Brown: " I want to be me"

[Tavi...]

This is a personal essay, not an article that purports to educate readers on who is or is not worthy of paying attention to. It contains the author’s personal impressions and opinions, and I don’t think the fact that it’s being published in a very public forum means that she should have to censor her tone or content just in case a reader might form a “negative” impression about someone or something she mentions. High profile sports writers like Christine Brennan and Phil Hersh, among others, sometimes say extremely critical things about the athletes they cover. They don’t pick and choose their words to make sure no one is offended by what they write. If it’s not wrong for Phil Hersh to say that Jason and Adam were “mediocre” at the GPF, then why is it not okay for this writer to express her opinions in the manner she chooses? Given that CB and PH cover skating regularly, the probability of someone forming a negative impression based on one of their comments would seem quite high - far higher than the probability that someone will form a lasting negative impression based on a sentence or two in a single essay.

 

[ice coverage]

I think one thing that is being lost in this discussion of other men's skaters is that she is writing about her (and her husband's) reaction as they're watching U.S. Nationals in real time, on television. Perhaps we might have not used her exact phrasing or descriptions, but really what she's saying is not really that different from what people say when they watch skating and comment on the competitions threads here. ...

But to me, there is a *huge* difference btwn publication of her opinions (and her husband's) in NYTM vs. posting of any GS member's opinions here on GS.

If I were to post an opinion on GS that undercuts Skater X's program at Nats, other GS members who bother to read my post probably also have seen the exact same performance from Skater X -- and they can and will decide for themselves what their own independent opinion is.
Or if someone on GS happened to miss that particular performance, s/he probably did see X's program at a previous competition in the same season. Or at least remembers X's skating from last season (even if a different program).
In other words: GS members who read my post have their own knowledge base of the sport on which to form their own opinions.

Whereas ... I think it is safe to assume that many NYTM readers just like to make a habit of reading whatever the NYTM offers -- and safe to assume that many of them do not follow figure skating and did not see any of the Nats free skates. Some probably have never seen Nathan or Ross skate at all. (Except maybe snippets of Nathan in NBC promos.)
So when Lockwood gives an opinion that undercuts (an appropriate verb, IMO) skaters other than Jason, her words can be very influential over those NYTM readers who are a blank slate (when it comes to figure skating) and who do not have any opinion of their own.

---

... There are just so many more important things going on in figure skating right now than this - judging, injuries, safety at the Olympics, Johnny Weir finding his stolen Birkin, will Gracie come back, is Ashley going to retire....et.al.

Forgot to mention before that I sincerely enjoyed the remark re Weir's Birkin bag.

(I know it really did get stolen, and I know that a crime is not a laughing matter. But I think/hope that one thing that you and I can agree upon is that neither one of us would find his Birkin to be a topic that cries out for discussion on GS.)

---

ETA:

This is a personal essay, not an article that purports to educate readers on who is or is not worthy of paying attention to. ...

Lockwood's piece does not purport to educate readers that Jason is worth paying attention to?

I beg to differ.

 

[noskates]

Must be a slow day in the news that this topic is still being hashed out.

For the record, I wouldn't even know what a Birkin bag looks like although I know they cost about the same as a gold crown for a tooth.

 

[Lamente Ariane]

I'm of two minds about this article. I like the idea behind it, both to showcase Jason and to remind casual fans and non-fans that there is a world of skating outside the Olympics, and that plenty of skaters who don't make the team are nevertheless worthy of note. (I saw another recent article about Kimmie Meissner that mentioned that some non-skaters assumed she had a "disappointing" career because she only made one Olympics... never mind being World Champion!)

Unfortunately I can't help feeling the execution is... lacking, to say the least. I'm not offended by Lockwood's lack of enthusiasm for Nathan or Ross, but I question her choice of words, particularly "caucasity" which erases a huge portion of the Nationals audience and does nothing to merit its inclusion. I also find it frankly bizarre that she simultaneously takes aim at Nathan for not moving her to raptures while inflating his accomplishments and crediting him with "single-handedly" starting the quad revolution. This makes many of her points ring hollow, since overall the piece chooses to ignore international skaters renown for combining strong artistry and technical skill (like, say, the reigning Olympic gold medalist who the Times also chose to spotlight recently)

(Also, the Yuri On Ice!! digression could have been cut entirely imo)

 

[Mrs. P]

If any of you are on Twitter and feel comfortable doing so, the author seems really comfortable taking questions and taking in people's take on the article -- even if they took issue with it. She took the time responding to Phil Hersh and many others.

ETA: Jason just posted on his Instagram story about a video shoot for a story in the Wall Street Journal. For not being in the Olympics, he's sure getting a lot of coverage....

