I've just read another review of The Mikado. I believe the newsletter in which it is located becomes public only a month after its release. You can find the full text here: this is what it had to say about the men's chorus...
Upon their entrance, the male chorus wooed the audience with their spirited precision fan choreography brought to the stage by Susannah Gordon-Messer. The men moved together in a tight ensemble aptly matched by their clean vocal lines and crisp diction. They would prove to be a boon to the leads throughout the performance, giving subtle yet effective support to the shared scenes.
[Barratt Park as Nanki-Poo's] performance of "A wand’ring minstrel I" was an innocent and sweet contrast to the brute strength of the male chorus.
The Mikado was a success: the pacing of the production was steady and well timed; the group numbers were creative and inspiring with their imaginative staging and contagious energy; and the cast worked very well together to create a memorable piece of theater and provoked cheer from their audience.
My word, you rate yourself pretty highly...what next, sending press releases?
ReplyDeleteWell, one of the reviewers of the paper I submitted last month used the description "de Gennes-like" (de Gennes, who was born exactly 54 years before me, won the Nobel Prize in 1991). They were referring to the type, rather than the quality, of the work, but it was a positive review.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately the other two reviewers weren't so impressed, so I'll need to revise my paper and submit it elsewhere.
Is Matthew finally feeling the harsh sting of rejection? As Pol Pot, who was born exactly 63 years before me once said, "It's up to history to judge". Your TV show equivelent, Rusty Cartwright, was also having problems with his project, but a good looking upstart freshwoman helped him out. There's something in that for everyone...
ReplyDeleteI'm not having problems with my project: the reviewers aren't denying that I successfully solved the problem I have claimed to, just that it's a particularly interesting problem. It's common to be rejected by the first (or first two, in this case) journal to which one sends a paper, because one is trying to publish it in the best journal possible.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of not having problems, I have now officially (sort of) joined Anna Wintour, John F Kennedy Junior and every Jehovah's Witness as a magazine editor. I am so close now to having job moderately comensurate to my intelligence.
ReplyDeleteNot sure how things can be moderately commensurate, but congratulations!
ReplyDeleteThere are scales of everything: a magazine editor is a job should be doing; the title could be more impressive. If you like, I can publish your paper in my magazine. Not sure whether I count as peer review, but I can pay a dodgy Lord to read over it.
ReplyDeleteWell, you need the experience somewhere small, where editing involves a lot more than editing.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your pragmatism.
ReplyDeleteIndeed: we know you can write magazine articles, but we still need to be shown that you can run a business, or a segment of one.
ReplyDeleteThe royal 'we' Matthew? Just because you're at MIT doesn't mean you've ascended to aristocracy...
ReplyDeleteI was really referring to the world in general. It doesn't bother me whether you can run a magazine.
ReplyDeleteThat's somewhat disheartening. It bothers me whether you can get published.
ReplyDeleteYes, but it doesn't bother you whether I deserve to. Likewise, I care more about whether you are seen to be capable of running a magazine, than whether you actually are.
ReplyDeleteI've always been a substance person, but in the Australian workplace, the importance ratio of substance to style is 15:85.
ReplyDeleteThe latter doesn't surprise me, but I'm not sure I agree with the former...
ReplyDelete