{"id":324,"date":"2019-12-13T08:24:54","date_gmt":"2019-12-13T08:24:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/?p=324"},"modified":"2022-02-05T13:26:39","modified_gmt":"2022-02-05T13:26:39","slug":"critics-should-never-say-in-writing-what-they-cannot-dare-to-say-to-the-subject-in-person","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/critics-should-never-say-in-writing-what-they-cannot-dare-to-say-to-the-subject-in-person\/","title":{"rendered":"Critics should never say in writing what they cannot dare to say to the subject in person: Interview with Ian Herbert"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

by Savas Patsalidis<\/strong>*<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

After leaving Cambridge University in 1961 with a degree in Litterae Humaniores<\/em>, Ian Herbert began his career as a publisher with Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons. He left Pitman after sixteen years, finishing as the Director of the company responsible for its general publishing programme. In this position he was able to edit two editions of Who’s Who in the Theatre<\/em>, often described as the ‘bible’ of London and Broadway theatre. He took Who’s Who <\/em>with him to join the Gale Research Company of Detroit as its European Director, leaving in 1980 with the publication of Who’s Who<\/em>‘s final, sixteenth edition. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

A past Chairman of the UK’s Society for Theatre\nResearch, he is now consultant editor of Theatre\nRecord<\/em>, which he founded in 1981 as London Theatre Record.<\/em> He was\nits editor and publisher from 1981-2003. He also edited the technical journal Sightline from<\/em> 1984-91, and several\neditions of the International Theatre Institute’s publication World of\nTheatre<\/em>. (As a member of the ITI Communications Committee, he was\ninstrumental in settting up this publication, as well as the companion World\nTheatre Directory).<\/em>He  has written extensively on sttage design, and\nserved as a jury member for both the Prague Quadriennal and the biennial\nexhibition of World Stage Design. He was European Editor for the two volumes of\nWorld Scenography.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

He has written regularly for theatre journals\nworldwide, including The Stage<\/em>\nnewspaper. President from 2001-2008 of the International Association of Theatre\nCritics, having spent the previous seven years as its Director of Training, he\nis now an Honorary President. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
The cover of Theatre and Humanism in a World of Violence<\/em>, the proceedings of IATC (Sofia 2008).<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

As IATC President, he was joint editor of the\nproceedings of the Association’s 2008 Sofia Congress, published as Theatre\nand Humanism in a World of Violence.<\/em> He is a board member of the Europe\nTheatre Prize, and a trustee of the UK Critics\u2019 Circle. A former visiting\nprofessor of several US universities, he has lectured on criticism and taught\ncritics in many countries of the world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

PART I<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Ian, you started off your career as a publisher, going on to edit Who\u2018s Who<\/em> in the Theatre in the 1970\u2019s. Then you moved on to launch London Theatre Record<\/em>. What made you start all this, to begin with? Have you felt that it was something British theatre scholarship needed at that time? <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Starting London Theatre Record <\/em>in 1981 was a\nlast attempt to find a living. After I left Gale Research I found that the\nrecession in British publishing meant that there were no worthwhile openings at\nboard level. I became an adviser to the British Centre of the International\nTheatre Institute on its publishing activities, and joined with Simon Trussler\nof Theatre Quarterly <\/em>and Malcolm Hay of Time Out<\/em> to plan the\nultimate British theatre magazine. The previous leading theatre journal, Plays\nand Players<\/em>, had ceased publication owing about \u00a3100,000, and its publisher\nhad committed suicide. When my friends and I looked for finance for our\nproposed publication, and had to explain the fate of Plays and Players<\/em>, doors\nclosed rapidly in our faces.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Left to my own devices, I wanted to continue the\nrecord-keeping function of Who’s Who<\/em>, and add to it resources which were\navailable in the USA but not in Britain. New York Theatre Critics’ Reviews <\/em>collected\nthe local critics’ reactions to Broadway shows, while a number of newsletters\ngave hints about producers’ plans for upcoming productions. Having consulted a\nnumber of London critics, and found a helpful local printer, I spent the last\nof my savings on printing and distributing the first (double) number of the\nfortnightly London Theatre Record<\/em>. It contained the unabridged theatre\nreviews of the major London critics, together with the cast lists and other\ncredits which had been a feature of Who’s Who<\/em>. A centre section gave\ninformation on future planned productions, plus box office and press contacts\nfor shows currently running. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

