NY Times Journalist's "Body Shaming" in 'Smokey Joe's Cafe' Review - Page 3
NY Times Journalist's "Body Shaming" in 'Smokey Joe's Cafe' Review
#50NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 8:25am
In this Age of Offense, I frankly admit that I find it hard to keep up with all the things that offend people. I know some folks who are offended by the presence of bicycles on the streets of New York. So I suppose the philosophy I'm tending to adapt is "By all means, be offended, talk about it, but it may be best not to expect me to fall into step with your expectations."
Updated On: 7/24/18 at 08:25 AM
#51NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 9:18am
Some people seem to have "being offended" as a hobby nowadays.
Maybe the journalist could have walked on eggshells a bit more, and put on her velvet gloves, but the journalist did nothing wrong in my opinion. She explains herself well, gives examples and finds certain things unflattering. I see no reason why she can't express herself about what she sees onstage and why she should be somehow forced to feel that every body and costume looks equally wonderful to her or that she has to lie about it whenever it is not the case.
It would be a crazy world if we were to direct people's opinions like that. The urge for wanting to do this is the real problem. It is the opinion of the journalist, nothing more, nothing less. And not liking her opinion has nothing to do with body shaming. Actually, the people using this term are body shaming. I fear that in the near future, when the millennials take over, who grew up with a figurative pencil eraser in their hand, to erase everything from life that slightly offends them, it will get even worse.
If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. This is showbusiness people.
#52NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 9:35am
It seems people love to blame the current generation or a modern way of thinking as if it hasn't always been considered in poor taste to comment on a woman's weight. That's just basic decency. The comment should have been made without noting the actor's size.
I wish more people on this forum had empathy.
#53NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 9:50am
jv92 said: "I agree with all of that, but guess what? Without social media, this would have passed over, Umphress would have gone on being terrific and no one would have cared about this nonsense or thought about her appearance."
A tweet from Alysha Umphress as of last night -
"Last night I cried myself to sleep. This morning I woke up mad as hell. Tonight I feel completely overwhelmed and extremely grateful from the outpouring of love and support from this amazing community (and beyond)! Thank you all from the bottom of my heart. You’re all FEROSH."
So I'm guessing she would have cared, but with social media outrage - she feels re-validated in her own body and her art, which will help her to go on being terrific.
Caption: Every so often there was a rare moment of perfect balance when I soared above him.
#54NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 9:59am
As a reaction to the last 2 posters, I think the reaction of this actress it is a little too much exploiting the victim role and wanting to receive empathy.
Her reaction has nothing to do with what the journalist actually said. It's completely out of line.
It reminds me of certain groups of people wanting to take down the show America's next top model with "not every person in the world looks like the contestants, so it's not fair for all people" as an argument. Everything will always offend somebody. We can not erase everything.
#55NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 10:00am
Dave, your instrument has like three notes and we've heard all the possible combinations.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
#56NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 10:04am
Still better than your 1 note reactions.
And the 1 note victim role fans for that matter.
#58NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 10:11am
My favorite assertion in this thread is that Liza Minnelli and Madeline Kahn are paragons of stability in the face of the pressures of this business and the horrible comments made about them in the press. I mean...
John Simon is a hateful critic. I was in a cast (there were only five of us) and he wrote 'It's a cast bereft of talent and looks.' So...not only were we bad, we were ugly. Nothing makes me happier than the fact that his career has gone the way of the dodo. And when he has finally left this earth, I'll say 'Death...go ahead and be a little proud today.'
#59NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 10:13am
Dave28282 said: "Still better than your 1 note reactions.
And the 1 note victim role fans for that matter."
