go watch it.

…

…

…

Why are you still here? GO WATCH IT!

Musicians Insult Each Other By Jonathan Coombs

                Set aside the Guinness and pay up the tab, as drinking is no longer the only Irish experience in the States. A cheerful band by the name of Danú spent an evening in the Shalin Liu Performance Center playing Irish folk music and exchanging insults to each other. The band has been together for 20 years, creating a delightful chemistry between the members. The band plays all things Irish, ranging from fast jigs to slow emotional ballets.

                Before going to see the concert, I thought that the concert was going to be entirely jigs and up tempo songs to dance to. This can be attributed to the veritable clichés given to the genre from American television and radio, a culture that I grew up well versed in. This does not mean I thought I was going to have a bad time, on the contrary I was looking forward to it. During the concert the jigs did not disappoint, with the band having energy, the crowd clapping along and the intensity of the fiddler. I say that last one not to mean that the fiddler was the only one intensely playing, as all the band members were, just he was the only one that reached a point where part of his instrument broke. He was playing and having a wonderful time when the hairs of his bow started to come undone. This was a non-issue and did not affect his playing.

                While the jigs did seem to be the main crowd pleaser, the concert had other aspects. There were slow songs that had vocals, there were quicker songs that had vocals, and there were a mix of instrumental slow/moderate tempo songs. Out of these the most memorable song was a song about Willy Crotty, a Robin Hood type of man who was executed. This song stays in mind because it was an example of the band involving the audience, as the guitarist/vocalist taught the chorus to the crowd so we could sing along. I’d like to bring up the chemistry between the band members again, in sake of the title of this review. The band had some playful fun by insulting each other and themselves on stage. From talking about their instruments to announcing the intermission there always seemed time to make a joke about someone in the group. The best example is when Oisin McAuley, the banjo player, started describing the uilleann bagpipes. He asked the crowd if people were familiar with the instrument and a few people started clapping. Without pausing he said “Those who are clapping clearly never heard it.”

Right?

Get it?

Maybe you had to be there, I don’t know. If you’re a musician like me you’ll get it.

At the end of the day the question is: is it good? YES! IT IS VERY VERY very VERY GOOD! The only reason I think someone wouldn’t like it is if they don’t like music at all or are just unable to move outside of their preffered genre. But the energy the band has on stage, the tone they set with each other, and the way they get a crowd cheering speaks for itself.

Rating: 10 acoustic guitars out of 10, because even though it seems like a lot it’s just awesome.

Artwork Inside of a Dead Person’s Home by Jonathan Coombs

            While most people believe that entering someone’s home and staring at their belongings is an invasion of privacy, the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum allows you to stare at the private collection of the curator inside of her home. The museum, curated by Isabella Gardner, opened in 1903 and is located in Boston at a house she built to store her collection. In Isabella’s will, she stated that none of the pieces are to be moved from where she had placed them.               

                The collection is quite gorgeous, made up of statues, paintings, mosaics and more. My personal favorite was the courtyard, as it is a work of art constructed out of other works of art. It is a grassy place, with several statues, human and animal, meticulously placed around a tile mosaic that holds the face of medusa. The human statues face medusa while the animals all face north. The air is calming, with everything from sight to smell being authentic and unique. This is just one of several great works to be found in the museum.

                There is one piece, however, that I would like to use this platform to discuss. By discuss, I mean I will tell you what I think, and give you little or no chance to state your own opinion. Ok? In the room titled “The Tapestry Room” there is a piano. The piano is elegant, from the sleek appearance to the gold plated brass forming different patterns along the body and legs of it. This piano is clearly a work of love, the maker did an amazing job creating it. What makes me upset is the misuse of the piano. A collection is made up of paintings and statues among other things, and a collection is meant to be looked at and admired. This is fine, as paintings and statues are made to be looked at. A piano, contrarily, is made to be played. Even if the piano is beautiful, the art it creates comes from the music it produces. The craftsmen clearly put love and effort into the design of the piano, yet, it is not allowed to be touched and played. The curator of the collection did not seem to understand that there is a difference between paintings and instruments. And that partially ruins the museum as a whole for me.

                Now take a second and form an opinion. Disagree with me? I don’t mind.

                Overall, I would recommend the museum to those with time to spare and money burning a hole in your pocket. I don’t advise bringing kids under 7, as there are small dark spaces that an energetic kid will hurt themselves in. As long as you have a basic appreciation of art there is no reason you shouldn’t love this museum. If you don’t share my same opinions, then the piano won’t bother you and ruin the collection. So yes, if you live in the greater Boston area with spare time and nothing to do, consider paying a visit to Isabella Stewart’s home.

                Rating: 8.5 skittles out of 10 skittles, good while it lasts but is quickly consumed and leaves an alright aftertaste.