Response to the Critics Questionnaire: Executive Summary
as compiled by Mark Charney
National Coordinator of Criticism and Dramaturgy
Following is a summary of each of the questions distributed to those leading the
critics institutes in each region. The questions meant for the students were not sent
beforehand, so we have little direct response from them. Next year, we should send
those questions out to the institute leaders before the festival. Reports are attached
and generally brief.
1. Guest Respondents
I:
Four: Melissa Hurt, Maggie Lally, Tony Howarth, William Roudebush
II:
One: Wendy Rosenfield, critic for Philadelphia Inquirer with limited
teaching experience
III:
One: Chris Jones, Critic for the Chicago Tribune
IV:
One: Jenn Goddu (also co respondent), critic for Charlotte Weekly
V:
One: Michael Phillips, critic
VI:
None: lack of financing
VII: None: local critic backed out at the last minute
VIII: One: Kari Sayers, no bio provided
2. Number of Participants
I:
16, 12 who stayed
II:
8
III:
14
IV:
24, 20 who stayed
V:
7
VI:
15, 11 who stayed
VII: 3
VIII: 8
3. What works well
Regions enjoy having reporters and professionals working alongside
academicians. One suggested a book called, The Critics’ Canon: Standards of
Theatrical Reviewing in America. Another region seems to think that the
institute is its own reward. Students who did respond appreciate close
attention to their writing; good balanced feedback sessions; and the ability to
do more than just the institute.
4. Improving the Educational Experience
A. Knowing what goes on at the national festival
B. Sharing reviews from the national workshop
C. Sharing reviews from different regions
D. Professionals who post student review on blogs and encouraged bloggers
to comment on their work
E. Requiring students to attend a response session for a play that they did
not review, and then comparing media and academic responding
F. Chair of the Critics Institute needs to be less involved with other aspects
of the festival
G. Posting the reviews always positive
H. Improving the balance of roundtable instruction*
I. Not demanding too much
* Clarification - This means that, when students are discussing their reviews in
roundtable, that they need a terrific, charismatic, efficient instructor who can honestly
criticize writing while supporting simultaneously.
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
Mostly the Critics’ Institutes seem to be running well. Institute leaders are
happy with the way they run the institutes, and students seem satisfied.
Reviews forwarded to the Kennedy Center are strong, reflecting good,
thoughtful writing. A few recommendations are below:
A. Find a way to publish the responsible reviews (i.e. actually
hanging/displaying in public.)
B. Make sure that critics can be involved in other elements of the festival.
C. Make sure that critics write no fewer than three review, four ideally**
D. Work with a professional critic
E. Encourage writers to attend response sessions
** The O'Neill staff believes that students should have written multiple reviews during
the regional festival to be prepared for the experience at the O’Neill; not having this
experience puts that writer at a disadvantage at the national festival and the O'Neill.
Response to Critics Questionnaire
as compiled by Mark Charney
National Coordinator of the Criticism and Dramaturgy
REGION I
Guest Respondents were: Melissa Hurt, Maggie Lally, Tony Howarth, William Roudebush
I had 16 applicants for the Critics Institute and ended up with 12 who actually stayed. This
is way up for us.
When I took over as Chair a few years ago, we typically had 3 or 4.
I think it would help me a lot to learn more about what goes on a the Kennedy Center.
Perhaps the powers that be can put something together about what they do there and what
they are looking for. Perhaps share with the rest of us some of the reviews that come out of
the national workshop? Perhaps share the winning ones with us?
I also plan to try to get an actual newspaper critic from Boston or Providence to come and
spend a day with us.
I found an interesting book that might be of use to others. It is called: "The Critics' Canon:
Standards of Theatrical Reviewing in America" and appears to be written by someone who
had something to do with KCACTF at one point. A man named Richard H. Palmer. I have
just started it but it seems very valuable as a tool for those of us who do this.
REGION II
Who was the guest respondent? Give a brief bio, if available.
Our Guest Critic was Wendy Rosenfield. As is frequently the case, she's a
solid critic with limited teaching experience. That's why I stay in the
room to help stay on top of those "teacherly" things. She was solid. I'd
like to have her again. You should also know that we always try to bring in
local talent. It saves money and exposes the students to different critics
and approaches. Here's her bio:
Wendy Rosenfield (Guest Critic) has been theater critic for the Philadelphia
Inquirer since 2006, when she emerged from a five-year baby-raising
sabbatical, cold-called the arts editor and asked if they needed an extra
freelancer. She currently writes the Drama Queen blog for ArtsJournal.com, a
clearinghouse for international arts news, and was chief theater critic for
the Philadelphia Weekly from 1995 until 2001, when that baby was born. She
was a 2008 NEA Fellow in Theater and Musical Theater, a participant in the
Bennington Writer's Workshop, and is a 1991 graduate of Bennington College.
