May 25, 2021 • 54 mins
This week on Key Change, Robyn and Julie revisit the topic of opera and criticism with Karen Fricker of the Toronto Star, with a focus on why reviews matter long after a performance run has closed. As a seasoned writer and academic, Karen makes the case for criticism as a historical record, shares her hopes for the future of performance art, and also helps draw parallels between opera and… circus!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Julie McIsaac (00:00):
Hi, everyone.
Welcome to Key Change (00:00):
A COC Podcast, where we explore
everything about opera from afresh perspective.
Robyn Grant-Moran (00:17):
We're your hosts, Robyn Grant-Moran
Julie McIsaac (00:20):
and Julie McIsaac.
Robyn Grant-Moran (00:24):
Hello again, and welcome to Episode 15.
Julie McIsaac (00:27):
It's really hard to believe we're nearly at our
last podcast for the spring.
Robyn Grant-Moran (00:32):
We've had such [a] great time connecting
with so many amazing guests overthe last few months, and we've
loved hearing from you. Thereviews you leave on Apple
Podcasts are great for helpingother people find their way to
us at Key Change.
Julie McIsaac (00:44):
Yeah, we'll be taking a break at the end of
this season, but please keepthose comments and questions
coming. You can tag us anytimeon social @CanadianOpera, or
email us at audiences@coc.ca.
You can also send us a voicememo; there's instructions for
how to do that atcoc.ca/KeyChange.
Robyn Grant-Moran (01:03):
So, today we wanted to revisit a topic we
explored e (01:05):
opera and criticism.
Julie McIsaac (01:09):
Yeah. So, back in March, we spoke to longtime
writer and music critic AnneMidgette. Now as someone whose
career has spanned severaldecades and positions with the
New York Times and WashingtonPost, she gave us a lot to think
about when it comes to thechallenges of critiquing art,
the particular challenges ofcritiquing opera, and what kinds
of skills and considerations arerequired to be a quote-unquote
(01:31):
"good critic."
Robyn Grant-Moran (01:32):
We stepped back and took a long lens view
at the value of opera criticism,and one thing that really stuck
out for me that Anne had saidwas that it's important to be
really honest about aproduction. So, if a production
was just so-so, you need to saythat for many reasons, one of
which being if someone's new toopera and they read a review
(01:54):
that this was a greatproduction, but it's only a so
so production, it might alienatenew listeners and new audiences
unnecessarily. That was thething that I hadn't really
considered and she had a lot ofgreat thoughts like that.
Julie McIsaac (02:08):
And for anyone if you happened to miss that
podcast and this recap ispiquing your interest now's a
great time for us to mentionthat all of our episodes can be
found coc.ca/KeyChange forlistening anytime.
Robyn Grant-Moran (02:21):
Today we're sharing our chat with theatre
critic Karen Fricker.
Julie McIsaac (02:25):
Karen Fricker is Associate Professor of Dramatic
Arts at Brock University, she'sa theatre critic with the
Toronto Star, and author of the[Robert Lepage's] Original Stage
Productions (02:34):
Making Theatre Global. Karen is also regularly
involved in a number ofinitiatives around the future of
theatre criticism in the digitalage.
Robyn Grant-Moran (02:52):
Hi, Karen, thank you for joining us today.
Karen Fricker (02:55):
Thanks, Robyn.
And lovely to meet you, Julie.
Julie McIsaac (02:58):
You, too, Karen.
Robyn Grant-Moran (02:59):
So, Karen, I first met you at the Performance
Criticism Training Programthrough Generator, and that was
my introduction to theatrecriticism. And I'm wondering
about yours (03:10):
how did you get started in it?
Karen Fricker (03:13):
Well, it was long before then, Robyn. I guess my
start in theatre criticism was,kind of, organic, and lateral,
and a process of figuring outthat it was something that you
could do and that I could do.
Because I was a theatre kidsince I was 13, but I actually
didn't know when I applied touniversity and this is me
(03:36):
revealing my ignorance for whichI continually atone with my
students that, like, I didn'tknow you could study theatre
other than being an actor. So,because I'd been a good academic
student, I said, "Oh, well, Ihave to go study English." And,
so, I didn't really exploretheatre in university, but I
found that, during universityand after university, the thing
(03:59):
that I loved the most wastalking about it afterwards
that was just like the mostdelicious thing. And I went to
University of California, andthen I went to London, U.K. as
soon as I graduated, and Iwaited tables, and I just saw
everything, and went to the pubafterwards and argued about it
with friends, and, like, thatwas just so exciting. And then
(04:20):
through, kind of, talking tofolks and reading all the
newspapers, I was, like, "Well,maybe I could write some of this
down," and I started selling afew pieces to publications in
London and, you know, fastforward about a year and a half
in a bad visa situation, and Iended up in New York, and that's
(04:40):
when I really started trying tofigure it out about how to make
a career as a theatre writer.
So, it was a process of talkingmyself into believing that it
was something that you could do,that I could do as a woman, and
(05:03):
that I might actually get paidto do.
Julie McIsaac (05:07):
And from the vantage point of where you're at
presently, Karen (05:09):
what do you see the role of a theatre critic
being?
