RSS

The Time Of Their Lives

There was a time when the Catskills were the summer destination of thousands of New Yorkers. The bungalows and hotels of the area were known collectively as The Borscht Belt, as the clientele was predominantly Jewish.  Some families came for the entire season (the father coming up for the weekend) others for a week or two.  The heyday was in the 1940s and 1950s, and started to ebb in the 1960s.  Tastes change, the world changed.  Today, middle and working class families rarely vacation together for an entire season.  Private space is far more coveted than communal living and/or dining.  The grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the Catskills take their families to the Hamptons, The Rockaways or down the shore.

A few of the Catskill’s famed physical structures still remain and have been converted for modern use, with varying degrees of success.  But looking at them, it is not possible to even begin to imagine what that world was like.  At least two movies (A Walk on the Moon and Dirty Dancing) capture the mood and social dynamics of both the bungalow world (A Walk on the Moon) and the resort (Dirty Dancing) world of the Catskills.  There were two hallmarks of the Catskill experience; the food and the entertainment.  Comedians, singers, musicians and dancers made a steady and hefty chunk of change by “playing the circuit” every summer.  Few remember these icons of their time.  Perhaps the exceptions would be Woody Allen and Joan Rivers.  Almost everyone who had a hand in creating television (and by “creating” I mean ‘inventing the very concept of programming”) played the Belt; Milton Berle, Carl Reiner, Burns and Allen, Sid Caesar, Molly Berg.  Theatre people played the Catskills too; Betty Garrett, Camden and Green, Molly Picon, Fanny Brice.  All the big names played the Catskills; it was close to the city and it wasn’t a bad way to make some real money.

The entertaining in the Catskills went beyond the stage however.  A tummeler (pronounced: toom-e-ler) was the court jester of their day.  Tummelers were jovial, extroverted fellows whose primary job was to get the party started.  They cajoled people into gaiety, usually while wearing something quirky.  The recent death of Lou Goldstein, a tummeler’s tummeler if there ever was one, may be the last bit of spark to sputter from the Borscht Belt ash.  (You may remember seeing Lou on daytime talk shows in the 1970s.  He was famous for his Simon Says.)

The Catskills (as they once were) are gone and they’re not coming back, but tummelers are still doing quite well.  Have you been to a Bar or Bat Mitzvah in the past 25 years?  You can’t swing a rubber chicken without hitting some festooned guy or gal encouraging middle-aged guests to drop it like it’s hot.  (Twenty-five years ago, Aunt Shirley was being told she was too sexy for her shirt.)  The good news for tummelers is that the gigs are now all year long and women may apply.

It is interesting that the tummeler is the only thing to emerge from the rubble of the Borscht Belt.  Seasonal communities don’t exist in the same manner.  They do exist in an ad hoc manner, but not as a large collective and certainly not with the same degree of familiarity.  Actors, musicians, comedians and the like, have nowhere to earn a stable income while perhaps trying out new material and cultivating new audiences.  Performers were able to work (and play) with their friends and sometimes make enough money to make it through a lean year.  Yes, today some do work cruise lines and casinos, but those are finely choreographed shows and are usually reserved for the boldest faced names on the B list.

There are new ways for entertainers to breakout and find new audiences, online and off.  The proliferation of televised contests assures that a new finely coached belter/wailer will be discovered every week.  Comedians have their pick of new media as well as consistent traditional outlets (someone will always have to prep live audiences to laugh at tepid television shows.)  But what may never be replicated is a place for performers of different genres to perform in the same place at the same time.  Like the Catskill guest experience, it’s the collective that will be missed.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on April 16, 2012 in Cultural Critique, Travel

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Woman v. Woman

Can you hear it?  It’s bubbling up again.  There it is!  The woman wars.  Every so often (usually precisely timed to an election cycle) the media is abuzz with the ‘in the home versus outside the home’ battle.  There are so many flaws in this campaign it’s difficult to know where to start.  But I hardly see why that should slow me down.

  • There is no war – this is completely made up.  Nobody cares what you (or I) are doing with our lives.
  • If I’m wrong (and it’s been known to happen) and there are snips and snarks and snide remarks, they are being made by people who feel insecure about their own choices.  In other words, it is a very biased opining.
  • Semantics matter: “Working inside the home” means a person “works from home” – for money.  It doesn’t make anyone’s efforts less worthy to properly identify them.  Managing a household and perhaps children for no compensation is difficult and unrelenting labor and warrants its own term.  It is confusing to use euphemisms such as “working inside the home” simply because we’ve become allergic to terms such as housewife and haven’t come up with anything better.
  • Where a woman spends the majority of her time has little to do with how she votes.  Women can see the world as a larger place than what is directly in front of them.
  • When is it time for men to be pitted against each other in a fictional sophomoric war?

