Suck The Culture Right Out of Society We went to go see the Atlanta Ballet perform Dracula a few weeks back. Visually pleasing, stunningly choreographed, dramatic in its theatrics, not to mention homoerotic, the show was enjoyable to watch. It's precision was inspiring. However, I didn't make too many friends sitting around me. In fact, I downright pissed off the friends I came with. Seems no one took too kindly to my revelation at the first intermission, "It's kind of dark and gothic ­ like Madonna in her 'Like a Virgin' days." Apparently comparing high art to pop culture is a bit of a taboo. It's "disrespectful" and "rude." I've always had the impression the mainstream arts, or Classical Arts, are self-glorified to the point where one can question whether it's really art. But this impression didn't form at one ballet. A few years back, the members of the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra refused to play their season, and went on strike. They thought 14 weeks vacation and an average starting salary somewhere around $70k was not enough for the seasoned artist. Forgive me; but that sounds like a group of autoworkers, not cultural conveyers interpreting the world we live in. I learned during the artists' strike, from the propaganda the orchestra produced, that it was about respect. Respect the art. Respect the performer. What came through was a secondary message: don't question the quality or the inspiration ­ it's art. And art, good art at that, costs money. If that's the case, then art exists for the sole sake of art itself. It has been reduced to an economic engine. And what ever happened to respecting the audience, and their interpretation of the artist's interpretation? Or did that just never exist? What I don't understand is why it's forbidden to talk about art and culture and it's impact on every day life. I mean we talk about sports heroes and their drug habits, and celebrities and their private lives. We talk about their influence on children, and turn to them as natural leaders, whether they were born to lead or not. But when we talk about something slightly meaningful, like the profound influence of an individual artist (in this case, Madonna) on all the performing arts, and conversely the art community's affect on an individual artist, it's suddenly taboo to correlate art to popular culture. Now I've only been to three ballets, and I can't say that I saw the ballet pre-Madonna. So when it comes to ballet, I'm like a virgin, so-to-speak. But my hunch says the ballet has become increasingly elaborate. My hunch is that changes in society's expectations, fueled by corporate institutions like M-TV and FedEx (which continue to speed up our society), have forced the Ballet, as have all cultural institutions, to be more hip, and to push the mainstream envelope. They must reinvent themselves, or find themselves struggling for survival. Why can't we acknowledge those forces that require the creative leaders of these institutions to look at their art and the way in which they interpret the world in entirely new perspectives? After all, that is the very essence of what they're trying to do for us as audience members, isn't it? Why can't we say "It was Madonna who took us to a new level"? After all, she never went on strike, abandoning her loyal audience because she didn't have enough vacation time. During the curtain call, we (as in the collect audience, we) gave at least three-and-one-half minutes of uninterrupted ovation. I worked my triceps two days earlier and, honey, that applause was some serious work. I about cramped up. As my triceps reverberated, I couldn't help but wonder why are we expected, as audience members, to provide standing ovations to a cast and crew, yet at the same time, forbidden to question their motives and influences? That, in itself, will be the death of culture. Not Madonna mimicking masturbation on a mattress. February 2002