Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 18:24:18 GMT -5
We need to ask ourselves does Jackie need instruction, courage, practice, exposure to become successful in this quite different arena? I believe we all are saying something all this line and can agree that she is simply not ready YET. But the potential for success is there and will require WORK by her and from others able to help her achieve this goal. I agree, Gordie, and I think we may be premature in expecting any particular ambition from Jackie because of her interest in the musicals she chose in selecting her repertoire for The Debut. She said she was fascinated with Broadway and loves the music, excited to be in NYC where she can experience the Broadway scene, having attended several plays in her research. Her appearance at Feinstein's/54 Below may have attracted attention, but the purpose according to Will Nunziata, was to promote the album with a debut performance, "album release concert", he called it, with a tour to follow. Jackie has several aspirations and interests to pursue as part of her career. Performance on stage in a musical is probably not an immediate one. Her vision of playing Christine in POTO was just that, and no doubt remains with her.
|
|
|
Post by rogeraphil on May 2, 2019 12:48:26 GMT -5
Just changed my avatar to the latest photo of Jackie and I that I was fortunate enough to get at Feinstein's/54 Below. What an enjoyable show it was, and I already have ringside seats to the next one in June. If there is any way for you to be there, DON'T MISS IT !!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2019 13:22:05 GMT -5
A lot of posts are appearing about Jackie's new attire and how much flesh, if any, should be revealed etc., for her to shake off the pre-adult life. The clothing that she wears is not so important as the way she presents herself in them. I find that her frequent wearing of jeans with holes/rips tend to give her a more juvenile appearance and may be seen to attract a young set of teens. However, that clothing would not fly in a cabaret setting. She has reached a point in her career where her demeanor needs to better match her venue and audience. A cabaret/club setting is not for pre-adult teens, so the dress and demeanor should match the surrounding. If she develops a repertoire that is appealing to a younger crowd and is likely to attract an audience that is best accommodated in an arena setting for perhaps 5000 people, then maybe her attire should relate to the audience and so should her demeanor. Her demeanor even in such a large setting should still project her being adult and not a teen. Just my nickels worth because Canada retired the penny. If you look at Emily Bear's jeans, you can consider Jackie's jeans as ordinary jeans. https://www.instagram.com/p/Bw2DvGKHqhv Those are the sort of jeans many girls are wearing these days. Just chill out! :-)
|
|
|
Post by yellowstone2014 on May 2, 2019 14:50:55 GMT -5
... Those are the sort of jeans many girls are wearing these days. Just chill out! :-) ...
I really don't care, what Jackie is wearing. But some have problems with it.
|
|
|
Post by yellowstone2014 on May 3, 2019 14:55:08 GMT -5
Another review … cabaretscenes.org/2019/05/03/jackie-evancho-the-debut/Jackie Evancho: The DebutChris Struck | May 3, 2019 | 0 Comments Feinstein’s/54 Below, NYC, April 23, 2019 Reviewed by Chris Struck for Cabaret Scenes Jackie Evancho is a stunningly polished performer who has created an interesting niche for herself at the intersection of Broadway and pop music. By using the full extent of her strong range and consistently hitting her high notes, she consistently impressed her audience of adoring fans song after song. Without doubt, she knows her strengths and played to them by combining well-rehearsed pop songs with an intriguing variety of inspirational Broadway numbers. Most interesting were some of the subtle choices that she made during the show, such as singing the best Phantom parts in her The Phantom of the Opera medley. For a woman in a white power suit (for most of the show), that was a power move. Evancho made it a point to include a lot of current Broadway material along with classics—for example, featuring songs from both Anastasia and West Side Story. If I were to pick a single best performance of the evening, it’d have to be one of the classics and the choice would be between “The Impossible Dream” (Mitch Leigh/Joe Darion from Man of La Mancha) and “Somewhere” (Leonard Bernstein/Stephen Sondheim from the aforementioned West Side Story). When she sang “some day a time for us” from the latter, it was as if she had spoken to the whole crowd and told them that their 54 Below rendezvous was as secretive as Tony and Maria’s. But, referring to lofty dreams, the lyric, “to run where the brave dare not go” from “The Impossible Dream” spoke more believably to Evancho’s underlying drive. She didn’t just sing the male parts. She also performed the showstopping number from Hamilton, “Burn” (Lin-Manuel Miranda), where the character Eliza destroys her husband’s letters. Evancho’s interpretation of “You built me palaces out of paragraphs/You built cathedrals” still haunts me. Evancho could have delved deeper into her life or career; she sometimes just introduced the songs, rarely braking stride for more than a brief respite. However, her fans didn’t seem to mind her skipping the details; they appeared constantly enthralled. Evancho truly knew her audience and catered to them. Music director/pianist Jorn Swart and his band—Horace Bray (guitar), Leon Boykins (bass), and Devin Collins (drums)—were practically mute, preferring that their instruments do the talking.
