In your evaluations, we expect the highest caliber of theatrical criticism. We do not want you ever to say, “These are only high school students.” However, we wish you to understand that this organization serves an educational purpose that transcends its theatrical one: to teach, to experience; therefore, you must try to be positive, encouraging each entry to continue its theatrical work despite the difficulties you feel are present within the production. How you evaluate is just as vital as what you evaluate. One final note: it is imperative that your comments be precise, thorough, and LEGIBLE; one word answers, ambiguous statements and illegible handwriting are not helpful to the participating school.
Below is an example of how well a judge has used the narrative comments portion of the written critique. The play being discussed is “Suppressed Desires”.
“The actors seem to be on one very high level throughout the play. You needed to score the script better and
find where the quiet, lower moments were to contrast with the bigger, more
dramatic ones. Inherent with this notion
is: what are the objectives of each of
the characters? What does Henrietta want
from Steven? What does Mabel want from
Henrietta, etc.? When you answer these questions,
then decide on the many different ways they go about winning their
objective. This way you find lots of
variety in the piece. All three actors
seem to have a lot of energy and enthusiasm about doing their roles, and they
need to find more subtlety and nuances to make the roles grow. On your next play, you might try to heighten
your talking and listening skills. You
all know your lines well, but often that made you anticipate what the other guy
was going to say and consequently, you did not really listen to his/her line.”
As you can see, a director or student reading these comments knows exactly what the flaws of the play are in the opinion of this judge and how to correct them.
Problems regarding the use of the narrative comments have arisen in a few general areas. The first of these concerns a method of critiquing that is very harsh and that sometimes borders on the insulting. The following example written about a comedic adaptation of a Shakespearean tragedy did nothing to further the educational value of the Festival of the director or students.
“This production was poorly conceived from the first wisp of cigar
smoke. Although I am not a purist, this
was not even an honest attempt to deal with Shakespeare’s work. None of the characters showed any depth or
potential for depth. This had little
cohesive action to hold anything together.
The business was ridiculous with no meaning to the script or character. There is no sense of the production leading
anywhere. If the director intended this
to be a comedy, there must be a better way.
It certainly could not be taken seriously.”
The next concern deals with commenting directly on the material presented by the cast. The written script should not be a basis for criticism unless the material is part of an original production, and even then, the focus of the comments should be on the students’ performance. Remarks such as the following are inappropriate:
“I had a real
problem with the material. I didn’t feel it tied well together.”
“I do fault some of the writing for the static nature of the
piece. It just appeared too contrived
and without much dramatic impact.”
“This script
is worse than T.V., truly trivial. The
actors seem capable; give them a better vehicle.”
Finally, please follow these guidelines regarding written
criticism of cuttings: If a director
buys and produces a ready-made cut version of a full length play, please do not
criticize the cutting. When the director,
him/herself, cuts a full length play, you may comment on the effect the cutting
has on the production. In any case,
remarks about the cutting of a play should not be the basis for the entire
critique.
As with written criticism, how you evaluate is just as vital as what you evaluate. We ask that you try to direct comments to actor choices as apposed to director choices. Your goal should be to balance constructive criticism with supportive suggestions. Please do not engage in a dialogue with the students or director at this time.
It is suggested that this “adult only” critique session take the form of a dialog between the adjudicators and the production director. This discussion is a time for questions and answers regarding director choices.
The adjudicators are asked to share their perceptions and ideas, promoting a relaxed atmosphere in which problems and possible solutions can be discussed amongst colleagues. Again, please note that the play selection and/or cutting may be commented on at this time, but should not be the basis of the entire discussion.
If a play is directed by a student, the student director will be welcomed at the Director’s Critique but must be accompanied by an adult advisor. Judges should be sensitive to the fact that this is a student but must hold all directors and productions to the same standards.
Objective judgment of a theatrical piece is virtually impossible given various backgrounds, experience, and taste. However, we do expect judges to evaluate only the work they see on stage. Every attempt must be made to avoid judging the material or basing judgment on any prior experience with the same piece.
Many argue that choice of material be judged. However, the NHETG Board, while understanding the principle behind this argument, finds it faulty. We require that only the success of the production is what you, as judges, must evaluate. However, an excellent production of a difficult play may be chosen ahead of an excellent production of a less difficult play.
Please note that election to the All-Star Company should be based on a student’s outstanding performance. At the state festival do not be mislead into thinking that every school should win something. This only defeats the value of recognition. Also, time on stage should be avoided as a criterion for acting awards: whether the performer has been on stage for 35 minutes or 10 minutes is irrelevant. The operative word is “outstanding”.
The NHETG encourages awards in such areas as costume, set, make-up, special effects, props, lighting, ensemble performance, movement, sound, voice work, etc. Again, they should reflect what you consider to be outstanding student work. You have the freedom to word the award in any way you wish, for example, “Use of Color”, “Creative Props”, or “Use of Ensemble Movement”. These awards are given only for work done by students.
Collaboration and discussion among the judges is
enthusiastically encouraged. In
finalizing the selection of productions to move on and All-Star Company awards,
input from all judges is necessary, with the consultant monitoring
discussion. We sincerely hope that this
will prove to be an enjoyable and educational experience for you as well as all
participants.