Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« Make the Call | RIP Vern Fonk »

Monday, June 5, 2006

I Second That Boo, Bill T. Jones

Posted by on June 5 at 9:32 AM

According to the (S.C.) State’s Spoleto Festival blog, the choreographer-performer Bill T. Jones last week returned to the stage after a performance to call out a guy who was booing his performance. When shouting “You come on down” twice didn’t elicit a response, Jones resorted to the macho “I dare you to come down,” and a silver-haired man appeared at the footlights. Somebody else in the audience, most of whom had prostrated themselves in the now-perfunctory standing ovation after Jones’ anti-war piece Blind Date, called out to Jones, “Let it go. A statement was made,” and then said, as if he, too, were being bullied by the dancer, “It was great.” “I know it was great,” the famously self-righteous Jones said.

Shouted the silver-haired man, “I disagree. I’m giving you my message.” “What do you disagree with?” responded Jones. A choreographer named a MacArthur genius, Jones danced “Blind Date” in a suit, sometimes barefoot, often as counterpoint to a soldier, in a multi-media work clearly anti-war, anti-dogma and not so fond of patriotism, either. The man leaned further over the balcony rail and announced, “I think it was a cliche disguised not very cleverly as third-rate art. “Boo!” Somewhere in this a wit yelled, “Four more years.” … To the man booing, Jones called out, “You’re hiding behind your politics.” He said the boos were about the politics of the art, not the art itself. He got the last word, something along the lines of, You stay out of my art; I’ll stay out of your politics.

In response to this, the State’s writer Claudia Smith Brinson wrote, “Booing is not intended as a conversation opener. And while the community agreement at sports events is to cheer and boo and do The Wave, the agreement is different at art events. … As Jones noted, people who don’t like an art performance ordinarily just leave. When Jones tried to force a dialogue, he lost some ground. But the effort was doomed, anyway. People who boo don’t want a conversation. They want to hear themselves boo.”

First of all, was this silver-haired scourge actually a rabid right-wing Bushhead, or did Jones just assume he was? If he ever came out as one, Brinson didn’t report it. What’s quoted above is the extent of what came out about the booer in his exchange with Jones. And while Brinson interviewed Jones later”As a member of society, I feel hamstrung … I make works about my feelings,” she didn’t bother talking to the booer, who might have had something more interesting to say than Jones’s self-involved hooey.

Jones’s logic is that since he feels disenfranchised in the world, he gets to disenfranchise anybody who disagrees with him in his theater: Yeah, that’s progress. Plus, this idea that sports fans can boo but arts fans shouldn’t is ridiculous, and is part of what makes the arts seem so bloodless. When people are given the options of outright dismissal (Jones’ talk of displeased audience members who “just leave,” thereby getting out of the hair of artists who have the more important task after a performance of soaking in the audience’s worship) or sycophantic panting, who can be surprised when they choose dismissal?

Bill T. Jones, you’re a coward.


CommentsRSS icon

One time in Chicago I booed actor Brian Bedford in a hideous, self-absorbed performance of "School for Wives" (fer instance, for three acts NO ONE picked up prop someone had clumsily dropped on the stage in Act 1). One single, short "Boo" at the curtain call. People around me were having heart attacks. 'My God, why are you booing?' Um, because the whole show, and especially BB's perfunctory performance, stunk. This is the flip side of the Tyranny of the Standing Ovation (paraphrasing the NYT here), which has become meaningless. We're not supposed to say Boo and we are supposed to stand for anything presented to us. Phooey. Take a risk with an audience. Be genuine.

agreed, booing should be brought back to all arts. I mean, the best moments in music history involve boos. art should be no more impervious to this simplest form of criticism than sports.

Ms. Graves,
Sounds like Mr. Jones needs to thicken his skin, just a bit. It also sounds like the booing gentleman is a member of the Culture Police. That caveat aside, I would hazard that people have some "right" to be rude - but they can't then be shocked if someone calls them on it - on either side of the footlights; I wholly disagree that just because something is permitted by sports fans, it's wonderful to spread the joy and behave similarly in all public venues; and as a critic yourself, beware the prejudgement and assumption that performing artists necessarily need to 'soak in the audience's worship or sycophantic panting.'
Some of us truly don't.

booing is ok. but exactly how did jones "disenfranchise" his audience, or the person booing, by getting angry?

Black performers have always had to deal with racist audiences. Bill T Jones was correct in calling out a racist audience member. No one should have to hear boos just because of their skin color.

Laurence Ballard: So you're saying the boo doesn't belong equally to the arts and to sports in history? I disagree. The arts has its own foothold on that form of expression, which is anything but uncivil: it is a simple collective representation of disagreement, much more suited to a theater or concert hall than a riot, and those haven't been unheard of. But I would agree with your observation that my characterization of Jones doesn't apply to all performers, and I should have made that clearer. He's particularly bull-headed, and his blend of rage and righteousness are uniquely unpleasant.

Ms. Graves,
To answer your query: No. I didn't say anything about booing in the arts with respect to history. And I, for one, am grateful we've moved beyond heaving vegetables at the stage when the audience doesn't like a given performance. Boos are better.
As an audience member, booers irk the hell out me - during performance, not the calls. Why? Because suddenly the performance has added a new performer. A new cast member whose sole opinion is so important, so vital, so justified that it must take all focus and become part of the show. I may be enjoying the performance. The people around me may be enjoying the performance. But this self-styled opinion of this critic and Culture Policeperson is now ascendant and trumps all attentions. It suddenly becomes all about him. Or her. My expensive ticket - or more importantly, the verisimilitude lost in a live performance - doesn't include that price.

I love the booer's criticism: “I think it was a cliche disguised not very cleverly as third-rate art. Boo!”

I think Jones' retort, that he'll stay out of his critic's politics, if the critic stays out of his art, is ludicrous. He's performing his art in a public space. His audience has a right to criticize him for it, no matter if they're criticizing the work itself or his political message. If Jones wants others to "stay out of [his] art," then he shouldn't present it to an audience.

Of course audiences have a 'right to criticize' bad art in public places. Contact the artist directly, talk to management, write a letter to the editor - rail away. Organize a boycott. Start a blog. This approach begins a dialogue. Always remember those same public spaces are shared spaces, and I don't wish to have my experience marred by some nitwit in the audience who can't keep their mouth shut. Again, I didn't spend hard-earned money to listen to an ego-challenged booer make themselves the center of attention. This event isn't about *them*. If one must, then be rude at the calls, afterwards. But not during the performance. And to conflate the behavior of some sports fans who boo at ballplayers at a stadium to players in a performance hall is ludicrous; sports are binary. The arts are not a win/lose situation - quite the opposite: an abstraction by definition and execution. I have been bored spitless by any number of performances; I have applauded feebily at the end, and then moved on.

I suppose one has a right to fart in church when the pastor serves up flatulent platitudes, for that matter - but don't be surprised when your nearby fellow congregants take offense at such an ill- conceived and timed retort. There is a time and a place for opinions to be heard.

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).