|
|
|
Post by ursus on May 4, 2019 1:59:58 GMT -5
Another review … cabaretscenes.org/2019/05/03/jackie-evancho-the-debut/Jackie Evancho: The DebutChris Struck | May 3, 2019 | 0 Comments Feinstein’s/54 Below, NYC, April 23, 2019 Reviewed by Chris Struck for Cabaret Scenes Jackie Evancho is a stunningly polished performer who has created an interesting niche for herself at the intersection of Broadway and pop music. By using the full extent of her strong range and consistently hitting her high notes, she consistently impressed her audience of adoring fans song after song. Without doubt, she knows her strengths and played to them by combining well-rehearsed pop songs with an intriguing variety of inspirational Broadway numbers. Most interesting were some of the subtle choices that she made during the show, such as singing the best Phantom parts in her The Phantom of the Opera medley. For a woman in a white power suit (for most of the show), that was a power move. Evancho made it a point to include a lot of current Broadway material along with classics—for example, featuring songs from both Anastasia and West Side Story. If I were to pick a single best performance of the evening, it’d have to be one of the classics and the choice would be between “The Impossible Dream” (Mitch Leigh/Joe Darion from Man of La Mancha) and “Somewhere” (Leonard Bernstein/Stephen Sondheim from the aforementioned West Side Story). When she sang “some day a time for us” from the latter, it was as if she had spoken to the whole crowd and told them that their 54 Below rendezvous was as secretive as Tony and Maria’s. But, referring to lofty dreams, the lyric, “to run where the brave dare not go” from “The Impossible Dream” spoke more believably to Evancho’s underlying drive. She didn’t just sing the male parts. She also performed the showstopping number from Hamilton, “Burn” (Lin-Manuel Miranda), where the character Eliza destroys her husband’s letters. Evancho’s interpretation of “You built me palaces out of paragraphs/You built cathedrals” still haunts me. Evancho could have delved deeper into her life or career; she sometimes just introduced the songs, rarely braking stride for more than a brief respite. However, her fans didn’t seem to mind her skipping the details; they appeared constantly enthralled. Evancho truly knew her audience and catered to them. Music director/pianist Jorn Swart and his band—Horace Bray (guitar), Leon Boykins (bass), and Devin Collins (drums)—were practically mute, preferring that their instruments do the talking. That is a great review, but I feel that it should have mentioned that she is returning in June.
|
|
|
Post by michaelcorden on May 5, 2019 9:37:54 GMT -5
My response to two questions on another Jackie proboards site 1) How did you (and the others in your party) like the "new" post-Debut Jackie vs the "old" pre-Debut Jackie? 2) Was the audience (as we expected) mostly middle aged or older? +) Plus an added comment ++) From the point of view of this relative newcomer to proboards, I will later add a post on the Balkanization of JE commentary on proboards that forces multiple postings simply to engage with other declared JE fans. --------------------------------------------
We did look around the room to determine age, but I left the analysis to my friend who is better able to judge age. While there was one table with four college age women and the father of one of them, the average in the room seemed mid-to-late-fifties. Our table mates are an example. The husband was early-fifties and a long-time fan. His wife, early-forties, was a first-timer. The room was about evenly mixed between men and women. It was generally hard to tell the OTTs in the room since a number of songs deserved their standing ovations. But the ones that yelled out "Yea Jackie" and "Way to go, Jackie" blew their cover.
I'd say the biggest difference in Jackie's presentation of these songs is that she had a better understanding the emotion and sadness in some of them. She was more convincing. Also, her last song, "Somebody to Love" by Queen, had something I don't remember in her previous songs: a strong beat, which she was really enjoying delivering and moving to. Previous to that night, she said she discovered her belting voice. I think she enjoys using it.
My thoughts went to an event...my God...fifty years ago when I heard Grace Slick sing "White Rabbit" at Woodstock. Lordy! I just found a video of the very same performance I saw back then (I'll paste it below). Slick had superb vocal control and phrasing and a powerful presence. Wouldn't it be great if Jackie added "White Rabbit" to her repertoire!! From today's perspective, I think the psychedelic aspect of drugs is almost quaint. It's expanding ones consciousness and rejecting the advice of fools that continues to remain relevant.
