rescripted.org: We’re baaaaaaack. Much like Johnny in The Shining y’all don’t know how to quit. This is the third installment in “Dear White Critics,” the series that never should have been, and unfortunately it focuses on a couple of beloved Chicago critics who each made a really offensive judgement call in different ways.
3 comments:
The review being critiqued in this article is so extremely rude I cannot begin to address all of its issues. Not only is it ableist to say that because of a medical condition she should not have performed the role, but it is unbelievably unprofessional to insinuate her career is on the decline. Clearly, the company felt that her talents were strong enough that it was worth it to keep her on the show after the side effects of her medication presented themselves. I find it odd that this critic treated her performance as if she couldn't be bothered to memorize her lines even though he knows the situation. Maybe the critic is right and her on book performance was too distracting, but I think he could have handled his take down in a more professional manner. Things happen. Actors get hurt or handle adverse reactions to medications, but that does not mean they cannot perform their jobs.
Any time someone tells me ableism, sexism, and ageism aren't "really an issue" anymore I'm going to start directing them to this article. Honestly, I am so f*ing tired of women being reduced to baby makers and the sum of a mans success. Believe it or not, it's possible for a woman to have a successful career, have children, and continue working as long as she pleases. This article reeks of condescension and disrespect. This review isn't even about the performance itself, but rather entirely focused on using as much outdated misogynistic ableist thinking possible. Regardless of the performance itself (Which I'm sure was impressive given her status in the community) the idea that this theater company was willing to be accommodating to have her in the show deserves to be acknowledged and supported, because it's about time for theaters to start incorporating disability that may affect the tools an actor needs to participate in the performance.
AHHH WHY ARE THERE CRITICS OUT THERE THAT PEOPLE PAY TO BE LIKE THIS!? I literally don’t understand the point of theatre critics when the majority of them just seem to be bad. Like I’m sure there are good ones I just see things about the bad ones but imagine if there were only good ones. Imagine a world where we could read a review and actually believe the authenticity of the viewpoint being given without having to wonder if the person giving the viewpoint is overlooking many important things such as ABELISM AND AGISM [OH AND SEXISM??????] WHICH ARE THINGS THAT SHOULD NOT BE OVERLOOKED ESPECIALLY BY POWERFUL PEOPLE LIKE THEATRE CRITICS WHO SHOULD KNOW BETTER. (Sorry it seems like I’m yelling in all of my comments this week, but I am MAD). This critic should have known better, or they should not get to be a critic. Obviously though, based on the author’s experience with the critic, it seems like this is not out of the norm, which makes me again say: if you cannot be a good, respectful critic and think about these important things, don’t be a critic.
Post a Comment