Karen Fricker (05:14):
That's always the biggie. I mean, I think at its
base, the role of the theatrecritic is to respond to artists;
it's to respond to an offer thatis made in the form of an
artwork. And, for me, it's alsoimportant to say that it's the
continuation of a conversationthat artists start up they
(05:39):
say, "Here's something, we gotto say, we wanted to say this,
we wanted to express it in thisform. Here you go, audience,"
and a theatre critic is a memberof an audience who says, "Oh,
thank you for that offer. Here'ssome things I think about what
you did." And, like, that, tome, is the heart of it. When
you're a professional paidtheatre critic for a mainstream
(06:01):
outlet, it isn't just anexchange with the artists; it's
an exchange with your readers,and with your editor. So, what
you say is elevated over that ofother audience members who might
still be talking about it in thepub. And so it's public speech,
(06:22):
it's speaking about theatre inpublic think about the arts in
public and it's feedback forartists. It is a forum when
you're talking about amainstream outlet like the
Toronto Star that I write forit's a form of consumer
guidance, or that's how it'spositioned, right? Like, in the
real times, there's lots ofstuff to see in Toronto, how are
(06:43):
we going to choose? Well, maybewe're going to go read some
reviews in The Star and havethat help us figure out what we
want to see. And the other pieceand this is super important to
me as an academic is it's thehistorical record, and that you
are writing stuff down becausetheatre disappears, and opera
(07:04):
disappears, and if we didn'thave the written records of
critics from the past, then we'dreally have massive holes in our
understanding of performancehistories.
Robyn Grant-Moran (07:14):
So, has the job changed since you started?
Karen Fricker (07:18):
For me, it has. I mean, I'll speak quite
subjectively about my own work,and then I'll, kind of, talk
more broadly. The way my careerhas played out, I've always been
a foreign correspondent. So,when I first started reviewing
in New York through a series ofhijinks, I ended up being the
New York theatre critic for theFinancial Times newspaper in
(07:38):
London. So, I was writingnotices from Broadway to a
readership that was mostly, youknow, international business
people, which was, kind of,weird because I was, like, 25.
And then I moved to Ireland andI started writing for The
Guardian, which is aLondon-based newspaper about
Irish theatre. So, this currentmoment for me, where I'm writing
(08:01):
about theatre in Toronto for theToronto Star, is something I
always really wanted and I'm soglad I've gotten to have that in
my career, which is that I'mactually writing in the market,
which means I feel like therelationships are really acute
and, for me, the stakes arehigher because it this is my
(08:23):
theatre world; I'm not saying topeople over there, "This is
what's happening in Torontotheatre," I'm saying, "This is
our world." So, there's a senseof investment and
responsibility. I feel like thejob's changing because we are
now and I hate the wordcompeting but now "everyone's
a critic," right? Now, thanks tothe advent of the internet and
(08:44):
social media, there's a lot ofpressure on this question of
whether expertise which iswhat I've always understood is
what the professional critic ismeant to bring is that they know
their field inside out I feelthat that continues to be very
important, but that's always theconversation I find myself
(09:05):
having is, "Do we really needquote-unquote "expert opinion"
anymore given that so manypeople are out there on Twitter
and Instagram and everywhereelse posting their points of
view?" And, I mean, I have a lotof things to say about needing a
whole multiplicity of points ofview from folks from all kinds
of backgrounds and we can getto that I'm sure but, to just
(09:29):
finish answering your questionof like, "How is the job
changed?" those are some of thefactors that I see are really
affecting the field at themoment.
Robyn Grant-Moran (09:38):
And now to follow up with the really
obvious (09:39):
how's it stayed the same?
Karen Fricker (09:42):
Well, right now it has because, I mean, what's
been super interesting duringCOVID is the fact that
responding to work that's comingthrough Zoom, or another media
platform, is different thanresponding to work that's live
on a stage. So, when I'mteaching my students theatre
criticism as I continue to doat Brock University we're
(10:04):
having to take on board a wholebunch of different factors in
terms of how they're using thecamera, how acting is different
if you're acting in a Zoomcontext, etc. But bracketing
that, when I'm a working criticin the real times, I still am
turning up at 7 (10:23):
30 [p.m.] or 8 o'clock and having that rush of
adrenaline, and that moment oflike, "It's me and the work."
And no matter how much researchI've done, no matter what kind
of day I've had, no matter howannoying that person sitting
next to me is, that sense ofbeing in relationship with
(10:48):
something that is live and infront of me, is what always drew
me to it, and that still is thesame when live theatre is
happening.
Julie McIsaac (10:58):
And you may have touched on some of this, Karen,
but we're curious about (11:00):
what are some of the biggest
challenges that you've faced orface presently as a theatre
critic?
Karen Fricker (11:07):
I mean, I think the biggest challenge facing the
field of performance criticismright now is its incredible
whiteness. And I think thatisn't just that most of the
people that I've ever knownwho've practiced this craft are
(11:27):
white, university-educatedfolks; it's all of the
structural, societal, historicalfactors that have made that be
the case. And this is somethingwhere I feel, like, I am in a
period of deep reflection andchange about this work, and it
(11:49):
has to do with the times thatwe're living in; it has to do
with the year that was 2020; ithas to do with BLM [Black Lives
Matter]; and it has to do withIndigenous resurgence on this
land. And I think a lot of uswho are thinking about theatre
criticism in Canada right noware asking the question, "Why
aren't there more voices thatare representative of all of the
(12:14):
communities and experiences inToronto?" for example, because
so much of the exciting work,and the important work, and the
timely work is coming fromvoices that were historically
underrepresented. And, I mean,I'm going to mention something
that would be well-known tothose of us within the theatre
world perhaps less-known inthe opera world: about this time
(12:37):
last year, an Indigenous theatremaker named Yolanda Bonnell I
wouldn't say, "disinvited," butshe requested that when she did
a show at Theatre Passe Muraillethat Indigenous, Black and
People of Colour critics andotherwise minoritized folks,
(12:57):
particularly queer folks sheinvited them to come and respond
to her work, and she preferrednot to have others come respond
to her work. And this caused ahuge hullabaloo with reporting
on it as far as away as London,U.K., and I think it was an
incredibly importantintervention that Yolanda was
making, because it disrupted awhole bunch of conventions,
(13:21):
because it's a convention thatwe get free tickets to go see
work and write about it; it's aquid pro quo; it's a
relationship that Canadian OperaCompany has with The Globe and
Mail, and the Toronto Star, andthe CBC. But it was not always
thus, and I think Yolanda'sintervention was on behalf of
(13:43):
herself, but I feel also itraised a question which is, "Who
who can really speak and respondto this work in a way that is
from a place of understanding,and sympathy, [and] resonance,"
that if she's offeringIndigenous ceremony which is
what I understand she was doingRobyn, as an Indigenous person
(14:04):
has a way into that work, and Iwould go so far as to say,
almost a right, to speak or tobe present to see that work that
might not be as I feel Robyn'sis a more important voice to
hear about that piece than mine.