From Wikipedia - "White Rabbit" is one of Grace Slick's earliest songs, written during either late 1965 or early 1966. It uses imagery found in the fantasy works of Lewis Carroll...such as changing size after taking pills or drinking an unknown liquid. Slick said the composition was supposed to be a slap to parents who read their children such novels and then wondered why their children later used drugs. Characters Slick referenced include Alice, the White Rabbit, the hookah-smoking caterpillar, the White Knight, the Red Queen, and the Dormouse. Slick reportedly wrote the song after an acid trip. For Slick, "White Rabbit" "is about following your curiosity. The White Rabbit is your curiosity". For her and others in the 1960s, drugs were a part of mind expansion and social experimentation. With its enigmatic lyrics, "White Rabbit" became one of the first songs to sneak drug references past censors on the radio. Even Marty Balin, Slick's eventual rival in Jefferson Airplane, regarded the song as a "masterpiece." In interviews, Slick has related that Alice in Wonderland was often read to her as a child and remained a vivid memory well into her adulthood. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Slick mentioned that, in addition to Alice in Wonderland, her other inspiration for the song was Ravel's Boléro. Like Boléro, "White Rabbit" is essentially one long crescendo. The music combined with the song's lyrics strongly suggests the sensory distortions experienced with hallucinogens, and the song was later used in pop culture to imply or accompany just such a state."
White Rabbit
One pill makes you larger, and one pill makes you small And the ones that mother gives you, don't do anything at all Go ask Alice, when she's ten feet tall And if you go chasing rabbits, and you know you're going to fall Tell 'em a hookah-smoking caterpillar has given you the call And call Alice, when she was just small When the men on the chessboard get up and tell you where to go And you've just had some kind of mushroom, and your mind is moving low Go ask Alice, I think she'll know When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead And the white knight is talking backwards And the red queen's off with her head Remember what the dormouse said Feed your head, feed your head
|
|
|
Post by michaelcorden on May 5, 2019 10:47:07 GMT -5
Perhaps a few members here are curious how these multiple Jackie Evancho forums are perceived by and affect this relative newcomer to proboards.
My purpose in coming to proboards is to listen to and engage in conversation with other Jackie Evancho fans and observers. While I’m retired, I’m engaged in a number of other activities which limits the time I have to spend here, and so I’m motivated to offer this opinion in hope that the core elements of these three Jackie forums might see the benefits of joining together into one Jackie Evancho-United Forum.
I find in all three forums thoughtful people and indolent dolts, provoking posts and downright drivel, excellence and excrement. There are definitely people on each forum who I would want to read and engage with. Those who do not fall into this group? Well, that’s why god invented the scroll wheel.
From what I’ve been able to determine, there has clearly been a lot of bad history, mutual antagonisms, wounded egos, and just plain different world views going on. That’s fine with me, but attempting to understand this cultification and “profile” of each forum is work I simply don’t want to do, and shouldn’t need to do, at least as far as sticking with one these forum is concerned. I simply don’t have time nor the inclination for it.
So, while I’m probably spitting into the wind, I propose that all three groups migrate to a Jackie Evancho-United Forum that is mature enough to accept both over-the-top praise AND cut-to-the-bone criticism. A united forum that has a well-thought-out thread structure, somehow acceptable to all existing admins (I chuckle as I propose this one, but why not). I propose that all existing threads be migrated (ask the proboard tech staff) to the united forum so they can be searched, but then be locked so that only the new threads are used going forward.
As stated, I have no interest in finding out the perceived differences between the three existing JE forums. Were I to ask, I’d surely get biased views from all concerned. So, not having the time to “work this thing” I’d probably disengage and direct my energy to other activities I value, dropping by only occasionally—definitely not to catch up but only to survey the landscape.
But one thing for sure, this is definitely my last triple post.
