Reviewing people you know

Hey Everyone, I've got a question that I would like some opinions on. I have recently written a review of a show that I saw. Quite a few of my friends were in the show and my review has been questioned because I know some of the people involved. (My review is located in this thread if you want to read it - http://www.theatre.asn.au/theatre_reviews/paris ) My situation however is that I live in a relatively small community and therefore I know quite a few of the people invovled in theatre around here. As such, it's difficult for me to find a show in this area that doesn't have at least a couple people that I know in it. My question is then this: Is a person incapable of writing a balanced, un-biassed, constructive review of a show that involves one or more of that person's friends? I personally don't think this is the case. Quite often my friends ask me for my opinion because they know I will tell them honestly. I do hold to a philosphy that there is no point in being mean when giving feedback - all that does is shatter confidence. BUT I will always be honest, and if this means telling someone (including friends) that I didn't think some work they did was good, I will, however I will focus on how to improve that aspect as opposed to just saying it was bad. Is that biassed? I personally don't think so, but I would love to hear what other people have to say on the matter. Hoping to get lots of feedback Darren

I'm an unusual person, in that I'm highly critical of everything I see onstage, whether I like it or not. I've mentioned before on this site, that for me, a good performance is one in which I'm not distracted - if I don't spend half the show staring at the lights, it's a good thing. I also have to say, that if I know that I'm going to write a review about a show it does change the way I watch it. It doesn't make me more critical, it just means that I tend not to relax when watching it. I also try and remember notes and things to write, which makes it hard to fully enjoy a performance. I have reviewed friends' shows before, and I don't think it made me less or more harsh. I believe that I can manage to separate my feelings out - of course, there's no such thing as unbiased, but I think I can be as unbiased as possible. Furthermore, my friends respect my opinion, and often knowing them, I can give them more constructive criticism - because I know their weaknesses, their traits, etc. (Eg. I have a running joke with a friend, whom is particularly bad at keeping a straight face. I can say one word to him, and he'll immediately understand what he did wrong) I don't think there is anything wrong with having an insight into the actor's mind; and in fact, if you know what the person was trying to achieve, it can help pinpoint a term or phrase which can be written in the review, and make it more constructive for that person to improve with. I think that I have enough experience now to speak honestly, and in theatrical terms, or acting terms, that can make my reviews be insightful to the cast and crew; and though it may come across as blunt or rude, there's usually a sentiment of hopefulness in my review. I can see both the things that need to be worked on, as well as the potential. If you go into a show keeping both those things in mind, then I don't think it matters if you know anyone involved. Here's a great tip in writing a review - it comes from my training to be an editor - it's ok to write a criticism, or something that should be changed/improved upon. Just back it up with a suggestion of how it could be better, or what the result would be if it was changed. That's ultimately what the cast and crew want to hear - how to make things better. And it doesn't matter whether you're saying it to friends or not. I personally believe that the greatest 'attacks' or biased reviews don't come from people who are associated with the cast or crew, but from those who don't use theatrical terms, or a language similar - it's the ambiguity that lies in the words that can often upset so many people. For instance, there's a difference between saying "So and so can't act", to "So and so wasn't believable in their character". It's a small but slight difference, the first can be seen as an 'attack', the second can be consider constructive (so and so may now decide to do more work on characterisation for instance). Many people on this site may disagree with that last para... But I have found that when reviewing, cast and crew have been more willing to accept or listen to the criticism when said with specification, definition, and the use of generally accepted theatrical terms. In other words... yes, I do believe friends/family can be unbiased. Or as unbiased as anyone else at any rate. EDIT: Additionally, I would also say that it is important to recognise that there's no such thing as a perfect show - and often friends/family will see this more clearly (or rather, forgivingly) than non-related reviewers. Sticky Apple Legs www.thepromptcopy.com/sal Puppets in Melbourne www.puppetsinmelbourne.com.au My puppets www.collectzing.com/collection/137/

