Friday, October 10, 2008
The Other Shore
Pittsburgh City Paper - Pittsburgh: "'Whoops' is what I muttered when I stepped into the auditorium of Carnegie Mellon's Chosky Theater: Even though it was still 10 minutes to 8, I saw that a cast of 14 young men and women was standing stock-still onstage in a circle (as they had already been for several minutes previously), dressed in identical black pants and shirts ... and I knew I was in for an evening of Important International Theater."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I wholeheartedly disagree with several points in this article. Firstly, and most importantly, I don't think that this piece was a poor choice for our school. It was an incredible learning experience for all of the actors, as well as providing new design opportunities for the scenic, lighting, and sound departments. Also, I was completely entranced as an audience member. Maybe Mr. Hoover wasn't as emotionally attached to the piece, but if you were following along, I think that the show did an amazing job of pulling at your heartstrings and really getting you to think about what was happening before you.
I do not believe that this play was a "Whoops", I think that it was done incredibly well, and was an incredibly challenging show that was completed fully.
Well this guy pissed me off; so I wrote him an e-mail. Well, not just him, I also sent it to the editor. Funny thing is that I got a response from the mail server less than a minuet later saying that Mr. Ted Hoover was no longer with steel city news. And with good reason.
The one thing that Ted Hoover said that was fairly interesting was the writers interpretation of women. I also noticed that when watching it, I also noted how few women there were on stage in comparison to the number of men. I think that this was most likely a good choice for the year for School of Drama. I'm sure everyone in the process of the show learned a few things and got a much better sense of a whole culture of theatre hopefully. Yes, maybe this play didn't have that much entertainment value and was a little more of a movement piece but that has nothing to do with why it shouldn't be done.
This review is annoying in the way that it says far more about the reviewer than the actual peice. Ted Hoover doesn't like international theater, Ted Hoover thinks that CMU students didn't get anything out of the show, Ted Hoover thought that the actors were facing the wrong way. I wish Ted Hoover had done more research before Ted Hoover had seen The Other Shore.
While I understand and respect this view, I don't agree with everything said. Personally I feel that the play was the type of theatre that you have to accept not understanding everything. It is very much so a personal experience and the director didn't want to spoon feed the play to an audience (who are used to having everything explained to them). It was a challenging play to watch and I think that it was done very well.
As a person involved firsthand in this production, I have lots of problems with Hoover's article. The show is not meant to be anything in particular--it is what you make it. It seems to me that Hoover went in to this not expecting to like or understand it, and that's precisely what he got.
And speaking to his mention of the lack of women (those in the School of Drama should have noticed this): the cast is made up entirely and exclusively of senior actors. There was never a plan to bring in any other students for this play. As it happened only 4 women actors were available (the others are abroad this semester) and thus the show only had 4 women. Deal with it.
How can someone not get anything out of this show, especially the actors. There is always a response whether good or bad there is a response. And I believe it is unfair of Mr. Hoover to decide for the general masses that one can not get anything out of this show.
It also is very funny that he is no longer with the paper after this article!
I really enjoyed the show and thought it was more interesting than the majority of shows I've seen. I thing the reviewer definitely was too uncomfortable with the way the show was not about one specific thing to enjoy it. While this may have been the way for some of the rest of the audience, it wasn't necessarily a failure of the play, it was a different experience.
Critics that lampoon a show without giving reason are what kill theatre nowadays. People like Ben Brantley and Ted Hoover label and give no reason for their label ing. I agree that the show was a giant acting exercise - but what's wrong with that? This is a school of drama, isn't it?
Post a Comment