This week’s chapter is all about writing about theatre and serves as a nice prep for the chapter you’ll read next, which is all about marketing and outreach. We’re now in the realm of thinking about how theatre and the outside world communicate back and forth, and one of the best channels of communication is the theatre review.
Theatre reviews are invaluable marketing tools for production companies. I’ve spent time working in marketing for smaller production companies, and I cannot overstate how useful good reviews were. A good quote from a reputable reviewer on a piece of marketing (a postcard, a poster, an ad in the paper, etc.) carries a lot of weight.
Why might it carry so much weight? Simply because peoples’ bank books/purses/wallets are sometimes at odds with all of the theatre they want to see. Seeing a lot of shows can be expensive, so we use respected and reputable theatre reviews to help us make choices about the shows we see and theatres we subscribe to. A good reviewer is a bit like a good sommelier in a fancy restaurant: they help you pair your purchase with your tastes.
What makes a good review? The chapter gives you a couple ideas.
ASSIGNMENT:
Look at the Review Pitfalls to Avoid–they start to show up in the chapter around p. 102. There are five pitfalls listed. I’d like you to pick three of them–your choice–and explain why each of them would make for a bad review. USE RECORDED SHOWS YOU’VE WATCHED AS EXAMPLES OF YOUR REASONING. Give about 100 words to each of your three choices.
For example, why is censorship/moralizing in a review bad? How does it temper/tamper with/poison the reviewer/theatre relationship? Are there shows you’ve watched that had energies, plots, or overall importance that would have been missed or downplayed if a reviewer tried to censor the show within their review?
Experiencirg Theotre
Anne Fletcher
So uthern I lli nois U n iversity
Scott R. Irelon
Weste rn M i ch i g o n U n ive rsity
/gfo c ut
*#i*irl)g,ml,;;nn.,,,”.
EXPLORATION FIVE performtion wo.
t
oo
, thal
(space, 1
hard toc
One
arrivi
ng
to the a
bathroor
does not
of the flr
the ticke
call and
extra tin
unavoid
;
house m
There ar
process.
audience
perform;
formancr
be seater
you arrir’
exchange
Itisa
is preferr
busines
s
a Broadu
Tourists i
going to
ing for tl
watchers
consider;
hairstyle
Do not rr’
sary, ther
view of o
Theri
the start
the bathr
hour has
gins, inte
without c
you, does
Seeing & Writing obout
Live Theotre
After some yea rs in the job, inundated with invitations and greeted
wherever they go by smtling press representotives, reviewers ore
opt to forget that monagements value their comments moinly
because they are published.
-lrving Wardle, Theotre Criticism, 6.
IM M ERSION #5
Audience Etiquette
You have probably attended some sort of live performance event-a concert, dance
recital, or a play. For this exercise, a film at a movie theatre works. In fact, any
place where a group of people gather to view and/or experience the same event, like
church or a graduation ceremony, will suffice.
List the sorts of behaviors on the pqrts of others that have disrupted your
enjoyment of the event or annoyed you-for example, someone seated near
you repeatedly getting up to go out.
After you make your list, discuss it with others, and try to imagine what it would
be like if everyone at the event behaved this wayl
Attending a live theatrical performance involves its own set of con
–
ventions (rules or expectations). Watchers who are not prepared for
seeing any type of live performance event can be distracting. Granted,
expectations vary from event to event. The kind ofbehavior expected
at a football game, for example, is different from that at live theatre.
The theatre experience begins with your first encounter with the the-
atre building itself-whether that is a trip to the box office to purchase
your tickets (or even interfacing with the venue’s website to buy them
online) or your entry to the lobby or when an usher directs you to your
seat. fust as the front-of-house personnel, those who meet you at the
door or get you to your seat, should treat you, the patron, with respect,
answering any questions you might have, helping you exchange your
tickets if you wish, directing you to the concession stand, restrooms,
or gift shop if there is one, there are some guidelines you, the watcher,
should follow in attending a production. Remember, a live theatre
92
nce
IilIV
I
Ek;l
u,d
I
con-
:d for
inted,
ected
eatre.
: the-
chase
them
) vour
at the
spect,
,vour
loms,
tcher,
ieatre
performance can be exciting. All of the people involved in the produc-
tion work hard to be sure they give a great performance. Remember,
too, that you the watcher are the fourth component to theatre-making
(space, performer, idea, and watchers) so it is important that you work
hard too.