|
|
|
Post by ursus on May 5, 2019 11:18:13 GMT -5
Perhaps a few members here are curious how these multiple Jackie Evancho forums are perceived by and affect this relative newcomer to proboards. My purpose in coming to proboards is to listen to and engage in conversation with other Jackie Evancho fans and observers. While I’m retired, I’m engaged in a number of other activities which limits the time I have to spend here, and so I’m motivated to offer this opinion in hope that the core elements of these three Jackie forums might see the benefits of joining together into one Jackie Evancho-United Forum. I find in all three forums thoughtful people and indolent dolts, provoking posts and downright drivel, excellence and excrement. There are definitely people on each forum who I would want to read and engage with. Those who do not fall into this group? Well, that’s why god invented the scroll wheel. From what I’ve been able to determine, there has clearly been a lot of bad history, mutual antagonisms, wounded egos, and just plain different world views going on. That’s fine with me, but attempting to understand this cultification and “profile” of each forum is work I simply don’t want to do, and shouldn’t need to do, at least as far as sticking with one these forum is concerned. I simply don’t have time nor the inclination for it. So, while I’m probably spitting into the wind, I propose that all three groups migrate to a Jackie Evancho-United Forum that is mature enough to accept both over-the-top praise AND cut-to-the-bone criticism. A united forum that has a well-thought-out thread structure, somehow acceptable to all existing admins (I chuckle as I propose this one, but why not). I propose that all existing threads be migrated (ask the proboard tech staff) to the united forum so they can be searched, but then be locked so that only the new threads are used going forward. As stated, I have no interest in finding out the perceived differences between the three existing JE forums. Were I to ask, I’d surely get biased views from all concerned. So, not having the time to “work this thing” I’d probably disengage and direct my energy to other activities I value, dropping by only occasionally—definitely not to catch up but only to survey the landscape. But one thing for sure, this is definitely my last triple post. I come here to learn about what is happening to Jackie and to post my opinions. The problem, as I see it, about the other forums is that the signal-to-noise ratio is too low. It is tolerable here even when there are some clashes. I would not want to see this one merged with either of the others. As to the other two merging, I don't really have an opinion.
|
|
|
Post by oatmealforme on May 5, 2019 11:48:38 GMT -5
I concur, and I would not want to see this forum combined with either of the other 2, since they are Jackie fan forums in name only. I came to the Jackie Evancho Amazon forum in 2010, so I know something of the history of the interactions between certain people, and in my opinion, it would be a mistake.
|
|
|
Post by michaelcorden on May 5, 2019 14:12:28 GMT -5
I come here to learn about what is happening to Jackie and to post my opinions. The problem, as I see it, about the other forums is that the signal-to-noise ratio is too low. It is tolerable here even when there are some clashes. I would not want to see this one merged with either of the others. As to the other two merging, I don't really have an opinion. I concur, and I would not want to see this forum combined with either of the other 2, since they are Jackie fan forums in name only. I came to the Jackie Evancho Amazon forum in 2010, so I know something of the history of the interactions between certain people, and in my opinion, it would be a mistake. Signal-to-noise ratio I agree that there is a lot of noise on the other two threads--and a few reprobates--but that's what the scroll wheel is for. I'm not going to avoid a bar because it's got a few jerks with nothing meaningful to say. I'll go in and find the good guys and talk to them and enjoy myself. The demons and the narcissists and the reprobates, I simply ignore. Jackie fans in name only I agree here too that certain people rather unbalanced and tilt to the perpetually negative and are consistently that way--but that's also what the scroll wheel is for. There are also people, like me for instance, who both praise Jackie or her team when they do well, and soundly criticize them when they screw up. I'm pretty thoughtful about these things and am rarely rash and unreasonable. I do the same with my family, friends and workmates. It's always a conversation where everything is in context. And I'm a good listener and I accept being proven wrong. But I do have good relationships with my family and friends and workmates. Just because I am sometimes critical does not mean I am not a fan. To me, being critical at times only shows how much I value the relationship. Some may, at times, put me into the "Jackie fan in name only" group and--strictly speaking--I can't argue against them if fan means "only positive all the time." To me that's the definition of a weak relationship, not a strong one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2019 15:10:18 GMT -5
It's always a conversation where everything is in context. And I'm a good listener and I accept being proven wrong. But I do have good relationships with my family and friends and workmates. The point is having a good relationship wherein conversation is in context and criticism is potentially constructive, at least appreciated and of value. A relationship implies interaction. We have no interaction with Jackie, only observations, opinions and sometimes judgments. Criticism, I believe, is valuable when the recipient is part of the conversation, therefore having the opportunity to benefit directly from suggestions and/or advice. I don't necessarily agree with everything Jackie and/or her parents have done, but I see no objective in publicly criticizing them, their having no opportunity to refute, disagree with or, in many cases, defend themselves. Not being outwardly critical doesn't mean one is oblivious, uninformed, unrealistic, "OTT" or "mush and gush". It's just minding one's own business. The objective of participating in this fan forum, as far as I am concerned, is to discuss Jackie's music, to promote her as an artist, respect her as person, and to respect her family as she respects them, and to support her career. We are not in an interactive environment with Jackie where criticism is of any benefit, except as we suppose it may eventually reach her. Meanwhile, all kinds of opinions, judgments, and erroneous conclusions are drawn from publicly stated criticism. That cannot be fair by any measure to Jackie and/or her family. Furthermore, I don't agree that celebrity implies she or her family are "fair game". At least that is not my attitude.
