| Author | Post |
|---|
Paddy
Moderator
|
Posted: Thu Jun 15th, 2006 09:09 pm |
|
In Writer's Bloc, a playwright's group I belonged to that was associated with a professional theatre, we had an amazing Dramaturge, Henry. Henry developed a set of guidelines for read-throughs. I've amended it to work for critiquing. Henry could tell you your play was crap and make you feel wonderful about it. Assuming most of the plays posted here will either be new or in-progress, these guidelines should help.
Lab Notes Re: Critiquing other people’s plays.
© Henry Bakker (amended for critiquing)
1) Your response to these plays is of vital importance. Each writer needs your response, needs specific information so that they can move forward in their particular process.
2) How the feed back is delivered is also crucial. Please try always to respond in a way which is ‘empowering’ to the writer. Always try to provide response which can fuel the next step, ‘enable’ the work to move forward.
3) Bear in mind that most of the work being responded to is ‘unfinished’. We may be talking about a portrait in which the jaw-line has yet to be defined, or a landscape whish is still determining its exact point of horizon.
4) Rather than delivering a final verdict or judgment {or even an on-the-spot brilliant interpretation} – register a response: “I was confused because you had ‘A’ happening at one point and ‘B’ happening at another and I couldn’t put them together.” “I was very moved at this specific moment because…” “Perhaps I missed something, but I didn’t follow how you got from point ‘A’ to point ‘B’. I didn’t see the bridge.”
5) Make an effort to “hear with your eye” and your “kinetic ear.” Reading a play tends to privelege the dialogue and under-privelege the non-verbal, visual, kinetic worlds of the play. Try to ‘read’ and ‘hear’ the stage images and choreographies.
6) Don’t write your own play. Don’t start a statement with, “What should have happened is…” It does not help the writer to be told he is like another, more famous writer; nor to be criticized because the material has been treated elsewhere. On the other hand, it is important to tell the writer what was enjoyable about the play and why. Once he understands what works, it is easier for him to deal with what does not.
7) Avoid questions which require a direct response from the playwright. The playwright should be ‘listening’ to what you have to say, not launching into verbal explanations that distract from that focus. The playwright has already ‘talked’ in the script – now it is the their turn to do their part by giving the writer as much helpful feedback as possible.
8) You will start to know who’s advice is good for you, and whose may not be. Don’t always exchange plays to be read with the same person. Sometimes you will find the best advice from the person who for them, your style is a departure. There is a danger in taking advice too much to heart. It is your baby. Perhaps the vision is clear within your mind, but not that of the reader’s. If you believe in something, just stick with it.
9) This process will be more valuable if you submit plays that you are working on, rather than plays you’ve already had produced.
10) Have fun.
|
Edd
Moderator
| Joined: | Sat Jun 10th, 2006 |
| Location: | Denver, Colorado USA |
| Posts: | 872 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
|
Posted: Thu Jan 4th, 2007 02:05 pm |
|
| This is important and should be read by all members. This morning I read a response to a post that rewrote the author's work into an agenda having nothing to do with the original work.
|
scenedreamer
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 3rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 163 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Jan 4th, 2007 05:17 pm |
|
Boy this critiquing stuff is hard. Almost as hard as writing a play.
I'm a total klutz at it. If I like the play, all I can say is, "I like it," and I'm usually not sure why. Though that may be the nice thing to do, it may not be helpful.
If I like a play, but think it could be better, I go off the deep end and start trying to re-write or in fear sometimes come across as too critical.
Actually I'm half afraid to critique someone's work. I don't want to be nasty and I also don't want to post nothing but sweet pablum either.
There has to be a happy medium somewhere.
Maybe those of you who are good at it (and there are many here) could help the rest of us out. Perhaps in private messages to avoid the "piling on" that sometimes happens.
sd
|
mikej
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 10th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 5 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Jul 9th, 2007 11:58 pm |
|
| yep, i like to start with a moment reflecting what the author wants to say and then find a suggestion as to how i can point her/him toward focusing and sharpening that statement.
|
Deirdre
Member
| Joined: | Tue Mar 18th, 2008 |
| Location: | British Columbia |
| Posts: | 31 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Mar 21st, 2008 05:40 pm |
|
Is it too burdensome to post an entire full length play for read through comments and critiques?
I appreciate that it's a big committment in time and it seems like most of the plays posted are excerpts or shorter than full length.
D
|
theatralite
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 31st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 69 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Apr 6th, 2008 11:19 pm |
|
I consider your advice on critiquing very sound but I thought
I might briefly share a slightly weird experience I had earlier
this year re feedback on one of my plays.
I went to a meeting of a group looking for one act plays to enter
into a festival. There was an open invitation to take plays along
to be read for consideration.
So I took along one of my own one-act plays. The reading went
extremely well. Perhaps not surprisingly since all present were
experienced actors/actresses. It was interesting to hear the play
read and see whether the dialogue worked or not.
At the end, however, the play was greeted with a long silence.
Whether they were trying to spare my feelings or not I don't know?
They quickly moved on to another play and that was that. OK at the
end of the meeting the organiser thank me for bringing my play along
but that was that! I rationalised that at least I'd got a reading out
of the group. But I shall never know whether they loved or hated it,
or why?
|
Current time is 04:55 am | |
|