My considerable contacts in the theatre world meant\nthat I had a good mailing list for that first number, and enough of them came\nback with subscriptions to pay for the printing of the next issue. This pattern\nhas continued for the life of the journal, where income has kept just ahead of\nexpenditure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
The content of the first two issues of London Theatre Record<\/em> (1981)<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

As a follow-up to the previous question. Looking at the craft of the reviewer in the wider context of British theatre of the second half of the 20<\/strong>th<\/strong><\/sup> century do you see any similarities and\/or differences? For example, what was the background Kenneth Tynan was writing against and what was yours? Have you ever felt when you first started that there were things that had to be changed? And if so, what?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I started the journal as its publisher. It was only\nafter a couple of years’ assembling the critics’ views that I decided I could\noffer my own. Like many of the existing critics I had no training other than\nseeing a couple of thousand shows, in London and New York as Who’s Who’s<\/em>\neditor, and by now in Europe as a British representative of ITI. In the latter\ncapacity I met other publishers of theatre journals, as well as their critic\ncontributors. I became aware of the differences in approach to criticism in different\ncountries. (I recall an ITI conference on the training of critics, in Tbilisi,\nbefore perestroika<\/em>, where the ‘Eastern’ critics explained that as part\nof their seven years’ Doctoral training they would attend many rehearsals of a\nproduction, and as many performances, before committing themselves to analysis\nand commentary. We ‘Westerners’, on the other side of the conference table,\nadmitted that we simply went to the theatre rather a lot, and often gave our\nviews immediately after a production’s first night.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In terms of British theatre criticism, I had been\nfortunate to grow up reading the likes of Kenneth Tynan, who addressed not only\nthe quality of performance\u2015which was the main aim of his predecessors\u2015 but the\nnature of theatre and its extension beyond ‘entertainment’ to the absurdity of\nBeckett and Pinter and the socio-political commitment of Osborne and Wesker.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Most of the critics I was reprinting had responded\nto the next wave of major British playwrights, the ‘class of ’68’\u2015Brenton,\nHare, Stoppard. The London Fringe was thriving, the National likewise under\nPeter Hall, and the RSC’s Barbican home nearing completion. With the success of\nhomegrown musicals beginning to challenge Broadway’s monopoly, this was a good\ntime on all fronts to record London theatre.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The journal gathered together the unabridged reviews of all the major British theatre critics. Was there any other journal following the same policy?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I must give\ncredit to New York Theatre Critics’ Reviews<\/em>, which sadly no longer\nexists. Nor does Australian and New Zealand Theatre Record<\/em>, which\nfollowed my London example for some years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Vol. V, issue 1. Table of contents: IN LONDON : complete reviews, casting, photographs of: COMEDIANS Trevor Griffiths – A CRY WITH SEWN LIPS – EDEN Adrian Eckersley – GERTRUDE STEIN AND A COMPANION Win Wells – GREAT EXPECTATIONS Dickens\/Coe – IN THE PENAL COLONY Pip Simmons KING LEAR Footsbarn – LONDON MIME FESTIVAL MEET ME AT THE GATE – PERICLES\/VANITY FAIR Cheek by Jowl – SCRAPE OFF THE BLACK Tunde Ikoli – WASTE Gra nville Barker \u2013 WINTER. REGIONS: ROLL ON FRIDAY Southampton – WOYZECK Leicester<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

If I remember well the Times<\/em> did not join you at the beginning. Why? Was it a matter of different ideas about writing? Different policy regarding the selection of plays to review? Conflict of interest?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Times<\/em>\nNewspapers refused permission to reprint their reviews, on the grounds that I\nmight affect their circulation. I still think of this as quite a compliment. It\nwas not until Benedict Nightingale became the Times<\/em> critic, and wondered\naloud why he was not to appear in his major journal of reference, that The\nTimes<\/em> relented, followed quickly by its Sunday sister.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Talking about selection policy: were you after reviews with any particular emphasis, say on politics, engaged works, mainstream works, theory etc.?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I printed all the reviews of the London critics,\nextending the geographic coverage quickly (in 1983) to the shows they visited\noutside London. That alone determined what was included.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Do you remember the volume of your readership? Was it large enough to keep you, financially speaking, afloat?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As I said earlier, there was always enough money in\nthe bank to pay for necessities, and not much more. As for readership, I\nquickly found in my conversations with international publishers and editors of\ntheatre journals, that my print run of around 1,000 was the norm\u2015 with serious\nexceptions such as Russia’s Teatr<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What feedback did you get from your readers? Did they make you feel that you were doing something they really needed? <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I got a steady stream of letters from critics and\ntheatre people, mostly complimentary, sometimes angry, often correcting errors\nin published reviews. My editorial, Prompt Corner<\/em>, was partly intended\nto moderate when a production seemed to me to have received too much praise\u2015or\ntoo little. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

