The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Arts
6 — Wednesday, April 7, 2021 

A little over a week ago, news broke 

of the death of former Metropolitan 
Opera 
conductor 
James 
Levine. 

Reporters and critics across the 
classical music and opera worlds 
wrote long obituaries that interrogated 
Levine’s complicated legacy.

The first item that most obituaries 

touched upon was Levine’s critical 
success as the conductor of the Met. 
He led the institution for four decades, 
turning a noted opera company 
into the biggest classical music 
organization in America. (Levine also 
spent some time as conductor of the 
Boston Symphony Orchestra and the 
Munich Philharmonic, though neither 
of these posts received as much critical 
attention.)

Following 
this 
explanation 
of 

Levine’s performance career, most 
obituaries mentioned the years of 
sexual misconduct allegations that led 
to Levine’s unceremonious dismissal 
from the Metropolitan Opera last year. 
Numerous young men have accused 
Levine of abusing his power as a 

conductor to sexually assault them; in 
at least one instance, an alleged assault 
was reported to police.

Many critics, performers and 

composers have taken Levine’s death 
as an opportunity to question the 
conductor worship that gave Levine so 
much power in the industry. Perhaps 
Levine’s alleged abuse would have 
been addressed sooner had he not held 
hundreds of careers in his hands.

While I agree with this critique, I 

fear that this singular focus on Levine 
distracts from the larger issue at hand: 
Numerous individuals in positions of 
authority over the course of Levine’s 
career failed to address his alleged 
abuse. With some combination of 
feigned ignorance and deliberate 
silence, these individuals allowed 
Levine’s alleged predation to continue 
unchecked.

The first known allegation of sexual 

assault against Levine, for example, 
comes from 1968, three years before 
he garnered critical acclaim as a 
conductor. Levine was nothing more 
than a 25-year-old faculty member at a 
Michigan music school at the time — it 
was the inherent power of his teaching 
position that aided in his alleged 

perpetration of abuse. 

Had any other faculty members in 

this program learned of this alleged 
abuse, they could presumably have 
taken steps to address the abuse 
without facing significant professional 
repercussions. Levine did not yet hold 
the keys to hundreds of artists’ careers.

Though I can’t speak to the whisper 

network that presumably surrounded 
Levine throughout his professional 
career, I can write about the whisper 
network that long surrounded Stephen 
Shipps, former University of Michigan 
music school professor. (In 2018, I 
helped report four decades of previously 
undisclosed sexual harassment and 
misconduct allegations against Shipps; 
he was indicted on two sex crime 
charges in October and faces a post-
pandemic criminal trial.)

In The Daily’s first article on this 

case, we reported that Shipps’s alleged 
abuse was reported to a music school 
professor in the summer after Shipps’s 
hiring was announced and before 
he started teaching. This was in 1989 
— Shipps had not yet accumulated 
institutional power as a department 
chair, associate dean and youth 
program director. It remains unclear if 

the music school professor reported this 
allegation. It similarly is unknown if the 
University launched any investigation 
before granting Shipps tenure.

A few months ago, I obtained 

a statement that was sent to the 
prosecutors working on Shipps’s 
criminal case. The statement came 
from a former North Carolina School 
of the Arts violin student. In it, he spoke 
of the administrative indifference 
that he believes the school’s dean 
demonstrated 
toward 
allegations 

against Shipps.

“(The 
school’s 
then-dean) 

perpetuated Shipps’ inappropriate 
sexual conduct,” the former student 
wrote, “and allowed it to continue 
for 30 more years at the University of 
Michigan … This could have all ended 
in 1986 if (he) had taken the appropriate 
actions.”

I remember when I first learned 

about 
this 
former 
dean 
while 

interviewing a survivor that later went 
on the record. She mentioned that this 
dean was still teaching at the collegiate 
level. Unlike many of the other 
authority figures she believed ignored 
her allegations of abuse, he could still 
be held accountable for his actions.

When I reached him by email, he 

told me that he could not remember 
much of his time as the dean of the 
North Carolina School of the Arts.

“I was at NCSA from 1986-90,” he 

wrote. “It was long ago, and I have 
done so many things since then. I am 
not sure I could be of much help.”

He did not respond to multiple 

emails providing him with more details 
about the alleged sexual misconduct 
that took place during his time as dean. 
It remains unclear if prosecutors have 
sought to interview him based on the 
information they received.

It took tremendous bravery for nine 

survivors to speak to The Daily about 
the alleged sexual harassment and 

misconduct they experienced, and it 
took significant bravery for numerous 
friends and former colleagues of these 
survivors to corroborate specific 
aspects of their accounts.