|
|
|
Post by yellowstone2014 on May 5, 2019 15:16:21 GMT -5
The discussion above has nothing to do with the thread theme anymore. Please, discuss this under "Controversial Issues" or "Suggestion Box", but not here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2019 15:26:01 GMT -5
The discussion above has nothing to do with the thread theme anymore. Please, discuss this under "Controversial Issues" or "Suggestion Box", but not here. I agree, yellowstone. Once a subject is replied to, a conversation naturally ensues, but it is now better entertained elsewhere at Admin's discretion of course.
|
|
|
Post by jamesn on May 8, 2019 12:45:54 GMT -5
My response to two questions on another Jackie proboards site 1) How did you (and the others in your party) like the "new" post-Debut Jackie vs the "old" pre-Debut Jackie? 2) Was the audience (as we expected) mostly middle aged or older? +) Plus an added comment ++) From the point of view of this relative newcomer to proboards, I will later add a post on the Balkanization of JE commentary on proboards that forces multiple postings simply to engage with other declared JE fans. -------------------------------------------- We did look around the room to determine age, but I left the analysis to my friend who is better able to judge age. While there was one table with four college age women and the father of one of them, the average in the room seemed mid-to-late-fifties. Our table mates are an example. The husband was early-fifties and a long-time fan. His wife, early-forties, was a first-timer. The room was about evenly mixed between men and women. It was generally hard to tell the OTTs in the room since a number of songs deserved their standing ovations. But the ones that yelled out "Yea Jackie" and "Way to go, Jackie" blew their cover. I'd say the biggest difference in Jackie's presentation of these songs is that she had a better understanding the emotion and sadness in some of them. She was more convincing. Also, her last song, "Somebody to Love" by Queen, had something I don't remember in her previous songs: a strong beat, which she was really enjoying delivering and moving to. Previous to that night, she said she discovered her belting voice. I think she enjoys using it. My thoughts went to an event...my God...fifty years ago when I heard Grace Slick sing "White Rabbit" at Woodstock. Lordy! I just found a video of the very same performance I saw back then (I'll paste it below). Slick had superb vocal control and phrasing and a powerful presence. Wouldn't it be great if Jackie added "White Rabbit" to her repertoire!! From today's perspective, I think the psychedelic aspect of drugs is almost quaint. It's expanding ones consciousness and rejecting the advice of fools that continues to remain relevant. From Wikipedia - "White Rabbit" is one of Grace Slick's earliest songs, written during either late 1965 or early 1966. It uses imagery found in the fantasy works of Lewis Carroll...such as changing size after taking pills or drinking an unknown liquid. Slick said the composition was supposed to be a slap to parents who read their children such novels and then wondered why their children later used drugs. Characters Slick referenced include Alice, the White Rabbit, the hookah-smoking caterpillar, the White Knight, the Red Queen, and the Dormouse. Slick reportedly wrote the song after an acid trip. For Slick, "White Rabbit" "is about following your curiosity. The White Rabbit is your curiosity". For her and others in the 1960s, drugs were a part of mind expansion and social experimentation. With its enigmatic lyrics, "White Rabbit" became one of the first songs to sneak drug references past censors on the radio. Even Marty Balin, Slick's eventual rival in Jefferson Airplane, regarded the song as a "masterpiece." In interviews, Slick has related that Alice in Wonderland was often read to her as a child and remained a vivid memory well into her adulthood. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Slick mentioned that, in addition to Alice in Wonderland, her other inspiration for the song was Ravel's Boléro. Like Boléro, "White Rabbit" is essentially one long crescendo. The music combined with the song's lyrics strongly suggests the sensory distortions experienced with hallucinogens, and the song was later used in pop culture to imply or accompany just such a state." White Rabbit One pill makes you larger, and one pill makes you small And the ones that mother gives you, don't do anything at all Go ask Alice, when she's ten feet tall And if you go chasing rabbits, and you know you're going to fall Tell 'em a hookah-smoking caterpillar has given you the call And call Alice, when she was just small When the men on the chessboard get up and tell you where to go And you've just had some kind of mushroom, and your mind is moving low Go ask Alice, I think she'll know When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead And the white knight is talking backwards And the red queen's off with her head Remember what the dormouse said Feed your head, feed your head Thank you, Michael Corden, for reminding me how much I liked Jefferson Airplane for that brief period of White Rabbit and especially Someone to Love! I have that album but haven't played or even thought about it probably for decades; it and other psychedelic 60's music like the album from the musical Hair! were favorites even though I've always eschewed the lifestyle they promoted.
|
|