One of the best ways to ensure a quality viewing experience is by
arriving early for the performance, taking into account parking, getting
to the actual performance venue, picking up the tickets, visiting the
bathroom, and proceeding to the seating area. Sometimes if a patron
does not pick up herlhis reserved tickets ten minutes prior to the start
of the first scene, then the theatre will release that reservation and sell
the tickets to someone else on a waiting list. It is always a good idea to
call and ask how early the doors will open. Ariving at your seat with
extra time gives you the opportunity to peruse the program. If you are
unavoidably detained and arrive late, then treat the box office staff,
house manager, and ushers graciously. It is not their fault you are late.
There are late-seating policies at every theatre, so let them work that
process. Late-seating guidelines are established for the good of the
audience, and sometimes they depend on the size and design of the
performance space (intimate or huge) and on the duration of the per-
formance (Are there act or scene breaks during which late-comers can
be seated with less interruption?). This means that sometimes when
you arrive late you may not be let in to your seat. In this case, simply
exchange your ticket for another performance.
It is also a good idea to inquire in advance as to what kind of attire
is preferred. For example, a ninety-nine seat theatre may indicate that
business casual or urban casual are flne whereas the opening night
of
a Broadway performance may require some sort of more formal dress.
Tourists attending outdoor theatre will dress differently from watchers
going to a benefit performance of an opera. As you go about dress-
ing for the event, it is also important to keep in mind allergies that
watchers might have to ingredients in cologne or perfume. Two other
considerations should be hairstyle and hat choice. Make sure that your
hairstyle is not excessively tall or wide as it can block someone’s view.
Do not wear a hat into the seating area if at all possible. If it is neces-
sary, then make sure it is not too wide or too tall so as to obscure the
view of others.
There are some good housekeeping elements to attend to before
the start of the performance. As mentioned above, make sure to visit
the bathroom before you enter the seating area, especially if a cocktail
hour has been part of pre-show activities. Once the performance be-
gins, intermission is the next time this opportunity will be available
without disturbing nearby watchers. If an audience member, including
you, does have an emergency and needs to come or go to attend to it,
Q3
I
then be quiet and careful as you exit. Have an usher indicate when a
scene change occurs so that you can reenter with as little disruption
as possible. Keep in mind, however, some productions have no scene
breaks, and others do not have an intermission, so ask questions before
the live performance starts if you anticipate needing to come and go.
All electronic communication devices shouldbe shut off completely.
Texting, talking, and taking out the device for any reason is distracting
both to watchers and to performers alike (and iust plain rude). There
is no shortage of stories from Broadway where performers the likes of
Hugh Iackman and Nathan Lane have stopped a performance to com-
ment on the disrespectful behavior of someone texting (or phoning).
On a technical level, some of the component parts of these devices can
actually interfere with wireless control systems for lighting, sound, and
the like. Even if a watcher is a medical doctor, the device can be left at
the box offlce and an usher can offer notification of an emergency. If
someone does forget to turn off an electronic device, then do not snarl
at them or shout “Turn it off” in the dark as that is just as distracting
and rude. It is also a good idea to put away any image-taking devices
(video or still photograph cameras) as it is usually illegal for watchers
to take pictures, moving or otherwise. Flashes distract performers and
can even cause them to physically stumble so forget about using them
until after the show iTwhen you meet the performers in the lobby.
Once the performance starts, try to sit still. Shifting, lifting your
arms, foot tapping, and other such motions take attention away from
the main event. Also resist the urge to begin talking to a neighbor.
Whispering is still talking. Wait for intermission, or at least for loud
applause or musical numbers to make any sort of comment.
Although some theatres now allow food and drink in the seating
area, in general, neither of these has a place in a live theatre produc-
tion. Go to lunch or dinner before you arrive so that you can engage
fully with what you are watching. This said, some outdoor venues may
encourage picnicking, so do some research. If there is a chance that
something like a cough drop or piece of hard candy will be needed,
then either unwrap them before the performance starts or wait for loud
applause or a musical number to unwrap them.
If the seating area is close to (or even on) the performance
space,
then make sure not to clutter it with programs, coats, bags, or other
articles of clothing. All are distractions and tripping hazards for per-
formers.
