No More Secrets?
Tue, 11 July 2000, 11:27 pmGrant Malcolm23 posts in thread
No More Secrets?
Tue, 11 July 2000, 11:27 pmMaybe it's because I've managed to personally avoid the wrath of the bewhiskered one, but i've not been entirely unappreciative of the commentaries posted under the pseudonym "Secret Squirrel".
I'm not sure whether i find his/her nasty remarks any more or less pleasing, illuminating or fulfilling than some of the occasionally fatuous "the show was fantastic. i loved it" comments that pepper this message board.
Certainly the first couple of commentaries on Butterflies Are Free and Bumpy Angels appeared to be at least partly considered and thought out. The most recent message really seemed to be plumbing the depths of bile though.
I'd like to encourage Squirrel to keep writing critiques - under your real name. You don't need to own up to who you are, that's not my point. I just can't help feeling that if you posted under your own name, you would take a little bit more time rephrasing some of the hasty, nastier things you have said. Not that you should cut out the critical comments, but that you might give them at least a light dusting of icing sugar to help them go down. It would be much harder for people to dismiss you out of hand if you weren't so dismissive yourself. People would still hear your criticisms, but would take them on board more readily if they sense that you have made an effort to understand their difficulties and you share their passion.
Finally, if you really can't find anything positive to say, perhaps it's better to say nothing at all?
Cheers
Grant
I'm not sure whether i find his/her nasty remarks any more or less pleasing, illuminating or fulfilling than some of the occasionally fatuous "the show was fantastic. i loved it" comments that pepper this message board.
Certainly the first couple of commentaries on Butterflies Are Free and Bumpy Angels appeared to be at least partly considered and thought out. The most recent message really seemed to be plumbing the depths of bile though.
I'd like to encourage Squirrel to keep writing critiques - under your real name. You don't need to own up to who you are, that's not my point. I just can't help feeling that if you posted under your own name, you would take a little bit more time rephrasing some of the hasty, nastier things you have said. Not that you should cut out the critical comments, but that you might give them at least a light dusting of icing sugar to help them go down. It would be much harder for people to dismiss you out of hand if you weren't so dismissive yourself. People would still hear your criticisms, but would take them on board more readily if they sense that you have made an effort to understand their difficulties and you share their passion.
Finally, if you really can't find anything positive to say, perhaps it's better to say nothing at all?
Cheers
Grant
RE: No More Secrets?
Wed, 12 July 2000, 11:31 amWalter Plinge
What you say is fair enough Grant, but surely in the small, sometimes claustrophibic theatre community that we have all chosen to be a part of, we should expect peer reviews.
If you don't know who somebody who reviews a show is, then you have idea how seriously to take it.
For example the rodents last review commented upon a song in a production being mostly spoken instead of sung. A later poster pointed out that the speech was deliberate and intentional, so the SS comment was in fact, poorly informed. In order to sensibly review something or comment upon it, one must actually know something about it.
If you want give your impressions then fine, however a critique must be based upon more objective criteria than simply opinion, otherwise the ITA would collar people off the street and turn them into judges instead of using experienced theatre people.
Posters like SS and his/her ilk should be discouraged, why cause dissent with uninformed negative critisicm, when you can cause as much fuss without the rancour with fair and honest reviews(which presupposes some theatrical knowledge).
SS has always pretended to be treading the high moral ground in this issue. The school of "everything is crap, and I am the only one with the courage to say something honestly about it" is where he/she purports to come from. In fact SS has consistently shown a meanness of spirit, ignorance and a spirited desire to trash other peoples work that contradicts the so called honesty of the reviews.
If SS was a known animal then its own body of work would be available for critical review and the criteria for its judgements could be understood, then the posts could be understood in the context of its own accomplishments.
Whats wrong with theatre people having thin skins anyhow? We put enough time/effort/love/money/time/time/time into our work, so we dont want somebody trashing it. Constructive criticism is only useful if we are convinced that the person who delivers it to us knows more than we do or has a different approach that we can possibly benefit from.
Anyway rave over for the moment, I enjoy what I have done in theatre and when I have received bad reviews, I have mostly deserved them, but I would have been incensed and extremely angry if someone had said that my performances were "Crappy beyond belief" instead of "Gary has done better" or "Dissapointing performance from Gary" or "Some of the cast could do with some polishing".
There are many ways to damn something without causing personal offence.
That is really the issue with SS, why should he/she be allowed to slander us and ours without repercussion. If this was the real world, people would be a little more cautious than they are in this forum.
Best Regards to everyone
Gary Barnes
If you don't know who somebody who reviews a show is, then you have idea how seriously to take it.
For example the rodents last review commented upon a song in a production being mostly spoken instead of sung. A later poster pointed out that the speech was deliberate and intentional, so the SS comment was in fact, poorly informed. In order to sensibly review something or comment upon it, one must actually know something about it.
If you want give your impressions then fine, however a critique must be based upon more objective criteria than simply opinion, otherwise the ITA would collar people off the street and turn them into judges instead of using experienced theatre people.
Posters like SS and his/her ilk should be discouraged, why cause dissent with uninformed negative critisicm, when you can cause as much fuss without the rancour with fair and honest reviews(which presupposes some theatrical knowledge).
SS has always pretended to be treading the high moral ground in this issue. The school of "everything is crap, and I am the only one with the courage to say something honestly about it" is where he/she purports to come from. In fact SS has consistently shown a meanness of spirit, ignorance and a spirited desire to trash other peoples work that contradicts the so called honesty of the reviews.
If SS was a known animal then its own body of work would be available for critical review and the criteria for its judgements could be understood, then the posts could be understood in the context of its own accomplishments.
Whats wrong with theatre people having thin skins anyhow? We put enough time/effort/love/money/time/time/time into our work, so we dont want somebody trashing it. Constructive criticism is only useful if we are convinced that the person who delivers it to us knows more than we do or has a different approach that we can possibly benefit from.
Anyway rave over for the moment, I enjoy what I have done in theatre and when I have received bad reviews, I have mostly deserved them, but I would have been incensed and extremely angry if someone had said that my performances were "Crappy beyond belief" instead of "Gary has done better" or "Dissapointing performance from Gary" or "Some of the cast could do with some polishing".
There are many ways to damn something without causing personal offence.
That is really the issue with SS, why should he/she be allowed to slander us and ours without repercussion. If this was the real world, people would be a little more cautious than they are in this forum.
Best Regards to everyone
Gary Barnes
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···