HowlRound: It wasn't exactly an ambush, but the first question actor Bernardo Cubria posed to me as a guest on his theatre podcast was about a complaint that actors have about critics. I was his sixtieth guest, and his first theatre critic.
Why do so many reviews, he asked, just summarize the plot and not give an opinion? Later he complained that a critic’s opinion in a review upset a friend of his who had spent “three months of her life” dedicated to her show.
3 comments:
I believe this article does hold some weight in the position of theatre critics, but it does ramble onto other topics that don’t seem as relevant. In the beginning of the article, Mandell outlines that most people believe theatre critics to be negative and that they “summarize the plot and not give an opinion”, which I’ve noticed a lot of in reviews, to be honest. But also, I think reviews need to be read mainly between the lines, and not word-for-word. It’s often the tone with which a critic writes rather than what they say that matters. I think that over the years, critics’ jobs have been outlined to be ‘tell people what the show was about and the general quality’ and that the craft and knowledge of being literarily proficient has been completely dropped from the job requirements. I also think the main audience of reviews is the general public who doesn’t know much about art, but wants to know what show will be the best to see.
Critics are essential to the work we do in our industry. I believe this that there simply needs to be someone who will tell us what they think about our work. If we don’t get any feedback at all how can one improve upon their work on any given production or project that they are doing. A lot of the time I feel people do not respond well to critics because they are scared that they are going to get negative feedback. To this I respond that is simple part of the job. If you can’t accept that kind of critique get out while you can. Now back to the topic at hand, they are giving you this negative feedback simple to help you improve. And do not worry too much because eventually get it right and the critics will love you! Until then keep working hard on all of your projects!
As artists, we crave feedback. We need it to improve our work and grow as theater makers. So when I read a "theater critique" that consists of a plot synopsis and a few scattered opinions, I cringe and wish I hadn't spent that five minutes of my life reading the the article. When I read opinion pieces, I want to know 'why'. Why was the leading man's performance flat? What made his portrayal of the character unlikable and cold? There's only so far you can go with "his performance was terrible". It's one thing to judge another person's art, but it's another thing to delve deeper and figure out why you don't agree with it. Whether it be the fear of hurting feelings or what have you, I'm constantly disappointed with our articles from the Tartan written on School of Drama shows. All of them are the same, that everyone was great and that the set was great and the lighting was great etc etc etc.... I understand that the authors are usually non-drama students, but for once, I would love to see them write a scathing review of a show, if only just so we can dismiss them from the confines of Purnell. Tell me I suck. I can handle it. Or at least, I have to get used to it.
Post a Comment