Robyn Grant-Moran (14:20):
Well, and to your point about expertise
one thing that came up in aprevious episode when we were
talking with HannahChan-Hartley, and I'd asked her
a question about Baroque opera,and she's like, "Oh, well, I
can't really speak to thatbecause it's not my specialty."
Like, that's totally okay to dogenre-wise, but the whole "bug"
(14:41):
situation, it became incrediblyclear that it wasn't about
expertise; it was about "Whofelt entitled to sit in that
seat, and get that ticket, andhave their voice heard?" But how
can you be an expert if you'renot part of that world, or
you're not actively involvedwith that world?
Karen Fricker (15:03):
Yeah. This is flashing me back to a really
interesting set of conversationsthat I had when I was teaching
and working as a critic inLondon, U.K.: when some of the
senior white male critics wentto review a musical that may or
may not have been "Wicked," butlet's just say it was "Wicked,"
and they just didn't get it. Andthe question was raised by my
(15:26):
students, like, "Why don't theysend teenage female-identifying
people or even teenagemale-identifying people? Like,
who's the work for and whyaren't we hearing their voices?"
And there has since been somereally fantastic musical theatre
scholarship that's been writtenby the critic Stacy Wolf in the
States about female responses,young female responses, the role
(15:47):
of fan discourses around certainkinds of art forms. That
question has been circulating,for me, for a while but it has
really landed in a really acuteway at the moment in Toronto
around "Why should somebody hearfrom me if they could hear from
Robyn about Indigenous work?"And I'm working on a project at
(16:08):
the moment around the ObsidianTheatre Company/CBC
collaboration "21 BlackFutures," which is an incredibly
ambitious and importantarticulation around the question
of the futures of Blackness, andwe commissioned 21 Black
university students to respondto the works because that's the
voices they are the future ofBlackness! And the "we" here
(16:31):
is York University, BrockUniversity, CBC and Obsidian
we said, "It's response. Itdoesn't have to be a
quote-unquote 'review,'" becausethere's all kinds of colonial
patriarchal histories aroundthis idea of the solo-written
review, where it's one personlaying it down in a really
(16:52):
authoritative and, kind of, endof conversation way. We said,
"response." And we've got poems,we've got songs, we've got
thought pieces, young peoplerecording themselves so you can
see their embodied personexpressing these ideas. And, for
me, that is the future oftheatre criticism. And this is
(17:14):
all happening, like, superreal-time, that 21 Black Futures
to me is proof of concept, andI've been so wanting this
concept to be proved, which iswhat kinds of amazing things
come out when you pull away theformality and pull away the
histories and pull away thepower differentials and just
(17:34):
say, "Here's an offer. What dyou think?"
Robyn Grant-Moran (17:39):
And I expect in, like, 10 years from n
Karen Fricker (17:57):
I think and I have a lot of conversations
about this with Carly Maga, withwhom I share the job of theatre
critic of the Toronto Star theconversations we get to have,
the rooms we get to be in, theaccess that we have, the sense
that we are part of a communitya particular part of a
community but, you know, that isexperiencing incredible growth
(18:19):
and change that we can helpgetting the word out about
what's going on on the scene. Ilove to be in the middle of a
scene, I just love it! And Ilove to feel like I have a voice
within culture and within thescene, and that's why I think I
underlined before, like, whythis has been such an exciting
(18:42):
five years at The Star isbecause we're in the community;
it's not far away, it's here.
So, I think my most memorableexperiences are feeling like we
get to say to our readers,"Guess what? This is so
exciting! This is so cool what'shappening! You want to know
about this!" and to feel like wehave agency in figuring out what
(19:02):
the important stories are thatwe want our readers to know.
Julie McIsaac (19:09):
Karen, I'm curious. So, in addition to your
work in theatre and theatrecriticism, I'm really curious
about your perspectives on operapractice and opera production,
and I'm told that you did see"Hadrian" at the COC so a
couple years ago and you'verecently published a book about
Robert Lepage and he and ExMachina have directed a number
of productions for the COC. So,we'd love to hear about your
(19:30):
connections to these works, andalso that theatre/opera
crossover and what you'vewitnessed in attending those
productions by [Peter] Hinton orby Lepage, for example.
Karen Fricker (19:40):
Right. I mean, I've been thinking back to I am
pretty confident that the firstoperas I ever saw were
"Bluebeard's Castle" and"Erwartung," which were COC
productions, Lepage's firstopera productions, which then
went to the Brooklyn Academy ofMusic [BAM] in New York, where I
was then living and, at thatpoint, I was quite interested in
(20:00):
w, this is gonna be an incredily memorable moment in your care
Lepage's work as a journalistand, so, of course, I would go
to see the latest Lepage at atBAM, and that was really
r. But, until we get there (20:06):
wh t's particularly memorable up u
exciting.
til this point being a criticour experience as a rofessional?
