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 Kwanele Nyembe’s review.
Feedback from Tracy Saunders
The edit has taken much of the feedback into consideration, and the outcome is a far more robust piece of writing. The restructuring of the review makes more sense and contributes to the flow. I appreciate the added emphasis in this version on the context in which the play is staged, and the added import given to the systemic nature of violence against women and its role in the work. The power that women claim in this performance is one of the central themes of Jonas’s work, and I am pleased to see it foregrounded. Nyembe’s placement of the piece as a contribution to “the pedagogical search for creative ways of thinking and conceptualising epistemologies that encourage holistic approaches to South African theatre production” is an intriguing one and something I would be interested in reading more about.
Feedback from Nkgopoleng Moloi
Nyembe’s review is comprehensive and robust. Unfortunately, the author has fallen into the trap of overwhelming his ideas with too much theory and background information. It is crucial to add detail and context to the play and the ideas explored in the play; however, one should be careful not to go off on a tangent. My key recommendation is to think about critical editing – reading the text over and over from different perspectives and being ruthless about trimming down what does not serve the work.
When writing a review, the writer is expressing their thoughts and interest, but this should be done in a manner that allows the reader to make the connections. Often, this is achieved through distilling ideas to their simplest form. For instance, “creative ways of thinking and conceptualising epistemologies that encourage holistic approaches to South African theatre production” sounds nice, but what does it mean?
For the writer to hone a distinctive voice, that voice needs to be clear. Starting with the traditional form can ensure that you don’t fall into the trap of over-theorising. A description of the play, a summary and analysis of the plot, a discussion of the design elements of the play (lighting, costume, sounds) as well as a clear opinion or recommendation of the play in its entirety – this is a good place to start.
Mentor feedback: First version
Theatre review: First version
LitNet | STAND: Theatre review of Around the fire (version 1)
Theatre review: Second version
LitNet | STAND: Theatre review of Around the fire (version 2)
Also read:
LitNet | STAND: Teaterresensieslypskool 2023 | Theatre review workshop 2023