- Field Day |
- Buildings Alive |
- Visions |
- CLGBT |
- Green Community |
- Fun & Free S#!T |
- Crossword |
- CL Space |
Friday, January 16, 2009
The Critic as Playwright: More Complications
Posted by Mark E. Leib on Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 6:02 PM
So now we're less than a week away from the staged reading of my play A RIVER IN THE DESERT at Gorilla Theatre and I get an e-mail from John Fleming, arts critic for the St. Petersburg Times. What he wants to know is, isn't it a conflict of interest, or at least the appearance of such a conflict, for me to have a reading at a theater that I also review? And further, isn't this also the case with the full production of my play ART PEOPLE at The Studio at 620 later in the spring? Am I perhaps being unethical? Please comment. I call him immediately and leave a message on his voice mail. Then, this morning, he calls me at home and asks for a response. I tell him this: During the ten years that I've been theater critic for Creative Loafing, I've made it a policy never to ask a local theater to produce one of my plays. I've always felt that that would be putting an intolerable pressure on the theater's artistic director, who might worry that I would review his theater's work negatively if he/she didn't produce my work. But last year, Bob Devin Jones of The Studio@620 asked me to be one of the writers interviewed in the Studio's writers series.
He also asked to see a couple of my plays in order that actors might show the audience what sort of thing I tend to write. On the evening of the appearance, about 70 people showed up to watch Bob interview me about the writer's life and also to see some brief excerpts from two of my plays. When he asked why I hadn't had any of my work produced locally (though I've had productions in Boston, New York and Edinburgh), I explained my policy. He then asked - in full view of 70 audience members - whether I would permit him to produce ART PEOPLE, which he knew had been produced Off-Broadway. I thought for a moment and said "yes." My reasoning was that I hadn't sought out the production, and therefore there could be no question of my trying to use an unfair advantage. I certainly didn't feel that Bob's offer obliged me to be any more or less honest in my reviews of the Studio's work. I think my readers have gotten used to the idea that I'm uncompromising in my attitudes toward theatre. I don't intend to change that one bit.
As to the reading at Gorilla, I explained to John that I receive no money for such a reading, there will be no reviews, and the whole point of the thing is to help me see whether the play is working and, if not, how to make changes. I told him that I review plays, not theaters, and having a reading at Gorilla (I had one several months ago also, of my play AMERICAN DUET) is not going to affect my critical honesty. He told me that he thought i'd given him some good answers, but would probably write about the issue in his paper anyway. We said goodbye cordially enough - we know each other from all the plays we've both reviewed - and that, at least for the moment was the end of it.
But now I'm interested in the reaction of readers of this blog. Do you think that I should have a strict embargo on my plays where local theaters are concerned? Or is it all right for me to show my fellow Bay area residents what I have to say when speaking on the stage and not in the paper?
On a different note: we now have the actors for the reading. Playing NIlsson the SS man will be Eric Burgess, whom you might have seen in THE GOAT at Jobsite Theater. It's a relief to have all four characters in the play finally named.
What next? Rehearsals, that's what. Stay tuned.
Comments (5)
Showing 1-5 of 5
Mark, John Fleming, whose colleague I also have been, was right to ask you these questions. Many years ago, I quit performing music in public (and for money) once I started writing jazz, pop and classical music reviews in the St. Petersburg Times. Part of my decision was based on the same concerns that John raised. But to be honest, the emotional heart of it was that I feared being judged, even as I also judged. Twenty-five years later, I have a more nuanced view of the ethics involved (as well as the same performance anxiety). Few journalists are completely free of conflicts -- conflicts of opinion, association, obligation. I'm not sure it would be ideal even if we were. Journalists, and especially critics, bring every bit of their experience and worldview to their work. Naturally some of that will be conflicted. It was once very important for newspaper journalists to establish strict rules of separation from their sources and subjects. In many if not most cases, it still is. I'm satisfied with your explanation of how these events transpired. But it's not the most ameliorating point of your message. Your best point is the fact of your interactive disclosure to your readers. They are the ones who must decide whether your judgments of Gorilla or Studio620 productions have been compromised. They deserve full disclosure every time you review a play at one of those venues. (I disagree with your distinction between content and venue.) Fortunately, for you and for your readers, you can do this easily enough, by quickly linking readers to an explanation of your dealings with both venues. As well, your query on this site will provide you with a range of reactions, perhaps some different from mine. (I just love interactive media.) In any case, as one of your former editors, I would just encourage you to keep doing what I've always admired in your work: You're educated, you're thoughtful, you're honest, and you don't mind saying what people might not want you to say. In the end, that reputation will carry you.
like
dislikeWhen Scott Harrell worked as a music critic at CL, he often wrote about venues that his own band played at. He did not ever, in my recollection, worry about the fact that he played at said venues nor did he favor these venues when he wrote about shows taking place there. I never had a problem with it then (Scott writing about venues his band performed at)and I don't think any of the rest of his readers had a problem with it either. How is this so different?
Leilani: It's not that different, but that doesn't justify Mark's situation so much as call attention to the ethical issues involved in Scott's reporting on shows at venues where he also played. John Fleming was absolutely right to question Mark about his dual role as critic/playwright at the same theaters, because even the appearance of a conflict can erode reader trust. For instance: If they think Mark will write more favorable reviews for plays at venues where he has a personal relationship (regardless of who initiated that relationship) or feel he is using his position as critic to advance his work as a playwright in Tampa Bay. As for Scott, the issue isn't whether HE worried about playing at venues he also reviewed. It's whether readers would still trust his criticism. As you've said, they apparently didn't have a problem it. I know Mark did the right thing is fully disclosing his situation. Now it's up to his readers to have their say.
Mark- I suppose that it is valid to ask these questions and truth in journalism has and will continue to be a contentious point of discussion. However, as a local artist and avid theatre lover I would find it highly disappointing to learn that this community would be barred from interfacing with local writers based on a presumption that favoritism could come into play. I am most certain that by having a reading of your play The Gorilla Theatre and Studio 620 are not executing some calculating scheme to garner positive reviews. Rather I believe their goal is to take advantage of a local asset & share the playwriting process with their patrons. I think it is unfortunate that their motives must be called into question. I certainly understand and respect the argument that these events could be unethical, however I strongly urge you to consider the interest of local theatre lovers who can benefit form these unique opportunities. Regards, Ashlie Mohney
I think an important note missed here is this critic did not bring up this issue until AFTER another critic/reporter called him out on it. read the first line again. If Fleming did not say anything, we the readers would never ger the say you're giving us now.
Latest in Daily Loaf
-
USF held hostage by legislative terrorism
What's JD Alexander want? Simple. A new, taxpayer-funded university in Lakeland that he can take credit for and potentially lead.
-
Told that the city's bond rating is at stake, Tampa City Council supports major increase in garbage rates
Councilmembers Suarez and Cohen said they hated raising rates, but worried more about the city losing its bond rating.
-
Mitch Perry Report 2.16.12 - Iorio calls out J.D. Alexander
- More »
Author Archives
-
Spring Arts 2012: Theater
Seven Guitars, Becky Shaw and more hit Bay area stages this spring.
-
freeFall's musical Christmas Carol
The tuneful classic uplifts without the shadows of Dickensian darkness.
- More »
Top Commenters