 

[ice coverage]

If any of you are on Twitter and feel comfortable doing so, the author seems really comfortable taking questions and taking in people's take on the article -- even if they took issue with it. She took the time responding to Phil Hersh and many others.

I agree that Lockwood deserves credit for responding to tweets expressing a variety of viewpoints.

(And BTW, in case anyone missed it, Phil Hersh was gracious in thanking her for the Twitter conversation that the two of them had.)

 

[skylark]

I love Lockwood's article, in great part because she writes in imaginative terms, even creating an alternate reality. Because that's exactly what I love about figure skating!!! It combines two realities, where beauty, emotion and illusion matter equally with measurable factors. Watching it can be an experience of flow, when I lose myself in the athleticism and artistry. And the sheer wonder of physics seemingly being defied by will and desire.

Thanks, Mrs P, for the link to the article and thanks everyone for the discussion about it.

Lockwood's piece does not purport to educate readers that Jason is worth paying attention to?

I beg to differ.

I agree ... and that's my only quibble with the article. While Jason is definitely one skater who can transport me into a different reality, he's not the only one; and he's also not the only current one who does. For me, there's Javi, Adam, Ashley, Aliona and Bruno, Gabriella and Guillaume, Karen Chen (with OGP), and yes ... Nathan! Every time I watch Nemesis, he transports me. (haven't gotten there yet with MLD). Madi & Zach FS. Carolane & Shane transport me right into Fred Astaire/Ginger Rogers world.

I think it's ice presence that I'm drawn to, and an ability to draw a magical circle that invites people in, right onto the ice. That's what makes me an Ashley fan. And every time I watch the first move in Jason's Riverdance, I think "he's calling down the Magic."

I would love the article if only for this quote about the kind of performances that are, for me, the best moments in skating ( like Jason's Riverdance)

:agree:

The dream body moves through a universe where someone who skates with tenderness and vulnerability can stand on the podium next to a peerless technician who represents the new future of skating. This is not strict realism, no. But that is what’s so touching about it: Here is someone determined to impose his imagination on a crueler and more hostile reality. Here is a snow globe with its own sky, and if you want to join us inside, you’re welcome.

When Patrick didn't land any of his competition 3As at Nationals, I DID NOT CARE!!! The reason I didn't care was because I could see he was happy being on the ice again. ... it was more about his state of well-being for me. And the program was GORGEOUS despite minor errors. There is SO MUCH MORE to skating than doing all your jumps as intended, as nice as that is. It's about being yourself and showing what YOU can best bring to the ice.

When Adam performed a gorgeous 4Lutz in his NHK fs, I didn't give two hoots that it was underrotated. It was a beautiful jump, with footwork, flow in and out, speed. And it was only the one element in a superbly skated program. Watching it was like being inside a poem. (Even though I wasn't a fan of the bird posing at first. Now I think that he wanted to portray the bird with broken wing who ends up healed and strong.)

Results are awesome, but I'm here to watch the ACTUAL SKATING/PROGRAMS.

Moi aussi.

 

[Tavi...]

But to me, there is a *huge* difference btwn publication of her opinions (and her husband's) in NYTM vs. posting of any GS member's opinions here on GS.

If I were to post an opinion on GS that undercuts Skater X's program at Nats, other GS members who bother to read my post probably also have seen the exact same performance from Skater X -- and they can and will decide for themselves what their own independent opinion is.
Or if someone on GS happened to miss that particular performance, s/he probably did see X's program at a previous competition in the same season. Or at least remembers X's skating from last season (even if a different program).
In other words: GS members who read my post have their own knowledge base of the sport on which to form their own opinions.

Whereas ... I think it is safe to assume that many NYTM readers just like to make a habit of reading whatever the NYTM offers -- and safe to assume that many of them do not follow figure skating and did not see any of the Nats free skates. Some probably have never seen Nathan or Ross skate at all. (Except maybe snippets of Nathan in NBC promos.)
So when Lockwood gives an opinion that undercuts (an appropriate verb, IMO) skaters other than Jason, her words can be very influential over those NYTM readers who are a blank slate (when it comes to figure skating) and who do not have any opinion of their own.

---

Forgot to mention before that I sincerely enjoyed the remark re Weir's Birkin bag.

(I know it really did get stolen, and I know that a crime is not a laughing matter. But I think/hope that one thing that you and I can agree upon is that neither one of us would find his Birkin to be a topic that cries out for discussion on GS.)

---

ETA:


Lockwood's piece does not purport to educate readers that Jason is worth paying attention to?

I beg to differ.

You’re welcome to your opinion, but I don’t share it.

 

[Mrs. P]

Lockwood tweeted sections she ended up having to cut, including one that talks about Yuzu.
https://twitter.com/tricialockwood/status/959833162070274049

She also clarifies that she liked Ross Miner's skates at nationals.

