The Impotence of Seeing Ernest
Wed, 14 July 2004, 10:41 pmWalter Plinge20 posts in thread
The Impotence of Seeing Ernest
Wed, 14 July 2004, 10:41 pmIn my time as a theatre goer, I have read some particularly scathing reviews. I have also observed how little good they do, and subsequently vowed never to fall into the trap of writing such myself.
Consequently, I shall stick to the positives.
Firstly, I was very impressed with the versatility of some of the cast members, as well as the obvious political clout of the Director. I watched and listened in stunned and gratified amazement as first one player then another demonstrated the scope of their capabilities. First Gwennie astonished us all with her ability to switch seemingly at will between a high-falutin', plum-in-the-mouth upper-class English accent and a flat ocker drawl. Then, quick as a wink, she would drop into a fascinating rendition of the famous Monty-Python-esque Frenchman, so beloved of comedy fans around the globe. Before I knew it, she had stunned us all yet again, by bringing that well loved South African figure, Dr Rudy, to the fore, for a couple of quick, snappy oneliners, before reverting to a marvellous rendition of the Lady Bracknell herself.
As a long time Red Dwarf fan, I'm certain you can all imagine my delight on hearing the inimicable Lister being channelled through the otherwise unlikely vessel of dear Cecily.
And my joy, as I'm sure you would expect, knew no bounds when I realised that somehow, someone had managed to convince Mrs Doubtfire to perform the role of Lady Bracknell.
Further examples of the mind-boggling versatility of the performers abounded throughout, all tied together rather pleasingly by the repetition of "orfen" and "orf", to give a continuity of dialogue heretofore unheard of in community theatre.
Some truly gorgeous character notes were to be seen. Algernon Montcrief displayed his disdain for the travails of his servants admirably, by the simple expedient of repeatedly sitting on his coattails. Of course, I was very nearly rapturous when I realised that the butler was unshaven because Algie never told him to shave!!! Algie was so obviously oblivious to the underlings that surrounded him that he simply never even noticed the full, bushy and rather artistically unkempt beard his manservant was displaying. My ecstacy nearly overcame me at this point, and I was forced to leave the auditorium briefly.
I must also commend the back stage crew - it is a thankless task, and it was lovely to be able to hear the sound of the set being constructed from scratch between acts one and two. It lends a deliciously "behind the scenes" sort of feel to the whole production.
Last, but certainly not least, I offer my heartfelt thanks to the Director of this masterpiece. I am something of a student of theatre, and as you may or may not be aware, the position of director is actually a relatively new one. I felt a warm glow or reminiscence growing within me, to see a production that had been directed in the old style, with little or no interference from someone external to the performers themselves, thus allowing the cast members the deep satisfaction and pleasure of fumbling their way through the experience, whistling all the while, but preserving the integrity of their own personal vision in the face of any and all adversity.
Another aspect, with regards to the overall style of the piece, which I feel is noteworthy - I have had the pleasure of seeing Ernest before, and have never had the opportunity to actually catch everything that was said, frequently due to my own laughter, and that of the audience. I am pleased to share that I did not experience this distraction at all, and was thus able to appreciate everything that Oscar had written in full - or at least the majority of it. It was certainly clear to me that the cast had read the script, and were by and large reasonably familiar with not only the overall plot of the play, but the actual text as well.
All things considered, a delightful evening. I feel that my life has been enriched. Of course, I am unable to comment on anything after the beginning of second intermission, as I found I had a vital appointment with a radio documentary on the current socio-political situation in Bangladesh, which I was of course anxious to miss.
Consequently, I shall stick to the positives.
Firstly, I was very impressed with the versatility of some of the cast members, as well as the obvious political clout of the Director. I watched and listened in stunned and gratified amazement as first one player then another demonstrated the scope of their capabilities. First Gwennie astonished us all with her ability to switch seemingly at will between a high-falutin', plum-in-the-mouth upper-class English accent and a flat ocker drawl. Then, quick as a wink, she would drop into a fascinating rendition of the famous Monty-Python-esque Frenchman, so beloved of comedy fans around the globe. Before I knew it, she had stunned us all yet again, by bringing that well loved South African figure, Dr Rudy, to the fore, for a couple of quick, snappy oneliners, before reverting to a marvellous rendition of the Lady Bracknell herself.
As a long time Red Dwarf fan, I'm certain you can all imagine my delight on hearing the inimicable Lister being channelled through the otherwise unlikely vessel of dear Cecily.
And my joy, as I'm sure you would expect, knew no bounds when I realised that somehow, someone had managed to convince Mrs Doubtfire to perform the role of Lady Bracknell.
Further examples of the mind-boggling versatility of the performers abounded throughout, all tied together rather pleasingly by the repetition of "orfen" and "orf", to give a continuity of dialogue heretofore unheard of in community theatre.