I had nothing to compare it toat the time, but I was like, "I
(20:26):
thought they were pretty good,"and I think they've held up.
What Lepage brings to the plateis an incredible visual sense
like. he creates total works ofperformance with incredible acts
of onstage transformation ofobjects and bodies. And I think
(20:49):
he chose well with those shortopera pieces where there were so
many transformations that hecould create on stage. I also,
at that time in New York, wasworking for a company called
Stagebill, which doesn't existanymore sadly, but it created
program magazines for performingarts organizations. And, so, we
(21:14):
served most of the constituentorganizations of Lincoln Center.
So, I got to go to The Met. So,I was spoiled super young
because I got to see, like, someof the most magnificent,
beautifully sung, beautifullyplayed lavishly staged operas.
But when I was thinking aboutopera experiences that have
really stuck with me, it isinteresting because it is the
ones that are, kind of, theatrecrossovers because I'm
(21:36):
remembering "Satyagraha," thePhilip Glass opera, that Phelim
McDermott directed withImprobable theatre at the ENO
[English National Opera] takinga form of theatre-making that I
very much identified with thisparticular theatre company, and
just blowing it out, like,sonically and logistically,
(21:57):
like, massive chorus. And, Iguess, my appreciation of opera
and it's, kind of, an obviousthing to say about opera is
that there's so many more levelsand elements of expressivity,
and theatricality, andmeaning-making that are
available to artists. I oftencan find opera challenging
(22:18):
because I'm so used to plot andcharacter, and when it takes,
like, 10 minutes to say onething and because I'm not
music people like you are, thatI can't appreciate the nuance of
the music and what "new" they'rebringing to the music and I
find that frustrating. But,also, we all have stuff to
(22:39):
learn, right? So, I mean, I feellike that's an area in my work
as a spectator, where I canreally grow: is learning more
about music.
Robyn Grant-Moran (22:46):
In our practice with Key Change, we,
kind of, look at conventionaltraditional roles and think
about deconstructing them orasking, "Why?" And I feel that
that parallels very nicely withthe work you do with Circus and
its Others is that correct?
Karen Fricker (23:02):
That's true.
Circus and its Others is ainternational research project
that I've been co-directing forabout six years, to kind of
question to what extentmainstream circus practices
continue to be heteronormative.
racialized, not progressive interms of the stories they're
(23:24):
telling, and the performancelanguages and the
representations in them. Andthis was, kind of, literally a
question that I asked with acouple friends in the foyer of a
theater in Montreal, and it'sturned into this international
inquiry because what we found isthat circus-makers and circus
scholars around the world arevery engaged with this question.
(23:45):
So, we've been doing digitalpanels during COVID. So, we just
had a panel about Australiancircus, we had an incredible
panel about how circus isaffecting theatre artists around
the globe, and we had about fivecontinents represented hearing
from African circus-makers,Middle Eastern circus-makers,
and it's all glued togetheraround this question of "circus
(24:12):
as a performing art form thatmakes meanings," and asking
questions about, like, "Whattropes are being circulated and
recirculated in question," and"How can circus be used to break
down some stereotypicalrepresentations?" So, I think
(24:34):
that it sounds like there is,kind of, a vibration there
between that and what you dohere on this podcast because I
know, as a Key Change fan, thatyou're constantly looking to ask
questions about representation.
Robyn Grant-Moran (24:49):
I've kind of had this niggling feeling for a
long time that there's just alot of parallels between
traditional opera andtraditional circus with the
various roles, the sort of highflying aerialist, the clown, the
you know and why certain peoplehave certain roles, and I just,
(25:12):
kind of, feel like, "Is theopera just aristocratic circus?"
Karen Fricker (25:17):
I have to say I don't know enough about opera or
traditional circus in order toanswer that question fully, but
I can take a little stab.
Because traditional circus is, Ithink, picture Barnum and
Bailey, picture Three-RingCircus, picture it's
vignette-based, right? It's,like, "Here's the animal act,"
and then "Here's the juggler,"and then "Here's the high-wire
(25:40):
act. Contemporary circuspicture Cirque du Soleil is
much more theatrical- It doesn'treally have a plot but it, kind
of, has a theme, and it'sbrought together through, like,
musical and scenic elements thatgive it a, kind of, cohesion.
What we have found incrediblypersistent in circus is that the
apparatuses and the acts aregendered, right? So, that aerial
(26:04):
is feminine, juggling ismasculine, clown tends to be
mostly masculine, andhand-to-hand which is anything
that's two performers, where oneis, kind of, the base and the
other one is lifted the basetends to be a dude and the
(26:28):
lifted person tends to be alight woman. And what's super
exciting that's happening insome progressive circus
practices is consciouslybreaking down those tropes by
having and I saw the NationalCircus School of Montreal has a
show every year where theirgraduating class does their act,
(26:50):
right? And seeing male-malepairings in trapeze is
incredible; and seeing a femaleas a base in a hand-to-hand act,
like, that is subversive,fantastic stuff. And, I feel
bad, kind of, saying that that'ssubversive in 2021 but the work
is still to be done to be reallybreaking down these stereotypes.
And they come for a reason: like, masculine bodies tend to (27:14):
undefined
be bigger and heavier sothere's a reason why there's the
base but how about a sturdygirl as a base? And what are the
aesthetic gendered what are theimplications of that? I find the
(27:34):
implications of that reallyexciting. Does that resonate
with you, Robyn, and what I'msaying?