 

[skylark]

I was thinking later about the Darth Vader comment. And I wonder if it was just as simple as that Nathan was wearing all black!

With that remark, and the one right after, when he"fake whined" that he wanted male figure skaters to wear see-through shirts and pretend to be a swan ... Lockwood's husband sounded like he was just being funny and frivolous.

 

[noskates]

Skylark - my take too, now that you've mentioned it. It's so hard to determine intent from the written word without being able to see body English, etc. As I've said a few times ad nauseum, I think this whole discussion and analyzing was pretty silly. Some people are just looking to be sensitive about something. I repeat.....I bet if Nathan read the article he would have laughed! And for the record, I do like Ross but other than his LP at Nationals I've never found his skating very inspirational or exciting. JMO.

 

[Mathman]

She also clarifies that she liked Ross Miner's skates at nationals.

Lockwood describes Ross' performance as stunning but "amnesia-producing." Maybe she meant that it was a great performance, but somehow it got lost in the shuffle when the selection committee began its deliberations.

 

[ice coverage]

I was thinking later about the Darth Vader comment. And I wonder if it was just as simple as that Nathan was wearing all black!

With that remark, and the one right after, when he"fake whined" that he wanted male figure skaters to wear see-through shirts and pretend to be a swan ... Lockwood's husband sounded like he was just being funny and frivolous.

Skylark - my take too, now that you've mentioned it. It's so hard to determine intent from the written word without being able to see body English, etc. ....

If I were among the many NYTM readers who are just in the habit of sampling NYTM articles on a variety of topics -- and whose pre-existing knowledge of skating and skaters was basically nil or close to nil:

Would it occur to me that Darth Vader might be a reference simply to the color of Nathan's costume?

If my prior knowledge were basically nil or close to nil, would I ever have even laid eyes on Nathan Chen's FS costume at Nationals??
(Or on anyone's costumes at Nats? Or on Nathan or Ross at any competition? etc., etc.)

How would I have any idea whether that particular Nathan costume were red+black or blue+black or ... all black ... or something else entirely?​

My understanding of the posts from skylark and noskates is that the possibility of a simple reference to color did not occur immediately even to them -- even though they were well aware that Nathan's FS costume at Nats was all black.

ETA:

Not to mention that we GS members are putting way more thought into absorbing this article than most NYTM readers are. Or so I believe.​

In any case, as noskates says, the intent from the written word can be very hard to determine.

(I'm not sure I would agree with skylark's characterization that the husband was "fake whining.")

And what I was trying to say in a much earlier post is that I wish the author had wanted the meanings of some of her flourishes to be more clear (without the reader looking at her subsequent tweeting and without the reader taking an interest in looking up an article about her).

Examples of things that are unclear to me:

If a NYTM article were to make any reference to Lockwood's poetry as "amnesia-inducing," would that NYTM reference be displeasing or pleasing to her??
To just a small extent?? Or quite a bit??
Or neither displeasing nor pleasing???​

 

[Mrs. P]

Lockwood describes Ross' performance as stunning but "amnesia-producing." Maybe she meant that it was a great performance, but somehow it got lost in the shuffle when the selection committee began its deliberations.

In the tweet I posted earlier today, she says. "jimmy ma and ross miner’s skates at nationals, in particular, felt like a glimpse of a new future where the lyric is fully incorporated."

It sounds like she was impressed with Ross' skates to me.

I was actually thinking about this earlier today and I feel like "amnesia-producing" means it was such an amazing performance you forgot everything that happened right before it. That is what amnesia is after all -- it's when you don't remember anything from the past.

And perhaps that includes her past impressions of Ross Miner.

Reading the parts she cut, I wish she kept the one about Yuzu. It actually shows that she knows there's examples of when the technical/artistry has melded together well. Without it, it seems like she is completely void of what's going on outside of the U.S.

 

[lappo]

In the tweet I posted earlier today, she says. "jimmy ma and ross miner’s skates at nationals, in particular, felt like a glimpse of a new future where the lyric is fully incorporated."

It sounds like she was impressed with Ross' skates to me.

I was actually thinking about this earlier today and I feel like "amnesia-producing" means it was such an amazing performance you forgot everything that happened right before it. That is what amnesia is after all -- it's when you don't remember anything from the past.

And perhaps that includes her past impressions of Ross Miner.

Reading the parts she cut, I wish she kept the one about Yuzu. It actually shows that she knows there's examples of when the technical/artistry has melded together well. Without it, it seems like she is completely void of what's going on outside of the U.S.