Some truly gorgeous character notes were to be seen. Algernon Montcrief displayed his disdain for the travails of his servants admirably, by the simple expedient of repeatedly sitting on his coattails. Of course, I was very nearly rapturous when I realised that the butler was unshaven because Algie never told him to shave!!! Algie was so obviously oblivious to the underlings that surrounded him that he simply never even noticed the full, bushy and rather artistically unkempt beard his manservant was displaying. My ecstacy nearly overcame me at this point, and I was forced to leave the auditorium briefly.
I must also commend the back stage crew - it is a thankless task, and it was lovely to be able to hear the sound of the set being constructed from scratch between acts one and two. It lends a deliciously "behind the scenes" sort of feel to the whole production.
Last, but certainly not least, I offer my heartfelt thanks to the Director of this masterpiece. I am something of a student of theatre, and as you may or may not be aware, the position of director is actually a relatively new one. I felt a warm glow or reminiscence growing within me, to see a production that had been directed in the old style, with little or no interference from someone external to the performers themselves, thus allowing the cast members the deep satisfaction and pleasure of fumbling their way through the experience, whistling all the while, but preserving the integrity of their own personal vision in the face of any and all adversity.
Another aspect, with regards to the overall style of the piece, which I feel is noteworthy - I have had the pleasure of seeing Ernest before, and have never had the opportunity to actually catch everything that was said, frequently due to my own laughter, and that of the audience. I am pleased to share that I did not experience this distraction at all, and was thus able to appreciate everything that Oscar had written in full - or at least the majority of it. It was certainly clear to me that the cast had read the script, and were by and large reasonably familiar with not only the overall plot of the play, but the actual text as well.
All things considered, a delightful evening. I feel that my life has been enriched. Of course, I am unable to comment on anything after the beginning of second intermission, as I found I had a vital appointment with a radio documentary on the current socio-political situation in Bangladesh, which I was of course anxious to miss.
Walter PlingeWed, 14 July 2004, 10:41 pm
In my time as a theatre goer, I have read some particularly scathing reviews. I have also observed how little good they do, and subsequently vowed never to fall into the trap of writing such myself.
Consequently, I shall stick to the positives.
Firstly, I was very impressed with the versatility of some of the cast members, as well as the obvious political clout of the Director. I watched and listened in stunned and gratified amazement as first one player then another demonstrated the scope of their capabilities. First Gwennie astonished us all with her ability to switch seemingly at will between a high-falutin', plum-in-the-mouth upper-class English accent and a flat ocker drawl. Then, quick as a wink, she would drop into a fascinating rendition of the famous Monty-Python-esque Frenchman, so beloved of comedy fans around the globe. Before I knew it, she had stunned us all yet again, by bringing that well loved South African figure, Dr Rudy, to the fore, for a couple of quick, snappy oneliners, before reverting to a marvellous rendition of the Lady Bracknell herself.
As a long time Red Dwarf fan, I'm certain you can all imagine my delight on hearing the inimicable Lister being channelled through the otherwise unlikely vessel of dear Cecily.
And my joy, as I'm sure you would expect, knew no bounds when I realised that somehow, someone had managed to convince Mrs Doubtfire to perform the role of Lady Bracknell.
Further examples of the mind-boggling versatility of the performers abounded throughout, all tied together rather pleasingly by the repetition of "orfen" and "orf", to give a continuity of dialogue heretofore unheard of in community theatre.
Some truly gorgeous character notes were to be seen. Algernon Montcrief displayed his disdain for the travails of his servants admirably, by the simple expedient of repeatedly sitting on his coattails. Of course, I was very nearly rapturous when I realised that the butler was unshaven because Algie never told him to shave!!! Algie was so obviously oblivious to the underlings that surrounded him that he simply never even noticed the full, bushy and rather artistically unkempt beard his manservant was displaying. My ecstacy nearly overcame me at this point, and I was forced to leave the auditorium briefly.
I must also commend the back stage crew - it is a thankless task, and it was lovely to be able to hear the sound of the set being constructed from scratch between acts one and two. It lends a deliciously "behind the scenes" sort of feel to the whole production.
Last, but certainly not least, I offer my heartfelt thanks to the Director of this masterpiece. I am something of a student of theatre, and as you may or may not be aware, the position of director is actually a relatively new one. I felt a warm glow or reminiscence growing within me, to see a production that had been directed in the old style, with little or no interference from someone external to the performers themselves, thus allowing the cast members the deep satisfaction and pleasure of fumbling their way through the experience, whistling all the while, but preserving the integrity of their own personal vision in the face of any and all adversity.
Another aspect, with regards to the overall style of the piece, which I feel is noteworthy - I have had the pleasure of seeing Ernest before, and have never had the opportunity to actually catch everything that was said, frequently due to my own laughter, and that of the audience. I am pleased to share that I did not experience this distraction at all, and was thus able to appreciate everything that Oscar had written in full - or at least the majority of it. It was certainly clear to me that the cast had read the script, and were by and large reasonably familiar with not only the overall plot of the play, but the actual text as well.