I think a Review will always be a subjective thing...it is one person's assessment of a performance. A different person, even on the same night, may have a different assessment. We all have our own likes and dislikes and this will colour our Review, it's what makes us interesting as individuals. Life, and performances, would be very boring indeed if we all liked exactly the same thing! That said, it is very possible to achieve a degree of objectivity in your review, even if you are related to every last person in the cast (!), BUT it takes a strong will and perhaps an acknowledgement of what might be seen as a natural bias. I know of one reviewer here who can't stand farce, but he says so and avoids it if possible. When it isn't possible he grits his teeth, acknowledges the situation and writes a review of the performance. He also, as Na mentions above, suggests how improvements can be made. I don't think he's ever written an unconstructive review in his life, unlike some others I could mention. Savage reviews that just tear apart everything, performers, the script, the set, etc. are completely useless, except for possibly stirring up a controversy and maybe put some more bottoms on seats...not a good way to go about things though. Some theatre scenes are geographically small and as you say, you will inevitably end up reviewing people you know. I guess the trick is to aim to be as objective as possible, as you know. Good luck! Rapunzel "Papa, where is Mama? They tell me she has gone away, where is she?"

I write my own personal reviews of shows that I view as an audience member. I write them for my own personal benefit but also because I know that when I do a show I like to get some sort of feedback on my performance. The Perth theatre community is fairly small and no doubt I will see a show and recognise names and faces but I don't believe this makes me bias or unbias when it comes to writing reviews, comments and critisicms. If you flick through some of the reviews I posted on this site I have managed to start some controversial threads and some that simply dragged on for ridiculous amounts of time. I do agree with Na that there are ways of wording reviews so they sound less like an attack on an individual and more like a helpful criticism. I find the trick to writing reviews that don't come across as bias is having a balance. No show is perfect and there is always going to be something you dislike in a show and something you absoilutely love. Mention both but do it politically speaking - chose your words wisely. Meh my 2 cents worth. ~ Tari The Writer is a child forever listening at the keyhole of the adult world.

I think bias is inevitable. However, remaining aware of its possibility and allowing this to inform your writing does seem to have a soothing effect on what makes it to the page. It's possible to 'be' biased, and still write an unbiased review, but it takes discipline and a willingness to maintain your own integrity (as a reviewer). I have a few friends out there who are fans of my honesty in reviewing. The second I start pandering or giving reviews that simply don't add up, I lose all credibility with these people. This I would personally consider to be not desirable. Nev It's the simple things stupid...

This is a tricky one. I don't think it is possible to be unbiased, because you are always going to have your own opinions of what 'theatre' or 'acting' or a particular show should be. In Perth, the theatre scene is fairly small so it's pretty likely that you will end up reviewing someone you know. If you are going in as an adjudicator or critic in a professional sense, then of course you have the right to be as harsh as you like - providing you're willing to stand the consequences when you see that person next! But if you are going in as a regular viewer, or even someone's friend, I think a little more caution is in order. I used to hate the pissing in pockets that happens in the cases of 'friendly' reviews. What good could it do, I thought, to just tell people what was good about the show, or even lie? How would that help them? But we are talking about community theatre. Not everybody's in it to be a star, not everybody wants to hear that sort of criticism when they're just out there to do their best and have a good time. Consider how you would feel if you tried something outside your comfort zone, which perhaps you were nervous about but determined to enjoy - maybe a new sport - and then after the game, someone came up to you and proceeded to tell you everything you did wrong? I think a typical response might be, "hey mate, I'm just in it for fun". I read your review and I felt that some of it could have been a bit more tactful. Comments about needing to get singing lessons and so on could easily be taken to heart by those people who are just in it for fun. Do we really want to scare away those people who bring a lot of love and energy to community theatre? On the other hand, criticism can be a really helpful thing if a show is having problems. But if you know someone in the show, why not seek them out and ask them if they want critism? If they don't, you've saved them feeling criticised. If they do, saying it to them personally can help you avoid unintended insult! They could also pass on messages - tactfully - to other members of the cast to help improve the show in general. This may sound a little naive or optimistic. But I have just spent three years in a performance course and it was only in our last semester that we really learned to give constructive criticism in a way that really is CONstructive instead of DEstructive. It's very easy to convince yourself that being harsh or critical is helpful, when often that's not the case. If all else fails, imagine you are dating that cast member... what would lie in store for you when you got home if you wrote something about them in a review?!! In a relationship you need to be tactful, and same goes for reviews! Let's try a little love. ;) Positive comments usually get better performances out of people than negative ones. That's all from me, miss sunshine and roses.

