CMU School of Drama

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

What the Debate Over That "Big River" Review Really Means

Clyde Fitch Report: It’s rare that a piece of theatre criticism kicks open debate in the way that the New York Times’ Feb. 9 review of the Encores! revival of Big River did. Although Laura Collins-Hughes gave a largely positive account of the 1985 Tony-winning musical, which is based on Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

1 comment:

Julien Sat-Vollhardt said...

This article puts forth a very interesting and sad problem that has been plaguing the united states recently, and that is the breaking down of popular and political discourse and debate such that the parties involved are so polarized and proud that they essentially just start throwing shit at each other. I began this presidential race as a bright-eyed newly fully-fledged citizen ready to exercise my right to vote and participate in this great american democratic system, and I kept myself up to date with the state of politics. I signed myself up to the New York Times first draft on politics, I trie to engage in reasoned debate with people online, but i just became tired. Week after week of both parties engaging in low blows, and the only candidate that I really believed in, that I really felt anything more than complete apathy for, was essentially cheated out of a fair shot at the election. Now we have a person as president who cannot tolerate any form of criticism of himself or his dysfunctional administration, and attacks anyone who does so with endless Ad Hominem insults. And people see this, and now they think it's okay. They think it's a proper method to rebutt a New York Times article to tweet that they're a "failing business". I'm just tired.