You were more fun when you were trying to tell people that they didn't understand the nuances of Glee.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
behindthescenes2
Stand-by Joined: 7/30/12
#60NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 10:28am
Okay so the NYT hired or assigned a writer that isn't necessarily sensitive or tactful. Yes the wonderful performer is large - as if that needed to be pointed out unless you are blind, in which case, after reading the review, even the blind now know this fact. It doesn't need to be pointed out, she knows she is large, and so does the audience. What does need to be pointed out is that the costume designer is untalented and unskilled at adapting styles to fit every body type and adapt the look them to compliment the performer and keep the general look that has been agreed upon. For a performer, any criticism about or surrounding their performance or appearance is taken immediately to heart whether it is a direct comment on their talent or not - that's the performer "Id". Meanwhile, what is truly lazy is the director and/or producer not demanding a better look and design - "Oh well, what can you do with a fat performer other than this? There body get's in the way." A real designer's job is to design a look and adapt those imperfections that come with the talent and make the best of it." It is the same thing when wigs are put on a large female performer that doesn't balance her body, unless it is meant to be ugly or funny, because otherwise it is a tragedy and so often you see wig designers on broadway and opera guilty of that laziness. So, the valuable lesson here is for the future that this performer must insist upon the best from others when she performs in a show, be it fellow actor or designer and accept nothing less, because she brings only her best. Crying all night solves nothing except emotional release, and her anger really should be to the musical creative team for allowing such an easy criticism to take away from her performance, not the critic. Criticizing the critics creative or journalistic writing talents are left for others in that field to be determined. If everyone boycotted or screamed every time a critic remarked upon personal appearance in a show, film or opera.....please. If you really want to see a critic go after a performer, I suggest you look back at Frank Rich's critique of "Secret Garden," I am sure Mr. MP can relate.
#61NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 10:39am
I think there are two major problems in this thread:
1) The misconception that Hughes' comment was about Umphress' size (rather than the perception that the costumer dressed her unflatteringly), and
2) that "large" is, de facto, an insult. "Large" is an innocuous adjective; if one assume that it is by nature a pejorative term, one merely perpetuates the unexamined mainstream belief that "large" = "bad," when, in fact, many people find "large" to be their ideal.
#62NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 10:45am
Critics have judged actors by their appearance since forever and it has always been wrong. Even positive comments. If you've worked on a show and had it happen, it's always glaringly obvious how inappropriate it is - in fact, sometimes it's even more obvious when it is positive.
As for the argument it was actually a criticism of the design, that goes out the window when the critic proffers a better costume as being the one worn by a thinner cast member.
And let's remember critics at the Times are paid. And they receive free tickets. So being "sensitive" is least thing they could be. They're being paid by their editors and in-kind by the production for their writing ability. The standard for them should be high.
#63NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 10:45am
newintown said: "I think thereare twomajor problems in this thread:
1) The misconception that Hughes' comment was about Umphress' size (rather than the perception that the costumer dressed her unflatteringly), and
2) that "large" is,de facto, an insult. "Large" is an innocuous adjective; if oneassume that it is by nature a pejorative term, one merely perpetuates the unexaminedmainstream belief that "large" = "bad," when, in fact, many people find "large" to be their ideal."
The idea of what is or isn't "flattering" in this context is directly tied to a perception of how a larger body should (or shouldn't) be dressed. That is the issue people are taking with Laura Collins-Hughes's comment and how she phrases her argument. She offers no explanation of how the costume in question looked "especially unflattering" other than, to her, that it didn't look right on Umphress's large body.
"You travel alone because other people are only there to remind you how much that hook hurts that we all bit down on. Wait for that one day we can bite free and get back out there in space where we belong, sail back over water, over skies, into space, the hook finally out of our mouths and we wander back out there in space spawning to other planets never to return hurrah to earth and we'll look back and can't even see these lives here anymore. Only the taste of blood to remind us we ever existed. The earth is small. We're gone. We're dead. We're safe."
-John Guare, Landscape of the Body
#64NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 10:58am
A Director said: "Yes, the comments are "body shaming." As for the further explanation from Laura Collins-Hughes, perhaps she miswrote. Did she attend the Donald Trump School For Theatre Reviewing? I read other reviews and no other critic had a problem with the costumes!