All things considered, a delightful evening. I feel that my life has been enriched. Of course, I am unable to comment on anything after the beginning of second intermission, as I found I had a vital appointment with a radio documentary on the current socio-political situation in Bangladesh, which I was of course anxious to miss.
Consequently, I shall stick to the positives.
Firstly, I was very impressed with the versatility of some of the cast members, as well as the obvious political clout of the Director. I watched and listened in stunned and gratified amazement as first one player then another demonstrated the scope of their capabilities. First Gwennie astonished us all with her ability to switch seemingly at will between a high-falutin', plum-in-the-mouth upper-class English accent and a flat ocker drawl. Then, quick as a wink, she would drop into a fascinating rendition of the famous Monty-Python-esque Frenchman, so beloved of comedy fans around the globe. Before I knew it, she had stunned us all yet again, by bringing that well loved South African figure, Dr Rudy, to the fore, for a couple of quick, snappy oneliners, before reverting to a marvellous rendition of the Lady Bracknell herself.
As a long time Red Dwarf fan, I'm certain you can all imagine my delight on hearing the inimicable Lister being channelled through the otherwise unlikely vessel of dear Cecily.
And my joy, as I'm sure you would expect, knew no bounds when I realised that somehow, someone had managed to convince Mrs Doubtfire to perform the role of Lady Bracknell.
Further examples of the mind-boggling versatility of the performers abounded throughout, all tied together rather pleasingly by the repetition of "orfen" and "orf", to give a continuity of dialogue heretofore unheard of in community theatre.
Some truly gorgeous character notes were to be seen. Algernon Montcrief displayed his disdain for the travails of his servants admirably, by the simple expedient of repeatedly sitting on his coattails. Of course, I was very nearly rapturous when I realised that the butler was unshaven because Algie never told him to shave!!! Algie was so obviously oblivious to the underlings that surrounded him that he simply never even noticed the full, bushy and rather artistically unkempt beard his manservant was displaying. My ecstacy nearly overcame me at this point, and I was forced to leave the auditorium briefly.
I must also commend the back stage crew - it is a thankless task, and it was lovely to be able to hear the sound of the set being constructed from scratch between acts one and two. It lends a deliciously "behind the scenes" sort of feel to the whole production.
Last, but certainly not least, I offer my heartfelt thanks to the Director of this masterpiece. I am something of a student of theatre, and as you may or may not be aware, the position of director is actually a relatively new one. I felt a warm glow or reminiscence growing within me, to see a production that had been directed in the old style, with little or no interference from someone external to the performers themselves, thus allowing the cast members the deep satisfaction and pleasure of fumbling their way through the experience, whistling all the while, but preserving the integrity of their own personal vision in the face of any and all adversity.
Another aspect, with regards to the overall style of the piece, which I feel is noteworthy - I have had the pleasure of seeing Ernest before, and have never had the opportunity to actually catch everything that was said, frequently due to my own laughter, and that of the audience. I am pleased to share that I did not experience this distraction at all, and was thus able to appreciate everything that Oscar had written in full - or at least the majority of it. It was certainly clear to me that the cast had read the script, and were by and large reasonably familiar with not only the overall plot of the play, but the actual text as well.
All things considered, a delightful evening. I feel that my life has been enriched. Of course, I am unable to comment on anything after the beginning of second intermission, as I found I had a vital appointment with a radio documentary on the current socio-political situation in Bangladesh, which I was of course anxious to miss.
Babar IIWed, 14 July 2004, 11:48 pm
Re: The Impotence of Seeing Ernest
Thankyou Curtis, I think there's something in that for all of us. Lovely that you managed to pick up on all those subtle nuances, I for one had feared that they would be lost on an audience.
Walter PlingeThu, 15 July 2004, 11:25 am
Re: The Impotence of Seeing Ernest
well well well,
its great to see that after all this time the marloo theatre is finally getting a mention on the ita web site. its just such a shame that the only reason that some people took that "long" drive up the hill (i'm sorry i'm not as good at the subtle sarcasm as some) was for 'revenge' on a certain reviewer in the production.
i wonder if a particular review had not been posted whether there would be such an interest in this show.
as a regular visitor of the darlington theatre players, and a great many other theatre groups for that matter, i was suprised to see a show which i thought was most enjoyable be so negatively portrayed.
Walter PlingeThu, 15 July 2004, 12:33 pm
Re: The Impotence of Seeing Ernest
I've no intention of this degenerating into a flame war, so any further flames to be directed to me personally, please.
This was not about revenge. Worth noting that the review to which Oscar refers was of a play I was not involved in, nor am I partial to the partisanship implied.
I have no wish to discuss this further on a public forum - not for the sake of my sensibilities, I assure you, but rather out of respect for those who have no wish to watch laundry being aired, dirty or otherwise. I'll not respond to further mudslinging, although anyone who wishes to level accusations such as this last would be well served to have a strong argument ready.
For anyone who does wish to discuss my views - and I can promise to be able to support my opinions with extensive and cogent comment - I am happy to make myself available via e-mail.
