Dilettante's Diary

Mar 17/10

Who Do I Think I Am?
Index: Movies
Index: Writing
Index: Theatre
Index: Music
Index: Exhibitions
Artists' Blogs
Index: TV, Radio and Misc
NOVEMBER 3, 2023
Aug 2, 2023
July 4, 2023
Apr 21, 2023
Feb 10, 2023
Jan 24, 2023
Jan 11, 2023
Dec 2, 2022
July 26, 2022
July 4, 2022
June 2, 2022
March 25, 2022
March 11, 2022
Feb 14, 2022
Nov 19, 2021
Oct 2021
Sept 16, 2021
July 21, 2021
July 15, 2021
June 11, 2021
Apr 23, 2021
March 12, 2021
Feb 13, 2021
Jan 5, 2021
December 2020
Autumn Mysteries 2020
Aug 12/20
May 25/20
Apr 30/20
March 12/20
Dec 6/19
Jan 29/20
Nov 10/19
Oct 24/19
Sept 30/19
Aug 2/19
June 22/19
May 26/19
Apr 22/19
Feb 23/19
Jan 15/19
Dec 20/18
Dec 3/18
Oct 3/18
Sept 9/18
Aug 9/18
July 19/18
June 2/18
May 14/18
Apr 23/18
Feb 22/18
Dec 13/17
Nov 22/17
Nov 3/17
Oct 5/17
Sept 21/17
Aug 3/17
June 16/17
Mar 21/17
Feb 26/17
Feb 9/17
Jan 30/17
Dec 19/16
Dec 11/16
Nov 20/16
Sept 17/2016
Aug 21/16
July 17/16
June 29/16
June 2/16
Apr 23/16
Feb 28/16
Feb 1/16
Jan 27/16
Winter Reading 2016
Dec 15/15
Nov 19/15
Fall Reading 2015
Oct 29/15
Sept 16/15
Sept 4/15
July 29, 2015
July 1, 2015
June 7/15
Summer Reading 2015
May 19/15
Apr 30/15
Apr 19/15
Spring Reading 2015
March 23/15
March 11/15
Winter Reading 2015
Feb 20/15
Feb 8/15
Jan 29/15
Jan 20/15
Highs 'N Lows of 2014
Dec 19/14
Dec 2/14
Nov 10/14
Oct 29/14
Fall Reading 2014
Sept 17/14
Summer Reading 2014
Aug 22/14
Aug 8/14
July 11/14
June 16/14
May 28/14
Apr 30/14
Apr 16/14
Apr 2/14
March 21, 2014
March 13/14
Feb 11/14
Sept 23/13
Favourite Works: 2004-2013
Two Novels by BARBARA PYM
Sabbath's Theater by PHILIP ROTH
July 18/13
Summer Reading 2013
June 19/13
May 30/13
Spring Reading 2013
May 10/13
Apr 18/13
Mar 29/13
March 14, 2013
The Artist Project 2013
Feb 25/13
Winter Reading 2013
Feb 7/13
Jan 22/13
Jan 12/13
A Toast to 2012
Dec 19/12
Dec 16/12
Dec 4/12
Fall Reading 2012
Nov 17/12
Nov 6/12
Art Toronto 2012
Oct 23/12
Oct 4/12
Sept 28/12
Summer Reading 2012
Aug 26/12
Aug 8/12
Toronto Outdoor Art Exhibition 2012
July 14/12
June 28/12
May 27/12
May 20/12
May 4/12
La Traviata: Met's Live HD Version
Apr 21/12
Apr 6/12
Mar 22/12
Mar 9/12
The Artist Project 2012
Academy Awards Show 2012
Feb 26/12