It would have taken comparatively 

little bravery for a professor or a 
dean to address allegations of sexual 
misconduct that had been raised against 
their colleague — I would hope that it is 
within a dean’s basic job description 
that they actively address allegations of 
sexual misconduct that leave some of 
their students feeling unsafe.

Ra’anan Alexandrowicz’s (“The 

Law in These Parts”) “The Viewing 
Booth” is perhaps the most stimulating 
and perspective-altering documentary 
that I have ever seen. A film with 
two subjects, the Israeli occupation 
of Palestine and an analysis of 
documentary filmmaking itself, “The 
Viewing Booth” is thoughtful and self-
critical as it explores the manner in 
which we observe.

In short, the viewer of the film 

watches the watcher. A young 
woman, Maia Levy, enters a booth 
and sits before a computer screen and 
camera. Forty YouTube videos have 
been preselected by the filmmaker: 

half represent the perspective of 
Palestinians living under occupation, 
the other half presents the points of 
view of the Israeli settlers’ and soldiers’. 
Levy watches these at her own pace 
and is asked to speak her thoughts 
aloud as she reacts to the footage.

Levy is familiar with the Israeli-

Palestinian conflict: Her parents are 
Israeli, and she recently traveled to 
Hebron. She knows of the human-
rights group, B’Tselem — which 
produced or uploaded many of the 
Palestinian-perspective videos — and 
has seen a few of the clips before. As 
she clicks from video to video, pausing 
occasionally to think and respond, the 
viewer watches her face lit by the blue 
glow of a screen.

On one level, this film is about the 

Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Despite 

Levy’s 
even-handed 
deliverance 

of skepticism (there is much talk of 
events being “staged” — both clips 
of altruism and brutality by the 
Israeli military are given this label), 
she makes her own beliefs clear: 
Israel is acting morally, and there 
must be some justification for this 
mistreatment of Palestinians.

Her honesty is surprising, and 

her occasional racist commentary 
is embarrassing: “They lie a lot,” she 
says, referring to Arabs. She watches 
the videos with a confusing mix 
of open-mindedness and disbelief, 
acknowledging that these videos 
depict real events, but searching for 
the missing piece, the Arab instigation.

At one point, Levy asks: “Why 

would I believe this?” In other words, 
if she believes the Israeli army to be 

acting morally, why take this seriously?

Alexandrowicz has made more 

conventional films about the Israeli 
occupation, and this film offers a 
step back. His decision to make this 
film, to reframe the conversation 
around the viewer and observer of 
the situation in Palestine, becomes the 
film’s true subject by its conclusion. 
Through voice-over, he explains to 
the viewer and to Levy that the reason 
he focuses the film entirely on her, 
despite interviewing other students, 
is because she represents the intended 
viewer of his past films.

Levy’s steadfast skepticism is of 

interest to Alexandrowicz because 
it presents him with a frightening 
possibility: His films might do no 
more than preach to the choir. In this 
sense, “The Viewing Booth” is about 

the act of viewership. The film ends 
with a follow-up interview, in which 
Levy watches the recording of herself 
watching the films. The audience 
is three degrees removed from the 
footage, and the film begins to focus 
more pointedly on the process and 
psychology of watching.

Earlier in the film, Alexandrowicz 

states 
that 
these 
war 
videos 

“transform 
the 
viewer 
into 
a 

witness.” There is perhaps more 
responsibility coded into the latter 
term, as viewership is passive 
while witnessing is implicative. 
Alexandrowicz probes Levy’s desire 
to find fault and place blame on the 
Palestinians as an active resistance 
to this sort of implication, but Levy 
attributes the behavior to bias. She 
recognizes her filtered perspective, 

informed by her identity as the 
Jewish child of Israelis and muddled 
by fictional portrayals of the conflict. 
In a mildly hypocritical defense, 
Levy rejects these videos as possibly 
truthful because they do not show the 
entire picture. The videographer’s 
choices cannot be trusted, according 
to Levy, though she seems to have 
no problem with her own selective 
criticism of the clips.

Levy’s desire for an objective 

perspective illustrates the underlying 
challenge for a filmmaker like 
Alexandrowicz. 
Objectivity 

is 
impossible 
in 
documentary 

filmmaking, as the videographer is 
always making choices. 

Lana Del Rey’s latest album 

Chemtrails Over The Country Club 
will please longtime fans but feel 
lackluster for everyone else.

The album has all the right 

ingredients for a trademark bombshell-
hit with Del Rey’s deep serenade, 
evocative lyrical writing and tongue-
in-cheek references. Yet, Chemtrails 
stops short of the sharp and powerful 
sociopolitical 
commentary 
of 
its 

predecessor, 
Norman 
Fucking 

Rockwell!, 
and 
the 
emotional 

introspection feels underwhelming 
after Lana Del Rey’s recent gut-punch 
in her spoken word poetry release, 
Violets Bending Over Backwards. 
What’s left is an album that’s good but 
not exciting. 