The whole point of feminism is freedom of choice.  Women should be free to choose the life that works for them at any given point.  Women should also be free from being a subcategory or manipulated to fulfill a stereotype.  Women are not a numerical minority, but historically have had limited access to opportunities.  Our country has a long history of creating fictional fracases within minority groups for the purpose of distraction.  Eventually people do catch on.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on April 12, 2012 in Cultural Critique

 

Tags: , , , , ,

The Lyons – Review

The Lyons is an incredible one-act play conjoined to an impaired second act.  Linda Lavin is simply magnificent as Rita Lyons, a woman (literally) waiting for her husband Ben (Dick Latessa) to die.  Some of the most riotous sidesplitting moments come from the sparring between the two.  Mr. Latessa is wonderfully cast and plays Ben with such candor and sensitivity.  Rita’s dialogue is peppered with such bon mots one can only wonder of the ruin in lesser hands.  But under Mark Brokaw’s direction, Ms. Lavin’s interpretation is simply perfect.  When a play seems to have such perfectly timed humor it’s difficult to review.  If the summary is completely accurate, readers will have a skewed expectation that the reviewer did not have.  How then do you communicate the sophistication and spot on accuracy of the very funny dialogue, without potentially disappointing an audience?  Well, once the curtain rose in the dainty Cort Theatre for the second act, that particular conundrum ebbed.

While Ben and Rita’s adult children (Curtis and Lisa) appear in the hospital room in the first act, their parents are still there to do the heavy lifting.  Curtis (Michael Esper) and Lisa (Katie Jennings Grant) are ‘adult children’ in the truest sense.  They have victimized themselves to the point of utter infantile dysfunction.  (No doubt much will be said about this play (by Nicky Silver) being about a dysfunctional family.  I did not see any signs of a family not interacting effectively.  The adult children have ruined their lives but that does not make the family itself dysfunctional.)  The actors are solid interpreters of very dull characters.  Both “children” are on the other side of 30.  Curtis is incapable of ever having a romantic relationships; ever.  He’s also never supported himself, but that’s almost beside the point.  Lisa is an alcoholic with a self-destructive streak to beat the band.  She seems to have some sort of savior impulse that does not extend to her family and does not seem to have an organic root.  Damaged characters can be interesting, (Ms. Lavin’s previous gig in Other Desert Cities proves that.) These two people are not an example of that particular genre.  Drawing them the way Mr. Silver has, does evoke a response in the audience.  But as it is frowned upon to get up on stage and perform a duo of “snap out of it” smacks, there’s no outlet for the frustration.

The second act opens with a scene in an empty (for sale) apartment.  It is a long awkward scene (following an intensely paced and hysterical first act) that takes far too long to make a minor point, which could have been made off-stage.  According to the Playbill, there is normally a scene preceding this scene; depicting Lisa at Alcoholic Anonymous.  Omitting entire scenes seems a radical move during previews, but no doubt it’s been done before.  In its place (it seems) is a walk-on by dead Ben.  Never a fan of the dead returning for an encore, I found this very jarring.  The Lyons is a starkly realistic play and there’s really no room for ghosts.

It is comforting that the final scene takes place in the hospital room of the first act.  We are reminded of the promise of that first hour.  It must be said that The Lyons has a very satisfying ending.  Surrounded by a different audience I might have actually leapt to my feet and whooped.  The fact that the second act is (currently) in such disarray, should not stand in the way of seeing this play.  Simply to see Linda Lavin and Dick Latessa spar and jar is worth the trip.  It is safe to say that no one will ever play this role like Ms. Lavin does.  She is simply remarkable.  There are beautiful moments and resonating truths throughout the play.  Quite frankly, The Lyons is like most of us; it could use a little improvement.

 
2 Comments

Posted by on April 12, 2012 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Hunger Bane

No doubt you’ve heard of Americans flocking to Canada (virtually or really) for inexpensive pharmaceuticals?  There’s nothing necessarily back-alley about it, it’s just that the name-brand legitimate pharmaceuticals are less expensive in other countries.  But it seems that Canada may also be a destination for surgical procedures that are not exactly F.D.A. approved.  People with life threatening diseases (with resources) have often flocked to other countries in pursuit of treatment not available/legal in this country.  However, the recent surge in maple leaf medical tourism is for weight-loss surgery.

