You’d think from the number of times I’ve mentioned my jury duty on this blog I had served on a three-month trial. In actuality, I only spent 2 days on jury selection<\/i>, and wasn’t even chosen to serve, probably due to the fact that, when given the opportunity to ask anything of one of the defense attorneys, I asked if he truly believed in every client he chose to represent. Next. <\/p>\n
The other defense attorney possessed an uncanny ability to not connect with any of us. One woman in the front row had written down “reading” as a hobby on her jury survey, so this attorney asked what she was reading currently. “Well…it’s kind of embarrassing: I’m reading Twilight.” <\/i>“What’s that?” he asked. Really? He has no idea what Twilight<\/i> is? OK, fine – he doesn’t see movie posters or know any teenage\/20-something\/apparently 40-something women. Then this attorney got to a guy in the second row, who was probably about 28 and said he handled the booking of pop music tours. “So you like music; do you listen to 90.7 WFUV?” No, the guy responded, I don’t own a radio. Strike Two. Pop music guy asked some question about decision-making on the jury, and the lawyer decided to give him an example from “pop culture” rather than answer his question straight: “Well, you’ve seen the movie Twelve Angry Men<\/i>, right?” No, pop guy had not. “But most of you have seen the movie Twelve Angry Men<\/i>, certainly?” Everybody shook their heads except me and a woman behind me, and I was tempted to be a brat and say I had seen both the play AND the movie, but held back. Then we got to the also youngish guy next to the pop guy – let’s call him the “sporty guy” – who had written down “sports” as his hobby. It somehow came up that he had gone to Duke undergrad, to which the lawyer responded, “So you must be a basketball fan, eh? Duke’s not doing so well, are they?” “Well, it’s over, actually,” said sporty guy. Strike Five for the defense, at least. <\/p>\n
In his attempt to naturally relate to potential jurors, this poor guy only showed that 1. he had no idea what Twilight <\/i>was 2. he thought 28-year-olds in 2009 in New York City listened to the radio 3. he figured every juror in 2009 had seen a movie that came out in 1957 and 4. he didn’t know that college basketball season was over. By trying to be like us, he could not have alienated the group more. <\/p>\n
On Day Two of my jury selection, the lawyer for the MTA began (it was a case where a city bus had hit a car with two people in it). This should be rich, I thought; no way a room of thirty New Yorkers is going to like the counsel for the MTA. “How many of you love<\/i> the MTA?” was his opener. The room burst into laughter and eye-rolls. “OK, how many of you hate<\/i> the MTA?” A few hands shot up, mine included. “When I first started working for the MTA, I asked them: I said, guys, when I’m on the 6 train, and it’s coming into the station, and the 4\/5 express trains are across the platform, why don’t they just wait for the 6 train? That’s so annoying!” He continued to complain about the people who sign his paychecks, and then told us it didn’t actually matter whether or not we or he had ever had subway trouble; we had to judge this case fairly. He also said something general about turning on the news only seeing bad news, something, again, that a room of New Yorkers could all relate to. He gets us! He’s like us! Let’s side with him. <\/p>\n
This all reminded me of an argument I had with a friend a few weeks ago very late in a bar in Brooklyn. We have a mutual pianist…let’s say “acquaintance”…who I do not like and he does like. I don’t understand why you don’t like her, he said. Because she’s not smart, I responded. Amanda, she is smart. Anyone who plays the piano that well is smart. Not true not true!, I shrieked, continuing, musical-smart does not necessarily equal smart-smart! And anyway, she doesn’t read the news. Or books. She’s getting better at that, he offered. Oh is she now; she needs to get “better” about reading the news? How can she be a relevant artist if she doesn’t know what’s going on in the world around her? <\/p>\n
When I got home, I texted my friend, unable to let the argument go, as per my usual. I wrote, and I quote (I found it on my phone): “I have refined my point: If Hilary, Helene, Alisa [meaning Weilerstein, who I know but do not represent] or Gabe were unable to play instruments at all, let alone as well as they do, they would still be fascinating.” <\/p>\n
So this, combined with my the recent attorney mash-up, leads me to ask: does it matter if artists have other stuff going on besides their music? Should they be able to completely relate to their audiences, or do they get a free pass because they are exceptional at one thing? Do we want our classical stars to be just like us, or do we like it when they’re on another plane? And if audiences do want to be able to relate to classical musicians, is it a publicist’s or manager’s job to force artists to read books, to watch the news, to get some hobbies? Can having outside interests – and being interesting – be taught?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
You’d think from the number of times I’ve mentioned my jury duty on this blog I had served on a three-month trial. In actuality, I only spent 2 days on jury selection, and wasn’t even chosen to serve, probably due to the fact that, when given the opportunity to ask anything of one of the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-252","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-main","7":"entry"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/lifesapitch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/252","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/lifesapitch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/lifesapitch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/lifesapitch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/lifesapitch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=252"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/lifesapitch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/252\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/lifesapitch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=252"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/lifesapitch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=252"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/lifesapitch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=252"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}