NYT Offensive reviews- Page 2

[JudyDenmark]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 12:48pm

Kad said: "Sara Holdren's thoughtful reviews at New York Mag are the best. Even when I don't agree, they are at least illuminating."

I don't think I can read any of her reviews again after she blatantly spoiled The Band's Visit. I'm still salty about it. 

(FWIW, I respect Brantley's apology here. I believe him that he was just trying to echo the tone of the joke in the show, and didn't realize how it would read.)

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 12:52pm

I think it's crazy that LCH never put out an apology but Brantley did, when the former's offense was far worse. I thought it was obvious was Brantley was trying to get across, and I still think the reaction toward him has been a little harsh. He obviously didn't mean to alienate transgender folks or anything; what he wrote was just a poor choice of tone. LCH, however, clearly picked out Umphress, highlighted her weight, and turned it into a pitfall of her review. How horrible is that?

And all the while, Jesse Green still stands as the greatest asset of the NYT theatre department. I wish he'd just do everything these days.

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 12:56pm

I also accept Brantley's apology even though I shouldn't be the one to accept it or not accept it as a cis-gender person who identifies with the gender I was assigned at birth. It seemed genuine to me and he may have underestimated the fact that the effect he was going for really was dependent on people seeing the show, which most people who read it would not have seen.

Anyway, I will admit something since somebody mentioned LCH. I am a chubby gay man, so I have my own issues with weight (not fitting in the more desirable Asian twink look that seems to be popular), but I still am having a hard time grappling with the reaction a lot of people have with her review of Umphress. I mean I do get parts of it and I think I understand the basic negative reaction (Marissa Jaret Winouker's response was well-written), but I would actually like another thread (that won't be deleted and can stay respectful) where people can talk about just how much that line and mentioning her size impacted people. I would sincerely like to get where people are coming from. I also think it's also a matter of gender that is preventing me from fully understanding the negative reaction as much as I want to because, let's face it, as shaming as the gay male community can be, it's not on the same level as women who are judged much more harshly on their looks by way more people.

[AC126748]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 12:58pm

I have no inside information on the LCH/NYT situation. But as someone who works in the industry, I would stake a bet that her editor contacted her and consulted on how she wanted to handle the situation. Issue an apology, amend the review, let it stand, etc. If the NYT felt strongly that her comments were beyond the pale, they would be gone by now. If she's not saying anything and the review isn't being rephrased, then she's made that decision and her newspaper is standing behind her. Of course, she is a freelancer with no job security, and if the NYT feels that she's been made vulnerable, they can very easily just stop contracting her.

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 1:14pm

I just want to point out this tweet coming from an employee of Broadwayworld, https://twitter.com/alanhenry/status/1022636730791460864?s=21

I think this sentiment is very dangerous and disgusting. Just because you may not be the target audience of a show it shouldn’t take away your right to review the show. I’d very much like BWW to tell mr. Henry to take down this post.

[broadwaynerdnewbie]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 1:34pm

I don’t disagree with Alan Henry’s tweet honestly. I do think the theatre community of critics needs to diversify. That doesn’t mean those people will like every musical or play that is aimed at their demographic but full stop they’d treat their review with more care than cis het white men. Even if a transgender critic didn’t like HOH I know for a fact they wouldn’t have made the comments that Brantley apologized for today. That’s pretty much a fact.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 1:42pm

Seriously? You want BWW to tell an employee (more likely a volunteer) to censor their own, non work related  twitter, jorge?

[Gizmo6]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 1:54pm

I’m queer. I haven’t seen the show.

However, I can read! It was an obvious remark towards a character and plot point.

Much ado about nothing.

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 1:56pm

I think your tweet brought very valid points. A trans person of color who has a background to write theatre criticism may not like the show, but they would probably "get" what the show is going for better than some other critics who really are behind-the-times with a lot of the language, ideas, and cultural references. Brantley actually seems knowledgeable about it, but not as knowledgeable as somebody who is more in-tuned to the culture (and probably younger) and some of his attitudes does seem to be from someone who is older and probably was progressive back during his youth and still thinks of himself as such BUT hasn't kept up with the pulse of the changing culture and is a bit mainstream now. Every critic views art and projects through a lens of their background, education, life experiences, and where they are in life (or what mood they're in) at that particular time that they saw the show and wrote the review. Critics also see so much work that oftentimes they've seen everything and it gets to the point, especially as they age, where works simply lose its impact on them whereas it may be impactful to people who aren't as "experienced".

OT, but this reminds me of a few progressive-minded conferences I've attended with a variety of demographics and heard older people talk about their issues keeping up with all the changing language, attitudes and how certain attitudes they thought were radical during their time that they adopted can now be seen as "problematic" and etc.

[haterobics]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 2:05pm

Ironically, Brantley's review has started more discussion about Head Over Heels than the people who have seen it or are paid to promote it...

[Lot666]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 2:26pm

S394206H said: "The whole tone of the article comes off as snide and condescending"

That's Brantley's modus operandi. He's smug and self-important and I've never liked him.

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 2:31pm

I agree that more news venues should start hiring or promoting non straight white male critics, especially in the theatre. When playwrights like Suzan Lori-Parks, Paula Vougel, and Lynn Notage’s new works receive middling reviews while works like “The Low Road” recieve the same mediocre reviews but somehow manage to get the “Critic’s pick” seal, it does make one wonder.
However, if anyone thinks that the reason “Head Over Heels” got bad reviews because of the demographic, I question their discerning skills. I would love for more trans and/or POC critics in the theatre. But for this particular show, if they had magically had a different opinion then most of these critics, it would just make them a trans and/or POC critic with bad taste.