This was not about revenge. Worth noting that the review to which Oscar refers was of a play I was not involved in, nor am I partial to the partisanship implied.
I have no wish to discuss this further on a public forum - not for the sake of my sensibilities, I assure you, but rather out of respect for those who have no wish to watch laundry being aired, dirty or otherwise. I'll not respond to further mudslinging, although anyone who wishes to level accusations such as this last would be well served to have a strong argument ready.
For anyone who does wish to discuss my views - and I can promise to be able to support my opinions with extensive and cogent comment - I am happy to make myself available via e-mail.
Walter PlingeThu, 15 July 2004, 12:47 pm
Re: The Impotence of Seeing Ernest
I think I know the reason for my performance being sub-par on the night in question. Not wanting to be outdone by the Other Earnest Ernest, I foolishly rushed out to get myself a Prince Albert. Unfortunately it got infected. Truly I was in great pain. Plus my nipple clamps were chaffing. If any of my fellow cast members were performing below their usual excellent standard, undoubtedly it was because of the sympathy and concern they were feeling for my plight. But we can all take heart. After a generous application of soothing ointment by my beloved Gwendoline, the pain and swelling has subsided. Hopefully we will now all be able to concentrate fully on delivering outstanding performances for the remainder of our season.
Walter PlingeThu, 15 July 2004, 04:25 pm
Re: The Impotence of Seeing Ernest
SUCH sarcasm and thinly veiled contempt. Top work!
Interestingly, not posted under your real name...........hmmmm.........if you've got the nullies to speak your mind, and then some, and then some and then some.........don't be hiding behind a Witty and Charming pseudonym!!
Come clean mate!!
That's the shot!
J
Interestingly, not posted under your real name...........hmmmm.........if you've got the nullies to speak your mind, and then some, and then some and then some.........don't be hiding behind a Witty and Charming pseudonym!!
Come clean mate!!
That's the shot!
J
Walter PlingeThu, 15 July 2004, 04:35 pm
The Earnestness of Being Impotent
Mr Crisafulli,
I can understand why you asked for there to be no mudslinging in public as you probably know the mud is going to be aimed directly at you. I'd want to hide too. Now you've been named, the world at large knows who is responsible for this attack, and your review was most certainly an attack.
I have been following this with interest. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't your mother direct An Ideal Husband (a Wilde which I was unfortunate enough not to have seen)? The same play that was reviewed by a 'certain' K. Wallace? The same K. Wallace who appears in The Importance or Being Earnest as both 'Gendoline' and 'Gwennie"?
I've got no problem with reviews that are critical, contsructive and honest, both postive or negative. But honestly, what purpose was your review meant to serve? I got that you didn't like the production, but was it necessary to write about it the way you did? I mean harsh would be an understatement.
It's important in amatuer theatre that we are honest with one another. If there is no constructive criticism, how are we supposed to get any better? However, there was nothing constructive in your review Curtis, which is why I have labelled it an attack.
Chookas
Lee Mathison
(long time lurker, first time poster)
PS I had the 'pleasure' of seeing Curtis in One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest last year at the Studio. When it comes to accents Mr Crisafulli, it pays to remember that those in glass houses should not be throwing stones.
I can understand why you asked for there to be no mudslinging in public as you probably know the mud is going to be aimed directly at you. I'd want to hide too. Now you've been named, the world at large knows who is responsible for this attack, and your review was most certainly an attack.
I have been following this with interest. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't your mother direct An Ideal Husband (a Wilde which I was unfortunate enough not to have seen)? The same play that was reviewed by a 'certain' K. Wallace? The same K. Wallace who appears in The Importance or Being Earnest as both 'Gendoline' and 'Gwennie"?
I've got no problem with reviews that are critical, contsructive and honest, both postive or negative. But honestly, what purpose was your review meant to serve? I got that you didn't like the production, but was it necessary to write about it the way you did? I mean harsh would be an understatement.
It's important in amatuer theatre that we are honest with one another. If there is no constructive criticism, how are we supposed to get any better? However, there was nothing constructive in your review Curtis, which is why I have labelled it an attack.
Chookas
Lee Mathison
(long time lurker, first time poster)
PS I had the 'pleasure' of seeing Curtis in One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest last year at the Studio. When it comes to accents Mr Crisafulli, it pays to remember that those in glass houses should not be throwing stones.
Walter PlingeThu, 15 July 2004, 06:58 pm
Re: The Impotence of Seeing Ernest
I am one of those who frequently lacks the courage to use my real name on these forums, thus I very rarely ever make a contribution. In fact, I am quite certain that this is not a contribution either, merely a comment that has little to do with any review.
I have worked with Kurtis to some extent in the past (as many of you have) and I think I would not be the only person to assume that he knew full well that people would know he was the author, and would therefore find the use or disuse of a pseudonym irrelevant.
He’s not a bashful chap, so in order to avoid disappointment, I wouldn’t try to take issue with him on something as light as his choice of screen name. There are far greater subjects to debate on a ‘Reviews’ forum.