Robyn Grant-Moran (27:39):
Yeah! Earlier in March, the four co-founders
of Amplified Opera, along withsome other artists, had a live
digital conversation aboutgender and opera. (And that's
actually still available forviewing online: it's at
coc.ca/GenderAndOpera.) Therehave been more non-binary and
trans artists getting a lot ofcredit where credit is due
(28:03):
finally. But those totallychallenge the norms like, you
have, like each vocal "fach" hasits, kind of, archetype, and its
story. So, yeah, it sounds likeI'm not far off but maybe not as
(28:24):
close as I thought either.
Julie McIsaac (28:26):
Talking about, like, what's on the horizon or,
like, this exciting stuff that'spercolating. Karen, we're
curious about how do you seecriticism evolving over the next
few years?
Karen Fricker (28:35):
Well, if I have anything to do with it, um, I am
really excited to see what isgoing to happen when more
Indigenous, Black and Person ofColour voices and otherwise
minoritized voices find theirway into theatre criticism as I
believe they will. I'm workingon a few projects trying to I
(29:01):
feel like the biggest thing thatwe can do right now, in Canadian
theatre criticism, is lowerbarriers for participation in
theatre criticism. I know thisis sounding very top-down and
"white savior-y" and I don'tintend it that way those of us
who are professional theatrecritics in Canada do tend to be
white, college-educated folks,and how can we be using our
(29:26):
privilege, our responsibility inways that might lower those
barriers and might offeropportunities, find pathways for
folks that might not previouslyhave thought that this was
something that was available tothem, or they even wanted to do
to try it out? Because I'vealways said to my theatre
criticism students and I'vebeen teaching theatre criticism
(29:47):
for 25 years "I don't thinkI'm going to turn you all."
Like, there's going to be one ortwo students out of a class of
30 that want to do this; it'snot for everyone. But there
might be others who might findthat they really love this; they
might have the experience that Ihad, like, figuring out, like,
(30:08):
"Oh, this is a job. Like, I canrespond to the arts and people
are gonna want to hear what Ihave to say." And, so, I think
the for want of a better word"diversification" of of the
field is something that I'mreally, really looking forward
to seeing happen.
Julie McIsaac (30:26):
You already spoke to us about that project in
response to 21 Black Futures.
But, just wondering (30:27):
is there anything else that's giving you
hope right now, that's gettingyou excited about what's to
come?
Karen Fricker (30:35):
Totally. Well, 21 Black Futures, there's a lot of
momentum behind that and, so,I'm working on a project with a
couple of academic colleagues tohave a BIPOC [Black, Indiginous,
People of Colour] critics labthis summer and intensive, and
we're talking to a few Torontotheatre organizations. The
question for us was, "How are wegoing to find these young
(30:57):
folks?" Right? Well, theresponse that we had to 21 Black
Futures, to the student responseproject, we got three times as
many students who wanted to doit as we could take, which was
an unexpected bounty. And,again, this is one of these
weird things that's positive outof COVID: it was not
location-based. So, we hadresponses from all over the
country. So, I'm looking forwardto reaching out to those young
(31:19):
folks and other young folks, andbringing people together to
start to have them work withsome more established IBPOC
critics, writers, artists, andjust starting to stir that pot
going to start putting a lotmore energy into seeing what
this summer project is going tolook like.
Robyn Grant-Moran (31:43):
Welcome to the bonus question round! First
question (31:48):
in your operagoing experience, is there a
production that has really stoodout?
Karen Fricker (31:52):
I spoiled because I already said it
I've really enjoyed, since I'vemoved to Toronto, getting to see
a number of shows at the COC.
The opera experiences that standout to me are the ones where
theatre-makers, like PeterHinton, move into opera-making
and you get to see themstretching themselves and
embracing all those forms ofexpression.
Julie McIsaac (32:13):
Yeah, it's always so exciting to see someone at
the precipice, or at thatthreshold between what they do
typically and, like, that newform of expression. So exciting.
So, this might be hard to choosefrom but: what theatre
experience has had the greatestimpact on you?
Karen Fricker (32:27):
No, that's easy because it was life-changing. It
was in 1990 and I was in London,U.K., in the "waiting tables and
seeing everything phase," and Iwent to the National Theatre to
see a work by this Quebectheatre artist that the quotes
in the paper were amazing, andit was Robert Lepage and the
piece was called TectonicPlates, and this was, kind of,
(32:48):
his second major international,big show, and it was
astonishingly fresh to me (32:54):
his stagecraft, the transformational
nature of the staging, the useof multiple languages on stage
because, of course, he's alwaysplaying with as a bilingual
Francophone Quebecer but therewas semaphore, like, there was,
you know, flag-waving semaphoresigns in the show, was another
(33:16):
form of expression. And he wasin it as an actor; he played a
character who was, what we wouldnow say, trans, although we
didn't have that language backthen. And Robert Lepage is an
astonishing actor. He underplayseverything, that's his M.O.
[modus operandi], and just hedraws energy by not over-emoting
(33:39):
but under-emoting and this ispart of his philosophy of acting
and I was like, "What, what,what was that?" And that was the
beginning, the germ of whatbecame a PhD, and what became a
book, and what's now been mostof my career following, and
chronicling, and engaging withthe work of this artist who's
(34:01):
sometimes controversial, and whohas made a really significant
contribution to performing artsin the world over the past 40
years.
Robyn Grant-Moran (34:10):
Which theatre artist do you most admire right
now?
Karen Fricker (34:13):
Oh, my goodness, I made a list! Crystal Pite,
amazing Canadian choreographer;Taylor Mack out of New York
incredible drag artist; MichaelKeegan-Dolan, who is an Irish
choreographer who had aproduction of "Swan Lake" that
was here a few summers ago atLuminato. It's interesting
because I found myself saying alot of people who work at the
(34:35):
boundaries of theatre and dance,because a company that my friend
and colleague Carly turned meonto is rockbottom dance here in
Toronto. Alyssa Martin is achoreographer, unbelievably
fresh, millennial dance company,theatre dance company love their
work! And basically anyone inthe 21 Black Futures project
(34:55):
like, that's 63 amazing BlackCanadian theatre artists.