Sometimes live theatre events hold the attention of watchers well
and sometimes they do not. Sometimes watchers attend a production
well rested and sometimes they do not. In either case, try not to fall
asleep as the cast and crew can take it as an insult. Besides, snoring
will de.
ductior
Sin
distrac
an exp(
Our se;
vioush-
as we \\
often tr
Sor
in the 1
Talk rt’i
sion an
appreci
Thir
with au
order fc
tention
i’
:
;
Slip
I nstr
1. I
2.”
I MatI s-,
lno
s
3.(
t
4.L
94
There
tes of
) com-
ning).
E5 CAN
d, and
left at
nry. If
t snarl
acting
kivices
tchers
rs and
;them
ry.
g your
y from
ghbor.
rr loud
na
n
fore
40.
1y.
ng
eating
roduc-
rngage
:s may
:e that
eeded,
rr loud
space,
other
)r per-
rs well
uction
to fall
noring
–
i
:: –.
:
–
, ( /A: : f’r*H
will deflnitely disrupt other audience members’ enioyment of the pro-
duction!
Singing along with musical numbers or scene change music is also
distracting and can provoke deep stares from other watchers. We had
an experience like this when watching a popular musical on Broadway.
Our seats were in a section filled with high school tour groups that ob-
viously had played the cast album on the bus ride to the city. As much
as we wanted to fully engage the performance, the “singers” around us
often took attention away from the stage.
So many things to avoid, but what can watchers do? Engage fully
in the performance. Laugh when appropriate. Applaud when suitable.
Talk with other audience members about the experience at intermis-
sion and after the performance. Stay for the entire curtain call to show
appreciation for the work done by the cast and crew.
This introduction to watching live theatre has dealt exclusively
with audience expectations and behavior. Good watching is vital in
order for you to effectively evaluate a production. We need to pay at-
tention to the performance in order to speak or write about it with any
nf-Y,)
Exercise #47
Performing the “Bad’ Audience
Materiats needed:
Small, individually wrapped hard candies
Programs (Available to download and print. Visit the title support page:
www.hackettpublishing. com/experiencing_theatre worksheets)
Slips of paper assigning behavior:
> Dial someone’s cell phone number and let it ring
> Stand up and leave the room, allowing the door to slam
> Tell someone they are in your seat and try to get them to move
> Eat the wrapped candy and crinkle the wrapper
> Crumple the program
> Whisper to the person next to you
> Take a flash picture with camera or cellphone
lnstructions:
1. Hand out programs, slips ofpaper, and props as participants enter.
2. “Conduct” the cacophony of”badness” as ifit is a symphony, bouncing from one
sound to another while moving toward a climax.
3. Once set, have a select gloup get in front of the group and attempt to read over
the noise.
4. Debrief the exercise and relate to the watching experience.
I
Watcher
Fig. 5-1-The lmportant Etements of Drama
when Watching
authority. We all have preferences, likes and dislikes, belief systems,
and ideologies. However, these biases have no place in writing critically
about performance. To critique performance (or any art form), we must
practice aesthetic valuing and critical thinking.
Aesthetic Valuin&and CriticaI Thin kine
Aesthetic valuing and critical thinking are related. Aesthetic valu-
ing (“aesthetic” defined roughly as the appreciation of beauty in art)
has to do with determining the relative artistic (or in our case, the-
atrical) success of a piece, based on an evaluation that uses both the
vocabulary of the discipline and the principles of the art. Asking us to
“judge” the piece according to these and not from an individual gut
response like “l liked it” or “I did not like it” is key. Personal taste need
not be completely eliminated, but it must be supported with evidence
from the text or production. Like aesthetic valuing, critical think-
ing invites us to observe, react, talk, and write using evidence-based
reasoning, not iust personal opinion. Critical thinking is necessary to
success in any discipline or work place, and critical thinking can be in-
creased through our aesthetic valuing ofplays and productions.
Writers of Critique
lVhile, to some extent, all watchers can offer commentary on an ex-
perience, both critics and reviewers are individuals who have dedicated
themselves to writing about what
they see (or read) with the purpose of
informing a larger theatre community
about that experience. Some writers
of critique are on staff at a traditional
publication or website while others
are not. Some writers of critique are
paid for their work while others are
merely reimbursed for mileage and
hotel stays. Some writers of critique
work in higher education and analyze
a play as a text, a play as performance,
or both as a text and as a performance
in order to better place the work in
context for others. Al1 writers of cri-
tique, though, are educated, intelli-
gent, passionate people that not only
have
SCSS 1
and e
T
groul
the p
critic
ues-
websi
neces
“Criti
CCSS C
well, t
a proc
tory. I
8ener,
We wi
differe
then,.
as eitt
The C
Th
insigh
This is
consul
writes
a critir
rather,
Iourna
Studer
Colleg
writinl
about
(perfo
and ar
knowlt
ary qui
critics
rigoror
a perfc
they cc
made I
team.