Someone asked her what she meant with the amnesia inducing part (which was quite confusing at first, but I thought something got lost in my own translation since English is not my first language):
https://twitter.com/TriciaLockwood/status/959171959161540608

 

[skylark]

If I were among the many NYTM readers who are just in the habit of sampling NYTM articles on a variety of topics -- and whose pre-existing knowledge of skating and skaters was basically nil or close to nil:

Would it occur to me that Darth Vader might be a reference to Nathan's costume?

If my prior knowledge were basically nil or close to nil, would I ever have even laid eyes on Nathan Chen's FS costume at Nationals??
(Or on anyone's costumes at Nats? Or on Nathan or Ross at any competition? etc., etc.)

How would I have any idea whether that particular Nathan costume were red+black or blue+black or ... all black ... or something else?​

My understanding of skylark's post is that the possibility of a simple color reference did not occur immediately even to skylark -- who is well aware that Nathan's FS costume at Nats was all black.

In any case, as noskates says, the intent from the written word can be very hard to determine.

(I'm not sure I would agree with skylark's characterization that the husband was "fake whining.")

And what I was trying to say in a much earlier post is that I wish the author had wanted the meanings of some of her flourishes to be more clear (without the reader looking at her subsequent tweeting and without the reader taking an interest in looking up an article about her).

Examples of things that are unclear to me:

If a NYTM article were to make any reference to Lockwood's poetry as "amnesia-inducing," would that NYTM reference be displeasing or pleasing to her??
To just a small extent?? Or quite a bit??
Or neither displeasing or pleasing???​

I understand your concerns about the ways the other skaters were characterized, as opposed to Lockwood's rhapsodizing about Jason. That's why I said I agreed with you, above. But on the other hand, I don't really think readers would take this article for serious analysis. It's more like a Fantasia. Still, I'm hyper-sensitive when it seems like some are being treated with less fairness. I'm not saying you are hyper-sensitive, just that I am.

As for the husband's tone of voice, maybe "fake whining" isn't the best term I could have chosen. I just thought it sounded like the kind of interaction that this husband and wife are accustomed to .... whimsical, playful language between the two of them. And I did, even on first reading, think the swan-and-see-through-shirt remark was very funny. A playful exaggeration. And I wasn't, and still am not, at all offended by it, even though Rippon's one of my very favorites! It seems like the Darth Vader remark was in the same tone, and I wasn't offended by it either, just puzzled. That's the way I'd expect many others to take those two remarks, and maybe it would lead some readers to look Nathan up on you tube.

I don't know Lockwood and of course I can't read her mind. But I can speculate. If someone read her article and found it stunning and magical and imaginative in the moment .... but then a few hours later couldn't quite recall why they loved it so much and used the word "amnesia" ... I'm not sure, but I think it's possible she'd be okay with that. Like, if her primary aim were to give people an experience that they don't normally get when reading a magazine article, then it's possible she'd be happy. I may have to read her book, just to explore her style and my thoughts about it further.!!!

Thread Seriously . But at least I'm not the only one.

 

[ice coverage]

... maybe it would lead some readers to look Nathan up on you tube. ...

To give credit where credit is due :

I do not know whether the credit belongs specifically to Lockwood (who perhaps requested video hyperlinks??) or to an an editor/webmaster/staffer of NYTM/nytimes.com (who perhaps provided links without any nudging from the author??).

In any case, the online version of Lockwood's piece does have hyperlinks to a number of Jason videos ... as well as to Nats videos of the SPs of Adam and Jimmy Ma, plus Nathan's FS. Also to a video of Michelle Kwan.

Very convenient for any online readers who are motivated by Lockwood's writing to want to see skating videos (of Jason and/or others) .​

 

[Mrs. P]

I think it's okay since the article is about Jason.

For me, that's why struck me so much about this piece when I read it the first itme. It's such a different take on figure skating then I usually read. Perhaps cause it's free of things like "base value" or a chronicle of all the quads landed in the program. Her writing style was just so interesting and fun! And yes, if you're a Jason fan (as I am -- and look bringing it back to the thread, guys), this piece was welcoming because she described so well why she -- and his fans in general-- are so drawn to his skating and his performance in spite of his technical abilities. I also really enjoyed how she described her other skating experiences -- watching Yuri on Ice and watching U.S. Nationals on television.

She seems quite well-regarded as a writer and her writing style does resonate with people, which is why she seems to get very interesting assignments, such as covering a presidential campaign rally for The New Republic or this piece on Jason. I think she has a unique way of documenting experiences and profiling people. Honestly, I came into the article excited because it was about Jason, but I came out eager to read more work Lockwood wrote.

ETA: Look at these girls totally emulating Jason's spiral/spin positions, LOL.

 

[Mathman]

I wonder if Ms. Lookwood is reading this thread.

 

[dorispulaski]

Mrs. P, have you tweeted a link to it to her?