Feb 11/12
Jan 23/12
Jan 15/12
Jan 7/12
Dec 20/11
Dec 12/11
Nov 27/11
Nov 18/11
Nov 7/11
Art Toronto 2011
Oct 22/11
Oct 17/11
Sept 30, 2011
Summer Reading 2011
Aug 11/11
July 28, 2011
July 19/11
TOAE 2011
June 25/11
June 20/11
June 2/11
May 14/11
Apr 29/11
Toronto Art Expo 2011
Apr 11/11
March 24/11
The Artist Project 2011
March 11/11
Feb 23/11
Feb 7/11
Jan 21/11
Jan 17/11
Dec 21/10
Dec 6/10
Nov 11/10
Fall Reading 2010
Oct 22/10
Summer Reading 2010
Aug 9/10
Aug 2/10
TOAE 2010
July 16/10
The Shack
June 27/10
June 3/10
May 5/10
April 17/10
Mar 28/10
Mar 17/10
The Artist Project 2010
Toronto Art Expo 2010
Feb 22/10
Feb 3/10
Notables of '09
Jan 11/10
Dec 31/09
Dec 17/09
How Fiction Works
Nov 24/09
Sex for Saints
Nov 11/09
Oct 22/09
Oct 6/09
Sept 18/09
Aug 23/09
July 31/09
July 17/09
Toronto Outdoor Art Exhibition 2009
Toronto Fringe 2009
Zen Wrapped In Karma Dipped In Chocolate
June 28/09
June 6/09
Myriad Mysteries 2009
May 10/09
CBC Radio -- "The New Two"
April 14/09
March 24/09
Toronto Art Expo '09
March 1/09
The Jesus Sayings
Feb 8/09
Jan 26/09
Jan 10/09
Stand-outs of 2008
Dec 24/08
Dec 4/08
Nov 16/08
Oct 27/08
Oct 16/08
Sept 26/08
Sept 5/08
July 21/08
Toronto Outdoor Art Exhibition 08
July 5/08
June 23/08
June 4/08
May 18/08
May 4/08
April 16/08
March 26/08
Head to Head
Feb 26/08
Feb 13/08
Jan 30/08
Jan 17/08
Notables of 2007
Dec 30/07
Dec 8/07
Nov 22/07
Oct 25/07
Oct 4/07
Sept 18/07
Aug 29/07
Aug 8/07
Summer Mysteries '07
July 20/07
June 28/07
June 8/07
May 21/07
May 2/07
April 14/07
March 23/07
Toronto Art Expo 2007
March 8/07
Feb 16/07
Feb 2/07
Jan 24/07
Notables of 2006
Dec 27/06
December 11/06
November 28/06
Nov 8/06
October 14/06
Sept 22/06
Ring Psycho (Wagner on CBC Radio)
Sept 6/06
August 12/06
July 18/06
June 27/06
June 9/06
May 23/06
Me In Manhattan
May 2/06
April 12/06
March 17/06
March 9/06
Feb 16/06
Feb 1/06
Jan 11/06
Dec 31/05
Dec 12/05
Nov 25/05
Nov 4/05
Oct 24/05
Sept 7/05
Sept 16/05
Sept 1/05
Aug 10/05
July 21/05
Me and the Jays
July 10/05
June 15/05
May 18/05
April 27/05
April 18/05
April 8/05
March 21/05
Feb 28/05
Feb 21/05
Feb 4/05
Jan 28/05
Jan 19/05
Jan 5/05
About Me
Dec 20/04
Dec 5/04
OTHER STUFF: Art Exhibitions, Concerts, etc.

