|
||
|
|
TheatreLouisville interviews Sherry Deatrick, page 3
When Sherry writes a review, she tries to offer the reader an enhanced understanding of the play. "I do research," she explains, "and I try to get a little information that the reader isn't necessarily going to get from just going to the play." This involves trying to provide insights into the playwright's intent, and exploring its deeper meaning rather than just reiterating the plot. She also tries to stimulate dialogue about the play. "I like to get people involved," she says. "That's our job, to get people to not just sit there — think! Think about what you saw. Talk about it." She says that offering advice to the director is trickier
because a director's best work is transparent to
the audience. "If
the director's doing a good job, you're not going
to know," she
says. "But if they do a bad job, then you do notice it. So," she
says with a laugh, "I guess that a director can learn that if they're
not mentioned, that means they're doing a really
good job." She
sometimes attends rehearsals in order to get a
better idea of the process. "It's
so different, the final product, from what you
see during rehearsal," she
says. Reviewing the ReviewLike most critics, she sometimes gets feedback from readers, not all of it complimentary. "Most people don't take the time to write a nice letter telling you you've done a good job reviewing something," she comments. When readers send a negative response, they often do so by trying to assail her qualifications. But she has learned not to let herself get drawn into those arguments. "You have a hate on for Actors Theatre," wrote one angry reader, which she assures us is not the case, as her positive reviews of Actors Theatre outnumber unflattering ones by more than 2.5 to one. She has also been accused of being a "frustrated playwright," which she finds amusing. She has indeed written plays, although not recently. "I try to be fair," she explains. "And I always try to find something good to say, if I don't like something. But you can't always do that." Sherry is nonetheless vocal about her theatrical pet peeves. "What I really detest is unnecessary expository dialogue," she says. "There are other ways of getting across the back story of your characters. And I especially hate it when they do the monologue at the audience. It's lazy, and it doesn't engage me." Then she laughs. "Oh, gosh, you've really opened up a can of worms now." She also bemoans the preponderance of plays that seem compelled to teach a lesson at any cost. "What's wrong with just going to the theatre and being entertained?" she posits. She gives kudos especially to the production style of Louisville's Le Petomane Theatre Ensemble in that regard. "It does teach you a lesson," she says of Le Petomane, "but it's not hammered over the head, because you're laughing the whole time." The lack of variety and originality among local offerings is another major annoyance. "You see a lot of the same shows over and over again. Why is that?" She notes that, even with thousands of plays listed on Samuel French and Dramatists Play Service, rarely does a year go by without The Odd Couple, Nunsense, Oklahoma and Sylvia making the rounds. And some theatres choose award-winning plays that have long since outlived the reasons for those awards, or that just don't adapt well to today's Louisville stage. "People think that because a play won a prize, it's good," she comments. One irate reader emailed, "Are you aware that this play was a finalist for the Pulitzer?" Well, yes, she was. But the Pulitzer panel of judges wasn't sitting in that local theatre, seeing what she saw. Defining the Role of the CriticDespite her ready sense of humor, Sherry is very serious about her role as a reviewer and about the essential role of the critic in the arts process. She is currently developing an in-depth article on exactly that subject. She notes that theatre differs from other art forms in that it's a one-time event. "Every show is different," she points out. "You're never going to see the same show twice — so our job is to be like a mirror, to reflect what we've seen and how it made us feel on that particular night." Any other night could be completely different, and she tries to point that out in her reviews. She sees the critic as having a responsibility for trying to raise the level of performances and the selection of plays. She says she hopes to encourage theatre professionals to take more risks, and to make choices that are a little more daring. She is proud that many Louisville theatre groups are doing that. "I hope we have some part in it," she says. — A.S. Waterman ___________
| |
