No More Secrets?
Tue, 11 July 2000, 11:27 pmGrant Malcolm23 posts in thread
No More Secrets?
Tue, 11 July 2000, 11:27 pmMaybe it's because I've managed to personally avoid the wrath of the bewhiskered one, but i've not been entirely unappreciative of the commentaries posted under the pseudonym "Secret Squirrel".
I'm not sure whether i find his/her nasty remarks any more or less pleasing, illuminating or fulfilling than some of the occasionally fatuous "the show was fantastic. i loved it" comments that pepper this message board.
Certainly the first couple of commentaries on Butterflies Are Free and Bumpy Angels appeared to be at least partly considered and thought out. The most recent message really seemed to be plumbing the depths of bile though.
I'd like to encourage Squirrel to keep writing critiques - under your real name. You don't need to own up to who you are, that's not my point. I just can't help feeling that if you posted under your own name, you would take a little bit more time rephrasing some of the hasty, nastier things you have said. Not that you should cut out the critical comments, but that you might give them at least a light dusting of icing sugar to help them go down. It would be much harder for people to dismiss you out of hand if you weren't so dismissive yourself. People would still hear your criticisms, but would take them on board more readily if they sense that you have made an effort to understand their difficulties and you share their passion.
Finally, if you really can't find anything positive to say, perhaps it's better to say nothing at all?
Cheers
Grant
I'm not sure whether i find his/her nasty remarks any more or less pleasing, illuminating or fulfilling than some of the occasionally fatuous "the show was fantastic. i loved it" comments that pepper this message board.
Certainly the first couple of commentaries on Butterflies Are Free and Bumpy Angels appeared to be at least partly considered and thought out. The most recent message really seemed to be plumbing the depths of bile though.
I'd like to encourage Squirrel to keep writing critiques - under your real name. You don't need to own up to who you are, that's not my point. I just can't help feeling that if you posted under your own name, you would take a little bit more time rephrasing some of the hasty, nastier things you have said. Not that you should cut out the critical comments, but that you might give them at least a light dusting of icing sugar to help them go down. It would be much harder for people to dismiss you out of hand if you weren't so dismissive yourself. People would still hear your criticisms, but would take them on board more readily if they sense that you have made an effort to understand their difficulties and you share their passion.
Finally, if you really can't find anything positive to say, perhaps it's better to say nothing at all?
Cheers
Grant
RE: No More Secrets?
Thu, 13 July 2000, 11:25 amWalter Plinge
Gary wrote:
-------------
In your case Leah, your credentials are well established. If you give a bad review most people would probably agree with it because you know what you are talking about.
Based on this comment Gary, I assume that I would never be allowed/considered worthy enough to post a review - whether it be in the positive or negative.
I have plodded around theatre for the past almost 5 years - but I would be surprised to learn that I have 'credentials' outside my home theatre, well established or not. Why then, simply because few people know me, should I keep my opinion to myself when all around me are expressing theirs? Why cannot I exercise my right to freedom of speech?
Or should I be restricted to a 'good' review, and then work very hard establishing myself on a better-known platform before I attempted what could possibly be a more 'honest' review? I will point out that my lack of a high-profile in other theatre companies around Perth is entirely my choice, however I have sat in the audience of many a show from Wanneroo to Rockingham.
For example, I recently went to see Marloo's production of 'The Boyfriend' (a show that I enjoyed, by the way). I'll fill you in on a few background details. I know about music - being a piano and guitar player; I know a little about directing - having dabbled enough to produce a 1-act; I know about costumes - being an inveterate seamstress; I know about lights - having not only dabbled in this area but attended the recent course at PICA; and I have experience in the sound side of things. And I'll throw in front of house just for good measure.
Precisely what then, in your view, disqualifies me from posting a review? Would it only be that fact that you don't know who I am? Maybe we could ask Grant nicely to change for format/layout of this page so that you not only give a name and email address but there is a space for qualifications too, that must be filled in before any message is posted.
Or possibly it can be sorted with a simple name change from "Theatre Review" to "Theatre Reminisces" which would effectively take the contents of this page from critique to opinion.
Louise
-------------
In your case Leah, your credentials are well established. If you give a bad review most people would probably agree with it because you know what you are talking about.
Based on this comment Gary, I assume that I would never be allowed/considered worthy enough to post a review - whether it be in the positive or negative.
I have plodded around theatre for the past almost 5 years - but I would be surprised to learn that I have 'credentials' outside my home theatre, well established or not. Why then, simply because few people know me, should I keep my opinion to myself when all around me are expressing theirs? Why cannot I exercise my right to freedom of speech?
Or should I be restricted to a 'good' review, and then work very hard establishing myself on a better-known platform before I attempted what could possibly be a more 'honest' review? I will point out that my lack of a high-profile in other theatre companies around Perth is entirely my choice, however I have sat in the audience of many a show from Wanneroo to Rockingham.
For example, I recently went to see Marloo's production of 'The Boyfriend' (a show that I enjoyed, by the way). I'll fill you in on a few background details. I know about music - being a piano and guitar player; I know a little about directing - having dabbled enough to produce a 1-act; I know about costumes - being an inveterate seamstress; I know about lights - having not only dabbled in this area but attended the recent course at PICA; and I have experience in the sound side of things. And I'll throw in front of house just for good measure.
Precisely what then, in your view, disqualifies me from posting a review? Would it only be that fact that you don't know who I am? Maybe we could ask Grant nicely to change for format/layout of this page so that you not only give a name and email address but there is a space for qualifications too, that must be filled in before any message is posted.
Or possibly it can be sorted with a simple name change from "Theatre Review" to "Theatre Reminisces" which would effectively take the contents of this page from critique to opinion.
Louise
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···