>
> The music is unbearable, and let's leave it at that. The films,
>however, include her best achievements. Lennon collaborated and
>acted. They sometimes extended what she had already done: "Film No.
>5 (Smile)," in which he simply smiles at the camera in slow motion,
>is connected with her earlier sculpture "A Box of Smile." For
>"Rape" (it's not in the exhibition but will be screened at Japan
>Society), a camera crew followed an unsuspecting woman into her
>apartment, to her mounting alarm. Like "Cut Piece" it was about
>violation, but now Ms. Ono's and her husband's celebrity was the
>obvious subtext.
>
Nice review ,except for one thing. Why are reviewers so ready to call her
music unbearable? Why can't they take the high road and give it the
"challenging" moniker, like how people describe Lou Reed's "Metal Machine
Music?" His is a comparable story - an interesting artist in his own right
who became famous by association with an already famous artist, Warhol in
his case. But his "challenging" records are classics in critical circles.
And his arguably lame records ("The Bells") are just part of the master's
ouvre. Is it because she's a woman? Is it because she is viewed as having
broken up the Beatles?
I checked out the Ono box from the library once to really get a feel for
what her music was about. There are definite hits ("Plastic Ono Band") and
misses (some of the more dated hippie-rock things that I don't remember the
title of) but I think its a stretch to call any of it unbearable. It seems
dismissive rather than critical.
I'm not saying her work needs to be handled with kid gloves because she is
"poor Yoko." I would just like to see her art treated seriously.
Alex
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
