CRITICS

[Horsey]

Posted: 11/6/03 at 11:54am

JohnPopa honey, I "grasp" it just fine.
You missed my point. I never said that "critique" wasn't necessary.
But, I am saying that, unfortunately many theatre critics are ill qualified, uninformed, and hold far too much "sway" over public opinion. Sadly, many are also very poor writers. The major fault of the power of a critic's word as the primary (only) authoritative voice on the quality of a particular production, is that it is the opinion of ONE person (one, usually unknown, never met, possibly wouldn't even share the same opinion's with this "one person" regarding day-to-day minutia if one did ever happen to meet him/her) shepherding a flock of "theatre-going-sheep" ready to jump of the edge of the high-and-mighty-printed-cliff helmed by a hack who could never even recite "Dinner is served" convincingly. I personally miss Frank Rich. Not because of the ineffable power he held over the fate of a production, but because he was a brilliant and beautiful writer. Should anyone dispute this fact; I suggest that you read his stunningly beautiful NY Times review of the Broadway production, "Six Degrees Of Separation."

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/6/03 at 11:56am

And you felt the need to start a new thread to continue a discussion from another thread why, exactly? Be the horsey not the horsey's behind.

[Horsey]

Posted: 11/6/03 at 11:57am

Right.