Since 2006 Canadians can have a balloon inserted into their stomachs.  (Think of it as angioplasty for your tummy.)  The balloon makes you feel full.  I’m guessing nobody in the lab screamed “Eureka!” when they developed this device.  To my (very) non-medical self, there is nothing necessarily all that different between this and any other inflatable device one would have inserted somewhere.  Unless there’s some sort of high stakes patent wrangling in play, no doubt this procedure will be available in the lower fifty states soon enough.

But should it?  All weight-loss surgeries involve reducing the amount of food the patient can comfortably ingest.  In essence they are the modern-day equivalent of wiring one’s jaw shut.  The theory behind these “solutions” is that people need to be physically blocked from responding to their desires.  Rarely is putting a lock on the refrigerator door a sustainable weight-loss plan.

What would be most helpful to people, either in concert with surgery or not, is learning to cope with the sensation of hunger.  Hunger is not necessarily a cue to eat.  Needing nutrition is a cue to eat.  Someone who is constantly thirsty shouldn’t just be watered, they should be checked for diabetes.  A person who feels constant hunger needs help determining why and learning to manage the sensation.  Beyond the standard analysis of; are you bored, thirsty, sad, lonely? is addressing the feeling of emptiness that might be present.  The world is not a friendly place for the obese.  Clothes, furniture, seats, etc. are all geared towards average sized people.  Prejudice, mockery and serious health consequences lurk at every turn.  In other words, nobody wakes up and decides that what they really want to be is obese.  It tends to just happen.  Over time.

Since the F.D.A. seems to be dragging its feet in approving the balloon method, I’d like to think it’s because they are giving serious thought to reforming the protocols of weight-loss surgery in general.  While it is a slippery slope to mandate counseling before medical procedures, we do have precedent.  Since its invention, a person can not undergo gender reassignment surgery without structured preoperative psychological counseling and clearance.  (No doubt this protocol was created by male doctors who had their own issues about loss.)

If we agree that obesity is a problem, and that people are entitled to pursue good health, than we need to stop offering quick fixes in a vacuum.  There is no such thing as any surgery without risk.  But by ignoring the psychological side of the patient we are adding the risk of failure to the mix.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on April 11, 2012 in Cultural Critique, Well-Being

 

Tags: , , , ,

I’ll Take Manhattan*

Metropolis is brimming over with sights and sounds.  Flashing lights, street musicians and traffic meld together to form something close to a hum.  The density of the island means often there is no rhyme or reason to architectural placement.  Soaring glass office towers loom over the Art Deco Radio City Music Hall.  New condominium buildings cast a shadow over original mercantile buildings in the seaport.

The diversity of talent, interest and priorities in the city lead to incongruous surprises at every turn.  Sitting (or more aptly, “wedged”) on a seat in a subway car, feet often need to be lifted to accommodate rolling bottles or discarded lunches. One is surrounded by people at their very worst (which is to be expected in a can in a tunnel from which one can escape every 2 1/2 minutes.) Amidst all this, there is sometimes a poem (versus an advertisement urging one to sue someone else) on the wall.  Often the stations themselves are festooned with mini-mosaics.  On a bad day these reminders of our artistic potential only makes things more confusing (we are a species that can create, and evidently appreciate, such beauty, but we can’t move out of the doorway or help someone with a stroller?)

But it is actually these very incongruities which make for an interesting environment and lead to lovely surprises.  The most magical places in our fair city are practically silent.  This is the ideal time of year to discover a new spot.  Quiet blocks, uptown and down, are lined with brownstones and trees are heavy with flowering blooms.  If you look closely (or have the right app) you can discover who lived in the spot you are standing.  Being amidst beauty or charm is always a boost, but standing on history is flat out encouraging.

As we strive to keep up in life (whatever that means to you) it is inspiring and a bit soothing, to consider those who came before.  So much of what we find challenging or distracting is simply old news. It can feel overwhelming to trod ground that is only new to you, but it makes it a bit easier when you consider all that came before.  Whether wide open space, or concrete canyons, there are endless spots to lose oneself and find something inspiring if even for just a moment.

*Rogers and Hart (1925)

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on April 10, 2012 in Cultural Critique

 

Tags: , , , , ,