Have fun kids!
I have worked with Kurtis to some extent in the past (as many of you have) and I think I would not be the only person to assume that he knew full well that people would know he was the author, and would therefore find the use or disuse of a pseudonym irrelevant.
He’s not a bashful chap, so in order to avoid disappointment, I wouldn’t try to take issue with him on something as light as his choice of screen name. There are far greater subjects to debate on a ‘Reviews’ forum.
Have fun kids!
crgwllmsThu, 15 July 2004, 07:49 pm
Re: The Importance of Being Anyone
Insert-Charming-Pseudonym wrote:
>
> I am one of those who frequently lacks the courage to use my
> real name on these forums, thus I very rarely ever make a
> contribution.
I've written a couple of posts defending those who prefer to use pseudonyms....
http://theatre.asn.au/read.php?f=19&i=6475&t=6475).
http://theatre.asn.au/read.php?f=19&i=6656&t=6593&v=t
...if I don't know your name from a bar of Northbridge then the only thing that matters is the quality of your ideas. Sometimes even just your pseudonyms are entertaining enough.
Cheers,
Craig
[%sig%]
>
> I am one of those who frequently lacks the courage to use my
> real name on these forums, thus I very rarely ever make a
> contribution.
I've written a couple of posts defending those who prefer to use pseudonyms....
http://theatre.asn.au/read.php?f=19&i=6475&t=6475).
http://theatre.asn.au/read.php?f=19&i=6656&t=6593&v=t
...if I don't know your name from a bar of Northbridge then the only thing that matters is the quality of your ideas. Sometimes even just your pseudonyms are entertaining enough.
Cheers,
Craig
[%sig%]
AJThu, 15 July 2004, 07:54 pm
Re: The Importance of Being Ernest
Ahh - Thank you for this tid bit of information.
Until now I was struggling to understand why someone would profess to write a positive review and then stretch the limits of satire to breaking point in an attempt to cast the show in a negative light.
This prejudice makes things much clearer.
Until now I was struggling to understand why someone would profess to write a positive review and then stretch the limits of satire to breaking point in an attempt to cast the show in a negative light.
This prejudice makes things much clearer.
Walter PlingeThu, 15 July 2004, 08:03 pm
Re: The Importance of Being Anyone
Well said!
I'm finding myself agreeing with you whole heartedly. You appear to speak with intelligence and think about what you're saying...and, surprisingly enough, attempt to 'understand' what someone has written before making your reply.
Although (and this may be hypocritical of me) I am now entirely curious as to 'who' you are, I'm sure your name sounds familiar and I want to know why...
...Still, do any of us know 'who' we are anyway?
cheers
I'm finding myself agreeing with you whole heartedly. You appear to speak with intelligence and think about what you're saying...and, surprisingly enough, attempt to 'understand' what someone has written before making your reply.
Although (and this may be hypocritical of me) I am now entirely curious as to 'who' you are, I'm sure your name sounds familiar and I want to know why...
...Still, do any of us know 'who' we are anyway?
cheers
elisadivaThu, 15 July 2004, 10:44 pm
Re: The Importance of Being Anyone
As a new subscriber to this site, I was very interested to read the rather unfortunate review of The Importance of being Earnest as posted here by "Glad and Frank"
I am totally unconnected with amateur theatre in this or any other state in Australia.
I am, however, a full time working professional in the field.
I have no axe to grind and no backsides to lick.
I greatly enjoyed the performance of the above named play that I saw. And so did the audience I was part of. I think that's all that needs to be said, really. How easy it is to pick on the flaws and not the positives, not only in theatre but in life.
I am totally unconnected with amateur theatre in this or any other state in Australia.
I am, however, a full time working professional in the field.
I have no axe to grind and no backsides to lick.
I greatly enjoyed the performance of the above named play that I saw. And so did the audience I was part of. I think that's all that needs to be said, really. How easy it is to pick on the flaws and not the positives, not only in theatre but in life.
Babar's SisterFri, 16 July 2004, 01:40 am
Publicity
If only this was just a publicity stunt to get sell-out shows.
The nipple clamp references only tickled my interest, but now there's green-room gossip to be told, this show should become a must-see!
Walter PlingeFri, 16 July 2004, 12:04 pm
The Importance of Remembering Why We're Here
Geeze people! ArenÂ’t you supposed to be reviewing the play, not the reviewer and your opinion of their motives?
Someone involved with “An Ideal Husband” didn’t like this production and decided to share that. Someone who is in “The Importance of Being Earnest” didn’t like the other production, and at the time decided to share that. SO WHAT!
They are the opinions of two people who decided to review when the idea doesnÂ’t even cross most peopleÂ’s minds, this doesn't make anyone prejudiced.
If I were to add a third opinion I would say that I didn’t really enjoy “Importance” either, but you know what? It doesn’t matter what I think because the majority of the audience surrounding me obviously did and at the end of the day, they’re the ones who are clapping.