Shortly after graduation from Bennington, she created and edited the
literary quarterly Quo Modo, hosted the Monster Literary Truck and Tractor
Pull (a monthly fiction- and poetry- reading series), and taught a summer
class in ‘zine-making (a bit of anthropology: ‘zines were the paper and ink
precursor to today’s blog) right here at the University of the Arts. She is
the mother of two passionate young theatergoers, is a wife, fiction writer,
was proofreader to a swami, publications editor for the Women's
International League for Peace and Freedom, and still can’t believe she gets
paid for what she believes just might be the coolest job in the world.
How many participants applied to participate in the critics program at
your festival?
We had eight active participants.
What could you recommend to improve the students¹ educational experience
at festival?
I can't think of anything. We have had good critics. Our host schools have
been very good about reserving seats for the critics and providing computer,
printer, and copying support. I sometimes wish the more interesting shows
came earlier in festival, since those are the shows our critics write about,
but I understand why that doesn't always happen.
I'll contact our student critic and ask him to answer the other two
questions.
I will give my view though on what I thought worked well. In addition to
being a critic for the Philadelphia Inquirer, Wendy Rosenfield also has a
blog on artsjournal.com. She put our critics and their work on her blog.
It started before we came to festival. IO sent her pre=-registration stuff,
and she contacted those students who pre-registered. She asked for a
picture, a bio, and gave them their first assignment. She then posted the
reviews the students wrote on her blog. Other bloggers then commented on
the work. The students liked it, and it readily solved the problem I have
had with posting reviews at the festival. This worked very well. I'm not a
computer guy, or I would try to do this every time.
REGION III
Who was the guest respondent? Give a brief bio, if available.
Region III hasn't had a “guest respondent” for at least ten years, as the program has been
chaired during this time by Chicago Tribune lead theatre critic Chris Jones. Jones stepped
down from the position last year, however, and was our guest respondent this year. He may
be able to do this (making a one-day appearance, basically) next year as well.
[BTW: I don't expect to head this up for Region III next year. I did this, in my last year as
past chair, with the understanding that this was a transitional year for the region in this
area, due to Chris’s resignation.]
Chris Jones is the chief theater critic for the Chicago Tribune. He has reviewed and
commented on culture, the arts, politics and entertainment for the Tribune for more than a
decade.
Along with being the paper's chief voice on local and national theatrical productions, he also
writes a weekly column on culture and the arts.
Jones served for many years as Midwestern theater critic for Variety and Daily Variety,
publishing several hundred theater reviews with a particular emphasis on pre-Broadway
tryouts. Although a Midwest resident for 24 years, he has covered theater in numerous
cities throughout the United States, including time as Variety's Broadway critic.
He serves on the editorial board for the Best Plays annual and has also served on the drama
committee of the Pulitzer Prizes. His arts criticism also has appeared in the Los Angeles
Times, the New York Times, the Washington Post, American Theatre magazine and
numerous other newspapers and magazines.
For much of the 1980s he contributed film reviews, interviews and reports for WCBE-FM in
Columbus, Ohio and also served as the long-time film critic for Columbus Alive newspaper.
He also has reviewed film and theater for WFMT radio in Chicago and has contributed
chapters to several books. His numerous guest TV appearances range from "E! The True
Hollywood Story" to "Nightline" with Ted Koppel. Jones spent 10 years teaching at Northern
Illinois University, where he served as assistant chair of the School of Theatre and Dance. He
also served as associate dean of DePaul University's Theatre School. A native of Manchester,
England, Jones earned a doctorate from the Ohio State University in 1989. He lives with his
wife Gillian Darlow and their two young children, Peter and Evan.
How many participants applied to participate in the critics program at your festival?
14.
What could you recommend to improve the students’ educational experience at
festival?
Continuation of a new event added this year: requiring participants to attend a response
session for a play that they were NOT allowed to review, and then comparing between
written reviewing for media and academic responding.
Have an OCI chair who was less involved in other aspects of the festival. I had little time to
give written comments on their reviews, and that would have been the most helpful thing I
could have done.
REGION IV
Who was the guest respondent? Give a brief bio, if available.
Although she’s not a real respondent, since she’s a regular, we use critic Jenn Goddu. She
reviewed theatre in Chicago for a decade and now reviews theatre for Charlotte Weekly and
also teaches at Queens College. She was a 2002 Critic Fellow at the O’Neill Critics Institute.
How many participants applied to participate in the critics program at your festival?
24 signed up. 20 stayed with it.
What worked well about the process?
Almost everything. We ask for four reviews, and all four are roundtable discussed by two
critics and the entire group. We allow for students to work at other events, and meet three
times for about three hours to do the discussion. It’s pretty doable, although with so many
critics, we had much to read and much to which we responded. Having at least two
respondents helps, as does including an actual critic. Many of our students claim they learn
more about writing in four days than they do in a semester.
