Directors

> It's getting very crowded on Eliot's side of the boat.But, of course. My friends stand behind, on top of, and in front of me, and my foes wanna see me drown! :-)> In the case outlined by the Phantom i have little sympathy for> the complaint about someone daring to criticise their fellow actors.> Particularly as the critic in question apparently had the courage> to put their name to their comments, when the Phantom doesn't. But,> i wonder if it was really in the club's best interests to publish> the original critical comments?Therein lies a dilemma. On the tiny scale at which I have been occasionally asked to review a club's productions for their newsletter, I have practiced the Manly Art of Self-Censorship a) to get the damn thing in print, and b) to fall into an unspoken editorial policy of showing the club in good light.As anyone in this game of Community Theatre knows, it's hard enough for clubs to get patronage without some hellfire meat-sickened Dorothy-Parker-esque death-gimp with a computer writing reviews (however honest) slamming the group in their own newsletter. This is not so much criticism as reportage, as you're forced (by yourself usually) in to saying how wonderful the production was, regardless of the reviewer's own feelings.So is it ever in a group's interest to publish reviews in their own newsletters. Remember "DRAMATIK" magazine? Blood was shed over certain scribblings in that little organ, my friends... Learn ye your lessons well.El