July 8-14, 2004

mailbag

Letters to the Editor

by the Readers

Everyone's a Critic

One of the worst things that can happen to a theater community is that a single person becomes the voice of criticism. Unfortunately, this is what happens at most papers, and that person proceeds to boost his or her darlings (in this community, the artists we tend to see over and over again and whom it is therefore safe to endorse) and make it very difficult for lesser-knowns to break through and get noticed. While Toby Zinman's review of Blam! ["Splat!," July 1, 2004] was accurate (though snide and discourteous) about some of the show's weaknesses, the reviewer's condescension and failure to so much as acknowledge the difficulty in what these two unconventional pieces were trying to accomplish indicates a regrettably jaded and proscribed sensibility that can only damage and stunt Philly's burgeoning theater scene. To dismiss the artists' "direct address" mode as not "theatrical" is to sidestep responsibility for critically engaging the complexity of multilayered, metaphorical, first-person storytelling because it is not one's "cup of tea." Zinman's decision to exempt the director from condemnation is also telling. Anyone who reads Zinman's biased reviews regularly knows that David Disbrow is a darling, and anyone who saw Betsy Herbert's show in its earlier incarnation — a vastly more charming, funny and insightful piece at last year's Female Funny Fest, not directed by Disbrow — can attest to the fact that Disbrow's thumbprints (overburdening technology, superimposed "pet" themes, heavy performance stylization) are now all over it, to its detriment. Toby Zinman is doubtless an astute, knowledgeable observer of theater, but cronyism and condescension can do nothing to foster artistic growth. It's time for some fresh critical voices — the more, the better.

J.B. Todsttoe
Via e-mail

Not Nice, Notebook!

In a recent "Political Notebook" entry ["Pepper Picking," July 1, 2004], Mary F. Patel seemed to make fun of a proposal by state treasurer candidate Craige Pepper to have public debates with her rival, cynically and glibly asking: "Just what kind of debate can treasurer candidates have, anyway?" and quoting the campaign manager for Pepper's rival, Democrat Bob Casey Jr., retorting "that's what we would like to know."

Not a complimentary word was written about Pepper or her ideas, though she is a rare female candidate for office. In fact, the whole idea of voting itself is seemingly pooh-poohed, Patel writing off the entire campaign season as "a snooze." That's too bad, since the last thing people need is yet another reason not to vote. In the 2000 Florida presidential poll that George W. Bush allegedly stole, less than 50 percent of the eligible voters went to the polls. Had Al Gore "prevailed" in Florida, it would have been with the support of less than a quarter of the state's eligible voters, and who knows what the real majority wanted?

Given Philadelphia's flagging finances and falling population, I would think it obvious that each and every race is critical to our future. Young voters, likely most of City Paper's readers, least of all need more reasons not to vote. Even now, less than a quarter of them do so. If Patel goes on poisoning the well in this way, she'll soon do herself right out of a job. Craige ought to have been heaped with laurels both on account of her gender and her attitude, and City Paper ought to do what it can to support the process. Either that, or just get out of the way. A cynical person might think that people like Craige get the back of your hand because they are Republicans, but that couldn't be correct. Could it?

Dwight Zeeler
South Philadelphia