Those involved in a production (professional or otherwise) are never going to be happy with a bad review, so why get upset about it and try to justify actions and motives of either party?
While I think this review in question was delivered in a particularly harsh way, I also respect the request to ‘air dirty laundry’ elsewhere and doubt from the ‘frankness’ of the reviewer that this is to hide, as he never would have come here in the first place if hiding his opinions and identity were on his agenda.
If any of you actually want to review the show now, I look forward to reading your comments. Well done to everyone involved in both shows for entertaining many of your audience members.
Someone involved with “An Ideal Husband” didn’t like this production and decided to share that. Someone who is in “The Importance of Being Earnest” didn’t like the other production, and at the time decided to share that. SO WHAT!
They are the opinions of two people who decided to review when the idea doesnÂ’t even cross most peopleÂ’s minds, this doesn't make anyone prejudiced.
If I were to add a third opinion I would say that I didn’t really enjoy “Importance” either, but you know what? It doesn’t matter what I think because the majority of the audience surrounding me obviously did and at the end of the day, they’re the ones who are clapping.
Those involved in a production (professional or otherwise) are never going to be happy with a bad review, so why get upset about it and try to justify actions and motives of either party?
While I think this review in question was delivered in a particularly harsh way, I also respect the request to ‘air dirty laundry’ elsewhere and doubt from the ‘frankness’ of the reviewer that this is to hide, as he never would have come here in the first place if hiding his opinions and identity were on his agenda.
If any of you actually want to review the show now, I look forward to reading your comments. Well done to everyone involved in both shows for entertaining many of your audience members.
Walter PlingeSat, 17 July 2004, 08:23 am
Re: The Earnestness of Being Impotent
Just to clear up a few points:
Kurtis is spelt with a "K". Just FYI.
The request to avoid mudslinging was not because I fear it being slung at me, but purely because I consider public flame wars the height of self indulgence, and I've always found it incredibly tedious and pathetic of anyone to insist on making such public.
It was not my intention to hide - the name was an idle reference, in keeping with the endless wordplay surrounding the name of the piece in question. I was operating under the assumption that I would have been seen and recognised when I attended the production.
I will not comment on my motives. Once again, not because I fear backlash, but because such comment provokes response, which would only serve to exacerbate the flames. Anyone who wishes to discuss my motives or my opinions with me is more than welcome to e-mail me privately, as previously posted.
My review had nothing to do with my - peripheral at best - involvement with Husband. End of story. Anyone who wishes to continue with this absurd speculation is of course free to do so, but I will not again lower myself to responding.
The review - whether my intrepid readers choose to believe me or not is immaterial - was actually not intended to be so insulting as it obviously was. It was intended to be read with tongue firmly planted in cheek. No, it was not a possitive review, but that does not mean that it was meant to offend and upset. I am more than willing to concede that it may well have come across as being far more offensive than intended, but I make no apology for my opinions. Nor for posting. The apology I make is for not reading my own words more carefully, and more precisely guaging the effect they might have on readers with a less robust sense of personal ego than myself.
I am aware that some will take what I have just said as further insult. That is unavoidable. Others will chosse to see it as a recapitulation, or a vain attempt to save face. It is none of the above.
But you are all most certainly entitled to your opinions.
Kurtis is spelt with a "K". Just FYI.
The request to avoid mudslinging was not because I fear it being slung at me, but purely because I consider public flame wars the height of self indulgence, and I've always found it incredibly tedious and pathetic of anyone to insist on making such public.
It was not my intention to hide - the name was an idle reference, in keeping with the endless wordplay surrounding the name of the piece in question. I was operating under the assumption that I would have been seen and recognised when I attended the production.
I will not comment on my motives. Once again, not because I fear backlash, but because such comment provokes response, which would only serve to exacerbate the flames. Anyone who wishes to discuss my motives or my opinions with me is more than welcome to e-mail me privately, as previously posted.
My review had nothing to do with my - peripheral at best - involvement with Husband. End of story. Anyone who wishes to continue with this absurd speculation is of course free to do so, but I will not again lower myself to responding.
The review - whether my intrepid readers choose to believe me or not is immaterial - was actually not intended to be so insulting as it obviously was. It was intended to be read with tongue firmly planted in cheek. No, it was not a possitive review, but that does not mean that it was meant to offend and upset. I am more than willing to concede that it may well have come across as being far more offensive than intended, but I make no apology for my opinions. Nor for posting. The apology I make is for not reading my own words more carefully, and more precisely guaging the effect they might have on readers with a less robust sense of personal ego than myself.
I am aware that some will take what I have just said as further insult. That is unavoidable. Others will chosse to see it as a recapitulation, or a vain attempt to save face. It is none of the above.
But you are all most certainly entitled to your opinions.
crgwllmsSat, 17 July 2004, 10:18 am
Re: Earning Impish Portents
Didn't see the production, and was not intending to, so my position as a potential audience member has not been affected at all by anything I've read here.
