This mentor feedback is part of the LitNet | STAND theatre review workshop. The ten participants each submit a review to the workshop mentors for feedback. The participants will then be able to edit their submissions, receive additional feedback from the mentors and finalise their reviews.
This is the final feedback on version 2 of Klara van Rooyens’s review.
Feedback from Tracy Saunders
The change in structure of this edit adds clarity, and the addition of some details supplies more texture. I would value more information about the professional actors – who they were, and how many of them were in the cast alongside the amateurs. Given that the differential in experience of the cast is an integral part of the production, some specific information would provide clarity. The additional description of the dynamic on stage has been further elucidated, which does go some way to exploring the aspects of the interaction that were not included in the first draft. The review has retained its sense of authenticity and thoughtful engagement.
Feedback from Nkgopoleng Moloi
Klara van Rooyen’s review is robust and interesting to read. As suggested by the writer herself about the theatre piece, “Some moments could have possibly packed a stronger punch with some trimming” – this piece would benefit from more rigorous editing. In the last review notes, I suggested that the writer consider citation and referencing of other works, theories, etc to add a richer texture to the text – this suggestion still stands, as it could add depth to the analysis.
I would also suggest more attention be placed on the flow of the text. As it stands, the text contains many exciting ideas; however, they could be organised better. For instance, the paragraph beginning with “Oudtshoorn is a place sticky with memory and dreams” makes more sense earlier in the text, while the paragraph containing “I’d advise audience members” can come later in the text.
It is not typical to offer advice in a review of this kind; instead, the reviewer could lay out possible recommendations and how new choices could achieve the point the author is contesting. Overall, this is a good text that can be improved through better organisation of ideas and trimming.
Mentor feedback: First version
Theatre review: First version
LitNet | STAND: Theatre review of Droomkraan-kronieke (version 1)
Theatre review: Second version
LitNet | STAND: Theatre review of Droomkraan-kronieke (version 2)
Also read:
LitNet | STAND: Teaterresensieslypskool 2023 | Theatre review workshop 2023