I find deep pleasure in disliking something I'm "supposed to" like -- and that's how I feel about the current revival of "Ragtime." Everything about this effort seems misguided. It's a resuscitation of a mediocre show that does not need to be resuscitated. Also, the "bold vision" seems to be this: "We've taken everything from the original production and made it slightly worse !" It's like the 1990s "Ragtime" -- but without a set. It's like the 1990s "Ragtime" -- but without Audra McDonald. It's like the 1990s "Ragtime" -- but without an effective publicity team. (It seemed especially unfortunate that the production announced a "first choice" Sarah, only to lose her. The team then announced a "second choice" Sarah, only to lose her. "Grab your wallet and come on out for.... our *third* choice !") "Why look for answers where none occur?" The earnest,...
A personal essay should be iconoclastic. "Against Love." "Against Nature." If the essay just wants to affirm "received truth," it's going to be boring, like a bad watercolor on a coffee mug in an airport gift shop. Alice McDermott knows the rules, so she opens her essay by deflating Emerson. She suggests that, when Emerson told Whitman, "I greet you at the start of a long career," he was being silly. There is no "start" to a writer's career. A writer does not "make progress" -- everyday is square one. Every laptop screen can be a source of "rookie anxiety." McDermott has a talent for surprise. She next tells a tale about having been nominated for a National Book Award for "That Night." There was a sense of calm in the room, because everyone *knew* the prize would go to Toni Morrison for "Beloved." The winner's name was called. It was an obscure novelist -- for a book that is (now) ut...