I'm scared to review: Wild Bore

Wild Bore
Malthouse Theatre
18 May 2017
Beckett Theatre
to 4 June
malthousetheatre.com.au

Wild Bore. Zoe Coombs Marr. Photo by Tim Grey

Wild Bore. noun
1. Those who talk out of their arse, dribble shit and don't understand dramaturgical intent.
2. Theatre reviewer.

It's also Zoe Coombs Marr, Ursula Martinez and Adrienne Truscott's response to critical responses to their own work, and that of others. Opening to a critical contingent of two at Malthouse on Thursday, its verbatim(ish) mash-up of memorable reviews is as much a celebration of arts writing as it is a hilarious damnation of us who write those so-wanted-but-so-hated reviews.

Readers of reviews and critical writing in Melbourne will recognise some of the quoted voices.

But I'm not cunty enough to have been quoted.*

I don't know how I feel about that.

It's really nice to be quoted.

There are plenty of theatre makers who think I'm a bitch. I've seen the letters about my ignorance and know about the quest to get me banned. Most of these criticisms of the critic have been over writing about women's voices, women's points-of-view and how women are presented on stages.

I should have said feminist (bitch).

Wild Bore is mostly about people who write about women with a gaze that makes women feel so fucking special.

It's why these performers continue to make theatre that also encourages critical responses that use less-quotable words like gender, privilege, diversity and gaze. And why that writing can get a bit sweary because we're fucking over having to explain why we're fucking over it.

Remember when Jane Montgomery Griffiths wrote a response to reviews on ArtsHub that questioned a gender bias in reviews about her interpretation of Antigone (Malthouse, 2015)? Grab a snack and go deep into the comments – some are in the show – and know that the ones that were going on in a not-so-public sphere were funnier, smarter and bitchier. Some of us do censor our public voices.

Wild Bore. Ursula Martinez Photo by Tim Grey

This work – which they've been developing in their three home continents while performing their own shows – naturally focuses on the negative reviews and the failure (perceived or willful) of the writers to understand (or accept) the intent of the works.

With their best cheeks forward – the talking-out-of-the-arse imagery is clear –, each discuss reviews of their work that didn't get chosen for their pull quote of adoring adjectives or appropriate number of stars. Having seen the shows discussed, it was confronting to hear only the negative voices.

As artists and creators, do you really listen to those voices? Are the positive, researched, sat-up-until-4am-trying-to-get-the-words-right, you-made-me-feel-and-care reviews dismissed by the negative?

Of course, it makes far better theatre to use the negative voices – and the Wild Bore performances as described by the reviews may be worth the pain of those bad reviews. But it highlights why the bad bad reviews are encouraged, and why the responsibility of a reviewer's voice isn't necessarily considered.

Negative, bitchy reviews with memorable metaphors get read. They get shared. They get clicks. They encourage engagement and conversation. And so writers are encouraged, and often paid, to write more reviews like that.

It's awesome to be read.

It's brilliant to get paid to write.

Arts writers are writers. WE LOVE BEING READ.

Verbose metaphors get read.

Can anyone who read Byron Bache's corn-in-the-poo quote ever forget it? The show (The Crucible, MTC 2013) may have been forgotten, but not that quote. It got him regular paid work; the dream of most arts writers. But despite him continuing with some excellent writing and critical comment, he might only be remembered as the corn-in-the-poo quote critic. Arts writers understand irony.

Those gloriously hideous reviews are read.

They not only get read more than the positive ones, they get a bloody wonderful feminist theatre show made out of them.

 And, shhh, Krishna Istha.

Wild Bore. Adrienne Truscott & Zoe Coombs Marr. Photo by Tim Grey

*Or nice enough to be in nice quotes on the web page.

Time to Talk with The Guardian, 23 May after the 7 pm performance, Van Badham joins the cast to talk about their encounters with critics.

Monash Meets Malthouse, 27 May at 5 pm at  Jane Montgomery Griffiths, Alison Croggon, Cameron Woodhead, Richard Watts and Fleur Kilpatrick join the cast to discuss artists responding to critics.

The reviews

Maxim Boon: themusic.com.au

Alison Croggon: The Monthly

Cameron Woodhead: The Age

Rose Johnstone: Time Out

Keith Gow: keithgow.com

Kate Herbert: Herald Sun

The Sublime discussion & links

The Sublime

MTC

mtc.com.au

Photo by Jeff Busby

The response to my commentary about the MTC's The Sublime has been positive and nearly overwhelming with so many social media and real life conversations resulting.

I wrote about the aspects of this play that disturbed me the most (and I wanted to keep it less than a thesis). But there IS much more to say about it, including how honestly the men are portrayed.

Many of the conversations have been about the intent of the playwright, the director, the company and everyone who has had an input into the production – that's a lot of people.

It seems like the creators couldn't see what they were saying about young women and power because all they could see is what they were saying about men caught in football world.

Theatre is something that we all see through different eyes. You will never have the same experience that the person sitting next to you has. Please read all the reviews and rants or decide to see or not see it without reading the commentary. And #mtcSublime is worth a visit on Twitter.

But be thrilled that we have a critical arts community that wants to discuss our theatre and writing. Here are some links. I'll add more as they happen.

**NEW**
Alison Croggon saw it last night (10/9/14). She published this on alisoncroggon.tumblr.com (11/9/14).

Eloise Brook on The Conversation (12/9/14). However, I can't tell if she's seen the play.

I also have to add that so many of the conversations about this play are happening in private and away from public glare.

The others (from 5–6/9)

Me on AussieTheatre (3/9/14). I'll publish it in full here next week.

Richard Watts on RRR's Smart Arts (4/9/14). About 1hr 45 min in.

