THANKFUL FOR HONEST THEATRE CRITICISM?
Why does it serve the artist?
There are plenty of factors which affect performance. Of course, training, experience, direction, sleep, mentoring, script analysis, energy from partners on the stage, etc. all contribute to excellence. The performer throws all of the ingredients into the mix, aiming for artistic perfection. The one element that is missing from rehearsal, though, is the view from the other side.
And that’s where the reviewer enters the picture. Provided that person has wide experience in viewing stage performance, and an extensive knowledge of the discipline, it can be an eye-opening opportunity for the performer. Undeniably, that individual cannot see himself/herself and cannot hear from an audience perspective as well. Although the tools may be there to judge whether or not an audience is engaged with the performance (verbal reactions, laughter, etc.), that is about the extent of applicable information available for the toolbox.
Let’s face it. The artist is not likely to hear the truth from friends or family because other emotions come into play. If the reviewer has integrity, she attempts to provide that valuable feedback.
Caution! Any review tries to capture the features of that performance as they affect the critic. Therefore, the artist needs to take what he can from the review (i.e. accept or reject). If there happens to be a consensus among reviewers, then some serious reflection may be in order. Otherwise, that particular review MAY be an outlier – honestly offered, yet off the mark.
Comments of a reviewer generally should never be personal, though they may reflect bias (positive or negative). After all, he/she is a human being, not an automaton.
N.B. Photo of Frank Rich, a former, long-time, powerful critic from the New York Times
Mish & Mash…A Reflective, “Yours Truly” Musings about Life’s Travails, Juicy Tidbits and Crass Behaviors, Too!