After reading the above post by Countess Olivia, I think it should be made clear that my comments were aimed at reviews for both amateur and pro. theatre; and perhaps it needs to be made clearer whether this thread was started with the distinction in mind - is there a difference between reviewing for am and reviewing for pro? Sticky Apple Legs www.thepromptcopy.com/sal Puppets in Melbourne www.puppetsinmelbourne.com.au My puppets www.collectzing.com/collection/137/

Well... I never LIE about friends performances in reviews, although sometimes I do lie by omission, and occassionally I will tear their performance to shreds to their face but be a little softer on them in print. And if its a really bad review I sometimes hold off on submitting it until after the show has closed. So I suppose the answer is yes, I do review differently Oh... but then again I am also more likely to turn around to a friend in print and say "WHAT WERE YOU THINKING!" It all comes out in the wash

Hi Countess, The comment about the singing lessons was actually from my review and not DazzaB's. My review was very tactful and very carefully written. I have given feedback from a fan's POV but also from a performer's perspective. I am also involved in theatre and am very careful regarding the comments I give in reviews (which are rare) as I consider how it would be taken if it was about my show. Is there anything else that you felt that lacked tact? I'll take your comments on board for next time.

I don't tend to hold back in my reviews. As I commented above, I always consider how it would feel if the review was about my show. I'll always give honest feedback but I try to do it in a way that doesn't offend the recipients or the readers.

If you know someone in the show, don't review it. Simple as that. It all ends in tears.

Just a quick point - my review didn't say anything about getting singing lessons - that was the person who posted the first review in the thread. Mine was the next one. Also, I totally agree that constructive criticism is the way to go - as I said, I try to focus on the positives in order to encourage development but if I talk about the negatives I try to talk about how to achieve what the tried rather than saying that it was bad. However, my question was more about whether it is possible for someone who is close to cast members to write a balanced and constructive review. I too have done HEAPS of theatre study (I have a PhD in it) and I feel I am very honest yet constructive and understanding in my reviews. An assumption appears to have been made though that because I am friends with cast members I will give a glowingly positive review whatever the quality of the show. I disagree with that. You yourself have done the study, do you feel that you give honest feedback when commenting on friends' work? Darren

In community theatre, the cast and the audience are largely from the same community and so it is inevitable that at least half the audience know someone in the cast. With that in mind, there are very few people in the audience who have an objective eye, but more importantly, very few that WANT and objective eye. Many enjoy the show BECAUSE they know someone in it, and after all, does it really matter why they enjoy it as long as they do? It is probably best not to take any gushing praise seriously - it is mostly subjective. It is also best not to take any sharp criticism too seriously - it is almost certainly someone with a chip or a gripe since well balanced, happy people simply cannot be bothered finding the time to denigrate others. So somewhere between lies the truth. Most of the reviews I read contain valid and useful criticism and enough encouragement to recognize the effort that goes into any production at any scale. In many cases, it will point to things that the cast and crew are aware of and are trying to fix, but sometimes it is a fresh eye on something that had not been considered. In any case, constructive criticism is always welcome. Personal abuse should be filtered off this site, firstly because it is nothing more that cyberbullying - no different to the type which has been a problem with school children ( and probably by people with about the same mentality ) but also because it is useless to anyone and quickly causes a review site to degenerate into a "review of the review" page. Most pages have a moderator who should filter out the spiteful reviews - they are not hard to pick. Just a quick note re Tohrukuns "get singing lessons" comment - I think it was meant in a constructive fashion - that improving his singing would round off his performance - and was taken as such by the performer who has fought against the fact that he is an almost pathologically happy, considerate and smiling person who has to play a vile, ruthless villain. Of all the performances in the show, I think our cast as a group are most proud of Russell's performance because he is absolutely unrecognizable from himself when he is in character. There you go - a subjective review can also be valuable if you know how far the person has changed their persona to play a character!

