"We await your views, " he wrote, earlier this year about a somewhat controversial subject concerning Monte Carlo. He wanted to remain in the background. I only share this because it was one of the nicest things ever said to me -- and by a man whose background in the circus I admire and respect. He and I might differ on things, and both could be right. A review is only one person's opinion. Yes, I felt flattered, but also maybe appreciated for what I have tried to do, ever since first getting published in the white Tops in my fourteenth year -- a review not without a little nit picking, its mere publication perhaps codifying my critical nature and giving me sanction to proceed.
Yes, for some, I am too negative. Maybe a fair shot. Trouble is, I have a hard time spinning, that is in turning out circus notcies. Were I employed by the same show to work press and ballyhoo,I would switch roles and try doing my best to play up the positives, as I did for Sid Kellner's James Bros. Circus and, a few years later, for his George Matthew's Great London. "Peerless performers from Piccadilly!" I shamelessly promised.
Circus remains to many an idyllic subject, in the league with Easter and the Fourth of July -- a holiday for children, beyond the serious scrutiny imposed on the other arts. After all, a child is seeing for the first time what we have come to expect for generations. We love to be ballyhooed, as we love to be courted. Yes, favor and flatter us with grandiose visions --- we know what comes to town will probably not live up to them all, but oh how glorious those posters! How thrilling the sights!
Reviewing circus has, believe it or not, never been more challenging or fun or interesting for me. I like facing another test -- how to approach another likely variation on the "ageless delight"in the age of human-only spectacles.
I only wish there were more people in the circus community willing to put out reviews. It would be healthier for everyone.
HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!
No comments:
Post a Comment