Because, as we speak, thosemonodramas have all dropped on
CBC Gem and CBC Arts websiteand, so, I'm still making my way
through them. I mean, I'mborrowing what Carly said, which
is, like, "Since COVID, it's theone time I've felt, like,
(35:16):
literally that excitement of thelights going down." Like, it
really feels, like, such it'sso visceral, what they're doing,
and it's such an incredibleshowcase for incredible Black
Canadian theatre artists.
Julie McIsaac (35:29):
Fantastic, thank you. Lightning round! So, just
the first thing that comes tomind Karen, go with your gut!
Who is your favouriteplaywright?
Karen Fricker (35:40):
Caryl Churchill.
Robyn Grant-Moran (35:42):
Favourite director?
Karen Fricker (35:44):
Robert Lepage!
Julie McIsaac (35:46):
The last show you saw in-person?
Karen Fricker (35:49):
I kind of want to say it was "Hamilton." I mean, I
think there might have been afew since then, but that was the
last major opening I attendedbefore it all crashed.
Robyn Grant-Moran (35:59):
Favourite pre- or post-show meal?
Karen Fricker (36:02):
I have to say, when I'm reviewing, what I do
after a show is (36:05):
I go home and have a glass of wine and read
the play again. So, I'm, kindof, boring like, that's you're
asocial answer but I will say,right now, I would gnaw on a dry
crust of bread in front of atheatre if it meant that I was
going in there to see livetheatre. Like, you know, I'd
just do anything to be back livein a theatre again.
Julie McIsaac (36:23):
Do you have a least favourite theatre trend?
Karen Fricker (36:27):
The fact that there isn't any right now.
Julie McIsaac (36:31):
Yeah, we got to stop doing that! We gotta get
out of that!
Robyn Grant-Moran (36:33):
We got to fix that trend!
Julie McIsaac (36:34):
This silly habit!
Robyn Grant-Moran (36:36):
So, intermission or one-act plays?
Karen Fricker (36:39):
Ah. I do like a tight 80 minutes, I do have to
say. But I also because I, youknow, am somebody who's been
following Robert Lepage's workfor 40 years, no, 30 years I
also like an epic. Like, I satthrough all of Einstein on the
(37:01):
Beach, I had a transcendentexperience. So, like, really
tight and short or super long,so that it's an event and you
spend the whole day, and you getto know the people sitting
around you, and it's, like, lifein the theatre.
Julie McIsaac (37:15):
What do you consider to be the best seat in
the house?
Karen Fricker (37:18):
Ah, well, where the critic sits, of course! And
this is, of course, gonnacompletely undermine everything
I've said about how we need todiversify, democratize
criticism, but criticshistorically sit on the aisle,
and the reason for that isbecause, back in the day, they
would literally need to run outof the theatre as the applause
(37:39):
was happening because they couldmake a deadline for that night's
edition. And, so, now,typically, critics are sat on
aisles, and I have gottenincredibly spoiled because you
can throw your legs out into theaisle, and you don't have
another person next to you. So,for me, like, 12 rows back on
the aisle is a super happy spacefor me.
Julie McIsaac (38:02):
Karen, this has been great. It's been lovely to,
sort of, talk about that theatrestuff and the opera stuff and
just your enthusiasm for things.
Like, 21 Black Futures isgetting me excited and
enthusiastic to then dig in andjust, sort of, find that spark
again because I know it's been ahard year.
Karen Fricker (38:16):
Yeah. And thank you so much for being interested
in talking to a theatre criticbecause I know this is an opera
podcast, but I know from havinglistened to the podcast that you
were coming at it from suchinteresting angles.
Julie McIsaac (38:35):
Robyn, it was so great to meet Karen. I've heard
about her a lot through you andshe's even more wonderful than
you described. So, a greathonour and really fascinating to
have that chat with her.
Robyn Grant-Moran (38:45):
Yeah, it was really fun to actually get to
bring someone who helped me findmy voice
Julie McIsaac (38:51):
Right!
Robyn Grant-Moran (38:52):
into our space.
Julie McIsaac (38:53):
Right!
Robyn Grant-Moran (38:55):
I just want to take a moment to say thank
you to Generator, which is anincubator in Toronto that
focuses on mentoring, teaching,and innovation in the theatre
arts or performing arts. Theyran the Performance Criticism
Training Program. The programwas targeting BIPOC, queer and
women's voices those arevoices historically
(39:16):
underrepresented in general butespecially so in criticism. So,
it was really a great initiativeand without it I wouldn't be
here. So, it was cool to talk toher.
Julie McIsaac (39:29):
Well, and really cool that Karen, she reviews
theatre, but she has this greatinterest and knowledge about the
work of Robert Lepage, who's anartist that COC audiences might
be very familiar with due to thefact that he works in the opera
field as well.
Robyn Grant-Moran (39:43):
I read her book cover to cover a couple of
weeks ago, and [it] was a veryfascinating read. I don't know
that it's casual light readingfor anybody who is not in
academia, but one thing Ilearned that really, really
recontextualized Robert Lepageand how I look at his style of
(40:04):
production, I don't know enoughabout Qubcois culture: as an
Anglo, I don't recognize thatthere is maybe some
self-deprecation and some humourin it, because it's a piece I'm
missing not being so close tothat culture. So, it was really
important to hear someone whocould translate that for me.