"Personal abuse should be filtered off this site, firstly because it is nothing more that cyberbullying - no different to the type which has been a problem with school children ( and probably by people with about the same mentality ) but also because it is useless to anyone and quickly causes a review site to degenerate into a "review of the review" page. Most pages have a moderator who should filter out the spiteful reviews - they are not hard to pick." Go ahead and filter it yourself - everyone has the opportunity and ability to moderate or 'vote' posts and threads down. Many of us do this every day. (We also vote posts up as well) Sticky Apple Legs www.thepromptcopy.com/sal Puppets in Melbourne www.puppetsinmelbourne.com.au My puppets www.collectzing.com/collection/137/

Hey all, I have to start by saying thank you all for your comments so far. I have to agree from reading what you all have to say that it IS impossible to write an un-biassed review - but that's true for any piece of theatre, not just for theatre that has your friends in it. We're all going to be informed by our own personal tastes, and that's a good thing. I get the feeling that most people are saying yes you can write an honest review about your friends' work - which is what I thought too. I take on board the idea that one MUST be really careful with how you put things - I certainly try to be, I read over anything I post 3 or 4 times to make sure it says what I want it to say, but of course people will read/interpret anything that goes up here in their own way. I have experienced exactly what Neville says about reviews that pander or don't add up - you need to be honest. By saying things are fabulous all the time people stop taking you seriously - you generally know if you've done something that wasn't the best quality and if someone says it was fantastic you start to wonder about their credibility... I have to disagree with 'In_the_know_Joe' though. He says: "If you know someone in the show, don't review it. Simple as that. It all ends in tears." I've never had it end in tears. I do agree though that sometimes it is better to talk to an individual personally - very good point. Thanks for the feedback so far - here's hoping there's some more! Darren

"I do agree though that sometimes it is better to talk to an individual personally - very good point." I do too - many times I've had angry or upset actors/writers/directors say they disagreed with something I wrote, or plain found it insulting. Quite often I've chatted to them later and in doing so, we found a better understanding of what we both meant - and found a place to accept whatever was said in the review. Sticky Apple Legs www.thepromptcopy.com/sal Puppets in Melbourne www.puppetsinmelbourne.com.au My puppets www.collectzing.com/collection/137/

Hi Sean, Thanks for that - yes, I did mean it in a constructive way as he did very well for a non-singer and I felt that if he could relax more during his singing, he would be even more convincing on stage. I thought seriously about how to word it in the critique that I gave and re-did it a number of times but didn't anticipate that someone might take it as a "don't sing ever again - you suck!" type of comment......my bad!!!! Russell, well done and sorry for the confusion..... :(

Indeed, Torokhun's comment was meant in a positive fashion, as she would never tell someone to "stop singing - NOW". She is in fact a very talented and educated singer in her own right, but probably wont own up to that. Are we missing the whole point here? I was under the impression that a review was for the benefit of potential audience members considering shelling out their 'hard earned' to see a show. The production team, if they are worth their salt, will be already well aware of the shortcomings of their production (and all productions have them) and will have done all in their power to remedy the problems. I don't think directors will, nor should they, read a review and think - "gee, I better change that". Whenever I write a review, I try to be balanced, giving both positives and negatives, to provide an overview of MY thoughts on ONE performance of a production. I recently reviewed We Will Rock You. My brother was one of the leads in the show, he did a good job and I said as much. Others agreed with me. I also started my review with a disclaimer of the relationship. The show had it's low points. After talking to the sister of the the lead girl, I found I saw the worst performance of the run. Cast like to read good reviews. Thats human nature. Good or bad, They all need to be taken lightly.

