The right to criticize?

[mikewood]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 2:28pm

I guess this is a two fold question: Do we have a right to criticize? And do we have a right to criticize... here?

This came up on a thread I started on a thread about Amy McAlexander, and I wanted to open up it up as its own topic. I believe, as a consumer... as someone who is a patron of Broadway theater and someone who spends around four grand on theater tickets per year that it is perfectly within my rights to critique, analyze, praise. and in some cases, lambast shows I see on Broadway.

I also believe this forum would appear to be an ideal place to this. Speaking for myself, while I do believe one has a repsonsiblity to be somewhat dignified in one's criticism, harsh criticism backed up with sincere consideration seems perfectly valid. For instance, saying a Broadway performer "has no talent" would appear to be an invalid argument because they wouldn't be there if they had "no talent." However, saying that an actor's talents doesn't suit a particular role in which they were cast seems (with the proverbial and implicit IMO attached) perfectly valid.

[baddadnpa]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 2:29pm

I believe one can, and is permitted to be, critical without being mean.

[keggss23]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 2:32pm

I think it is well within our right to criticize any public work that is being done. However, I think some people don't seem to know the difference between criticizing someone's work and making personal attacks just to be mean.

[IMsooHyprToday]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 2:32pm

agreed.

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 2:34pm

Yes, of course we do, though some of us take it a bit far - myself included. My Idina and 'Wicked' bashing sometimes go a tad bit too far, I'll admit.

[starlight2]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 2:43pm

We have this Board so that we can share news, reviews, opinions, but ALL within reason, and I do believe it gets carried too far, such as Amy from LWand last week with CArly from Hairspray. NO ONE on this board knows everything, and everyone has a different opinion, and that is all they are...opinions!

Posted: 5/23/05 at 2:59pm

There has always been the perception that no artistic endeavor is complete until the reviews come in. We live in an age where those reviews can keep on coming-- forever! I think if a performer is thin skinned and doesn't want to hear feedback, then stay off the boards!

If you were to yell out your criticisms in the theater or grab the performer on the street and rant, now THAT would be wrong!

[StephanietheStar]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 3:04pm

I will admit sometimes I get a little nasty with my comments, but I believe critiquing an actor's performance is a LARGE part of being a Bway fan! I mean, we have favorite actors for the same reason that we have not-so-favorite actors. We liked/disliked something about their performance. People shouldn't get all pissy because we talk about specific performers and *GASP!* they or their family might read!

[Elphaba3]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 3:12pm

Of course--within reason.

[bunchamuncha]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 3:13pm

Yes, especially when they charge as much as they do for ticket prices.
On the flip side, I have gone to see productions based on reviews I've read here as well.
And yes, there are some folks who get a bit nasty for the sake of stirring the pot, but...

[MagicToDo82]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 3:24pm

Saying you didn't enjoy someone's performance is one thing, and acceptable.

Being mean just to be mean is another.

[Plum]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 3:33pm

Of course criticism is necessary; improvements can't be made without it. But starting a thread just to bash an actor- who is, despite how easy it is to forget, an actual person- it going too far. A balance has to be found between expressing our opinions and considering the feelings of others and the atmosphere of the board.

Also, as I posted not too long ago, there's a difference between bashing, negative feedback, and constructive criticism. The latter two are acceptable, but not the first.

[grizzabella]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 3:38pm

We all have a right to opinions, including the right to criticize books, scores, actors' performances or anything else that stikes us. How thoughtful we are, and how we express ourselves is up to us. Civility is never out of place. That said,we all have hot buttons, and sometimes they get touched and we react. If we're going to be on a public message board, we're, by definition, going to take some heat sometimes! For me, that's part of the fun. When it isn't fun, we can choose to keep on swinging or back off. Sometimes there's wisdom in choosing your arguments. Personally, I love the vast variety of sujects that get discussed. Keep the talk coming, says I!

[BluCat500]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 3:43pm

i think starting a tread to talk about your dislike for a performer is not going too far, in the scheme of things opening a thread is not a very bold or big move at all. It simply allows for discussion and even if the first post dislkies the performer then this does not mean others can not offer counter viewpoints, as long as it is all done in a civilized manner

[TGIF]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 3:48pm

Broadway is supposed to be the best of the best. So as a paying costumer, I expect the best (or close to it). If a performance or a show is not up to par with my expectations what should I do? Say I love it?

With out a doubt we have a right to criticize, but there is a right and wrong way. I think we (myself included) can all get out of hand at times and sometimes people forget this is a public forum where anyone can read what we write.

I also think we should all remember that these are our OPINIONS. There is a difference between a show being "THE BEST (or worst) SHOW EVER!!!" and "This is my favorite (least favorite) show."