The date above is the date on which the page was started. As new reviews are added, they will appear towards the top of the page and the older reviews will move further down.

Reviewed here: The White Ribbon (Movie); Fire Sale (Mystery); A Romance on Three Legs: Glenn Gould's Obsessive Quest for the Perfect Piano (Biography); Killing Floor (Mystery)

The White Ribbon (Movie) written and directed by Michael Haneke; starring Christian Friedel, Leonie Benesch, Ulrich Tukur, Ursina Lardi, Burghart Klaussner, Steffi Khnert, Maria-Victoria Dragus, Leonard Proxauf, Josef Bierbichler, Rainer Bock, Susanne Lothar

Beforehand, all I knew about this movie was that the New Yorker’s Anthony Lane liked it and NOW’s Norman Wilner didn’t. Also, that it was set in the period just before the First World War, somewhere in Germany.

In a very small village, as it turns out. The Baron and the Baroness preside from their estate. Among other households are those of the pastor, the doctor, the baron’s steward, the midwife and various farmers. It’s all told from the point of view of the young school teacher (Christian Friedel), looking back in later years, as an older man in voice-over narration.

One of the earliest scenes features a harvest celebration with all the villagers gathered for a feast under the benevolent gaze of the baron. But things are not as bucolic as they seem. Strange accidents have been occurring. The doctor was thrown from his horse when it tripped over a wire suspended across its path. A woman worker has died in a suspicious accident. Kids are found tied up and tortured A barn goes up in flames. A pet bird ends up on the wrong end of a pair of scissors. A farmer commits suicide.

The term that leaps out at you from practically every frame is "Bergmanesque". And that’s not just because of the black and white photography. There are the silences and the long, slow takes. The brooding looks from various characters. The ominous mood. The sense that something mysterious and almost ritualistic is taking place under the surface calm. But the most explicit reference to Ingmar Bergman comes in the person of the repressive pastor (Burghart Klaussner). The way this guy manages his children makes Baron von Trapp look like Robin Williams in one of his more clownish roles. The pastor’s kids have to formally kiss his hand and their mother’s before bed each night. When they’ve been naughty, the pastor forces them – both boys and girls – to wear a big white ribbon for a year by way of reminding them of their obligation to preserve their innocence and purity. And, of course, the adolescent eldest son (Leonard Praxauf) needs must have his hands tied to the bed during the night, lest he give in to the temptation to damage those "most sensitive" nerves, against the abuse of which God has placed "sacred barriers".

By which point you’re beginning to wonder if this melodrama, with its Gothic overtones, is some sort of parody of Bergmanesque gloom and dread. If it’s not working for you, that about sums it up. For me, though, the film’s virtues earned close attention.

Several scenes, for instance, stand out as marvels of cinematic art, to my way of thinking. Take the one where a farmer sits by the body of his wife, who is being laid out after being killed in a barn accident. Through the doorway of a room, we see only her lower body and his back and shoulders but we hear his sobs. That’s so much more effective than seeing him face-on. Another scene, shot from the middle distance, shows a funeral cortege leaving a farmyard, with the coffin on a horse-drawn wagon. A man approaches. Before taking his place in the procession, he greets the other mourners one by one. The way each of them reacts to him tells a whole story. We don’t hear any words. The body language says it all.

And then there are the scenes that not only offer fascinating glimpses of the way other people lived at other times but also manage to keep you wondering what the hell is going to happen from one second to another. Like the one where the school teacher is trying to court a young woman (Leonie Benesch) while her seven younger siblings look on from the other side of the table. And then, his encounter with her parents in the formal asking for her "hand": as each line of dialogue unfolds, you’re kept in suspense as to what the next one will be. Same with a drive in the country in a horse-drawn carriage, when the teacher proposes a detour so that he and the young woman can enjoy a picnic by the water. Shy but stubborn, she resists quietly. Will he insist? Will she yield? Will he back down? You’re kept guessing. As for his actual proposal of marriage and the woman’s response, the simplicity and verbal economy reminded me of one of the classics of the genre: that in Louis Hmon’s portrait of French Canadian pioneer life, Maria Chapdelaine.

For a more fiery type of drama, there’s a marital battle between the baron (Ulrich Tukur) and baroness (Ursina Lardi) at one of the climactic points of the film. As the argument spins and turns, you have no idea how things are going to land. One of the most unforgettable scenes in this vein would be the one where a despicable man (Rainer Bock) rejects the woman he’s been using for sex for many years. In response to his charges that he now finds her ugly and repulsive, she (Susanne Lothar) says, with quiet dignity: "You must be very unhappy to be so mean." You want to stand and cheer for that woman.

