Thanks, Judy. I used to think that. But I have experienced several times -
this was only the latest - how prompts to such debate just get swallowed in
the white noise of media talk. It's like throwing stones into soft mud -
it's like you didn't say anything at all - not a ripple, not a sound,
betrays the action... Quite a surreal feeling. Not sure that I will do this
particular kind of panel again. Unless, of course, I get to deliver some
kind of paper, and do it LAST.
Best
A
On 3/10/05 8:00 AM, "judy prince" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Next time you're on a panel you'll know precisely and profoundly what that
> formerly creeping vagueness was about, and you'll begin the discussion---the
> wonderful uncomfortable, in-all-of-our-faces debate about what theatre seeks
> and does, what art succeeds or fails in its trying, what the PEOPLE, the
> artists, strain to communicate, what parts of their productions explode
> meanings and what parts leave no traces.
>
> THEN critics and their critics---many of them, anyway---will have to get
> into the mud, name names of playwrights, actors, directors, plays, lines in
> plays, with the blood-enthusiasm necessary to life=art!
Alison Croggon
Blog: http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com
Editor, Masthead: http://masthead.net.au
Home page: http://alisoncroggon.com
|