I like to believe I am a reformed critic-basher. When I was younger (so much younger than today), I took pen to paper to write at what I felt was an unfair review of Mayfair's "Sweeney Todd" in DB Magazine. I thought I was so clever. I was wrong. The reviewer waited a fortnight to respond and when he did, he shot me down in flames. I'm sure the 15 people that read DB magazine got a huge laugh at my expense. He still writes reviews today (and has a penchant for quoting the entire works of Douglas Adams or Charles M. Shultz on their facebook page) and I learnt a valuable lesson. In the words of Tim Sexton "Don't argue with a critic- you'll never win".
What bought this up is a comment that sparked a massive debate on the Adelaide Theatre Collective FB group. From what I can gather, two "amateur" actors were nominated in a "professional" category and it raised the ire of some people. The initial comment was quite brutal in its assessment-
" Hmmm... Concerned that Santos "Exploitation Managers" earning over 150kpa have the gall to call themselves "theatre critics"! Such critics have become the "judges" of theatre companies and productions who often receive NO or LIMITED funding. Their criticism exhibits no practical or even theoretical expertise about theatre. At best it expresses personal opinion with an uber middle class view. At worst it simply shows up their own stupidity and ignorance. How would they like it if all us thespians turned up at Olympic Dam to tell them we didn't like the way the rock strata had formatted? Ignorant they would say... Well yes. My point exactly. Please, can we make our theatre critics credible? Could they at least know the difference between Ionesco and iron ore?"
That started a cavalcade of responses- 168 (at the time of writing) to be precise. You'll need to not only take a lunch break to read through it all but also bring a dictionary and have google on standby.
As I've gotten older, I've come to really understand critics. I've had good reviews and bad reviews. The funny thing is, when you step dispassionately away from the work you are presenting you realise that the critics are usually right. Yes, sometimes they can be as tactful as a sledgehammer to glass, but quite frankly all I can say is suck it in.
People whinge that there are far too many internet review sites (some even suggesting that they only exist so people can get free tickets- oh the outrage!), but here's some food for thought- barely any member of the general public reads them. The only critiques worth "bums on seats" are the ones written in print media and even then most people won't hinge their purchase of a ticket on a single opinion from one person- certainly not in Adelaide anyway. I have seen shows sell-out DESPITE bad reviews. I can't think of any shows where people have demanded refunds en-masse following a bad notice from the ATG or Barefoot Review websites.
Back when I was pilloried by this critic in DB, they stated the oft-used, well worn catch cry of the critic- "it's only one person's opinion"- and they are right. Maybe instead of whining about how under-qualified critics are, or how ignorant they are etc, maybe actors and producers need to look at their own product and take note of what they say. Look at the audience response and evaluate. Some theatre companies ask the audience for feedback (as if ticket sales were not an indication enough). The point is that critics voice one opinion and often they speak the truth on some level.
As for awards I can only say that it is incredibly frustrating when the show you've spent months on and poured blood, sweat and tears over is ignored nut then again, I don't believe we put on shows for the sole purpose of getting awards. It's wonderful when you get nominated but at the same time, rather than moping about who didn't get the nod why not celebrate the performances that did?
Critics are a necessary evil in the theatre world- they remind us of where we are and what we can do to be better. Do I agree with every review written? No. Do I think every critic that writes reviews is brilliant and should be allowed to continue? No. But I remind myself that I am in an industry that needs to come to terms with public scrutiny and criticism and that no matter how hard we try, we can always be better at what we do.
The outcome of the Facebook debate was a decision to have a forum to discuss the matters offline. Wow. I'm sure that will be riveting listening. Can I review that for an online site? It will not achieve anything except to molly-coddle a few actors with their noses out of joint. The other outcome was a post from the group's founder, Elena pleading for the debate to end and to remind us all of the reason the group was created- in other words "please critics, don't hang any negative crap on me- I didn't start it...they did!! (points finger furiously at the original poster)" If I sound a bit jaded on the matter then I guess I am. Publicly venting about critics always a dangerous game. I found out the hard way many years ago (and thankfully with few consequences)- maybe some actors need to learn from others past mistakes....