Like the actress who plays that role, everybody in the movie is utterly credible. In their heavy, baggy clothes, they belong to the era so completely that it’s hard to imagine these actors pecking away at their laptops and listening to rock music between takes. Nor do any of these kids look like they’ve heard of video games. At times, I wondered if these child actors didn’t look a little too rehearsed, but then it occurred to me that, since the kids in the story were, after all, controlled by their domineering elders, you can’t fault the actors playing the parts for looking a bit wooden.

So I tend to vote with the New Yorker’s Anthony Lane in rating this film as being worth seeing. And yet, as the evil in the village unfolded, I kept wondering: what is the point of it all? Is writer/director Michael Haneke merely wanting to show us how rotten people can be? And what was the intended impact of the declaration of the war at the conclusion to the movie? Was it a way of showing how huge evils can make us forget lesser ones? Or was it meant to show that all evil – from mean pranks to full scale warfare – falls along a continuum?

It didn’t help that the mystery of the wrongdoings in the village was never fully explained to my satisfaction. The teacher/narrator had apparently decided what had been going on, but his assumption left some questions in my mind. If he was right, the message would probably be that human beings can wage almighty war against evil until they themselves are implicated and then they turn a blind eye. At least, I think that may be the moral. You’re probably smarter than I am, so maybe it will all make more sense to you.

You also may have more luck, early on, in sorting out the inhabitants of the various households. For the first hour, I found it hard to keep track of the characters as the camera jumped from one scenario to another. For somebody who catches on to that stuff more quickly, the movie as a whole might be more comprehensible. The strongest message I could take home was that the one thing those kids desperately needed in their lives was a Julie Andrews.

Rating: C (i.e. "Certainly Worth Seeing")


Fire Sale (Mystery) by Sarah Paretsky, 2005

A sleepless spell a while back found me listening to an interview with Sara Paretsky from the BBC, as broadcast on CBC Radio’s middle-of-the night programming. The Brit interviewer seemed to think highly of Ms. Paretksy (whom I’d never read). There was talk about her books being of interest to the Obama family, in that Ms. Paretksy deals with the grimy side of life in South Chicago.

Toward the end of the item, the interviewer asked Ms. Paretksy to name some books she didn’t like. The author at first demurred, saying that she only reads what she wants to read. Pressed to come up with a name, however, she cited Saul Bellow's Humboldt’s Gift. In Ms. Paretksy’s view, Mr. Bellow failed to write a good book in that case because he refused to "get his hands dirty" and write about crime as it really is in Chicago. It’s a long time since I read that book but my memories of it, although vague about details, are very fond. So I’m thinking: ok, lady, if you’re gonna diss Saul Bellow, you better come up with something brilliant of your own.

It would appear that Ms. Paretsky has done just that, given the plethora of awards she has accumulated for her much-lauded novels. But this one sure ain't picking up any prizes around here.

Not that it doesn’t start with a bang. V.I. Warshawski, our plucky private eye, gets hurt in an explosion when she’s nosing around a factory. A woman who works there has expressed worries that something fishy’s going on. Ms.Warshawski’s connection to that woman? She’s the mother of one of the girls on the basketball team Ms.Warshawski’s coaching. An old basketball star herself, Ms.Warshawski has been asked by her former coach, who’s now undergoing cancer treatment, to take over the coaching on a volunteer basis. Recognizing that she can’t commit to the coaching fully as well as to her career, Ms.Warshawski’s trying to get the owners of a company, the biggest employer in the area, to come up with funds for a full time coach.

This scenario gives author Paretsky plenty of opportunity for discussion of the social ills facing under-privileged kids on Chicago’s south side. We’re treated to pages and pages of high-minded discussion about the importance of the girls’ finishing their educations and avoiding teenage pregnancy. Worthy issues to be sure, but do they belong in a mystery? Maybe they’d be tolerable in this context if any of the dialogue or any of the characters had any plausibility of any ring of true life. Ms. Paretksy paints low class bickering parents with such crude strokes that they don’t even come off as human. She doesn’t do any better with the upper class characters. In the rich family that she’s pitching for donations, the conflict between the right-wing capitalist owners and their ingenuous grandson comes off as contrived and stagey. And the capitalists’ contempt for jobless people exceeds all bounds of believable human expression.

