As a field, theatre criticism finds itself at a pivotal juncture. With the continued trend of print media moving towards skeletal arts criticism, much of the field has migrated to online platforms: blogs of varying types from organizational to personal , Facebook, Yelp, Google, even Twitter. Ease of access not just to the product of criticism but also to the means of criticism devalues the very notion of well-written, professionally trained critique and empowers every audience member to consider themselves a critic.
How is the average theatregoer to sort quality from digital noise and perhaps more importantly support those who create high level critiques? Education is key—not just for the would-be theatre critics but for audience members in general. In many ways, professional criticism is the cornerstone of an arts community. Most of these points also provide legitimacy to the considered piece and the company doing it.
It is one thing to simply produce a show, but quite another to have the world take notice of it. We lose that at our peril.
A January article for the Columbia Journalism Review written by longtime Boston Herald theatre critic Jed Gottlieb outlines this trend and its consequences. Digitization is problematic not just for critics who see danger for the longevity of their vocation, but also for arts organizations that feel the pressures of proving their legitimacy.
Even in the digital world, print media still enjoys a privilege that digital media does not, and that privilege has a great deal to do with perception. Warne discusses the paradigm of web reviews and the prevalence of amateur critics writing reviews of theatrical productions.
Online reviewing platforms increase the possibility of critique for productions and allow audience members from many walks of life to participate in the process. In my role as a clinical assistant professor at the University at Buffalo, I introduce theatre students in my class to the basics of criticism as it relates to the art of theatremaking. These students are beginners to theatre; some of them have never seen a play before they come to my class. Despite this, they are all avid amateur critics.
Dom is the editor of SeatPlan. The Bob Marley Musical , is so much more than just a celebration of regg Search Find a theatre or a show. Find Tickets. Two nations divided by a common language The art of reviewing theatre continues to change year on year. The Price is Right Countless examples can be made from both the past and present where London audiences have gone against mass critical opinion, and obviously there are also times where everything seems somewhat balanced.
What do you think? Do you rely on the opinion of critics when choosing what show to see? Let us know below. Previous post. Next post. Please select a show. Latest Show Review. Opening soon. Live on Stage Lyric Theatre. Sadler's Wells. Theatre in crisis? Performance manifestos for a new century. New York: Manchester University Press. Google Scholar. Eisner, E.
The enlightened eye. New York: Macmillan. Gener, R. The future of criticism: Notes on heart and mind or, the promise of theatre criticism in the republic of broken dreams. American Theatre , 25 2 , 38—41, 70— Goethe, J. A painting can be repulsive, a film can be not your cup of tea — but when theatre is bad, it is almost impossible to endure.
We all are aware that a theatre review can both elevate and diminish a theatre production. People will always go see art, good or bad; films can still break the box-office despite the negative reviews. A bad theatre review, however, can sink a production and the livelihood of the crew. Before enrolling as a mature student, I worked as a professional actor for many years and I know this feeling all too well.
I remember the opening night of a production in at the Crypt Theatre in Dublin Castle. We had a reviewer in from The Irish Times , which was very exciting. We delivered our performances that night like our lives and paying our rent depended on it.
We were buzzing after the show, and the following night we all ran to the local shop to pick up the paper. As we leaned over each others shoulders, huddled around and full of nervous tension, we very quickly realised this was not going to be the positive review we had hoped for. It was heartbreaking. But not because the reviewer simply did not like the show; it was the manner in which he criticised it. He lamented the set, the interpretation, the direction.
Fair enough! But he then proceeded to name each individual actor and criticise their performances. Our run only lasted a few weeks, but the bitter taste of this review stayed in my mind and the rest of the cast for months, even years after. Why was this reviewer so upset by a performance? Why did he decide to name each and every fault of the production, including the names of every actor?
0コメント