How was the journal\u2019s reception by academia? Have you ever felt they were antagonistic? Was theatre reviewing something British Universities would welcome in their curriculum back in the 70s and 80s?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The teaching of criticism in academia was still in\nits infancy. You have to remember that as late as the sixties there was only\none University drama department in England, that at Bristol. As the teaching of\ndrama spread, so did attention to criticism, which made Theatre Record <\/em>a\nvaluable tool, and not just for research.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Would you call Theatre Record<\/em> mostly a local journal? Does anyone who is not very much interested in British theatre as such have anything to gain?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In my time I was able to invite my international\ncritic friends to publish articles on the theatre scene in their country, and I\ncould also give regular reports on my own trips to world theatre events,\nlargely thanks to my positions within IATC. But the main purpose of the journal\nremains to record British theatre.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now the journal is run by other people.  Ian Shuttleworth has been succeeded by Julian Oddy. I know that you are still actively involved as consulting editor. Has there been any change in terms of focus and policy since you handed over the journal\u2019s leadership?  For example, the journal went digital. Any gains from that shift? Any change of perspective? Of philosophy? Of principles?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Since January 2019 the journal has been purely\ndigital in its input under the supervision of Julian. Digital subscribers have\nthe possibility now to check up on reviews almost as soon as they appear. Not\nonly that, they have quick and easy on line access to the entire printed archive\nof the Record <\/em>since its foundation in 1981, as well as the most\ncomprehensive available listings of productions running and to come throughout\nthe United Kingdom. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

There will be those\u2015myself included\u2015who regret no\nlonger having this information in printed form, but the gains are\nunquestionable. Since we no longer have to pay for printing and distribution,\nwe are able to offer the new, instantly accessible Theatre Record, <\/em>plus\nits complete archive,to individual subscribers for little more than\nthey would have paid in 1981 for the original printed journal. The one absent\nfeature\u2015no more provocative Prompt Corner<\/em>s from myself or my friend Ian\nShuttleworth. What we can offer, however, \nis access to the views of a selection of leading bloggers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Looking at the electronic archive of the journal is there anything you regretted not having done and anything that you shouldn\u2019t have done?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

When I started the journal, I wanted it to be the\nbasis of a searchable database of UK theatre, by person, by production, by\ntheatre. At the time, I was told that to create such a database would require\ncomputer power far beyond the capacity of even a University department.\nSubsequent requests for grants from academia to create the database, as\ncomputing power developed, were turned down. Now we are able to create that\ndatabase from our own resources, starting with the 2019 volume and in time\ngoing back over the archive. On the other hand, my guess in 1981 was that the\ngrowth of the then fledgling internet would render the journal obsolete in\nfive, maybe ten years. It’s still there.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

PART II<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Back in Greece, my home country, most reviewers are not paid. And I know that this is more or less what prevails in most countries. In my mind this attitude betrays contempt and total disregard for the art of reviewing. It is quite discouraging. I wonder, what is the situation now in England? The advent of the internet and the rapid decline of newspapers have changed many things in the field of reviewing. For better or worse?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the one hand\nthere are far fewer opportunities for arts critics to be paid even the paltry\nsums they have been accustomed to earn. On the other hand, there are infinite\npossibilities for anyone to express an opinion, informed or otherwise, on line.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Printed reviews\nare fewer, shorter and often subject to the dangerous system of star ratings,\nwhich means that potential readers may look no further than a review’s headline\nto make their choice of theatregoing. Online reviewers, on the other hand,\noften have unlimited space in which to express their opinions \u2013 a situation\nwhich is equally open to abuse. Just as published work of all kinds, be it a\nnovel or a scientific paper, may no longer be monitored (and brought down to\nsize?) by a skilled editor, so theatre reviews will often lack this form of\ncontrol.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Mark Shenton, president of The Critics\u2019 Circle<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