95
[i : :.] S,
t–,.11y
| .-..lst
iralu-
h art;
I the-
[r the
[us to
al gut
:need
dence
hink-
based
ary to
be in-
have the ability to conduct some sort of dramatic analysis but also pos-
sess the skill to recount that analysis in ways that are both interesting
and engaging to a readership.
Those who write about plays and productions fall into two basic
groups: 1) the critic and 2) the reviewer. For our purposes here, we call
the person who has time to write longer critiques the critic. Published
criticism varies in length and appears in many different types of ven-
ues-books, chapters in books, journal articles, and even peer-reviewed
websites. We should also note that, in this case, “criticism” does not
necessarily mean recounting errors or offering negative feedback.
“Criticism” in this context indicates engagement in a thoughtful pro-
cess of study and reflection, regarding to what extent elements work
well, to what extent elements are confusing, and how or to what extent
a production fits into the larger scope of theatre and performance his-
tory. Those who write opening night critiques of performances, then,
generally for newspapers or sometimes magazines, we call reviewers.
We will explore the type of work each does, focusing on similarities and
differences meant to provide a sense of both styles of writing. We start,
then, with a section on the person who writes what is often referred to
as either dramatic or performance criticism.
The Critic
The critic is an individual who has time to prepare carefullywritten
insights and flndings about a production, for a specifled theatre public.
This is because, unlike the reviewer, who writes for a community of
consumers (those who buy newspapers, for example), the critic often
writes for a community of scholars (those who study). This means that
a critic is usually not a journalist writing for the popular press but,
rather, a person writing for a peer-reviewed publication (i.e., Theatre
lournal) or at least a focused trade magazine (i.e., American Theatre).
Student critics are often involved with the Kennedy Center American
College Theatre Festival and, like you, perhaps, they find themselves
writing response essays for classes. Although we separate writing
about play texts (dramatic criticism) from writing about productions
(performance criticism), professional critics (those who write books
and articles and/or those who write performance responses) possess
knowledge of a wide range of plays and often relate the play’s liter-
ary qualities when they write about production. Because performance
critics take time before sharing their conclusions, they often perform
rigorous research regarding the play they have seen. At the core, then,
a performance critic is someone who engages in critical thinking as
they consider a particular watching experience, going over the choices
made by writers, designers, directors, and the rest of the production
team. When s/he f,nally writes up herAis flndings, the ideas they
rn eX-
cated
tr’hat
rse of
.unity
-riters
:ional
-rlhers
.e are
:s are
: and
itique
ialyze
lance,
I’IANCC
rrk in
rf cri-
rtelli-
t only
a7
=.,:.,..
lmportant Elements of Criticism
1. Original viewpoint regarding topic or inventive approach to topic
2. Rigor of analysis
5. Case-making through use of evidence (either read or seen)
4. Clear organization ofideas
5. Readable style and syntax with appropriate grammar and punctuation
I
_l
Fig. 5.2-Elements of Criticism
present usually provoke some sort of deeper creative thinking about
form, style, genre, character, action, or any of the myriad facets of live
theatre in production.
The performance critic is mostly concerned with the analysis of a
particular watching experience in terms of its success or failure, not
only to clearly interpret the play text as it appears in live performance
but also to build on an existing production history of other times and
places it has been performed. Remember, the professional critic may
have years of experience from which to draw and is able to draw com-
parisons with other plays and productions so they are able to fit, or sit-
uate, the performance within a larger historical context. They do this
by supporting assertions and conclusions with evidence drawn from a
watching experience. What does that mean for you as a watcher?
The performance critic might look at a particular performer and
compare herAis previous roles with the performance just watched,
or sAe might compare the performer’s work to other performers who
have tackled the same role. A performance critic might also look at
the work of the director and compare how s/he chose to approach this
production versus a previous production. The performance critic may
choose to write about design elements and designers, individually or as
a group, in comparison to previous efforts or at least other designs of
the same play in order to situate designs in a historical context. In the
end, the better performance critics incorporate these comparisons into
a flnal draft while still offering a clear sense of who, what, when, where,
especially focusing on how and why. For someone to offer an analysis
without adequate support of assertions goes against the signiflcance
of performance criticism. Because live performance events are fleeting
in nature, the closing of a production marks a “death” of sorts, so the
performance critic also preserves or archives the memory of the pro-
duction with images and detailed description.