As for the mystery, when Ms.Warshawski’s skulking around that troubled factory looking for clues with her flashlight, it’s impossible to shake impressions of the intrepid Nancy Drew. Ms.Warshawski does not inspire confidence as a professional investigator. Her bewildering way with words also causes some concern. As, for example, when she says that a certain sight "caused hackles to rise from my crown to my toes." (Last I heard, crowns and toes didn’t have hackles.)

It wasn’t until about page 150 that anything made me want to keep reading. At that point, a kid disappeared and Ms.Warshawski was asked to track him down. At last, some intrigue, was my reaction. I also liked the sassy way that Ms.Warshawski talked back to the kid’s rich relatives who were trying to boss her around. But pretty soon, we lapsed back into more amateur-style sleuthing and more preaching about social issues. Figuring I didn’t need to be convinced of the importance of education for inner-city kids or of the problems of teen pregnancies, I spared myself another 200 pages of tedium and abandoned the book around page 180.


A Romance on Three Legs: Glenn Gould’s Obsessive Quest for the Perfect Piano (Biography) by Katie Hafner, 2008

Sometimes you enjoy a book very much but you can’t help wondering whether other people will.

The first reason for my liking this book is that I’m a great admirer of pianos. To me, the piano is humankind’s most splendid invention. You can have your sports cars, your jet planes, your plasma tv’s. The fact that a piano – such a beautiful artefact in itself – can produce such exquisite sounds absolutely sends me. Of course, I’m talking here about a really fine piano. They’re not easy to come by. Hence my identifying with the great Canadian pianist’s quest (not that I identify with him in many other ways).

But even an excellent piano is only as good as its tuner. And that’s the second reason why the book interests me so much. Glenn Gould’s tuner for most of his recording career was the stellar Verne Edquist. In this book, he plays the major supporting role, if not a co-starring one. And it so happens that Mr. Edquist was also my piano tuner until his retirement about ten years ago. He often told me stories, albeit discreetly, about his most famous client, so it was fun to learn here more about their interaction.

One of the things that this book makes very clear is the enormous repertoire of skills that a good piano tuner brings to the job. To the afficionado, it’s not just a question of making sure the piano’s at pitch. Other very complicated issues, such as tone and voicing, enter into the overall effect. For the most part, Ms. Hafner elucidates the process very well. Will other readers follow the technicalities with as much enthusiasm as I did? I'm not sure.

Yet, there may always be an audience for more books about one of Canada’s most eccentric contributions to the world stage. What comes through in this portrait is the fact that he could put on the persona of a clever, articulate sophisticate, with even a generous measure of self-deprecating humour, while a very troubled person lurked beneath that veneer. I, however, am not one of the Candians who can’t get enough about Mr. Gould. Yes, he was an exceptionally gifted artist with a unique take on some kinds of music. (The way he treats Mozart should be illegal, in my opinion.) But that doesn’t make him an endless source of fascination.

Still, Ms. Hafner does come up with some details that intrigued me. For instance: the fact that Mr. Gould didn’t love pianos in themselves. "You know, the piano is not an instrument for which I have any great love as such," he told a reporter. "I have played it all my life and it’s the best vehicle I have to express my ideas." Apparently, the important thing about music for him was the idea of it and no instrument could adequately convey the music as he heard it in his mind. The piano, then, was just a means, albeit the best one available, to an end. So maybe Mr. Gould and I don’t have so much in common, after all. Which may explain why recording companies aren’t falling over themselves to sign me on.