The Critics\u2019 Circle of which you are a member (and a Trustee) believes in professional and impartial criticism as an essential ingredient of a healthy society. Nowadays there is a growing trend that supports subjective criticism against, so called, \u201cobjective criticism\u201d; participatory and embodied criticism as opposed to detached. What are your thoughts about all this?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think your premise is questionable. In my many\nyears of teaching (in reality learning from) young critics, I have always been\nat pains to stress that there can be no such thing as objective criticism. It\nis far more useful for the critic to make his or her prejudices and background\nclear, so that readers can then judge that critic’s opinions from their own\nperspective. What organisations like the Critics’ Circle can try to do, is to\ngive their approval to critics who have shown \nthrough long experience that their opinions have some validity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Internet fans claim that thanks to technology theatre reviewing is now experiencing phenomenal freedoms. They talk about the \u201cdemocratization\u201d of writing and the fair distribution of power. In short, they come to support the slogan, \u201ceverybody is a critic\u201d. Do you share this enthusiasm? <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes, everybody can be a critic. But there will always\nbe those few whose criticism is worth reading, be it because of their greater\nknowledge of the art form, or their greater skill in communicating that\nknowledge \u2015or best of all, both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Are there any limits regarding the freedoms of the critic? And if so, who sets the limits?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In today’s\nstrange world of snowflakes and trolls, critical freedoms have their place and\nI would not want to place any limits on freedom of critical expression.\nPersonally, however, I grow quickly tired of negative writing that relies on\nexpletives and insult. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I strongly\nsupport the view that critics should never say in writing what they cannot dare\nto say to the subject in person, face to face. We should also remember, in\nresponding quickly, perhaps in very few words, to a theatre piece, how many\nweeks or months of effort on the part of its creators it represents. Whether\nthat effort has been worthwhile, we remain free to say.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The previous question also brings forward the word tolerance? A very \u201chot\u201d issue in our days? How do you understand the term in relation to the theatre we see and review? Anything goes?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Anything goes,\nbut I don’t want to go along with much of it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is a whole argument about evaluative criticism\/reviewing, as being arbitrary, restrictive and limited. Do you think there can be any form of reviewing without evaluation? <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

No. One should always ask Goethe’s three questions:\nwhat is this piece trying to do, how has it tried to do it, and has it\nsucceeded?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is a growing tendency towards deprofessionalization of reviewing. Do you think it would have liberating effects?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’m more\nconcerned about the ‘professionalising’ influence of academic attitudes to\ntheatre, which can lead to long, apparently well informed articles so steeped\nin jargon that the ordinary theatregoer finds them of no use whatever.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe\u2019s three basic questions regarding criticism: what is this piece trying to do, how has it tried to do it, and has it succeeded?<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Also there is a dismantling of hierarchical positions of power towards more collaborative forms of criticism\/reviewing. Do you think that reviewing can be a team work as opposed to what it was: a loner\u2019s adventure?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If the best\ntheatre is a triumph of teamwork, I suppose we should also be prepared to see\nwhether team reviewing can have its uses. Certainly, critics can learn from\ncolleagues whose opinions differ from theirs: it’s one of the benefits of\nreading Theatre Record.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Yes, listening to different voices is useful. At the same time, however, the circulation of  too many voices, too many perspectives, too many angles create a confusing maelstrom of opinions  which do not really help you separate the wheat from the chaff.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is always\nroom for dialogue between critics and practitioners, although there are those\npractitioners who claim never to read criticism. They are usually the ones who\ncan quote back to you a bad review from many years ago. When it became possible\nfor the general public (and practitioners) to comment on newspaper reviews, it\nresulted in some vile insults as well as considered reactions.  Not all ‘open online conversation’ is worth\nreading.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reflecting on what you just said, I would like to add this: the eponymous influencers are no longer the people who run the game. Now, it is the time of the anonymous influencers. People who use the media in order to make money and a personal brand rather than serve theatre. For many, theatre is an alibi for being out there. That I find a bit scary.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is a fascinating phenomenon about which I know\nlittle. Apparently large numbers of young people take pleasure in watching\ntheir peers engage in everyday activity, like shampooing their hair, getting\ndressed or putting on make-up. These new video stars then earn large amounts of\nmoney from the producers of the shampoo, clothing or make-up. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I look forward to the time when on line viewers are\nsimilarly glued to the sight of an armchair critic saying how much they enjoyed\nan obscure production, and that critic then earns handsomely from the\nproduction’s ensuing transfer. Unfortunately, if the present pattern is\nfollowed, that armchair critic is likely to be a semi-articulate teenager who\nknows nothing about theatre.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now public bodies tend to fund theatre and reward quantity of activity over quality. When everybody acts critic don\u2019t you think that there is a similar \u201cfunding\u201d of theatre with quantity but not quality?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There has been much discussion in Britain following\nthe decision of our funder, the Arts Council, to put diversity of both audience\nand practitioners above the excellence of what they fund. I would prefer our\nfunders to start by demanding excellence in whatever they fund, then proceed to\nconcentrate on areas \u2015diversity, cultural deprivation\u2015where that excellence can\nbe best applied. There will always be enthusiastic companies prepared to take\ntheir own financial risk, regardless of the quality of what they create. To my\nold-fashioned mind, state funding should only be added to support the efforts\nof those who have demonstrated quality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Critics used to write for a particular readership, mainly national. Now that the character of this \u201cnational\u201d is so diversified who is the target group of a critic?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ultimately, a critic can only give their own opinion\nof what they see. If that opinion is based on their having seen a wide variety\nof theatre, and is expressed with a style and enthusiasm that can encourage\ntheir readers to go see for themselves, they will have done a good job. If the\ncritic’s view and experience is limited to that of a specific social or ethnic\ngroup, they can at least hope to encourage that group.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

