Peter Brook Pack Review

Is the pack accurate, does it fairly summarise and represent mainstream view on this practitioner?

Immdeiately evident from this pack is that the knowledge presented covers a wide base of the practitioners ideas and the execution/execution of said ideas.

By investigating the stated sources, which are numerous with both online and printed sources, it is clear that the information, when cross referenced, maintains a high degree of accuracy, with no obvious contradictions.

The style of the pack, which combines biographical and theoretical information regarding the practitioner, means that a large amount of useful information is compressed into a clear and sharp form, making it fair simpler to absorb the information presented to us as the reader.

Is it properly referenced, are sources cited properly?

All of the sources have been carefully referenced, enabling a reader who wishes to do further research easy access to the information that has been used by the creators of this pack.

With the website sources, not only has the website address been stated, but the name of the website and the information therein aswell.

With the book sources each of them have been referenced using the Harvard technique (title, author, year of pulication, publishers).

Are there divergent views which should be acknowledged?

The Peter Brook resource pack covers many different views about the practitioners ideas and practices. It is felt that it reflects many diverse opinions and uses quotes well to aid this, giving us a more in-depth knowledge of his life and works and impact it had, whether positive or negative. It looks both at his achievements and also at those projects which received negative reactions and critique, therefore giving us a more complete outlook of the practitioner and his works.

As for the style of the presentation there are no obvious diversions of opinion between the creators. The information has been melded to present a non-biased, factual resource, which has a flowing tone to the text.

Is the application of ideas appropriate, could this go further or in different directions, if so what directions?

It is possible, as always is with research works, to push the boundaries further. However, piling too much information into one short presentation makes it useless, as it is difficult to easily glean information from it.

However, something that may benefit this pack would be to include some visual imagery, for example photographs (if any exist) of some of Brook’s productions, or designs.

Also, a little more depth on the more revolutionary productions would give the reader a more in-depth understanding of how these were so unusual and how they affected theatre as it stands today.

Overall…