Leon the Wimp

1. According to their web site:

   “Members of the Kennedy Center’s national artists committee, as well as past Honorees, made recommendations of possible Honorees.” So the President and First Lady are involved in the process only as dignitaries to honor the arts. They should. As citizens the White house belongs to all the American people. Its just as much Lincoln’s white house as Andy Jackson’s or you can name the president you love or not. It would seem then that Mr. Fliescher’s comments were made in the right place. We love free speech.

2. “it is likely to have gone unreported – because of the nature of our corporate-controlled news media these days. Look at how Code Pink doesn’t even merit a news bleep these days – protests in general are never reported.” Jeff, go to cnn.com, and I believe you will see a story regarding the aforementioned group.

3. David Salvage, I agree completely with your eloquent comments.

   I would like to add: And precisely who cares about Leon Fleischer’s politcal views? Does anyone genuinely expect Fleischer to have penetrating thoughts to offer about the political arena? And why did the Washington Post even publish such a cliched, trite piece in the first place? It doesn’t belong in a serious publication.

4. This reminds me that almost exactly thirty-five years ago, the Nixon Administration objected to, and cancelled the performance of, a newly commissioned work by Juilliard’s Vincent Persichetti for narrator and orchestra, to be performed by the Philadelphia Orchestra at the official Inaugural concert at the then-new Kennedy Center. The Inaugural Committee removed it from the program feeling that the text, Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address, might embarrass President Nixon by its references to war.

   http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,906837,00.html

   http://www.presser.com/Composers/info.cfm?Name=VINCENTPERSICHETTI

5. For some reason (probably something I did or didn’t do), the WordPress software doesn’t carry names over to the comment page. But, if you start with the original post on the frontpage you’ll see that blame has been appropriately assigned.

6. Maybe he secretely feared turning down the Bush regime would set off a chain of events, such as a merc from Blackwater arriving at his door in the middle of the night to try out some new torture techniques. I jest. At least he wrote the article from the safety of his keypad. What do they say about the pen being mightier than….

7. We also need to remember how we pick our battles. If Fleischer would have caused a scene at the affair – it is likely to have gone unreported – because of the nature of our corporate-controlled news media these days. Look at how Code Pink doesn’t even merit a news bleep these days – protests in general are never reported. The war has almost dropped off of the American public’s radar. The right response was to do what it would take to get into the national news media; not be a patsy or ignored and writing the editorial.

   “For by wise counsel thou shalt make thy war.” – Proverbs XXIV,6

   Funny thing is, sometimes it seems that only unreportABLE events can change the course of this insanity.

8. Some good comments.

   I would add: Bush & Co. weren’t born yesterday. They know the artists they honor are overwhelmingly left-wing and probably disagree passionately with their policies. And yet the administration and the Kennedy Center still consider these artists to render valuable service to American life, service worthy of public, high-profile recognition.

   By endorsing Fleischer’s talent, no politician implicitly voices support for his political beliefs. In turn, an artist, by accepting an award from a political establishment, does not thereby endorse the political beliefs of that establishment. All an artist endorses in such circumstances is the validity of a government’s authority to recognize the arts. No one should have any problem with that.

   Anyway, if Fleischer really does not think Bush and his government have the right to bestow recognition on the arts, then I can hardly imagine the convulsions he goes through when he has to pay taxes these days – an endorsement of the government’s right to take his money and spend it as they see fit.

9. I liked his article. Just based on what I read, I interpret that he’s an intelligent and respectful man. It’s shallow and thoughtless for you to say that he’s “whining”. Reading his article and some of the other comments here, it’s obvious this was a complex situation that didn’t have a simple yes or no. I think he handled it the best way he could. And admirably.

   Btw, who are you and why isn’t your name on your post? It’s too easy to ridicule someone anonymously.

10. i agree, he could’ve done more than just write this article, but good for him that he wrote it- i think he should be commended for doing at least that- if only other artists would speak out just that much when they have the opportunity..

11. One reason why he did go was in order to promote the Peabody Conservatory, where he has taught for decades. Several of our students had the opportunity to perform on national television as part of his acceptance. If he had not accepted these students would have been the ones to pay the price and the president would have found another artist. Who would have lost in the end?

12. I don’t understand what harm he thought would have befallen the Kennedy Center if he had snubbed the White House reception, that wouldn’t happen as a result of such a piece in the Post. If he was truly concerned about hurting the Kennedy Center, he should understand that an opinion piece that calls out the “code of silence” would be much more damaging than skipping a reception in protest. (Though I doubt either would or will have any impact.)

13. Christ. Reminds me of John Adams & his Pulitzer. You either say, “Thank you” or “No, thank you.”

Comments are closed.