Re: views
Fri, 31 Aug 2001, 03:26 pmcrgwllms6 posts in thread
Re: views
Fri, 31 Aug 2001, 03:26 pmThere was a thread a short while ago about the merit of reviews, what degree of criticism is appropriate, and whether being reviewed brutally/honestly by your peers is desirable.
I have to say I found it most refreshing to discover this website an avenue to hear firsthand critique from "Josephine Public". The opportunity to learn what a stranger felt strongly enough to put into words, rather than the cautious compliments from friends at the bar after the show, is extremely valuable feedback.
The issue for me is not whether they are savagely scathing or sickeningly saccharine; whether they are writing to encourage, to sneer, to say "good effort", or "I would have done it like this", or "I've seen better"; or whether the writer is eloquent or even qualified to comment.
The important thing is that they EXPRESS their OPINION.
The reason I feel so strongly about this is that I have just read yet another Ron Banks review in The West (The Wolf At The Heart Of Innocence 31/8/01) that showed he was probably very good at English comprehension at school - he can analyse a plot, find metaphors in the content, draw parallels to current events, and quote from program notes - but in a 500 word review there is NOT ONE SINGLE VALUE JUDGEMENT OR OPINION! He doesn't say whether he liked it or hated it, whether it worked or not, whether you should see the show or save your money...he hasn't had the courage to express any opinion whatsoever about the acting, direction, lighting, production values or audience response, and there's nothing that he couldn't have figured out by just reading the script and looking at the press release photo. Why bother to even come to see the play? What's the point of writing such a review in the first place? Who cares? He obviously doesn't.
Whether I agree with them or not, I respect anyone who CARES enough to put forward their opinion, with the courage of their convictions.
Even a misguided review often has SOME fragment of merit. The only bad review is the one that expresses no opinion at all.
<8>-/====-----------
Craig
I have to say I found it most refreshing to discover this website an avenue to hear firsthand critique from "Josephine Public". The opportunity to learn what a stranger felt strongly enough to put into words, rather than the cautious compliments from friends at the bar after the show, is extremely valuable feedback.
The issue for me is not whether they are savagely scathing or sickeningly saccharine; whether they are writing to encourage, to sneer, to say "good effort", or "I would have done it like this", or "I've seen better"; or whether the writer is eloquent or even qualified to comment.
The important thing is that they EXPRESS their OPINION.
The reason I feel so strongly about this is that I have just read yet another Ron Banks review in The West (The Wolf At The Heart Of Innocence 31/8/01) that showed he was probably very good at English comprehension at school - he can analyse a plot, find metaphors in the content, draw parallels to current events, and quote from program notes - but in a 500 word review there is NOT ONE SINGLE VALUE JUDGEMENT OR OPINION! He doesn't say whether he liked it or hated it, whether it worked or not, whether you should see the show or save your money...he hasn't had the courage to express any opinion whatsoever about the acting, direction, lighting, production values or audience response, and there's nothing that he couldn't have figured out by just reading the script and looking at the press release photo. Why bother to even come to see the play? What's the point of writing such a review in the first place? Who cares? He obviously doesn't.
Whether I agree with them or not, I respect anyone who CARES enough to put forward their opinion, with the courage of their convictions.
Even a misguided review often has SOME fragment of merit. The only bad review is the one that expresses no opinion at all.
<8>-/====-----------
Craig
Re: views
Tue, 4 Sept 2001, 06:37 pmWalter Plinge
Hi Crg ( we know who you are)
I agree that this site is great for those in the industry, but to give Ron his due: A reviewer in the only daily paper in a fairly small town has a lot of power to influence the masses. By this I mean those who don't often have opinions of their own & believe that reviewers must be good/ right cos they are published... Those in theatre will go to a small 'independent' production despite (and often in spite of) a mainstream review... because they know someone in it (or the entire cast, this being Perth) or they think they can learn from seeing the show. The 'man on the street' (who after all can afford theatre tickets far more easily than the rest of us) relies on people like Ron to tell them what is worthwhile. If they see a bad review the slim chance that they would have bought tickets becomes no chance at all.
When Ron does like something he is effusive, and has done amazing things to ticket sales... My guess is that Wolf Lullaby didn't work for him but he didn't want to harm the season - the house was hardly full the night he came, after all. While as a performer this ambivalence is frustrating, but from a management/ pr/ marketing point of view he did you a favour.
Just a thought. Perhaps the moral is not to take mainstream reviews as seriously as those published in places like this site?!
I agree that this site is great for those in the industry, but to give Ron his due: A reviewer in the only daily paper in a fairly small town has a lot of power to influence the masses. By this I mean those who don't often have opinions of their own & believe that reviewers must be good/ right cos they are published... Those in theatre will go to a small 'independent' production despite (and often in spite of) a mainstream review... because they know someone in it (or the entire cast, this being Perth) or they think they can learn from seeing the show. The 'man on the street' (who after all can afford theatre tickets far more easily than the rest of us) relies on people like Ron to tell them what is worthwhile. If they see a bad review the slim chance that they would have bought tickets becomes no chance at all.
When Ron does like something he is effusive, and has done amazing things to ticket sales... My guess is that Wolf Lullaby didn't work for him but he didn't want to harm the season - the house was hardly full the night he came, after all. While as a performer this ambivalence is frustrating, but from a management/ pr/ marketing point of view he did you a favour.
Just a thought. Perhaps the moral is not to take mainstream reviews as seriously as those published in places like this site?!