Julie McIsaac (40:28):
What I'm hearing is that the critic has an
important role to play, or canplay a really important role, in
adding this additional contextand knowledge, and they can do
some research and unpack thingsfor us so that, as we receive
the work, if we're lacking forwhatever reason whether it's a
cultural barrier or a linguisticbarrier if we don't have that
knowledge for ourselves, thecritic can be a guide for us, an
(40:49):
aid for us through that process.
Robyn Grant-Moran (40:51):
Yeah, absolutely. And that's the
importance of having critics whoare really knowledgeable about
wh (40:58):
it's more than just, "I like this," or "I didn't like this."
It's being able to articulatewhere it fits
Julie McIsaac (41:06):
in the larger conversation, maybe.
Robyn Grant-Moran (41:09):
Exactly. So, that just changed my
relationship, that little tinypuzzle piece changed my
relationship to Robert Lepage.
There have been a lot ofdifficult things about him that
I don't want to be an apologistfor but I do feel that maybe
there are things I miss notbeing an expert, being an
(41:30):
outsider to his work, and to theculture that his work is created
within.
Julie McIsaac (41:38):
Well, it makes me wonder about when I attend a
production, who else is there inthe room, in the audience, that
has a different lived experiencethan I do, and therefore might
be receiving or viewing the workdifferently. And when I attended
"bug," which is that productionthat Karen referred to so,
Yolanda Bonnell's performancethey (Cole Alvis and Yolanda
Bonnell) before the productionbegan, they took a moment to
(41:58):
honour the Indigenous women inthe room, and so it brought my
attention, as an audience-goer,to the fact that Yolanda wanted
to share this performance tohonour these women, and it
brought our attention to that,and it placed me in a different
position to the work knowingthose women were there, and that
that work was for them. Theseare just really wonderful,
innovative, forward-looking,empathetic, community-based ways
(42:22):
of encouraging response to work,and encouraging audience members
to think about how they arepositioned in relationship to
the work. And all this is to sayI think this is a really
exciting time to be an audiencemember receiving work.
Robyn Grant-Moran (42:35):
I like how it challenges our notions of
expertise, and what expertiseis. Like, conventionally you
talk about in journalism andcriticism, objectivity is a
really big thing. But how canyou be both objective and an
expert, and not too close butclose enough to understand? It
(42:59):
ends up erasing a lot ofproximity that I think is
necessary to fully appreciatevery culturally specific works.
Julie McIsaac (43:09):
And not to diminish the importance of what
you're saying, Robyn because Ithink it's increasingly a big
part, an important part of theconversation but I also
appreciate what Karen said interms of ages: what is the age
of the person who's receivingthis work, and how does that
affect their proximity, like yousaid, potentially to the work
and their response? So, shespoke about Wicked and I know I
(43:30):
had an experience seeing the"Jane Eyre" musical in Toronto
when I was about 16 years old,and I wept, and the collar of my
shirt was just completely soakedthrough with tears, I had this
transcendent experience. Andthen that show goes to Broadway,
has some revisions but never hasquote-unquote "success" you
know, it wasn't received verywell by the critics, and it
wasn't received very well by,you know, Jane Eyre experts in
(43:52):
their 40s, or people who lovethe novel, and all of that is
okay. But in my 16-year-oldexperience, it was this
beautiful, transcendent momentthat was ultimately
transformative and supersuccessful in terms of the
impact it had on me.
Robyn Grant-Moran (44:06):
How is the criticism positioned? Because
clearly, it was ideal forteenagers. It should be okay for
a critic to say, "Hey, you knowwhat, I'm a 40-year-old white
dude, I'm whatever I didn'tappreciate it because I was not
the intended audience. However,this seems to be ideal for
(44:31):
teenagers," and it would begreat to then follow that with a
teenager's response, and forthat to be accessible to the
audience to potentialaudiences or just anybody who's
interested in the concept of theJane Eyre musical and is it
worthwhile or not?
Julie McIsaac (44:51):
Right, right!
Robyn Grant-Moran (44:53):
Because, like, there's a power in saying,
"I don't know," Like, "I am anexpert but this is a thing that
I am not an expert in. Let'shand it over." Just to get on my
soapbox for a moment (45:07):
without that, one runs the risk of
dismissing productions that canhave a great impact for certain
audiences in this case,teenage girls. And returning to
the notion of objectivity (45:18):
if the majority of critics are at
such a distance from theintended audience, critics can
wind up judging the value ormerit of something based on a
set of stereotypes ormisunderstandings, and maintain
the status quo, which onlyserves a small portion of
audiences especially whengetting into really culturally
(45:39):
specific works. It's also justunreasonable to ask a very small
number of writers to be expertsin so much when we're in a city
like Toronto, which has so manydiverse people and cultures.
Having more voices means moreaccurate representation and
understanding. Sharing iscaring!
Julie McIsaac (46:00):
Yeah, I remember seeing Spring Awakening in New
York on Broadway, and I wasolder at this point I was no
longer a teenager but Iwatched the teenagers who are
receiving that show, and whowere cheering and so moved. And
I could see that and it was areally neat experience to be
there, experiencing the show inthe way that I was, which was
disparate, which was differentthan what they were
experiencing, and to see both ofthose happening both of them
(46:22):
being real, and true, andlegitimate reactions to the
work, and yet they were verydifferent. And I'm reminded of
what Anne [Midgette] said in ourprevious criticism episode about
a successful review for herleaves that space for the
audience members to read it andgo, "Okay, I would have liked
it," or "I would not have likedit," but to have enough
information in context. Andthen, like you said, isn't it
(46:42):
beautiful to think, "Can we openup who is responding," so you
get that 40-year-old White man,but then you also get, like, a
bunch of different voicesspeaking to the work.