In the end, the critic focuses on a variety of areas directly related
to the written text. This can include elements of form, use of a central
image or guiding metaphor, representation of historical flgures, bio-
graphical information from the writer’s life, social or political events
r
I
I
I
5.
I
I
1. \,V
2. rd
5. Er
of
4. Ac
de
Cc
e\’
Fig.5.3-
that reli
current
arship b
One
task as 1
The Re
The
safety oi
an educi
assignec
viewers
to delirt
a produr
audienct
fering a
appealin
pitfalls t
Because
tator” u’.
knowled
content
little obi
Thin
your farr
ing expe
ing? Wh’
they wat
does. Th
up a vier
seriouslr
9B
: lout
live
ofa
re, not
trtt. t.t”rrrm
1. Write in clear, active prose with no endnotes or footnotes.
2. Identify stage positions with the accepted stage geography terms.
3. Emphasize analysis of the production over plot summary (no summary needed for
often produced or well-known plays and musicals).
4. Address production values vis-d-vis its historical moment, performers, director,
design, style, or constituent watchers.
5. Consider production values or emphasize the importance of a live performance
event culturally, politically, or contextually.
Fig. 5.3-Guidetines for Performance Criticism
that relate to the text, and so on. Criticism shapes (or at least refines)
current understandings of theatre because it builds on existing schol-
arship by providing fresh insights or opinions.
One way to think of the role of the critic is to consider his or her
task as part play analyst and part production dramaturg.
The Reviewer
The reviewer is a watcher who functions as either cheerleader or
safety officer depending on the production they see. Some of them have
an educational background in dramatic literature. Some are iournalists
assigned to the “arts beat.” Regardless of vocational background, re-
viewers quickly develop a way to use the review they write as a vehicle
to deliver a recommendation (good or bad) to other watchers. So, if
a production is engaging, they use the review to share with potential
audiences how and why they enfoyed the performance, most likely of-
fering a positive recommendation (cheerleader). If a production is less
appealing, then they use the review to warn potential watchers about
pitfalls they might encounterwhen attendingthe piece (safety officer).
Because reviewers often place themselves in the role of an “ideal spec-
tator” who represents the tastes of a larger public, it is the reviewer’s
knowledge of herAis readership that most often guides not only the
content but also the tone of the review. Given this approach, there is
little objectivity inherent to a review.
Think for a moment about the last time you watched an episode of
your favorite television show. Now recall how you described your view-
ing experience to a friend. \Mhat did you highlight as funny or engag-
ing? \Mhy? rrlrlhat was not so good about it? !Vhy? Did you recommend
they watch it? lVhy or why not? This is the type of work that a reviewer
does. The better and more entertaining a reviewer is when writing
up a viewing experience, the more people begin to take their advice
seriously. Reviewers of repute are often those quoted in advertising
:-a1]Ce
=s and
lC may
I com-
or sit-
1o this
from a
=: and
,:Ched,
:s ll,ho
rok at
:1-r this
-c may
.., or as
r3-rs of
In the
:-is into
“r-here,
nalysis
Icance
leeting
so the
le pro-
reiated
central
:s, bio-
etrents
oo
Exercise #48
Reading a Performance Review
Large group activity (instructor provides copies of performqnce reviews) OR individual
exercise (to be completed on your own or as homework for class).
This exercise asks you to read, reflect upon, and analyze a published performance
review in a iournal. We suggest using Theatre lournal. Under no circumstances
should you use a newspaper review of a play or musical.
Read through the article at least once, perhaps with an eye toward the author’s thesis
statement and topic sentences in each paragraph, before answering the following ques-
tions.
1. What are the author’s main arguments?
2. On what aspects of production does the author focus? Directing? Acting? Design?
5. Does the author relate the production to the script as written? To other plays? By
the same playwright? By others?
4. How does the author/reviewer situate the production? Historically? By style?
5. \,Vhat new information about the play or production do you get from the
performance review?
materials or play covers of a published version of the script. Three of
the better-known reviewers in the United States are Chris Jones in Chi-
cago, Charles McNulty in Los Angeles, and Ben Brantley in New York.