[Robbie2]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 2:35pm

haterobics said: "Ironically, Brantley's review has started more discussion about Head Over Heels than the people who have seen it or are paid to promote it..."

 

 

That's true...is this show being promoted and who's the target audience? I live in NYC and the fans of the Go-Go's are thinking they are getting a review and not what's on stage. A colleague (GO-GO's fan) commented that she Hated the show...and  a lot of other things that are being presented on stage that I will refrain from sharing. Personally, Love the GO-Go's but we have no desire in seeing this show!

[uncageg]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 2:41pm

I had a long winded response to all of this but I will just say that I have just been shaking my head over the fact that 2 critics have had to publicly apologize over things in a review that were clearly not meant to shame or put down certain people.

This really needs to stop when it is not warranted.

[Kad]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 2:46pm

Only Brantley has apologized.

[EllieRose2]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 2:50pm

And that's how you take responsibility and apologize for something. Good on Ben and the NYT,  Laura should take note!  

[haterobics]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 2:56pm

EllieRose2 said: "And that's how you take responsibility and apologize for something. Good on Ben and the NYT,Laura should take note!"

He is apologizing for what he wrote. She would have to apologize for how people interpreted what she wrote.

[uncageg]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 3:05pm

I thought she addressed it and said she was talking about the costume designer. Maybe I read wrong.

[AC126748]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 3:06pm

I’m somewhat wary of the extreme identity politics that occasionally crop up when discussing how to approach criticism (“this show is by a trans author, therefore we should only send trans writers to cover it,” etc). But the critical landscape is overwhelmingly homogeneous and would benefit from some new, diverse blood. The majority of critics are white. The majority of the majority are male. Some are gay, some are straight. There are still very few prominent critics who are women or POC, and among them, even fewer who have full-time appointments. I can’t think of any major critics who identify as trans or nonbinary. It is still very much an old white Boys club.

[haterobics]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 3:07pm

uncageg said: "I thought she addressed it and said she was talking about the costume designer. Maybe I read wrong."

You read correctly.

[binau]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 3:17pm

AC126748 said: "I’m somewhat wary of the extreme identity politics that occasionally crop up when discussing how to approach criticism (“this show is by a trans author, therefore we should only send trans writers to cover it,” etc). But the critical landscape is overwhelmingly homogeneous and would benefit from some new, diverse blood. The majority of critics are white. The majority of the majority are male. Some are gay, some are straight. There are still very few prominent critics who are women or POC, and among them, even fewer who have full-time appointments. I can’t think of any major critics who identify as trans or nonbinary. It is still very much an old white Boys club."

I really do agree with you and I share your perspective. I am probably first (well, second) to criticise the 'identity politics' issues that seem to crop up here time, and time again (e.g., I don't think gender/race/sexuality should or does impact intellectual diversity in most professional contexts)  - but if we are speaking of interpreting art I DO think that different demographics may react differently to what is being presented on stage and it is important that we genuinely have a diverse perspective.

Updated On: 7/27/18 at 03:17 PM

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 3:43pm

I would agree with you but I actually do think gender/race/ethnicity/cultural background/sexual orientation/gender identity does impact intellectual diversity in most if not all professional context because even how we analyze facts, discern theories, apply theories to facts, see certain facts, what theories we buy and what we reject, how we accept certain ideas but critique them in nuanced manners really are affected by the way one has experienced life and has been treated. Society does treat people differently based on their background and looks and people's upbringing does indeed impact their perceptions going forward. Even if one tries to be completely objective, which is impossible, they cannot truly divorce themselves from the life they have experience. All of that deeply impacts how you are shaped and thus how you perceive everything, even if you're trying hard to recognize your own biases and prejudices. That's why people can look at the same set of facts and come up with wildly different conclusions even if they have similar education backgrounds (or were mentored by the same professors, etc.). 

[uncageg]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 5:23pm

haterobics said: "uncageg said: "I thought she addressed it and said she was talking about the costume designer. Maybe I read wrong."

You read correctly."

Thanks.

So one apologized and one had to explain. It still needs to stop. JMO

 

Updated On: 7/27/18 at 05:23 PM

[ryankon]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 11:49pm

She is by far the best critic working today.  Thoughtful, witty, culturally sensitive, probing and still in love with the form.  I look forward to her reviews, even when I disagree with them.  Brantley's review of HOH was deeply offensive and frankly I think his apology was limp. It did not meaningfully reflect soul searching or someone who had been educated by an incident of deep insensitivity.  There was an article in (I believe) American Theatre Magazine when Jesse Green got the job as co-chief theatre critic at the Times.  In effect he said "no women were yet capable of the gig."  A number of feminist friends and I were furious and at least one women critic said so publicly(Linda Winer).  The Times has been tone deaf recently but Brantley's review represented a new low.  One of the worst I've ever read, it was dripping with sarcasm and completely oblivious to his own offensiveness.  I hope the conversation stays alive--it's too important to let it go(they've taken parts of the review down so I'm paraphrasing but there was a line about binary being the most overused word of the decade--as though conversations about civil rights can over stay their welcome).  

[adamgreer]

Posted: 7/28/18 at 12:16am

Alan Henry said: "Hello! Chiming in to state that my tweets are only my opinion and not the opinion of this site. While I could have been more eloquent (and this was tweeted before pretty much all the reviews were out), my point was mainly that if all critical voices are homogenous we might not get the perspectives of the target audiences for a lot of shows as critical voices. I later tweeted something to that effect. I do stand by my comments and won't be deleting them."

It must be nice to have the power to decide on your own whether or not to delete your posts, as opposed to having Nameless Faceless Moderator make the decision for you.