Don't know anything about the people involved, so no harmful preconceptions have been formed about any of you in my mind.
I read the 'review' at the top of this post and gave it three stars. I found it entertaining.
I realise that's probably how I view most reviews, including my own,...merely for their entertainment value. I can't really take issue with someone's opinion, which they are free to have and to air. I judge a review on how well it's presented, and in this case, the whole point seemed to be to take the piss and make someone like me smile.
The more people get up in arms about how devastated they are by what someone has written in jest, the more this seems to be mocking you, and the more I am inclined to laugh.
Richard Bach wrote (in "Illusions:The Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah"); "Live never to be ashamed of what is written about you...even if what if written is not true". For anyone who regularly gets their work criticised in the major papers, I've found that to be an invaluable attitude. It's never worth getting that worked up about. Let them think what they want.
Cheers,
Craig
[%sig%]
Walter PlingeSat, 17 July 2004, 02:20 pm
Re: The Earnestness of Being Impotent
Apologies for the somewhat spamlike repeat posting. It occurs to me that I missed a vital point.
I'll not bother going into the quality of my performance in "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest". Suffice it to say that I would never dream of taking issue with anyone for critisizing my performance in that or any other. It is simply not a case of living in glass houses - any actor, more or less by definition lives in a glass house.
Indeed, if anyone, punter or theatrical professional alike, had suggested to me that any aspect of my performance were substandard, or even simply appalling, I would have been grateful for the feedback, regardless of how it came to be delivered.
Make no stones about it, Lee.
I'll not bother going into the quality of my performance in "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest". Suffice it to say that I would never dream of taking issue with anyone for critisizing my performance in that or any other. It is simply not a case of living in glass houses - any actor, more or less by definition lives in a glass house.
Indeed, if anyone, punter or theatrical professional alike, had suggested to me that any aspect of my performance were substandard, or even simply appalling, I would have been grateful for the feedback, regardless of how it came to be delivered.
Make no stones about it, Lee.
Walter PlingeSun, 18 July 2004, 10:15 am
Ernestly seeking Oscar
FOUR STARS for Ernest and his turmoils.
As a long time member only of the audience (at Marloo, Kads and a few other places around the town,) I have to say how much I enjoyed the performance last night.
Old as I am, I have spent too much time in the practical world of work and service to others. Now, in my latter years, I have stumbled - no, I have been led by those near and dear to me, into the wonderful world of the compulsory audience. The past two years have been so much fun!
From South Pacific to One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest. Nunsense, Guys & Dolls, WASO, A Day on the Green, Oklahoma - the menu is highly varied, and can range from bland to very spicy. To my great joy, last night I experienced for the first time (I am almost ashamed to admit it) the wit, the elegance, the satire that is Oscar Wilde.
Little did I know of him - except that his reputation well preceded him and probably led me to avoid him at all costs! What a loss - to me!
And what great casting Douglas has made. Ernest by name (eventually) and so "ernest" in his presentation. It is little wonder that name stirs the elegant, cultured and brittle intending brides, Cecily and Gwendoline. Algie has that wonderful classic profile that speaks of a young man who could never do anything well, except to Bunbury. I am sorry I missed him as Dorian, for I feel he would have been outstanding. And Lady Bracknell - Victorian to the last cup of tea and cucumber sandwich.
As always, there are Douglas's own little touches that make even a classic play like Ernest his own. Tweedledum and Tweedledee as maids? Well down.
I do not care for smart 'satire'. It is not really clever and certainly always intended to hurt. I am inspired by the audacity of amateur theatre - to choose to expose oneself to possible public ridicule; to work for weeks and weeks in rehearsal; to invest so much time and energy; to be prepared to give up so much of themselves so that we - the compulsory audience - can have so much pleasure, being entertained by you.
If you have not seen this show, I ernestly urge you to seek it out. You will not be disappointed.
As a long time member only of the audience (at Marloo, Kads and a few other places around the town,) I have to say how much I enjoyed the performance last night.
Old as I am, I have spent too much time in the practical world of work and service to others. Now, in my latter years, I have stumbled - no, I have been led by those near and dear to me, into the wonderful world of the compulsory audience. The past two years have been so much fun!
From South Pacific to One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest. Nunsense, Guys & Dolls, WASO, A Day on the Green, Oklahoma - the menu is highly varied, and can range from bland to very spicy. To my great joy, last night I experienced for the first time (I am almost ashamed to admit it) the wit, the elegance, the satire that is Oscar Wilde.
Little did I know of him - except that his reputation well preceded him and probably led me to avoid him at all costs! What a loss - to me!
And what great casting Douglas has made. Ernest by name (eventually) and so "ernest" in his presentation. It is little wonder that name stirs the elegant, cultured and brittle intending brides, Cecily and Gwendoline. Algie has that wonderful classic profile that speaks of a young man who could never do anything well, except to Bunbury. I am sorry I missed him as Dorian, for I feel he would have been outstanding. And Lady Bracknell - Victorian to the last cup of tea and cucumber sandwich.