The title itself perhaps dooms the 

album to mediocrity — “Chemtrails” 
recalls 
the 
popular 
conspiracy 

theory that argues the visible lines of 
condensation an aircraft expels in the 
sky are actually filled with chemicals 
intended to harm the public. In a 
time when the truth is constantly 
under attack from wolf-cries of “fake 
news” and the recent rise of QAnon, 
Chemtrails Over The Country Club 
sets the stage for yet another pointed 
evaluation of American culture. The 
album title manages to capture the 
extremes of American life — from the 
wild conspiracy theories of “Q” to the 
idyllic mundanity of suburban life and 
class privilege — yet fails to build upon 
it. The “wrapping paper” of the album 
is in some respects far more thrilling 
than the contents of the package itself. 

Instead, Del Rey focuses on the 

trials and tribulations of fame. The 
song “Chemtrails Over The Country 
Club” celebrates the freedom of daily 
life, capturing that familiar, obligation-

free serenity of hot summers in 
childhood, where the only thing to do 
was wait for time to pass. Notably, the 
official music video features Del Rey’s 
infamous bedazzled mask, which 
is where we last saw Del Rey on the 
pages of The Michigan Daily.

“Dark But Just a Game” explores 

the hefty price of stardom, describing 
artists as chameleons who are forced 
to change until they eventually lose 
themselves — Del Rey vows to stay 
the same, to preserve herself. “Not 
All Who Wander Are Lost” strikes at 
the heart of the album’s core theme: 
It’s all about perspective. Where 
fame may seem a blessing, it is also a 
burden; when one may appear lost, 
perhaps it’s merely “wanderlust.” 
Beneath the dramatics of chemtrails 
and conspiracies, maybe there lies 
a hidden blessing in celebrating the 
boring, the normal, the straight-and-
narrow condensation trails. 

As a storyteller and songwriter, 

Del Rey excels as always. A 
mediocre album for a powerhouse 
like Del Rey is a far better album 
than another’s best work. Yet, while 
Chemtrails Over The Country Club 
offers a handful of tracks that build 
some engaging commentary, it 
lacks the drive of Del Rey’s previous 
works. Del Rey may have set the 
bar too high for herself — a feat 
which speaks only to her talent and 
celebrated career thus far. 

What holds the album back is 

the lack of stylistic experimentation 
or any fresh, noteworthy material. 
Chemtrails is a shoo-in Lana Del 
Rey album — a blessing and a 
curse. Those who love Del Rey will 
continue to love her, but anyone still 
not convinced will find little here to 
sway them.

The culture of complicity must end

Lana Del Rey’s ‘Chemtrails Over The 
Country Club’ is good, but not great

Ann Arbor Film Festival 2021: Observing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in ‘The Viewing Booth’

Read more at 
MichiganDaily.com

Read more at 
MichiganDaily.com

MADELEINE VIRGINIA GANNON

Daily Arts Writer

SAMMY SUSSMAN
Daily Arts Contributor

ROSS LONDON
Daily Arts Writer

Design by Emily Gordon

This image is taken from the official music video for “Chemtrails Over The Country Club” by Lana Del Rey.

puzzle by sudokusnydictation.com

By Jeff Stillman
©2021 Tribune Content Agency, LLC
04/07/21

Los Angeles Times Daily Crossword Puzzle

Edited by Rich Norris and Joyce Nichols Lewis

04/07/21

ANSWER TO PREVIOUS PUZZLE:

Release Date: Wednesday, April 7, 2021

ACROSS

1 Go __: hit to right 

field batting right-
handed, say, in 
baseball lingo

5 Trying to block
9 Performs like 

Missy Elliott

13 Ruckus
14 Eve’s opposite
15 Sun: Pref.
16 *Second 

Commandment 
prohibition

18 Heroic sagas
19 “Awake and 

Sing!” dramatist

20 South Carolina 

state tree

22 *Old-fashioned 

parting words

25 See stars
26 Widen, as pupils
30 Fri. preceder
33 “Oh dear!”
36 Sherpa’s home
37 *“Cheese stands 

alone” kids’ song 
title guy

41 When some 

dinners are 
served

42 Delhi wrap
43 “Narcos” org.
44 Certain Tibetan
46 Sounds of disgust
49 *Metaphorical 

insect observer

55 “Yada, yada, 

yada”

58 Old copy
59 Little pigs 

number

60 Go to pieces, or 

what’s literally 
hidden in the 
answers to 
starred clues

63 Tally again
64 Skeleton prefix
65 Grandson of Eve
66 Geologic spans
67 __ buco
68 “The Banana 

Boat Song” 
opener

DOWN

1 No longer using
2 Designer bag 

brand

3 Not as bright
4 Raw bar mollusk
5 “__ imagining 

things?”