As a follow up to my previous question. I know that you travel a lot watching theatre all over the world. How difficult is it to write a good review of cultural products that are far away from your native culture and at the same time do justice to them?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’ve been doing this for years, since it has been my\npleasure to watch a great deal of theatre in languages or theatre traditions\nthat are not my own. At least I’ve been able to offer the reactions of someone\nwith my background and preferences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Do you think that as we will probably see real time collaborative audience reviews using Twitter and the like, we will need the specialist theatre writer to provide a more informed view on the play, the production?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It’s happening already. And it has to be admitted that the\nword of mouth transmitted by social media is now often more influential than\nthe word of established critics. The great gain is that shows which might never\nreach the attention of the established critic do at least provoke reactions,\nwell informed or not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Consider a world without critics. Is there any value left in the act of criticism? <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I agree with your suggestion that everyone is a critic, so\nthis will never happen. But I also believe that good, well informed, well\nwritten criticism is still of value \u2015I even have a sneaking suspicion that with\nthe growth of online writing, there is much more such criticism available to\nthose who can seek it out. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Taking into consideration all the changes technology has caused what is the role of a good critic nowadays? To be a community binder or just be him\/herself?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

First and foremost to be true to\noneself. This applies to both the good and the bad critic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Are there any British internet reviewers today that you think stand out? What makes them different from newspaper reviewers?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are\nplenty of good reviewers now writing online only, many of them former critics\nfor printed media. Their only problem is the temptation to write at excessive\nlength\u2015it’s difficult but necessary to be one’s own editor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n
\"\"
Jemima Rooper and the cast of Blank<\/em> at the Donmar Warehouse. Photo: Helen Maybanks<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n <\/a>\"\"
 \n\n\n\n

*<\/a>Savas Patsalidis\u00a0<\/strong>is Professor of theatre and performance history and theory in the School of English (Aristotle University, Thessaloniki), the Hellenic Open University and the Drama Academy of the National Theatre of Northern Greece. He is also a regular lecturer on the Graduate Programme of the Theatre Department at Aristotle University. He is the author of fourteen books on theatre and performance criticism\/theory and co-editor of another thirteen. His two-volume study,\u00a0Theatre, Society, Nation<\/em>\u00a0(2010), was awarded first prize for best theatre study of the year. His latest book-length study\u00a0Theatre & Theory II: About Topoi, Utopias and Heterotopias<\/em>\u00a0was published in 2019 by University Studio Press. In addition to his academic activities, he works as a theatre reviewer for the ejournals\u00a0lavart<\/em>,\u00a0parallaxi<\/em>, and\u00a0thegreekplay project.\u00a0<\/em>He is currently the president of the Hellenic Association of Theatre and Performing Arts Critics, member of the curators\u2019 team of Dimitria Festival and the editor-in-chief of\u00a0Critical Stages\/Sc\u00e8nes critiques<\/em>, the journal of the International Association of Theatre Critics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Copyright \u00a9<\/strong> 2019 Savas Patsalidis
Critical Stages\/Sc\u00e8nes critiques<\/em> e-ISSN: 2409-7411<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Creative<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