Just ignore this

Hi Na Later in this thread you state that you intend the above to be true for Pro reviews as well as Am reviews...but I actually don't think you are talking about theatre REVIEWS at all, but theatre CRITIQUE. In a critique, you are writing for the benefit of the practitioners - the cast, director, etc. So yes, by all means, write about what can be improved upon and how you think the practitioners may benefit from heeding your advice. But a REVIEW is not written for the company, it's written for the audience. (In fact, even that's an over-generalisation...it's actually written for a readership) So when writing a review, you are simply informing the readership about what you thought. You HAVE to be subjective...because it's only your opinion. Obviously, the more you can support your opinion with good argument, example, and subjective fact, the better it will be received and believed. But you have no duty to give constructive criticism, unless it is of interest to your readership, and either helps justify your opinions or maintains your right to voice them. Many of the 'reviews' written in this forum are more along the lines of constructive critique, intended for the practioners, and I suspect so was the review mentioned in this topic heading, therefore your comments are helpful. I just wanted to make the distinction that an actual review is a slightly different thing. The readers of a newspaper review generally don't want or need to know how something could be done better. They want to know if the reviewer thought it was any good, and whether it is recommended that they see it for themselves or not. These are value judgements, and can not be made without being subjective. As for bias, this would occur if the reviewer was promoting (or demoting) something or someone more than it deserved. For instance if a reviewer said good things about a show with his friends in it, when it wasn't really justified. This should obviously be avoided...eventually, when found out, a reviewer with bias will simply lose all credibility. Having said this, if you have friends in a show who deserve to be heaped in praise, and you heap praise on them, this isn't bias so long as it is exactly what you would do if they weren't your friends...ie no preferential treatment (or unfair panning of people you don't get on with). So yes, you can review your friends positively and not be biased, if you can put it in a fair perspective. Having this good perspective is usually what makes a good review. (or critique). Cheers, Craig ~<8>-/====\---------

Is there a difference between reviewing for am and reviewing for pro? See my reply near the top of this thread, to understand my reply here. There is a difference between 'reviewing' and giving 'critique' or feedback. I don't believe there ought to be a huge difference, if you are critiquing a show, between pro and am...but you ought to give your feedback with the understanding of how the people you are writing about are likely to take it. And if you are reviewing a show, it being pro or am shouldn't change things much about your observations, however it may well be important to your readers, and influence your perspective. It's all about understanding your audience. Craig ~<8>-/====\---------

Lets be honest here, a review is the point of view of one person regardless of relationship...i would admit that i would much rather watch an amdram performance with friends or family in it, as by its nature community theatre will lack in quality. that said i think people are sensible enough to recognise that criticisms will be made and opinions will definately vary. i think this wooly prissy attitude to reviews etc is very damaging...stop being a drama queen!!!

People who review their friends and give favourable crits should be well hung drawn and quartered Ivor Biggun

well hung...ivor bigun, i think hes taking the piss mate!

I agree with Craig If I write about a show I don't see myself as writing to teach or advise the cast and crew - if I were, surely I'd be writing to them privately. I do think you can review shows involving people you know. In fact, I think it's probably not a bad idea to pretend you know everyone you mention, because this changes the way you word what you write. Some of the writing on this site is just nasty; you can make the same basic points but just be tactful about it, as you presumably would be if you were face to face with the subject. Some of the comments don't need to be made at all.

