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, 05:35 pmI've been following this entire anonyomity debate. for some time, and am certainly in two minds over certain things.
Firstly, I am fifteen years old. Many people may know this, many may not. I turn sixteen years old in September this year, and I joined the amateur theatre scene in February of 1999, when I was fourteen. I have been involved in a number of shows since, most recently 'Bumpy Angels' as Madonna. However, I have been acting since the age of eight, with various classes and with various tutors. I may have never been awarded with anything, but perhaps this merely comes down to the fact that I have never entered any competitions. I may be young, but I have almost eight years experience under my belt. I am not trying to say I am wonderful and better than anyone, because I will be the first person to admit that I am still learning. However, I believe that 90% of the world is still learning, no matter how old. I do not for a moment believe that I know more than most other people around me, but I do understand theatre. Over the years, I have developed a wide knowledge and respect for different forms of theatre. I try to see as many shows as possible, and have attempted to teach myself to be able to watch a show with an open mind, and give it an educated criticism (either good or bad). For this reason, I think the fact that I am young should not be attributed to my inability to review a show (or give an opinion thereof).
Thus, I understand some needs to hide behind a pseudonym, as an opinion such as mine would quickly be surpassed if not liked. Of course, unlike squirrel, I understand the words 'tact' and 'constructive criticism'. I do not pretend for an instance that I have not got a thousand more things to learn, and those of who who know me know I do not believe this. However, my point is that right now there will be certain people reading this, and thinking that it's not even worth reading past the first few lines, in which my age is mentioned. Some will think I have completely missed the point of this debate, and perhaps I have. In ten years time, I know that I will know so much more than I know at the moment. This post is not in defense of Squirrel, because I do not for a moment condone what they have done (and that has nothing to do with the fact that they trashed my singing {and in response to that, I would like to say that 'Bumpy Angels' is a play with music in it, not a musical, so therefore it is not imperative that we can sing}), it is defense of the few people around like myself, who are a bit timid of sharing an opinion or contributing to a debate, due to fear of their opinion being shunned because they are young. A well thought out, concise and diplomatic review is still a review, regardless of the author. In my opinion (dare it be stated), the entire reason this debate has been sparked up is not due to Squirrel's inexperience or age (although even I know who Brecht is, so there's no excuse for seeing it with such a closed mind. It seems Squirrel doesn't understand the idea of different styles of theatre!!), it's due to their cruelty and harsh attitude. If Squirrel had written a tactful review, people would have seen it through different eyes. Unfortunately, due to Squirrel's blatant lack of thought, many young actors now have the fear of having their ideas not respected due to this one person being a (pardon the language) wanker over something they didn't totally understand.
So in conclusion, although we are young, we still have opinions that deserve to be heard. I just pray that in future, I can see a show and post a review without fear of it being rubbished due to age. Perhaps Squirrel doesn't know what they're talking about, but this debate shouldn't end in everyone agreeing that only this age bracket with this many years experience can review, and nobody else can. I don't mean to sound angry or rash, but I am simply trying to help you see where this debate might just be leading. I'm sorry to anyone who didn't get this far, because I was too young to waste your time.
Regards,
Angela.
Firstly, I am fifteen years old. Many people may know this, many may not. I turn sixteen years old in September this year, and I joined the amateur theatre scene in February of 1999, when I was fourteen. I have been involved in a number of shows since, most recently 'Bumpy Angels' as Madonna. However, I have been acting since the age of eight, with various classes and with various tutors. I may have never been awarded with anything, but perhaps this merely comes down to the fact that I have never entered any competitions. I may be young, but I have almost eight years experience under my belt. I am not trying to say I am wonderful and better than anyone, because I will be the first person to admit that I am still learning. However, I believe that 90% of the world is still learning, no matter how old. I do not for a moment believe that I know more than most other people around me, but I do understand theatre. Over the years, I have developed a wide knowledge and respect for different forms of theatre. I try to see as many shows as possible, and have attempted to teach myself to be able to watch a show with an open mind, and give it an educated criticism (either good or bad). For this reason, I think the fact that I am young should not be attributed to my inability to review a show (or give an opinion thereof).
Thus, I understand some needs to hide behind a pseudonym, as an opinion such as mine would quickly be surpassed if not liked. Of course, unlike squirrel, I understand the words 'tact' and 'constructive criticism'. I do not pretend for an instance that I have not got a thousand more things to learn, and those of who who know me know I do not believe this. However, my point is that right now there will be certain people reading this, and thinking that it's not even worth reading past the first few lines, in which my age is mentioned. Some will think I have completely missed the point of this debate, and perhaps I have. In ten years time, I know that I will know so much more than I know at the moment. This post is not in defense of Squirrel, because I do not for a moment condone what they have done (and that has nothing to do with the fact that they trashed my singing {and in response to that, I would like to say that 'Bumpy Angels' is a play with music in it, not a musical, so therefore it is not imperative that we can sing}), it is defense of the few people around like myself, who are a bit timid of sharing an opinion or contributing to a debate, due to fear of their opinion being shunned because they are young. A well thought out, concise and diplomatic review is still a review, regardless of the author. In my opinion (dare it be stated), the entire reason this debate has been sparked up is not due to Squirrel's inexperience or age (although even I know who Brecht is, so there's no excuse for seeing it with such a closed mind. It seems Squirrel doesn't understand the idea of different styles of theatre!!), it's due to their cruelty and harsh attitude. If Squirrel had written a tactful review, people would have seen it through different eyes. Unfortunately, due to Squirrel's blatant lack of thought, many young actors now have the fear of having their ideas not respected due to this one person being a (pardon the language) wanker over something they didn't totally understand.
So in conclusion, although we are young, we still have opinions that deserve to be heard. I just pray that in future, I can see a show and post a review without fear of it being rubbished due to age. Perhaps Squirrel doesn't know what they're talking about, but this debate shouldn't end in everyone agreeing that only this age bracket with this many years experience can review, and nobody else can. I don't mean to sound angry or rash, but I am simply trying to help you see where this debate might just be leading. I'm sorry to anyone who didn't get this far, because I was too young to waste your time.
Regards,
Angela.
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···