This work is licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution International License CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":325,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[12],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-324","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-critics-on-criticism"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/11\/Ian-Herbert.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":756,"url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/a-note-from-the-guest-editors\/","url_meta":{"origin":324,"position":0},"title":"A Note from the Guest Editors","author":"Savas Patsalidis","date":"December 4, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Manabu Noda* and Yun Cheol Kim** The world is ageing\u2212and fast. According to the United Nations, already one in eleven of the world population is over 65, and by 2050 the rate will be one in six. The 65+ age band outnumbered children under five years of age for the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Special Topic"","block_context":{"text":"Special Topic","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/category\/special-topic\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/10\/Manabu_Noda2-140x150.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":495,"url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/the-theatrical-career-of-samuel-morgan-smith\/","url_meta":{"origin":324,"position":1},"title":"The Theatrical Career of Samuel Morgan Smith","author":"Savas Patsalidis","date":"December 2, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"By Bernth Lindfors339 pp. Africa World Press Reviewed by Robin Breon* On August 7, 1867, one of the world\u2019s greatest Shakespeareans breathed his last. While on a tour to Poland, Ira Aldridge became ill after a rehearsal of Othello with a local company in Lodz. As was his custom when\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Book Reviews"","block_context":{"text":"Book Reviews","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/category\/book-reviews\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/12\/Robin-Breon.jpeg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":728,"url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/theatre-in-malta-amateur-practice-and-professional-aspirations\/","url_meta":{"origin":324,"position":2},"title":"Theatre in Malta: Amateur Practice and Professional Aspirations","author":"Savas Patsalidis","date":"December 16, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Vicki Ann Cremona* Abstract This article provides a general outline of theatre in Malta where the small size of the archipelago (316m2) makes it difficult to develop professional theatre. It evaluates the issues theatre faces when confronted by political constraints that affect cultural policies and outlooks. It looks at the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "National Reports"","block_context":{"text":"National Reports","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/category\/national-reports\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/12\/image7-3.jpeg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/12\/image7-3.jpeg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/12\/image7-3.jpeg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/12\/image7-3.jpeg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":827,"url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/modern-scottish-theatre-emerging-from-the-shadow-of-the-reformation\/","url_meta":{"origin":324,"position":3},"title":"Modern Scottish Theatre: Emerging from the Shadow of the Reformation","author":"Savas Patsalidis","date":"December 29, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Mark Brown* Abstract Scottish theatre has, arguably, enjoyed its richest period over the last half-century. This paper will seek to explain Scotland\u2019s relative lack of a historical theatre tradition and to explore the key elements in what the author proposes has been a \u201cEuropean modernist renaissance\u201d on the national stage\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "National Reports"","block_context":{"text":"National Reports","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/category\/national-reports\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/12\/image8-4.jpeg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/12\/image8-4.jpeg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/12\/image8-4.jpeg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/12\/image8-4.jpeg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":627,"url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/with-age-i-get-more-tolerant-of-failure-interview-with-michael-billington\/","url_meta":{"origin":324,"position":4},"title":"\u201cWith age, I get more tolerant of failure\u201d: Interview with Michael Billington","author":"Savas Patsalidis","date":"December 8, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"by Mark Fisher* He had a front-row seat for the political theatre of the 1970s, the musicals of the 1980s, the in-yer-face generation of the 1990s and the cross-cultural developments of the twenty-first century. Now, at the age of 80, and after 48 years as lead drama critic on the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Critics on Criticism"","block_context":{"text":"Critics on Criticism","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/category\/critics-on-criticism\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/12\/image12.jpeg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":534,"url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/theatre-at-the-crossroads-trends-and-challenges-of-georgian-theatre-today\/","url_meta":{"origin":324,"position":5},"title":"Theatre at the Crossroads: Trends and Challenges of Georgian Theatre Today","author":"Savas Patsalidis","date":"December 3, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Natalia Tvaltchrelidze* Abstract The paper overviews recent tendencies in the theatre life in Georgia. In particular, it presents the latest statistical data and audience research on theatre; it discusses theatre festival life in Georgia and the latest trends in the productions of young directors in the country.Keywords: Georgia, theatre, festivals,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "National Reports"","block_context":{"text":"National Reports","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/category\/national-reports\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/12\/image5-3.jpeg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/12\/image5-3.jpeg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/12\/image5-3.jpeg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/21\/2019\/12\/image5-3.jpeg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/324","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=324"}],"version-history":[{"count":12,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/324\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1183,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/324\/revisions\/1183"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/325"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=324"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=324"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/20\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=324"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}