In today’s society, we are flustered with a variety of artistic performances, which are both praised and rejected by others. In a recent 2011 article by Bert Cardullo, he explains the two main types of persons whose main jobs are to look over these artistic performances and give their personal feedback. “It is certainly true that the critics—those persons whom the dictionary describes as “skilled in judging the qualities or merits of some class of things, especially of literary or artistic work”—have long harbored murderous thoughts about the condition of our drama, but their ineffectuality as public executioners is legendary. The reviewers, by contrast, come close to being the most loyal and effective allies the commercial theater could possibly desire” (Cardullo, 2011). Looking into this quote, it demonstrates that critics take their job to the extent where they aren’t afraid to strike hard at a particular piece. As for a reviewer, they will be more “sugar coating” about performances and offer helpful suggestions for the piece (they are praised more than critics). This research will focus on the lenses of theatrical critics and reviewers with their similarities and differences (as well as emphasize on some important Theatrical Critics and Reviewers). Then, based on this research, it will be put to the test as a playwright takes his previously produced play and use criticisms and reviews as a guide to recreating a play and bringing it back onto the stage. Once doing that, a survey will be conducted to see if the help of criticisms and/or reviews aided in the success of the newly revised play.
II. Purpose of the Study
Evaluating the differentiation of theatrical critiques and reviews are crucial in any artistic setting because it allows for personal reflections and to determine how one should go about accepting the feedback and if they use it, how it will benefit the performance as a whole. In doing so, this research is designed to give a general overview on the difference between how a theatrical critic and reviewer look at a performance and remove the stigma that both types of persons do the same tasks. At the same time, it will allow for a previously produced play to be revised based on past reviews and critiques from the original cast, crew, and audience members. Then, those responses will be used as a template for recreating the same play. After the show is redone for a new audience, surveys will be distributed where there will be a chance for more criticisms and reviews. Within the survey, it will ask if the necessary changes were made and what were the strengths and weaknesses of the newly created production. As a result, it will be feasible information to use in determining if criticisms and/or reviews aided in the process of making the production better than it was in the previous session.
III. Literature Review I
“Person of the Drama: Stanley Kauffmann as Theater Critic” is an interesting article dealing with the...