Allow me to explain
I've obviously struck at least a couple of people the wrong way in my reviews. One anonymous commenter in particular seems to been so offended that he (or she) has taken to scanning my archives to find insulting things to say.
Let me just spell out a couple of things that I'd hoped would've been clear to readers, but maybe weren't.
I love Gilbert & Sullivan, and I love watching G&S performances. That's one of my favorite things about the festivals.
When I review shows, I identify both things that I do like and things that I do not like. The fact that there are things that I do not like does not mean that I do not have great respect for the shows and the performers.
This is my diary, and I write about my experiences, and express my opinions, and focus on the performances I'm in, with a special emphasis on myself. I make no apologies for this. I don't think I'm more worthy of being talked about than other people, it's just that this is my diary, so of course I write about me.
As a performer, I value sincere constructive criticism very highly, and I would welcome anyone to give candid appraisals of any of my work, the way that I have given candid appraisals of the performances I write about here.
In light of various reactions to things I've written here, I am rethinking my approach to reviewing shows. I don't mean to come across as negative, and I certainly don't mean to come across as "a pompous, self-aggrandizing ass, quick to pick up on the faults of others yet unable to recognise your own." If that's the way I've been coming across to a substantial number of readers, then I ought to make a change in the way I handle things. I do expect that I will probably be back in Buxton in 2006, if I can save enough money. That leaves me plenty of time to decide how I want to handle this blog.
I invite suggestions.
(Still to come for Buxton 2005: a review of the professional Ruddigore and a more detailed account of the Young Artistes Pirates.)
Let me just spell out a couple of things that I'd hoped would've been clear to readers, but maybe weren't.
I love Gilbert & Sullivan, and I love watching G&S performances. That's one of my favorite things about the festivals.
When I review shows, I identify both things that I do like and things that I do not like. The fact that there are things that I do not like does not mean that I do not have great respect for the shows and the performers.
This is my diary, and I write about my experiences, and express my opinions, and focus on the performances I'm in, with a special emphasis on myself. I make no apologies for this. I don't think I'm more worthy of being talked about than other people, it's just that this is my diary, so of course I write about me.
As a performer, I value sincere constructive criticism very highly, and I would welcome anyone to give candid appraisals of any of my work, the way that I have given candid appraisals of the performances I write about here.
In light of various reactions to things I've written here, I am rethinking my approach to reviewing shows. I don't mean to come across as negative, and I certainly don't mean to come across as "a pompous, self-aggrandizing ass, quick to pick up on the faults of others yet unable to recognise your own." If that's the way I've been coming across to a substantial number of readers, then I ought to make a change in the way I handle things. I do expect that I will probably be back in Buxton in 2006, if I can save enough money. That leaves me plenty of time to decide how I want to handle this blog.
I invite suggestions.
(Still to come for Buxton 2005: a review of the professional Ruddigore and a more detailed account of the Young Artistes Pirates.)
posted by Jonathan Ichikawa | 2:13 PM
12 Comments:
Why should you change the way you review performances just because a few people may not like it? I personally like the more critical reviews as sometimes you can read a review that is soo full of praise that you wonder if the reviewer has seen the same show.........of course this can also be taken the other way around, but as i saw most of the same shows that you did at the festival I think what you have said is fair! As a performer, and avid reveiw reader myself I like seeing some constructive critisism such as yours, it is much more helpful than straight praise! Plus, when it comes to G&S I think we can safely assume that you have a pretty good idea of what you are talking about! Like you said, If people don't like what you are putting here they don't *have* to read it!
Hey SJ, thanks for the comment.
I wouldn't change, of course, just because some people don't like what I'm doing. But if people are affronted or insulted by it, and if I'm coming across as something I'm not, and don't want to be, then that just might be a reason to change my practice.
I don't know. I'm thinking it over, and I have more than eleven months until I have to decide.
Jonathan, you crack me up.
Someone who takes issue with the fact that you mention the lack of air conditioning in the Opera House, and accuses you of messing up the phrasing on a song you haven't sung, is really not someone to whose opinion of your blog you need to give great weight, or in response to whom you need to rethink your approach to blogging.
If reasonable people take issue with your reviews, that's another matter, and possibly to be thought over. (You refer to "at least a couple," but I just see the one, though I didn't go through all your posts looking for insults.) I'm not too familiar with review ettiquette in the amateur theatrical community, though I really can't imagine that you violated any such ettiquette with the reviews I've read here, nor have I noticed anyone else taking issue with the tone or content of your reviews in the comments.
The Hierophant's crossing you again, man! Push him off the boat with your oar!
-Savannah, with fond exasperation
I echo the others' sentiments. You don't need to change for someone who cannot seem to express him or herself other than with childish and petty insults.
Some time ago a SavoyNetter posted some comments from a friend of his who had seen the SavoyNet "Yeomen". They were less than complimentary. A torrent of indignant exclamations followed (and one once-prominent SavoyNetter retired from SavoyNet productions), but I maintained (and still do) that that person was thoroughly within her rights to express those opinions. As long as one does so constructively and does not resort to personal attacks, public performances are open to honest review.
What's more, the reviewer was correct - the performance was below par and it deserved the comments it received.
Your blog (as all blogs do) has invited criticism, being a public diary - what it has not invited is the sort of insulting tosh that this person has been posting.