As for some of the postings on this thread, I could give a rat's ass about what John Simon wrote years ago. <>.
I don't give a rat's ass about comments by French Designers or what clothes Lane Bryant and others are selling now. The comments have nothing to do with costume designs!
OlBlueEyes, you don't know a thing about Alysha Umphress' health and if she is or isn't overweight, <>! <>!"
What was the last production that you directed? The Three Stooges Join The Army? If you’re willing to deny that one can tell if another is overweight by looking at him or her, to support your agenda, nothing much can be done with you.
”Body Shaming” is a fairly new term, but most of what it preaches is just common civility. You don’t point to a guy in public and announce that his nose is huge. You don’t tell a girl that her legs aren’t good enough for her to ever make the chorus, and you don’t call a girl out for being overweight if she’s carrying around an extra ten pounds.
But you go too far when you reassure everyone who is obese that they are fine the way they when they are actually putting themselves at risk for serious health problems that they don’t want any part of.
I’m not addressing this to Umphress because I’ve only seen one photo of her and I don’t think that she is dangerously overweight right now.
As always, just my humble opinion.
ViniFromBrazil
Stand-by Joined: 1/26/16
#65NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 11:28am
Jeez. Sometimes I think some of you guys pretend to be insensitive just too cause drama at the boards.
It was a snarky comment and the lady was offended. Whatever the critic tried to achieve, she did it poorly, and that's all.
If ir were only a matter of interpretation, well, ok. But the actress herself went on to say she was offended. What the hell are you arguing about?
yfs
Featured Actor Joined: 11/1/13
#66NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 11:44am
behindthescenes2 said: "What does need to be pointed out is that the costume designer is untalented and unskilled at adapting styles to fit every body type and adapt the look them to compliment the performer and keep the general look that has been agreed upon. For a performer, any criticism about or surrounding their performance or appearanceis taken immediately to heart whether it is a direct comment on their talent or not - that's the performer "Id". Meanwhile, what is truly lazy is the director and/or producer not demanding a better look and design - "Oh well, what can you do with a fat performer other than this? There body get's in the way."
This is foolishness. I don't know how "behind the scenes" this poster actually is, but actually, behind the actual scenes, this costume is a collaboration between the designer and the performer, guided by and approved by the director, and signed off on by the producer. But the performer has a key say in what she will and won't wear, and what makes her happy and comfortable to wear so that she can deliver her most confident possible performance. Alejo Vietti is a top designer with many credits for many shows in which he has dressed many men and women of various shapes and sizes, and many of them brilliantly. Say what you want about this performer in this particular costume, but I can guarantee that laziness didn't enter into the equation, nor lack of talent. This was what Ms. Umphress wanted to wear, as conceived and built and altered and revised over time by Mr. Vietti. She even said in her response to Ms. Collins-Hughes, that she thought she looked great in the costume. So let's not be ridiculous.
#67NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 12:58pm
Beaver: Gee, Mom, why did you say you liked the blouse and that you would wear it to the concert?
June: Well, Beaver, you're right. I shouldn't have told you I would wear the blouse and not worn it. I told you I liked the blouse because you bought it for me and I didn't want to hurt your feelings.
Beaver: Isn't that like lying, Mom?
June: In a way, Beaver but let's say a man was walking down the street and he was ugly. You wouldn't say to the man, you're ugly. You'd want to spare his feelings. Do you understand what I'm trying to say, Beaver?
Beaver: You mean you told me you liked the blouse I got you for your birthday when you didn't because you love me?
June: That's right, Beaver. I hope some day when you grow up, you'll forgive me and really understand why I did what I did.
Beaver: That's OK, mom. I think I understand now.
VintageSnarker
Broadway Legend Joined: 1/30/15
#68NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 1:54pm
Again, I agree that what the critic said came across as poorly worded and offensive.