And because this is a public forum that others read and (as someone in this thread even mentioned) a place where others may decide what shows to go see we should always back up our statements. To say something was "horrid" say WHY you didn't like it.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 3:48pm

I think there's a way to criticize, and then there's a way NOT to criticize, and I also think that within reason, it is a theatregoer's right. I really see no problem in, for valid reasons, offering comments on a performance or something like that. I don't, however, see the point of starting an entire thread dedicated to the bashing of a *person* rather than said person's *performance*. Even then, I don't know that an entire thread is particularly necessary, but I think that the more important matter is the way the criticism is presented, and why it's given. Especially on a board like this that, as we learned last night, many more people than a lot of us would suspect are reading, we *do* need to think before we write. It's wrong to just come out and go on about a person, disguising blatant dislike for valid, opinionated criticism. Criticism should have backing and a reason behind it, not just "oh, I hate him/her." That's not useful, and it doesn't tell anybody anything - it makes the poster come off as mean, bitchy, stupid, whatever - but not good. To further go into this Amy Alexander example - just look at the title of the thread - begging for attention in the form of "backlash." Why not just have a thread in which to discuss her performance, rather than one that might as well say "come on, let's bash this girl just because!" I realize that her performance isn't very widely liked (and honestly, I didn't enjoy it much either - I think she went far overboard), but the way that it was presented was rather tasteless.

Updated On: 5/23/05 at 03:48 PM

[mikewood]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 3:53pm

"Being mean" is such a gray area. ANY criticism can be considered "mean" depending on the thickness of the skin receiving criticism. For instance, one criticism I had of the casting of John C. Reilly in Streetcar was that he lacked the physical beauty Tennessee Williams he called for. I think the writer's intentions are a perfectly valid stepping off point for criticism. Some parts call for a particular type. The inverse is true as well...Hugh Jackman shouldn't play Winston Chruchill, a short stout man.

Personal attacks? Now, that's mean and something to avoid but most everything else would seem to fall into the category of "fair game.'

[mikewood]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 3:56pm

Also, as I posted not too long ago, there's a difference between bashing, negative feedback, and constructive criticism. The latter two are acceptable, but not the first. >>>

But one problem is when fans of certain performers consider any negative feedback of an actor or actres bashing.

[TGIF]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 4:02pm

And another is when people don't know how to seperate a performance and the actor(ess) while criticizing.


I also wanted to add how much I dislike when people say this: "You have no right to criticize! You're not up there. I'd like to see you try and belt 8 times a week!"

I love theatre and I love performing, but I know that my love for the theatre far outweighs my talents! This is their job just like we have our jobs. You wouldn't hear someone say "Give the doctor a break! You try to do surgery!"

Updated On: 5/23/05 at 04:02 PM

[riv]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 4:03pm

A) The price of a ticket gives one the right to knock a show or performer.

B) If a bashing thread is started, and many people join in with the same hostile opinion, than there must be something about a show or performer which is seriously bothering those who express opinions around here. If a harsh criticism is unwarranted, it will be firmly and quickly countered and put to rest.

C) Let me say, just to mention the other side of the coin, there are also idiot "I ABSOLUTELY WORSHIP this, that, or the other performer" threads and "This show is SOOOOOO GREAT!" threads which are nothing but mindless drivel. It all balances out.
Updated On: 5/23/05 at 04:03 PM

[mikewood]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 4:05pm

To further go into this Amy Alexander example - just look at the title of the thread - begging for attention in the form of "backlash." >>>

Begging for attention....? I think not. I daresay an apt use of the language.

Everytime there was a Little Women thread, especially relating to it closing, there would be a strain of McAlexander bashing, a backlash so to speak. I noticed this and commented on this. I have no problem justifying the title of thread and my use of the term "backlash". There are many terms I could have used....many of them in fact fall in the realm of the dreaded: "Mean".

[Plum]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 4:21pm

Actually, "backlash" implies some kind of counter-movement. If close to no one liked Ms. McAlexander's performance in the first place, what is the "backlash" against?

Like Emcee said, last night provided proof that the people we discuss are probably reading this place in greater numbers than we realize. Criticism is okay, and even necessary. But have a little thought before you press "Post Message."

To say, "I have an opinion and I'll express it however I wish" is selfish. We have a responsibility to others as well as to ourselves, and would do well to remember that. You don't live in a little "me" box; everything you do and say affects others. You can be honest without being rude.

[mikewood]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 4:40pm

Plum,
I am not going to get into an extended debate of the semantics and use of the term "backlash" on another thread on this thread. As a matter of fact, your focus on that word indicates to me that may not have even read the post that followed it up and certainly not the subsequent posts.

Semantics aside, I challenge you to find a post where I proclaimed anything close to "To say, "I have an opinion and I'll express it however I wish" is selfish."

To compare anything I've written to a false comment that someone made about an actor beating his wife is ridiculous and not even close to accurate and has no place in this thread.

"We have a responsibility to others as well as to ourselves, and would do well to remember that You don't live in a little "me" box; everything you do and say affects others. You can be honest without being rude. "

I can honestly and politely tell you that I resent this little soapbox of moral superiority you seem to have placed yourself upon. Don't preach to me. You're not qualified. I will gladly have a rational conversation WITH you about anything you choose. But don't presume to talk AT me.

Updated On: 5/23/05 at 04:40 PM

[Plum]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 4:54pm

That's what I get for mixing responses. Not everything in the post was directed at you, mikewood, or I probably would have named you. I'm responding to opinions I've seen expressed here that pretty much amount to "I have an opinion and I'll express it however I wish." Not necessarily yours. I did not compare what you said to accusations domestice abuse; I merely pointed out that yesterday's incident shows that the people we discuss are more likely than we think to be reading what we write. It's an example, not an accusation. And I'm not addressing the last part of your post because it stems from your belief that my entire post was directed at you. As I said, it wasn't.

[mikewood]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 5:00pm

Thank you, I apologize for my extreme reaction.