As always, there are Douglas's own little touches that make even a classic play like Ernest his own. Tweedledum and Tweedledee as maids? Well down.
I do not care for smart 'satire'. It is not really clever and certainly always intended to hurt. I am inspired by the audacity of amateur theatre - to choose to expose oneself to possible public ridicule; to work for weeks and weeks in rehearsal; to invest so much time and energy; to be prepared to give up so much of themselves so that we - the compulsory audience - can have so much pleasure, being entertained by you.
If you have not seen this show, I ernestly urge you to seek it out. You will not be disappointed.
LawsonMon, 19 July 2004, 09:56 am
Re: Important - **PLEASE STOP!!**
Ladies and Gentlemen:,
Just for a second, shall we take time out, step back away from this infestation of illusional and disillusioned jargon and remember what we are and why we are involved with the parody.
Do we really want those who look from outside in, to stop, look and be amused by this internal struggle between two farcical facets and think – “Typical”? What is more important: to have touched many or to be touched?
There’s enough sickness within this illusion we live, without adding to it. Our challenge is to touch those who have invited us into their minds and hearts and take them to that place where reality is what you tell them it is – you are their breath, their heart beat, their every thought – you touch and feel and in return receive all that is good and natural in an emotional expression of self awareness and then the connection – you are in return touched.
Reality returns hard and fast, like a bull in a china shop, once the curtain closes. But the seed has been planted and growth from within will envelop and evolve in time. Without full comprehension, you have probably been closer to that stranger than most of their friends will do in a lifetime.
You are all the possessors of this trust, this magic and this ability to see and feel deeper than most. The material appearance and participation is just the package – beyond, within is so much more. You are the gifted, the chosen few, the ones that really count – you make a difference, you entertain, but also touch, feel, move, engage, express, excite, depress, encourage and connect. Appreciate this day on day as you walk through the streets and gaze upon these empty headed zombies who are in search of the end.
Is the question to be “Ideal” or “Important” – NO! The question is “To be or not to be”
You decide ………… remove yourselves from this petty bitchiness and appreciate how lucky you are and how talented we all are for being a part of this final, magical, touching, experience. Don’t make the theatre anything less than wonderful. The stage is your microphone to your heart – trust it.
Just for a second, shall we take time out, step back away from this infestation of illusional and disillusioned jargon and remember what we are and why we are involved with the parody.
Do we really want those who look from outside in, to stop, look and be amused by this internal struggle between two farcical facets and think – “Typical”? What is more important: to have touched many or to be touched?
There’s enough sickness within this illusion we live, without adding to it. Our challenge is to touch those who have invited us into their minds and hearts and take them to that place where reality is what you tell them it is – you are their breath, their heart beat, their every thought – you touch and feel and in return receive all that is good and natural in an emotional expression of self awareness and then the connection – you are in return touched.
Reality returns hard and fast, like a bull in a china shop, once the curtain closes. But the seed has been planted and growth from within will envelop and evolve in time. Without full comprehension, you have probably been closer to that stranger than most of their friends will do in a lifetime.
You are all the possessors of this trust, this magic and this ability to see and feel deeper than most. The material appearance and participation is just the package – beyond, within is so much more. You are the gifted, the chosen few, the ones that really count – you make a difference, you entertain, but also touch, feel, move, engage, express, excite, depress, encourage and connect. Appreciate this day on day as you walk through the streets and gaze upon these empty headed zombies who are in search of the end.
Is the question to be “Ideal” or “Important” – NO! The question is “To be or not to be”
You decide ………… remove yourselves from this petty bitchiness and appreciate how lucky you are and how talented we all are for being a part of this final, magical, touching, experience. Don’t make the theatre anything less than wonderful. The stage is your microphone to your heart – trust it.
tomasfordThu, 5 Aug 2004, 05:35 pm
Re: The Importance of Being Anyone
As much as this review was written in a fashion that might sting the performers, I have to put my 2c in to disagree with the idea that seems to have been repeatedly put forward on this thread that negative views should not be aired in this forum, just positivity and encouragement.
If I review a show, I am writing an honest critisism of what I saw at the performance, so if I read a review I hope to see the same thing. If you never get negative feedback, not only does it reduce the buzz you get off a good review (if all reviews are good then it gets to the point where you're like "that's a bad review because I don't feel like the antiseptic effects of having smoke blown up my arse have taken effect") but how are you expected to know what areas to improve?
If people aren't free to "review" shows then maybe this forum should be renamed "praise"?
[%sig%]
If I review a show, I am writing an honest critisism of what I saw at the performance, so if I read a review I hope to see the same thing. If you never get negative feedback, not only does it reduce the buzz you get off a good review (if all reviews are good then it gets to the point where you're like "that's a bad review because I don't feel like the antiseptic effects of having smoke blown up my arse have taken effect") but how are you expected to know what areas to improve?
If people aren't free to "review" shows then maybe this forum should be renamed "praise"?
[%sig%]