Each has had the opportunity to be both cheerleader and safety officer
for many productions. What distinguishes them from the thousands of
other skilled reviewers is both their artistry and insight when writing
up a watching experience and their large readerships beyond the the-
atre market in which they are located.
While many of you may not read a lot of theatre press, most of you
are probably already familiar with the type of article a reviewer pro-
duces, especially if you look for recommendations on fllm and music
selections to stream or download. Nevertheless, when thinking about
the tone and style of a theatre review that might appear in a large pub-
lication like the Chicago Tribune, The New York Times,, or even a small
publication like a campus newspaper, it is important to keep in mind
that the piece should work in much the same way that a book report
does. That is, it should be something that stimulates interest (either
positive or negative) in potential watchers by describing as much as
possible about the viewing experience without revealing too much and
becoming a “spoiler.” Written on a tight deadline, theatre reviews are
also often limited both in content and in word count (usually 500- 1500
words). The idea is not to provide an exhaustive situating of the text
in performance but rather to offer an immediate, flrst-person reaction
Who
ing d,
Plot
poter
Actir
chara
that t
1 Desig
i like; 1
i donc
I Reao
j basei
l_. “-_.=…–..-.=
Fig.5.a-
to the e
when a’
model t
work cl,
Mat
mation
the perl
reviewe
(and pe
if a spe
graph ir
next pa
recounl
view. Tl
finer pc
ago. Ser
them a
form tc
(and ch
weakne
fourth I
gards tr
ate a uI
The
ing recr
roo
tr-‘r +*
:ee of
I chi-
\brk.
: lflcer
rds of
riting
: the-
rf you
: pro-
nusic
about
r pub-
small
r-nind
‘eport
:ither
lch as
h and
rs are
-1500
e text
Lction
A Basic Mode[ for Review Writing
Who, what, when, where, and why: Provide the given circumstances of the watch-
ing done.
Plot review and/or synopsis: Use events that are important to the review to filI
potential watchers in on the story.
Acting and directing (and choreography if a musical): Reflect on stage pictures,
character interactions, and the like; paying attention to those moments and images
that hold attention and those that do not (and why).
Design elements: Reflect on lights, setting, costumes, sound, proiections, and the
like; pay attention to those moments and images that hold attention an those that
do not (and why).
Reaction, opinion, and overall recommendation: Close with a flnal evaluation
based on evidence provided in previous sections.
Fig. 5.4-A Modelfor Review Writing
to the experience. As such, what follows is a suggested starting point
when attempting to write a review. Although we offer a flve-paragraph
model here to getyou started, each reviewer and publication frequently
work closely together to devise an appropriate approach.
Many revi ewers ope n with basic wh o, wh at, when, wher e, why infor –
mation. In this case who refers to the producing organization,what is
the performance being watched, when is obviously the day and time the
reviewer saw the production, where is the proper name of the theatre
(and perhaps city), andwhy can cover whether it was opening night or
if a special charity or performer was featured. The point of this para-
graph is to clearly recount the given circumstances of the viewing. The
next paragraph should offer potential watchers a plot synopsis that
recounts elements of the sequence of events vital to the overall re-
view. This serves two purposes. First, it may remind readers about the
finer points of a play with which they are already familiar or saw years
ago. Second, if watchers have never seen or read the play, then it offers
them a nice window into the world of the performance.It is often good
form to follow the slmopsis with a discussion of acting and directing
(and choreography if a musical). This should highlight strengths and
weaknesses of either the entire ensemble or speciflc performers. The
fourth paragraph should consider design elements, particularly in re-
gards to how they either do or do not work together to effectively cre-
ate a unified production.
The last paragraph is reserved, then, for reaction, opinion, or a part-
ing recommendation based on the previous case-making in the review.
t0t
Review Pitfa[[s to Avoid
1. Censorship (iiber-safety officer)
2. Excessive cheerleading
5. Unjust war with the pen
4. Know-it-all tone and style
5. Restaging or redesigning the production (because writer is a frustrated artist)
Fig. 5.5-Review Pitfatts to Avoid
Put another way, this is the “Dear potential audience member, here is
what I ultimately think and why you should/should not go see this pro-
duction based on my experience” paragraph. This closing paragraph
is particularly important in large theatre markets, like New York City,
Chicago, or Vancouver, because a strong recommendation can mean a
box office success while a poor review can lead to immediately closing
the production in order to avoid losing too much money.
Given the weight that reviews can carry, there are some important
aspects of writing and content ethical reviewers try to avoid (Fig. 5-5).