Hey All, Seriously, many thanks for all of the feedback on this so far. :) I think Craig brings up a very valid point that I have forgotten - a review and a critique are different things. The line between the two is blurry, but they ARE two different things. I think that what we see most of on this site are critiques - being honest, that's predominantly what I do. Kudos to Gordon the Optom - he's most definately a reviewer, not a critiquer. And I always value what he writes as I trust it comes from a balanced, informed perspective whether he appears to know someone in the cast/crew or not. At the same time, I don't think the critiques should stop. I personally learn a lot from the critiques I read on this site, whether written about one of my performaces or someone else's (as long as I have seen the show they are in). Marcie makes a good point: "I do think you can review shows involving people you know. In fact, I think it's probably not a bad idea to pretend you know everyone you mention, because this changes the way you word what you write. Some of the writing on this site is just nasty; you can make the same basic points but just be tactful about it, as you presumably would be if you were face to face with the subject. Some of the comments don't need to be made at all." Using this strategy would allow you to be the MOST effective when offering constructive criticism. People respond much better to advice/criticism that they think is coming from a good place. If you have some honest advice for someone, they are far more likely to listen to you if you phrase it in a positive, helpful manner :) The other possibility is to think "How would I like someone to tell ME that?" This would have a very similar effect I believe. Finally, coming back to the original question of this thread - Is it possible to review people you know from a balanced perspective, I'm going to quote Craig: "As for bias, this would occur if the reviewer was promoting (or demoting) something or someone more than it deserved. For instance if a reviewer said good things about a show with his friends in it, when it wasn't really justified. This should obviously be avoided...eventually, when found out, a reviewer with bias will simply lose all credibility. Having said this, if you have friends in a show who deserve to be heaped in praise, and you heap praise on them, this isn't bias so long as it is exactly what you would do if they weren't your friends...ie no preferential treatment (or unfair panning of people you don't get on with). So yes, you can review your friends positively and not be biased, if you can put it in a fair perspective." I have re-read the review (really a critique) that I wrote that spurred this whole discussion and I wrote the most positive remarks about someone that I had never met/seen before viewing the show in question and I offered constructive feedback to the people that I know well... I guess this means that, yes, I can write balanced reviews of people I know. Thanks again for everyone's feedback on this topic. :) Darren

Thanks Darren, I'm pleased you found my opinion worthy enough to quote. Personally, I love Marcie's suggestion of pretending you already know everybody you mention. And I just wanted to add to that thought: our theatre world is a pretty small community, really. If you don't know someone NOW, there's a bloody good chance you WILL know them later, if both of you stay in the game long enough. In three years time, that struggling performer I'm writing about now could quite conceivably be billed above me in a stage or screen production, or even auditioning and potentially employing me. Any justified criticism in the review I write today will be water under the bridge, and we will have both moved on and learned from the experience. But if I have written something today that causes them embarrassment or to lose respect for me, then that will be far harder to surmount in future collaborations. People have long memories for that sort of thing! It's not the opinion you hold, but whether you express it with dignity and perspective, that will earn you present and future respect. (...why am I starting to sound like Confucious at the end there?) Cheers, Craig ~<8>-/====\---------

Thanks DazzaB is all I can say. I think you posted a fair and impartial review. From talking with many people that have come to see the show I think most would agree with the words that you have written about the show. We have worked in shows together before and I know you well. One thing I think all would say that know you is that you will always say what you want to say. You do not play the whole "You were wonderful, great, 'insert nice comment'" game that some do in theatre. You will call a spade a spade. I once remember you and I telling a member of a Les Miserables cast that we were cheering for Javair because John Vajohn was uncomfortable to listen to. (hope that spelling is right, pretty sure its not but care factor) The person we were criticising was standing in front of our eyes. So in the virtual wasteland that is the internet where one can be even more brutally honest I was grateful for the review and support most of the criticism with our show. I think as most fair minded people do when they see community theatre they enjoy it for what it is. "A bunch of local people doing the best that they can do regardless of the training that they have received". Glad you had a great time and look forward to someday treading the boards with you again. Congrats on your engagement once again and it was great to see you at KTW mon ami. Cheers Reg