http://disqus.com/by/steveramm/enFri, 21 Aug 2009 02:53:28 -0000http://blog.cambiareproductions.com/2009/08/20/take-your-lumps-and-learn/#comment-15184151<p>One more thing... for Travis... you don't know me, but I saw the show. If you want a review of Orestes I'll give one.</p>steverammFri, 21 Aug 2009 02:53:28 -0000http://blog.cambiareproductions.com/2009/08/20/take-your-lumps-and-learn/#comment-15184047<p>Also, any press is good press. Rarely will a reviewer say "Don't see this show." And if he or she does... examine your work first...</p>steverammFri, 21 Aug 2009 02:45:23 -0000http://blog.cambiareproductions.com/2009/08/20/take-your-lumps-and-learn/#comment-15183992<p>1. If you don't like criticism, don't read reviews.</p><p>2. If you like praise, read reviews... unless...</p><p>3. If you like praise and don't like criticism, sacrifice the former so you don't have to experience the latter.</p><p>If you believe the theatre has the power to change the threads in the social fabric, then bad reviews, good reviews, no reviews... whatever - shouldn't matter. Except where reviews affect audience numbers - even then - not in your control. So don't waste your time.</p><p>Are you doing theatre to gain fame? Or because you have a vision that you want to share? Do you think you're perfect or do you know that the work is never done? I was always taught that if in your life, your work affects one person for the better, that you're a success. If you've studied audience behavior at all you know that the viewer's perception of the show is informed by so much more than the aesthetic at work. A bad pre-show meal, an uncomfortable seat, a neighbor in the audience that unwraps candy the whole time, a pre-disposition either for or against a specific genre - these are just the examples I thought of while writing this - and these examples and MILLIONS more affect the viewer. And I believe that as educated or aware as reviewers may be that they are still humans and still fall under the umbrella of the intrinsic and extrinsic factors that may inform how a production is viewed.</p><p>But you can't change that. You can only do your work - that hopefully - for the sake of your review - doesn't look like work. You can only control what is within your power. So focus on that.</p><p>Arguing a critique is like when an actor can't take or leave a note and instead becomes distracted. His or her work becomes complacent and feeble.</p><p>So what is responsibility of the reviewer? To tell us where our vision or our ideas or intentions fell short or succeeded. And reviewers are as responsible for this task in the theatre as the practitioners are responsible for committing themselves to producing the best work they can... and I mean the best... That means taking your editorial eye off of your work and committing to your vision and voice. And if you do that then you need the reviewer to tell you where your "best laid plans were bound to go awry." Take it or leave it - but whichever you choose, leave your baggage at the door.</p><p>Finally, the reviewer is the go-between. Often the audience doesn't think in our terminology and the reviewer does. Further the reviewer sees the show as an audience member - unbiased. So the reviewer helps the audience understand our work and helps us understand our audience's perception.</p>steverammFri, 21 Aug 2009 02:41:47 -0000