One of the most important pitfalls to circumvent is censorship of any
kind. It is not the iob of a reviewer to object to content. This approach
is taking the safety offlcer role a little too far. They should, however,
write a warning to potential watchers if there is either strong language
or adult themes that some might find obiectionable. At the same time,
a reviewer must be careful not to be an excessive cheerleader (think
Cheri Oteri and Will Ferrell in the “spartan Spirit” sketches on Sat-
urday Night Live).If any reviewer stays too excited about every[hing
they see, then theywill lose the respect needed of their readership. Any
production, even the best at Lincoln Center in New York, has places
where watchers are drawn in and taken out of the live performance
event. Report on that. Be honest. Reviewers must also try not to think
of the pen as a sword and go about writing harsh, negative pieces that
often kill off anything that they consider “bad theatre.” lVhen writing
from this place of retribution, reviewers put themselves ahead of the
taste of the larger theatre public. Reviewers need to consistently work
hard to find a balance of good to go with the bad. Another pitfall re-
viewers should avoid is coming off as a know-it-all pontificator of all
things great about theatrical production. If readers want a teacher to
talk at them, then they will go to the local college or university and
enroll in a course. |ust as dangerous is the thwarted theatre artist who
uses a review to share how they might direct, act, design, or otherwise
better mount the production. This is neither helpful nor useful to po-
tential watchers. Ultimately, crafting reviews takes continued practice
{*-“–
I
I
I
I
I PARIl =,X ,.rtlr
I
=.,0l*I 4.rd
L.,0
I
I PART
I 1.Nl*I z.wItt
| ,.t.
I n.r,
I s.u,
| 6.UsI z.ctl'”t*:r
and stu
they wr
C losir
Wril
have rei
theatre.
hope th
and spe
theatre
la’/
::e is
: fro-
.aph
: i:ity,
aan a
rsing
r:tant
5-s).
.: any
roach
‘,.ever,
+1age
iime,
ihink
t Sat-
-ihing
r. Any
rlaces
nance
think
s that
riting
cf the
-rtrork
lll re-
of all
her to
v and
t who
rrwise
😮 po-
actice
Exercise #49
Review Writing
PART I
1. Choose one ofthe plays you are studying.
2. Find at least three different reviews in major news publications (i.e.,The New York
Times, Variety).
3. Identify how the writer of each piece positively or negatively discusses the
watching process.
4. Identify and list all of the positive remarks, noting phrasing choices.
5. Identify and list all of the negative remarks, noting phrasing choices.
PART II
1. Now that you have studied stmcture and flow, go see a live theatrical event with
the purpose of writing a review.
2. With your production notes at the ready, begin by writing an opening paragraph
that covers the name of the production, the producing 8roup, the dates, etc.
3. Follow this with a paragraph that fills in the details of plot, story and main idea.
4. Use the next paragraph to address strengths and weaknesses oftechnical elements.
5. Use the next paragraph to address strengths and weaknesses of performer choices.
6. Use the next paragraph to address strengths and weaknesses of director choices.
7. Close with original, thought-provoking conclusions, beliefs, opinions, or other
revelations based on your watching experience.
8. Submit your review.
and study not unlike the work that playwrights do to make the pieces
they write better.
Closing Thoughts
Writing about plays in performance (and writing about a play you
have read) is an important part of the art-making that happens in live
theatre. Though we have only scratched the proverbial surface here, we
hope that you have a clearer impression as to why the reviewer, critic,
and spectator are all valued members of the dialogue surrounding live
theatre and its history.
rn<.
For Fu rther Exploration
Americon Theatre Critics Associotion. American Theatre Critics Asso-
ciation. ATCA,2014. 6 May 2014. Web.
Americo n Theatre Wi ng. “f healre Jou rnaIism: On Ii ne a nd Off #399.”
Working in the Theotre. American Theatre Wing, May 2011. 9
January 2012. Web. Accessed viaYouTubeT May 2074.
Otis L. Guernsey, Jr. Curtoin Times: The New York Theatre 1965-1987
(NY: Apptause, 2000). Print.
v-
I
E
{
I
I
I
i rr,tr,.
I Politici
I youbeli attend
I
I! >Ai.,
Ii >Ai”n ‘vt-i >r
“out
procity I
(momen
Outreacl
theatre 1
perhaps,
Some of
educatio
ered soc
signed tr
amount
free-of-c
get. Mo
selling t
ilo4,