2. All of the critiques that we analyzed followed a general format, with the
exception of a few details from “A Girl is a Half-Formed Thing” as it wasn’t
the script of a play, but a critique of a book.
The General Format;
Location the play was performed
Background information on the play
Information on audience/reaction of audience
Structure of the writing/critique of subject matter
Pros and cons of writing/Purpose of the writing
Comparisons to other playwriting
Conclusions made by the critic
3. What I immediately noticed about the review of A Girl is a
Half-Formed Thing was that it presented the novel in an interesting
light, and one that seemed to mimic the feel of the novel itself. It
was informative and gave a broad general scope of the novel, but it
wasn't just a summary or a review. It allowed me to truly
understand what the text's shortcomings and achievements were
while also telling parts of the story. There didn't seem to be a set
"format” as much as other reviews, so much as it seemed to allow a
flow of words and literary devices while presenting information
that would be helpful to those who read the review.
This critique used many direct quotes, and the main
character is revealed as a young girl struggling to understand why
her family is so strict regarding religion and her rebellion against it.
The author’s development of characters seems profound despite a
cliché story, and while her style wasn't "brought up from scratch" it
didn't need to be to find success.
4. While the structures of our other critiques were
straightforward, this one is written to mimic the style
of the book.
Since this example from The New Yorker is critiquing a
book instead of a play’s script, it’s expected that the
format would be different
The mimicry of format allows readers to have a better
connection to the writing and makes them more likely
to understand references to the novel in context
5. The Chicago Tribune provides a well-rounded critique of a
newer play from the writers of the television satire “South Park” and
offers a deeper view onto something that some would consider vulgar.
It starts off by describing what kind of audience this play is most likely
to attract, which in this case, was much of the audience it's authors
already have from the hit Comedy Central show and all of those
individuals are looking for a cheap laugh and are most likely not the
harshest of critics for a musical.
While this was their most interesting point, they also go on to
describe the cast members, the pros and cons of the show, and
presenting how well it was all put together. The play itself touches on
subject matter that no other production is willing to include, and
many consider the shock humor crude and something unwelcome to
the Broadway, so the critic is intent on showing the value of this. With
reviews like this promoting this production, it's only assumed that
there would be opposition (such as this critique) to such a touchy
satire despite overwhelming ticket sales, so it often depends on the
audience when it comes to deciding if it’s brilliant or brash.
6. The Book of Mormon is a unique play in the sense that
there are two distinct audiences that would be
interested in seeing it.
“South Park” fan base audience – generally just looking
for a quick laugh
Broadway “regulars – typically more critical of the
content of the play and how it is portrayed
Because of these two audiences, the critic is careful to
include specifics about the writing that both would find
enjoyable or displeasing
7. Although the length of my article: "Not Exactly Preaching to the Choir", is
not one of notable aspects, it does do a good job at analyzing the very Off-
Off Broadway, Queens even, play: "Get Mad at Sin". At the beginning he
mentions where the play is and how that may effect how the crowd might
receive the play. Historical context is given next, that the reader may have
not known before. He then describes the play itself in just a paragraph.
Although this isn't much, he knows what he is doing.
Somehow I feel like I know I can see this play being performed...
Perhaps it's the fact that I've seen pastors preach, and it's a one man type
act so there isn't much left to the imagination. He then explains how
much, to a certain degree, the director's genius. Finally, he explains how
the audience won't "(throw) out their miniskirts to avoid the sinful
repercussions, but the sound of the audience did tell a story". This
suggests that they audience was somewhat allowed to think about their
personal choices, with respect to why they do what they do; self-determination
for their own actions and those of others and why they do
things. "Listen closely and you might have heard a type of conversation".
8. Unlike the previous critiques, this one actually
describes the impact of the play on the audience in the
perspective of a moral to be learned
Because of the genre of the play, being a sort of one-man
act, it’s purpose is based around emotion and a lesson
that’s being portrayed
This is effortlessly woven into the rest of the critique and
adds a new dimension to the summary of the writing
9. Jones, Chris. "The Book on "The Book" -- Chicago Tribune." The Book on "The Book"
The Chicago Tribune, 20 Dec. 2012. Web. 12 Oct. 2014.
<http://graphics.chicagotribune.com/mormon/review.html>.
Mahne, Theodore. "Vulgar and Tasteless 'Book of Mormon' Opens Broadway Series at
Saenger."
NOLA.com. NOLA, 17 Oct. 2013. Web. 12 Oct. 2014.
<http://www.nola.com/arts/index.ssf/2013/10-vulgar_and_tasteless_book_of_m.html>.
Zinoman, Jason. "Not Exactly Preaching to the Choir."
The New York Times. The New York Times, 1 June 2010. Web. 16 Oct. 2014.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/theater/reviews/02getmad.html>.
Wood, James. "Useless Prayers." New Yorker 29 Sept. 2014: 80-82. Print.