6 Doze
7 Figurative 

expression

8 Eloper’s 

acquisition

9 Drove back

10 Came down
11 Early Briton
12 Just okay
15 Fashion variable
17 Sunrise dirección
21 Was ahead
23 Get wind of
24 MLB pitcher 

Dock profiled 
in the 2014 
film “No No: A 
Dockumentary”

27 Parroted
28 One shared at a 

campfire

29 Jazz legend 

Fitzgerald

30 Maker of 

nonstick 
cookware

31 Doth possess
32 Constellation 

bear

34 Political 

commentator 
Navarro

35 Walk with a 

swagger

38 Many printer 

jams

39 Praised highly
40 Elevation word
45 “Science Guy” 

Bill

47 Blood: Pref.
48 Ran through a 

reader

50 Lover of 

Euridice, in a 
Monteverdi 
work

51 Tandoori breads

52 Maytag rival
53 “Bad, Bad” Brown 

of song

54 Bear voiced by 

Ned Beatty in 
“Toy Story 3”

55 Basic French 

verb

56 “Sons of 

Anarchy” actor 
Rossi

57 Fruit drink prefix
61 Mormons’ gp.
62 Bath bathroom

SUDOKU

Sudoku Syndication
http://sudokusyndication.com/sudoku/generator/print/

1 of 1
5/26/09 3:34 PM

2
1

4
9
1

3
8

3

5

8

1

8
3

4

2

6

5

2

9

8

5
1

8

4

7

WHISPER

“I have the 
emotional fragility 
of a pinecone”

“Hi Mom!”

By Joe Deeney
©2021 Tribune Content Agency, LLC
03/31/21

Los Angeles Times Daily Crossword Puzzle

Edited by Rich Norris and Joyce Nichols Lewis

03/31/21

ANSWER TO PREVIOUS PUZZLE:

Release Date: Wednesday, March 31, 2021

ACROSS

1 Toronto Raptors 

president of 
basketball 
operations __ 
Ujiri

6 “Ditto!”

11 Qatar’s capital
15 Largest members 

of the dolphin 
family

16 B’s equivalent
17 Iridescent gem
18 2010s sci-fi crime 

drama starring 
Michael Emerson

21 Two after epsilon
22 Full Sail offering
23 “Rats!”
24 Completed in 

haste

30 Bill collection?
32 Diva’s numbers
33 Stalls
35 NBA official
37 “I’ll skip it”
38 Noodle output?
39 Equine sprinter
42 Leave speechless
44 “Silly me!”
45 Discouraging 

words

46 NBC drama with 

two pronouns in 
its title

48 Brass in parades
52 Name that’s 

also a Roman 
numeral

53 Pull-and-peel 

food item

57 Dresden denial
59 Castle 

queenside, in 
chess notation

60 “Atonement” 

author McEwan

61 “Start at the 

beginning,” and 
a hint to the four 
other longest 
Across answers

67 Smoothie berry
68 Traffic cop?
69 More loyal
70 Ping-Pong 

supplies

71 Kids
72 Showing one’s 

claws, so to 
speak

DOWN

1 Fuel-efficient 

bikes

2 Playground 

rebuttal

3 Prescription, to a 

layperson?

4 Remote batteries
5 Prefix with 

metric

6 Take to task
7 Did in
8 Whom Clay 

became

9 Fellow

10 Wednesday kin
11 TV explorer with 

a monkey named 
Boots

12 Hygienist’s 

request

13 Can really play
14 Ctrl-__-Del
19 Photographer 

Goldin

20 Freezer aisle 

brand

25 Shutout feature
26 Crossing the 

pond, say

27 Pronoun-shaped 

girders

28 Hurry
29 Emmy winner 

Cicely

31 Anti-traffic org.
34 Crying need
36 Cold coat
37 __ Challenge: 

soft drink 
promotion

39 Shake in fear 

over

40 Series of dates
41 With 66-Down, 

nest egg option

42 Cardinal letters
43 Metaphor for 

a treacherous 
situation

47 Ain’t right?
49 Lebanon’s 

capital

50 How flatware is 

usually sold

51 Guard at the gate
54 Time being
55 “We Got the 

Beat” group

56 Trig. ratio
58 Goddess with 

cow’s horns

61 Ceiling fixture
62 Big bang letters?
63 Mare’s meal
64 Really bug
65 Consumer 

protection org.

66 See 41-Down

WHISPER

Read more at 
MichiganDaily.com