But I don't get how I'm suddenly on team "obesity is an epidemic" for making the very body positive point that designers should dress all bodies like they are beautiful and worth of being seen. That means not using peplums and empire waists to avoid VBO. It means long sleeves and long skirts and shawls aren't necessary to shroud a larger body's shame. I wish this moment didn't just open up a dialogue about what it is appropriate about another person's body (especially in a professional capacity) but also the standard that should be demanded from designers.
behindthescenes2
Stand-by Joined: 7/30/12
#70NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 2:54pm
it isn't foolishness and many, many performers have no say so in the design - it is laziness and inattentiveness and it is obvious when a critic feels compelled to comment upon it. Just because a performer collaborates or says I want to look like this or that, doesn't mean it's in the best interest of the character or the actor - get real. It could be not wanting to be critical in a moment during the design process when it's easier to make the decision and gently guide the actor "the first cut is the deepest" as the song says than these 1000 cuts she experiences now.
#71NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 3:12pm
I just read the full review of Smokey Joe's and had I not know about the "controversy" I would have thought that the costume designer didn't make costumes that flattered all the actors. The reviewer said the actor was "bigger" than the other women on stage. I don't know the actor or have ever seen her so I would have taken it as she was bigger than the other women, again, with no context as to what this actor looks like.
I wouldn't consider it body shaming but I'm not the one she's writing about. The reviewer was clearly calling out the costumer designer's ability or lack of ability to dress the entire cast.
(as a side note I looked up the review from Frank Rich on the Secret Garden. YIKES, although Rich was clearly commenting on MP's acting style and choices and not on this biological features)
#72NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 3:16pm
behindthescenes2 said: "it isn't foolishness and many, many performers have no say so in the design - it is laziness and inattentiveness and it is obvious when a critic feels compelled to comment upon it. Just because a performer collaborates or says I want to look like this or that, doesn't mean it's in the best interest of the character or the actor - get real. It could be not wanting to be critical in a moment during the design process when it's easier to make the decision and gently guide the actor"the first cut is the deepest" as the song says than these 1000 cuts she experiences now."
Exactly, I wonder what these victim role fans/supporters, who agree with her blaming the journalist actually think of what you describe, and if they realize at all that the biggest part of this is how she approaches this and most of all how the creative team handled in the first place.
Unfortunately my posts got deleted when I pointed that out, and I was wrongly accused of shaming her too, but these people are completely missing the point.
It really is nowadays like when you just scream and be offended, whoever you point out as the black sheep gets the blame. It's ridiculous. The overall situation is so much more than that.
I mean, if she is really standing hand in hand with the costume designer etc, pointing an angry, offended finger to a random journalist, not wanting to see the whole situation, posting it on twitter, receiving lot of praise for your cries and then be content again? I'm sorry, but people like this need a reality check. That's what I meant by my previous post about exploiting the victim role. It really is how the new generation is taught to think and act and it is such a lame and easy way to not have to confront anything in life. It really is avoiding the point of every situation.
What is her goal here? Silencing everybody with a certain opinion about things? Wanting people to lie if the opinion doesn't suit her? Or is it having a talk with the creative team, and try to find out how this could happen and trying to make the right choices?
Or is she actually agreeing with the creative team and costumes and very content with it? And just angry that a journalist mentioned anything about unflattering because she disagrees?
#73NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 3:33pm
I agree the critic was tactless. However I'm surprised Alysha Umphress said she "cried herself to sleep." I'm sure people in the business have told her way, way worse. That doesn't justify their actions but fat shaming in the entertainment community is as common as lines of coke. I mean, Joan Rivers made an entire career out of it.
#74NY Times Journalist's
Posted: 7/24/18 at 3:42pm
Kad said: "You were more fun when you were trying to tell people that they didn't understand the nuances of Glee."
Thanks! You were never fun unfortunately.
Glee had some wonderfully, well written, interesting scenes about criticism in this business.