And Ms. Hafner does show a more reasonable aspect to some of Mr. Gould’s seemingly outrageous behaviour. Take the incident where he sued the Steinway company because a friendly Steinway technician had slapped him on the shoulder, leading to a month's convalescence in an upper body cast. Granted, doctors did diagnose a pinched nerve or some such condition, but one can’t help thinking the root cause of the trouble wasn’t so much the technician’s touch as the pianist’s touchiness. But the issue was resolved with surprising equanimity. Although initially claiming $300,000 in damages, Mr. Gould eventually settled for about $9,000 to cover his medical costs. The astonished Steinway representative noted that the pianist was gentlemanly and cordial about the negotiations.

Entertaining as I found the book to be, it’s not a literary gem. The prose could only be rated as serviceable at best. While one feels Ms. Hafner’s interest in the subject throughout, one never gets a sense of an inspiring passion behind the book. One area in which the writing lacks flair is the depiction of Verne Edquist’s involvement, especially the account of his initial service call to Glenn Gould’s apartment. Verne refused to kowtow to the great artist and defiantly announced that his beloved old Chickering wasn’t worth working on. A stubborn prairie boy at heart, Verne had to put honesty first, even though he knew it could lead to being fired from his job as head tuner at Eaton’s. Instead, it led to decades of work with Mr. Gould. Ms. Hafner gets the story right, as far as I can tell, but it had more oomph when Verne told it to me.


Killing Floor (Mystery) by Lee Child, 1997

Having recently become a fan of Lee Child’s books featuring Jack Reacher, I was pleased to find this, the first of the lot, in a pile of pulp fiction on offer during a recent holiday. However, it didn’t thrill me as much as some of the later Reacher novels. Often, a reader finds that a series starts strongly with the first books and gradually peters out. On the basis of my experience with the Reacher books, though, I’d say it took Mr. Child a while to figure out how best to handle the remarkable character he created.

Not that there aren’t plenty of the Reacher qualities on view here. It’s easy to see how this character’s debut appealed to a world of readers encountering him for the first time. The yarn starts:

I was arrested in Eno’s diner. At twelve o’clock. I was eating eggs and drinking coffee. A late breakfast, not lunch. I was wet and tired after a long walk in heavy rain. All the way from the highway to the edge of town.

And there we have it: Jack Reacher, the terse loner, the stranger who appears in town out of nowhere, a magnet for trouble. We learn that he’s wandering the US after thirteen years in the army. Having arrived in this small Georgia town on a whim, he finds himself fingered as a possible suspect in a murder. Thrown into jail for a couple of days, he comes into contact with a local citizen who obviously does have something to do with the crime. In spite of himself, Reacher gets involved.

The guy’s impossibly tough and self-reliant. And yet the writer does a fair job of making the character just about plausible. That army training after all: as a military cop, he had been responsible for solving murders and tracking fugitives. Hence, his ability to psych out bad guys. Another thing that makes Reacher believable and real is his habit of calculating everything before he makes a move. He always knows just how many seconds it will take to do such-and-such and he plans every tactic accordingly. Lee Child is at his best in this kind of writing. He also offers up lots of interesting detail, when explaining what the criminals are involved in, about a certain feature of our civilization.

But the book’s dragged down by features that have become too familiar, I find. Most notably, the placid small town that’s seething under the surface with evil. And you don’t get many points for guessing who the baddies are. The dialogue is flat most of the time and none of the characters is notable, except for a few humble black people who leap off the page with surprising vitality. The staccato, monotone narrative in the first person – short, simple, declarative sentences – verges on self parody in a way that it doesn’t in later Reacher mysteries.

One of the weakest aspects of this one would be the fact that the romance shapes up too easily. It’s far too obvious from the get-go that Reacher and the woman are going to become an item. And yet, the ultimate resolution of that part of the story proves to be one of the most interesting and thoughtful aspects of the novel. Best of all, it establishes once and for all one of the key characteristics of the Reacher that we’re going to meet in the subsequent novels.

You can respond to: patrick@dilettantesdiary.com