Comment of the Week

Here are this week's contenders:

Comment #1: a new comment on your post "How 'Angels in America' changed the national conve...":

I think one of the most powerful things about Angels in America, is that the theme of the play had it's peak of relevancy 20 years ago, such a weird length of time. It's old enough to be put into history and to look with hindsight and see what the impact of the play was. Here we see that not only did it affect the people who saw it, but it "changed the national conversation". As one of the quotes said, it brought "gayness" to the front, AIDS couldn't be discussed without bringing up gay issues. America has this thing where it likes to avoid topics in an effort to avoid conflict, but problems don't ever really get solved. This play said "You can't ignore this any longer. This is an issue." That's a big deal to bring a practically taboo subject not just into the nation's peripheral view, but instead crossing front and center. The other reason this 20 year mark seems so weird, is that while it's history and hindsight and significance all rolled into one, it's also something that a majority of the population can remember. There isn't any guessing as to what the impact was, most people 35/40 years or older (especially in the theatre community) have some reason or another as to why this play is significant to them. Unlike when a teacher says "Shakespeare was relevant because...." the teacher says "I remember it was relevant because...." which adds a whole new level onto how it's performed now. This play not only has a historical significance, but a personal significance to many people in America, and it's not often that a play can be both. 

Comment #2: a new comment on your post "Who’s Afraid of the Dark?":

While I agree with what everyone has said about this production being a challenge for the production and design team as well as the actors, I'm surprised no one picked up on the fact that there is no costume designer. Sure, designing a show that takes place in the dark will mean added challenges for the lighting and sound designers, and a unique opportunity for the scenic designer, I am amazed that there was no costume designer for the show. The actors are not in costume, but are in "street clothes" for every performance. While most of the show is in the dark, the article lends the reader to think that the actors will be seen. The lighting designer described prop effects such as a glowing fire or television screen. Any actor close to these objects would be able to be seen by the audience. The actors are also seen at the top of the show. Why wouldn't they be in costume? More importantly, different clothes and shoes will affect the play differently each night. If an actor wears soft-soled shoes that are practically silent one night, and high-heeled shoes that make noise the next the two audiences are getting different experiences. Cotton sounds differently than chiffon as an actor moves on stage. If the production team is focusing so much energy on the sound scape in the room and the sound effects in the play, wouldn't they also care about the extra noise in the space as well? I would be interested to know if these things came up as issues during rehearsals, techs, or performances, and I am curious as to whether the actors have any guidelines as to their wardrobe for the performances. 

Comment #3: a new comment on your post "AB Concerts presents Sleigh Bells":

NOISE POP IS CERTAINLY AN ACCURATE DESCRIPTION OF SLEIGH BELLS MUSIC, AND 'LOUD' HARDLY ILLUSTRATES THE ATMOSPHERE OF THAT ROOM. AT ONE POINT THE SOUND RIG WAS PUSHING OUT ROUGHLY 115-120 DECIBELS. HOWEVER, LIKE THE WRITER SAYS, THIS IS DEFINTELY MUSIC TAILORED TOWARD A NICHE AUDIENCE. IN ADDITION THE WRITER ATTEMPTS TO DESCRIBE THE AUDIENCE AT ONE POINT DURING THE CONCERT;
"There was a circle of students running into each other, and at one point, it felt as if the audience was pushing on itself from every direction."

ALTHOUGH, THEIR DESCRIPTION AGAIN FALLS SHORT, AS WHAT I THINK THEY MEAN TO SAY IS THAT THIS CIRCLE ENGULFED 1/3 OF THE CROWD IN A RAUCOUS, MOSH-PIT.

ALL IN ALL, AS A LONG TIME SLEIGH BELLS FAN I GIVE THIS CONCERT AN 8 OF 10. THE LIGHTING WAS NOTHING SHORT OF FLASH BANG AUDIENCE BLINDING SHOW AND THE SOUND, WELL WAS SLEIGH BELLS...

also,sorryforthecapslock,i'mstillsufferingfromtheeffectsoftheconcert. 

Comment #4: a new comment on your post "How “Right” is Right?: Conservative Voices in Thea...":

What I have to say to this kid is, if you can't find any conservative theater out there and you are so concerned about it's existence then why don't you write some. You could have Summer Awakening where instead of getting an abortion at the end the lead women has the baby and starts a club that try's to ban guns. The reason that there are not very many conservative playwrights is because we are surrounded all of the time by conservative messages and ideals and theater is and has pretty much always been a response to that. If you want to talk and think about conservative views all you have to do is turn your television to Fox news and it's right there in front of you. But to get the real liberal message, to get something edgy and unique (because that is basically how this kid is defining liberal, by using examples like Spring Awakening and Kushner) you have to go to the theater. Why would I want more conservative values in my theater? That is the one place I can escape the whole thing!

Also I agree with everything Matt says. 

Comment #5: a new comment on your post "Hollywood Reporter apologises for role in McCarthy...":

Can anyone argue that black-listing people from making a living because of their political beliefs is wrong? It would be a tough sell. I do have to be the outlier here though and say that I think it's just as questionable for us now, and by us I mean Sean Penn, from the distance of time and comfort of fame, to hand down on the past, even if it did affect his family specifically. The fact is, none of us can say with certainty what we would do were we in Kazan's shoes, facing a choice between capitulation and excommunication, or worse deportation. Taking the self-righteous position is too easy here, I think, and when an apology or an outcry of injustice bears about as much authority or ability to set things right as the cheap entertainment rag on which it is printed, it seems like a waste to me, and worse, a publicity stunt to sell more cheap rags. Maybe our efforts, and Mr. Penn's, would be better spent looking out for the millions of people suffering from unfair working conditions RIGHT NOW in our country. Yes we must learn from past injustices to better guard against new ones, but we also have to learn to forgive the past and admit our own imperfections and moral frailties before judging them in others.

Put your vote in this post's comments.