Peta Mayer on ArtsHub (5/9/14), with an excellent discussion about how the female character doesn't sit comfortably in a work that's wanting to be an honest depiction of society.

Byron Bache on his blog (5/9/14). Byron was the first on Twitter to call any negative response and I too stress his point that NO ONE has accused the MTC or this play of condoning rape. Read what we say, don't cherry pick trigger words.

MTC management on Crikey's Daily Review (2/9/14) while the reviews were positive. And why is anonymous "management" commenting? Surely it should be AD Brett Sheehy?

Chris Boyd in The Australian (1/9/14). And a text version if the pay wall stops you.

Andrew Furhmann on Crikey's Daily Review (29/8/14).

Cameron Woodhead in The Age/SMH (29/8/14).

Kate Herbert in Herald Sun (29/8/14).

Reuben Liversidge on ArtsHub (30/8/14).

Peter Craven in The Saturday paper (6/9/14).

Brendan Cowell in The Age (6/9/14, but the interview was during rehearsals).

Brendan Cowell in The Age (18/8/14).

And here's playwright Brendan Cowell talking about it the 2014 MTC season launch.

All-a-twitter over Midsumma's Henry

Here Lies Henry at Theatre Works is about a liar and #Midsumma is a all-a-twitter because reviewers don't agree and never lie.

The Midsumma festival celebrates that we all see the world differently and that it's ok to be exactly who you are, unless you're a theatre critic who doesn't explode a glitter bomb of quotables for every show.

I love reading a review that is so different from my own that I wonder if we saw the same show, and embrace such a diversity of opinion because if we all agreed, I can assure you that the only thing that show would be is BORING.

Matt Hyde in front of his poster. Pic nicked from @Theatre_Works 

On Arts Hub, Nicole Eckersly liked the Henry.

"... an epic monologue, veering like a Mad Mouse between endearing, witty, existential, awkward, hilarious, black, insightful, and, more often than not, several of the above simultaneously."

more

In The Age, Cameron Woodhead wasn't so keen.

"Much of the gay stuff feels grafted on, gratuitous. The stereotype isn't playfully explored. Mainstream gay male culture comes across as superficial and boring and the shallowness represented lacks complexity and affective range - and, therefore, anything in the way of effective critique."

That makes me want to read more and find out why he didn't like it. He tells us. A good review doesn't mean praise.

I was somewhere in between.

"You don't have to believe someone to enjoy their tales, but reviewers never lie, so don't be scared to get to Here Lies Henry before it ends on Sunday. It's intense and mad and will leave you wondering."

more

"You don't have to believe someone to enjoy their tales ..."

Reviewers are writers. Writers tell stories.

I read other reviews to see a show from eyes other than my own. I know what I think. I want to know what goes on inside other people's heads.

PS: "Cameron hated it" will get more people along to see Here Lies Henry than "A-M liked it".

Woodhead on Wilson

There's a terrific interview with Robert Wilson in The Age today by Cameron Woodhead. Here.

Melbourne's been lucky to see Wilson's The Temptation of St Anthony (MIAF 07) and I La Galigo (MIAF 06), but the Perth Festival gets Threepenny Opera.

In the meantime, I'm trying to find a way to get to Perth to and have already done a happy dance knowing Einstein on the Beach is here in July.

Meanwhile ...

Meanwhile ...

On another theatre blog, in a critical galaxy that doesn't discuss poo, cheese or glitter,

Cameron and Alison are at it again.  Head to the comments.

It's only been a couple weeks since we farewelled Theatre Notes, but they can't help themselves.

Sad Farewell to Theatre Notes

I'm sad to read that Alison Croggon has decided to close down Theatre Notes. She tells us why here. I'm going to miss Theatre Notes (a lot), but totally understand why it's time.

Theatre Notes inspired me to start SM and I know there are many other bloggers who will say the same.

Alison's writing told me to not be afraid to write deeply about theatre, to use my own voice, to never speak down to readers and to not feel guilty when I don't have time to write something (or read something; Black Spring is on my pile).

Just this weekend, she was talking at a conference and discussed critics as advocates for the arts.

And perhaps that's the Theatre Notes legacy. Criticism isn't about antagonism between writer and artist. Theatre writers write about theatre because we love it. We don't like all that we see and we certainly don't agree all the time,  but we write about it all. We read and write to discuss thearte and art, to celebrate the amazing stuff created and to see a work from a different perspective. It's not about "us" and "them"; it's all "us".

How Alison has sustained such an incredible output of incredible words continues to amaze me.  I really have no idea how she kept writing great criticism and finished a novel this year.

If you don't know just how much she writes, here's her bio and alisoncroggon.com will take you to her novels, poetry and everything else.

Theatre Notes is going to be very missed, but I look forward to reading all that Alison creates now she's freed up some time.

And who is Cameron going to fight with now?

Having an opinion

I haven't seen Site Unseen, but Cameron Woodhead's review for The Age is leaving me tempted.

He didn't like it.

He's not alone. I've heard similar opinions about this show, but the difference is that they were whispered.

Cameron loves theatre, he sees more than I do and he writes reviews that I read. I don't give a toss if we agree or not.

I can't comment on the show, but I like this review.  I'd rather read a passionate and honest opinion than a compromise written to please everyone.

He's also written a follow up on his blog.

Here's John Bailey's review.

And here are some other opinions from people who have seen it and loved it.

And the response from the creators in The Age.

And this is what I thought when I saw it.

Wheeler Centre forum: Critical Failure, Theatre

I was away for this, so thrilled to see it up on The Wheeler Centre's site.

Last week's forum asked if theatre criticism in Australia failing practitioners and audiences, and Alison Croggon, Julian Meyrick, Cameron Woodhead and Stephen Sewell assess the role of the critic in contemporary Australian theatre.