I am currently reviewing the way that I write on this blog, it has started to trickle a little bit and I find this a bit alarming.
This is the process area of my practice but of course that is difficult when it is also public. People have noticed that I have been writing about performance works and started mentioning it to me. This has an interesting affect on me because I have become more aware of what I am writing instead of using it as a place of reflection.
Writing about shows was always for me to continue to my knowledge of performance and research into dramaturgy and not really about anyone else. It has never been a service for other people – and I certainly don’t see my writing or reading to be anything like those who do it so well in this city (Hi John Bailey and Alison Croggan).
But I have found it difficult to be both a practitioner in the field and also someone who comments in a public forum about the scene here in Australia. Sometimes the ability to be independent and have enough distance to be critical about work comes into direct contact with people you may be employed by or work with. Perhaps this is a comment on how small the scene is here in Australia?? What is more likely is that as I have been taking on roles like sitting on panels (Dancehouse, Inter-Arts and various Melbourne Fringe panels) and directing projects where the possibility of bias begins to become an issue.
In any case, it has been hard to write about works I have seen that I have been critical about here, which means I have been only writing about works that I have liked. Is this cowardice? Surely I should just speak out and become part of the dialogue that is so needed in this countries performance scene?
Hmmm, i don’t really have a good answer for any of this, but I think that I will be backing off from naming posts after shows – as what looks like a review and smells like a review most often tastes like a review.
