Timothée Chalamet was one of the more discussed Oscars snubs this week. For months since the film’s release, critics have celebrated his performance in Marty Supreme as the work of a young actor well on his way to greatness. Chalamet pulled out all the stops both in promoting the film as well as spearheading its Oscar campaign. The film itself earned stellar reviews and made $180 million worldwide, garnering nine Academy Award nominations. Yet it went home empty-handed.
Despite all this, most of the commentariat claims Chalamet deserves the slight. Not because he wasn’t great in the film but because of his recent comments on opera and ballet.
Chalamet has found himself in hot water thanks to a now-viral interview where he quipped that “no one cares” anymore about those two art forms. The incident is now being cited as one more piece of evidence that the young actor has let fame go to his head.
The comment provoked a string of toothless retorts from celebrities like Whoopi Goldberg and Nathan Lane as well as wounded reactions from people who have been fighting tirelessly to preserve these venerable traditions.
Many jabs at Chalamet focused on his inability to compete with the sheer artistic talent of dancers and singers, while others insisted on the enduring power of classical performing arts.
These objections miss the point. Opera and ballet are in genuine financial and cultural crisis, and anemic celebrity white knighting does little to expand their audience.
Yet far too many of Chalamet’s critics are ignoring the role of public infrastructure in the modern life of the performing arts. Well into the twentieth century, opera and dance preserved their mass appeal even as new paradigms emerged — including film. Especially in Europe, they did so on the back of ambitious state ownership programs and public funding.
The real question isn’t whether anyone cares about opera and ballet — it’s who will pay to keep them alive. What these art forms need…
Auteur: Jarek Paul Ervin
