wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

OK, well said, but is it really "gratitude" we're expressing? Look, some performances are better than others. We can still show respectable applause for the performer's efforts. We're not going to throw rotten fruit at them or storm out of the concert hall. But should we automatically leap to our feet when the performance doesn't merit it? That's being dishonest. We're not all winners all the time,you know, and it insults the performer to receive lavish respones on a bad night. Warm thanks for a lousy dinner is a different matter. That's being gracious.

Given the difficulties and challenges we face in this world, I cannot believe that we are concerning ourselves with people expressing gratitude. Worse yet, essentially grading their ability to discern a great performance, rather than just enjoying their enthusiasm. Honestly, does it really do any harm at all in the scheme of things? Let everyone enjoy in their way (so long as it does not impede upon others - like speaking during a performance), and move on to more important things.

I think ovations are often a sign of an unsophisticated audience. In addition common sense tells me, though I haven't graphed it, that there is some direct relationship among the following trends: steeply rising ticket prices, increase in over-the-top enthusiasm, and general increase in self indulgance and lack of civility.

I think standing ovations are just fine. They may mean less than they used to, but then people spend less time together than before computers, malls and cell phones -- and social conventions change. Criticizing people finding a way to show appreciation for someone's efforts is really rather snotty. Does it really matter, when you thank someone for dinner, how good the dinner was? You thank them just as warmly regardless of how inedible it was.

I believe much of this is a baby boomer phenomenon and learned largely from rock concerts and other mass gatherings. There is desperate need to have a good time, a need to belong, to show in a very demonstrable way that we are all connected and I'm an important part of this.

A group-think, group feel-good... All Kumbaya, all the time.

It seems to me a related behavior has also infiltrated audiences in politcal forums & debates, an inablity to show restraint and a conceit that everyone shares my beliefs.

#17 That's very true. People pay a lot to see a big name like Yo-Yo Ma and just assume anything he does merits a big ovation. Sometimes audiences are savvy though: I recently heard the Emerson Quartet do a new piece by Kaija Saariaho at Carnegie. It wasn't a very appealing piece - very dissonant, hard-edged and aimless - and the audience responded with a polite but reserved applause.

I think people are afraid to recognize mediocrity when it exists. Sometimes a perfomance is simply OK, and the audience should learn how to recognize it. Just because yo-yo ma is a fantastic cellist, does not mean the piece of music he chooses to perform is; just because it is a "world" or "new york" premiere, does not mean it is an astounding piece of music. I think the excessive ovation has now diluted an audience's ability to laud a truly worthwhile piece. It is like, not to be cliche, the use of "breathtaking" in the Seinfeld episode.

It's because tickets are so incredibly expensive. People have to rationalize paying these outrageous prices by reacting as if they've seen the greatest thing ever. It must have been worth it if we gave it a standing ovation....

Sometimes we forget that many theatre goers on Broadway are going to a Broadway performance for the first time. All of us remember our first Broadway experience and I am sure most of remember that experience as being positive, exciting and moving... that emotion is hard to recapture and since the auidience is filled with newbie theatre goers, what is so wrong with them ovating?

I think people stand a lot possibly because a lot of people don't go to many shows, and therefore have little to compare performances to. Also, perhaps people feel a bit ignorant of theater etiquette, and if they see a few people stand, that it gives them permission to stand too. And that they may feel awkward just staying more passively in their seats.

My pet peaves are the claque syndrome, where arias are followed by applause and "bravo's" in the midst of an opera, and the seeming need of people to jump in and applaude the moment a piece of music is finished, without letting the sound reverberations even die away. Somehow, showing that you were the first to know that the piece has finished has become a major competition. And this is true in Europe as well as here.

I was so disappointed, 3 times in a row, seeing teh movie Hairspray in audiences taht didn't even tap their feet or nod their heads! How can an audience not respond to Hairspray??? I hope you are not so smug on this!!!

While I agree that the audiences are less discerning I think the real reason for the current popularity of the standing ovation is because the person in front of you stands up and you cannot see so you stand too!

People are so grateful to see live performers that they feel they must interact with them in a noticeable way. I don't think this happened much before movies and TV.

The audience at a ballet performance (e.g. American Ballet Theater at the Met Opera House) like to yell "Bravo" and clap before the end of a passage of music. It's annoying because that is usually the crescendo of the music and dance and the dancers are doing the most difficult techniques. How much distraction is that to the dancers?

I've always heard that a person should only give a standing ovation three times in their lives -- if that's true then people should be much more careful about the ovations they give! I've only given one standing ovation in my life.

I saw the Moody Blues at Radio City last night. A woman sitting next to me had to stand up and applaud after every - EVERY - song. It got quite annoying. By the end of the concert you had to stand because everyone was on their feet already and there was no seeing the stage if you stayed in your seat. Now I understand this is a rock 'n roll concert and different rules apply but the meaning and honor of a standing ovation has truly lost it's gravetas.
MMN

"Frenzied approval from the balcony" as Glenn Gould described it, is in my opinion an indication of the audience's desperate desire to be part of the performance. They can't neccessarily sing or play the piano, but by God they sure can clap and be noticably loud. Is there a prescription for EOS?

Do concert organizers still hire applauders? It used to be (in the 70s, at least) that you could get free tickets simply to be part of a cheerleading group. Apparently, one person in a red jacket would be up front and lead the applause, and the other shills would follow. Anyone know anything about this?

What George wrote is exactly what Stephen Sondheim said about the phenomenon.

A lot of busy people who make the time and go to the expense of attending a concert, opera, or show simply want the experience to live up to their high expectations. In the case of a lackluster performance, the audience reaction takes up the slack. It's a kind of mass denial that the undertaking might have been a colossal waste of time and money.

Even worse than the jumping up and clapping madly, like in old Reichstag footage, is the ass who bleats out "Bravo", before the last note of the piece has rung out. Is that guy (he must be on the same subscription cycle as I am) so eager to be immortalized on every recording? There is never the chance to take a deep breath and let the pleasure of the performance linger for just a moment or two more.

Whenever I go to the New York Philharmonic concerts I see what I like to call the "standing evacuation." The minute the piece is over the audience starts to rise to their feet and, while still applauding, slowly shuffles their way up the aisle. The ovation is just a way to get to their cars so they can beat the rush to Connecticut.