What could you recommend to improve the students’ educational experience at
festival?
Post the reviews. Include an actual critic. Give students times to do other aspects of the
festival.
REGION V
Who was the guest respondent? Give a brief bio, if available.
MICHAEL PHILLIPS SERVED AS OUR RESPONDENT THIS YEAR. HE DID A WONDERFUL
JOB. I ASSUME YOU DON'T NEED HIS BIO.
How many participants applied to participate in the critics program at your
festival?
WE HAVE 7 THIS TIME, DOWN FROM THE 12 PARTICIPANTS FROM YOUR SESSION LAST
YEAR. NOT SURE WHY THERE WAS A DIP. WE DID HAVE SOME DELAY GETTING THE INFO
ON THE WEBSITE. STILL, IT WAS A SOLID GROUP.
What could you recommend to improve the students' educational experience at
festival?
NOTHING COMES TO MIND. THE STUDENTS SEEMED TO HAVE A GOOD EDUCATIONAL
EXPERIENCE.
REGION VI
What worked well about the critics institute process?
EMPHASIS ON THE FACT THAT YOU REALLY CANNOT DO MUCH OF ANYTHING ELSE
DURING REGIONAL FESTIVAL WHILE INVOLVED IN NCI.
What needs improvement to make the critics institute program more
educationally beneficial?
IT SEEMS TO BE ITS OWN REWARD.
Who was the guest respondent? Give a brief bio, if available.
AS I UNDERSTAND IT, WE DID NOT HAVE MONEY FOR A GUEST WORKSHOP LEADER.
IN 2008 WE HAD DANIEL PATTERSON OF KING'S COLLEGE IN NH. HE WAS GREAT.
THIS YEAR, I HAD TO DO IT MYSELF. NOT TO BE IMMODEST, BUT I DID A
MUCH BETTER JOB WITH IT THAN I THOUGHT I WOULD. I WILL POINT OUT,
HOWEVER, THAT A PROBLEM EXISTS WITH THIS INSOFAR AS IT MIGHT HAVE
LOOKED BAD HAD THERE BEEN ANY STUDENTS FROM UCO IN THE WORKSHOP. IT IS
BETTER, THEN TO HAVE SOMEONE FROM OUTSIDE THE REGION.
How many participants applied to participate in the critics program at
your festival?
THEY JUST SHOW UP AT REGIONAL FESTIVAL, NOBODY APPLIES AHEAD OF TIME.
15 STARTED, 11 FINISHED. THEY WERE ALL REALLY HARD WORKERS, AND IT WAS
DIFFICULT TO PICK A WINNER.
What could you recommend to improve the students¹ educational
experience at festival?
AS I SAID, I DID A GOOD JOB WITH THIS WORKSHOP, AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT
THESE STUDENTS REALLY LEARNED A LOT. IT IS REALLY ABOUT WHERE IT
SHOULD BE. I MUST GIVE THE CREDIT TO THE PROFS AT THE COLLEGES AND
UNIVERSITIES IN THE REGION FOR REALLY TALKING UP THE NCI WORKSHOP AND
GETTING THEIR STUDENTS TO SHOW UP.
I wanted to share a little of the record keeping/sharing of the reviews
and writing process my students went through during NCI. This is the
blog I kept of the workshop:
http://kcactfregionvinciworkshop.blogspot.com/
I had a great time doing this, and I would love to do it at regional
festivals in the future!
REGION VII
Who was the guest respondent? Give a brief bio, if available.
Our guest respondent (a local newspaper critic) fell through the week before festival. So, no
guest respondent this year. I did ask a regular ACTF faculty member (George Caldwell from
Oregon State University) to step in as a reader to help determine the winner.
How many participants applied to participate in the critics program at your festival?
Seven applied, but scheduling conflicts during festival dropped the number to only three.
That's the lowest number we've had in a number of years. (Usual average is around 8 to 9.)
What could you recommend to improve the students’ educational experience at
festival?
Honestly, I think Critics works pretty well as is. There's already a lot demanded of them
(sessions every day of the week, writing reviews every day), and if much else was added I
think we'd lose participation. Region VII has a very packed schedule, so unless students are
coming just for Critics, there's always a tension between how much we ask of them and how
much they can participate in other areas.
REGION VIII
What worked well about the critics institute process?
Good shows to review.
What needs improvement to make the critics institute program more
educationally beneficial?
Nothing.
Who was the guest respondent? Give a brief bio, if available.
Kari Sayers for Critics.
How many participants applied to participate in the critics program at your
festival?
8
What could you recommend to improve the students’ educational experience at
festival?
I still think one review is enough. Jim asked for two reviews to bring
us up to national standards.