Ignore him or her.
I agree with what was said. Try a little humility! That way you might avoid coming across as "The Big I Am".
Have greatly enjoyed reading your site over the past week or so, and really please don't take any notice whatsover of the bitter meanderings of whoever this person is... There's always at least one person in any amateur theatrical enterprise that unfortunately reminds us why professionals hold us in such contempt!
I would just ignore what this individual is saying. There are always people who deliberately try to wind up others and all I sense is jealously because of your achievements at the festival. Don't worry about it because no one agrees with what this person has said in any way shape or form. Also I have thoroughly enjoyed reading your blog, it has been honest not the normal wishwash reviews can be. Please carry it on and don't worry about the idiot.
Hey, Jonathan,
I agree with Savannah. Don't let this miscreant rob you of your right to Blog. Yours have been the only open and honest reviews of the Festival that I have seen in public this year. Everyone has been scared off honest reviews, including one very prominent SavoyNetter who has apparently been taking happy pills. Your reviews give your views of the good and the bad of what you see. People can disagree, but thank God that one man is willing to give the public his analysis and perspective, rather than just letting the inner circle in on what might be rethought in the future. Even David Turner, whose early adjudications were blunt, to put it mildly, now praises all productions. His praise of Blue Hill was OTT, and then he only gave them one award and two nominations.
Beyond your reviews, all of your observations about the Festival have been fascinating, and for those of us stuck at home, we waited every day for your postings and were delighted at our much-needed daily fix.
Finally, with respect to your descriptions of your own performances and activities, I completely agree that this is YOUR diary, and you are entirely justified in chronicleing YOUR goings-on so that, when you are old and crusted, you can look back on these eventful summers and have a wonderful memento. Plus, as you say, all the performing that you are doing is at the REQUEST of the Festival. They specifically wanted you to come and perform to show that interest in G&S is alive and well among the younger crowd. Plus, they wanted to showcase young talent, and you are definitely in the category of young talent. And it seems to me that you have been the best kind of Young Ambassador that you could possibly have been. Also, the fact that your tormenter also mentions John S. shows that his comments are borne of jealousy (and I am quite sure it is a him).
Keep on bloggin' Jonathan!
Sam
I actually think it's pretty funny someone would be so bold to leave annonymous comments like that! I mean, for Pete's sake - leave your name at least... what a wimp!
I actually learned about this blog through the Opera-L postings, and while I can see where this Mr. Anonymous might get angry - those of us who know Jonathan certainly know that what he's expressing are his PREFERENCES, which we all have.
I can't really say that he and I commonly share that many of the same preferances. To be a bit critical, I frequently get vibes that Jonathan views that there is only 'one true' way to do G&S - and that all other attemps just don't come up to his expectations. I guess that's OK, but I tend to be much more leniant.
I was personally THRILLED last year when the adjudicator commented that my performance was quite a different 'pace' from the norm - just that I was different at all from the norm was good enough for me. I prefer to be in the 'creative' arts, and am admittedly not interested in 're-creating' anything, G&S or otherwise.
But obviously this Mr. Anonymous has nothing constructive to say - so why bother pondering about it? I'm glad you wrote all you did - I really wish I could have been there myself, if nothing else to have at least one decent pint at the pub! God knows no Chicago G&S troupe is ever going to cross the pond to perform there... oh well...
Jonathan, don't change a thing. You have every right to express any opinion and preference you choose to in YOUR blog space. What you criticized in your view, you also backed up with good explanations - that while others may or may not agree with them, you weren't tossing crap out without thought. I shudder to think what Mr. Anonymous would print in HIS blog, and if he'd even give any post even half as much thought.
At the risk of piling on, I agree with those who've said that you have nothing to apologize for. I attended the first half of the Festival, and during the second half your blog was my daily connection to what was going on in Buxton. I checked it religiously. I do not agree with you 100% of the time, but it is YOUR diary, and it is emminently worth reading in its current form. Don't you go a-changin'.
Marc Shepherd
Hi Jonathan,
A here, here to all that has been said, it's YOUR diary and we love it. As Simon said the other night don't take it to heart tell them to ........ off.
Jo
"that unfortunately reminds us why professionals hold us in such contempt!"
Actually, professionals DON'T hold amateurs in contempt. The very vast majority of pro singers admire amateurs' committment to light opera and to G&S in particular.
After all, amateurs perform for the love of it (remembering that the word "amateur" comes from the Latin word "to love"), whereas we professionals do it for money.
In fact, amateurs pay for the privilege - audition fees, company fees, costume fees - and usually drag themsselves bodily to rehearsals after a hard day earning a living, and then give up more precious free time should there be a weekend rehearsal, and spend hours and hours and hours learning and rehearsing, all of which are unpaid.
And another reason that us professionals admire amateurs is for the simple reason that amateur companies have kept G&S alive and flourshing, introducing their works to new audiences around the world. Whereas in "the old days" you would have to wait until the Doyly Carte Co. paid a visit to your city, there are probably several amateur G&S productions a season.
So, let's not assume that the pro's hold the amateurs in comtempt. Because, honey, it just ain't the case.
(and besides, the comments on this blog are VERY small beer compared to the bitching, backstabbing and general nastiness that goes on in most pro companies).
- An Old Pro
Post a Comment
<< Home