Robyn Grant-Moran (46:53):
One thing I wanted to mention, just as a
note of housekeeping, in theinterview, I referenced to
Hannah Chan-Hartley's interview,and talking about me asking a
question about Baroque opera,and her saying, "It's not my
specialty." I did not mean toconflate her as a critic that
(47:14):
is not her job however, I justwanted to use that to exemplify
that, in professional circles,it is totally okay to say, "I'm
not an expert in that, I doright now." And that was my
intention (47:29):
not to conflate her or her work with Karen or Anne.
Just wanted to put that outthere because I realized
afterwards, it sounded like Imight have done that, and that
was not my intention, just thatif there's space for it, in
Hannah's world, there's spacefor it in our world, too.
Julie McIsaac (47:50):
Right, that we all have the right to say, "You
know what, I don't know; that'snot my wheelhouse. That's not
what I know best but maybethere's someone else who does,
who can offer something." Andfor anyone who's curious,
thanks, Robyn, for taking thetime to clarify that. And that's
in Episode Two [Sounds LikeOpera]. So, anyone who wants to
check out Hannah's interview,you can go back and do so. Now
another thing we talked aboutwith Karen, which I think is
(48:12):
very important to flag, is the"critics as keepers of the
historical record," and what animportant role they have to
play, so that decades from now,centuries from now, they provide
us with this way of looking backon what was accomplished during
this period.
Robyn Grant-Moran (48:27):
I had never really considered the importance
of criticism or writing aboutperformances as a historical
document until I was in my 30sand doing my undergrad. And I
was doing a presentation on"Tristan und Isolde," and I read
a review that said and Ibelieve I'm quoting pretty
(48:52):
directly that it was "sonicpornography." And it's silly and
it's a little salacious but itreally solidified, in that
moment, the importance ofcriticism and writing about
performance as historicaldocuments. In reading that, I
(49:12):
could understand that this operathat I listened to, and I hear
so much longing, and so muchsensuality, and sexuality, and I
take for granted that it's thisreally intense, sexy, longing
opera, but it was scandalouslike, when they heard that for
the first time. So, I couldunderstand it very differently
(49:33):
than I do now. Like, it wasn'talways, "Oh yeah, that's that
hot opera."
Julie McIsaac (50:12):
And, likewise, I think it gives us insight into
what it takes to createsomething great or something
enduring. For example, thereviews around the initial
reception of "Madama Butterfly"tell us that the Madama
Butterfly that we know here andnow and we could have a whole
episode about Madama Butterfly,and the complexities there, and
the things to unpack, andthere's certainly a lot but
(50:35):
when it was first performed, itwasn't received very
rapturously; there was a lot ofpeople who pointed out that
there were problems. And, so, alot of revisions happened before
it became the work that achievedgreater success. And the
critics, and what they wroteabout at the time, are part of
our record of that and part ofwhy we know these works, what
had to happen in order for themto become what they became.
Robyn Grant-Moran (50:56):
Yeah, as a, sort of, funny sidebar
like the original, from whatI've read of reviews, would
actually be more entertaining insome ways now I mean, just to
speak to the character of KatePinkerton, that she was largely
cut out entirely. And what'sinteresting about it now like,
(51:18):
how would that fit in today'snarrative? How would the critics
respond if that wasn't cut outtoday?
Julie McIsaac (51:25):
Well, and that makes me think, Robyn, that
whether these critics areoffering conversations here and
now or whether we're lookingback 200 years ago on what the
critics were writing about anddocumenting, to me, it's a
really good reminder that we'reall participating in the ongoing
story of opera production ortheatre production, and that
we're just one chapter of it oreven just one little paragraph
(51:47):
of one chapter in it, and thatwe're all part of this
constantly evolving whole entitythat will continue to move
forward beyond us.
Robyn Grant-Moran (51:56):
Thanks for joining us in our small little
paragraph.
Julie McIsaac (52:08):
We're so glad you joined us for Episode 15. And a
special thanks to Karen Frickerfor being our wonderful guest on
this one.
Robyn Grant-Moran (52:15):
We also wanted to share a happy update
ab (52:17):
since we first recorded this episode, Yolanda Bonnell's "bug"
has been nominated in the DramaCategory for a Governor
General's Literary Award.
Julie McIsaac (52:28):
Some very well deserved recognition and
congratulations to all thefinalists.
Robyn Grant-Moran (52:32):
Yes, congratulations. Next time on
the podcast we're throwing thespotlight on a building that's
been key to so many of thestories and topics discussed so
far on the show (52:42):
the Four Seasons Centre for the
Performing Arts [FSC].
Julie McIsaac (52:46):
That's right. Our Toronto venue was the first
purpose-built opera house inCanada and has served as a local
and international stage forartists of all kinds as well as
a community hub.
Robyn Grant-Moran (52:57):
We'll connect with the architect behind the
venues distinctive design, JackDiamond, co-founder of Diamond
Schmitt Architects.
Julie McIsaac (53:05):
We'll also be speaking with Janice Oliver, who
oversaw the building of theopera house.
Robyn Grant-Moran (53:10):
And if you'd like to know what it's like
performing in that incrediblespace, we'll hear from an artist
who's no stranger to the COC'smainstage, Sondra Radvanovsky.
Julie McIsaac (53:20):
Yes, the star soprano last performed at the
FSC in a stunning production of"Rusalka" in 2019, and we're
sure she has many stories fromthat stage.
Robyn Grant-Moran (53:30):
Oh my gosh, I don't doubt that at all. It's
going to be a great one, so makesure to join us.
Julie McIsaac (53:36):
Bye, everyone!
Robyn Grant-Moran (53:43):
Be the first to find out about free events
and concerts from the COC bysigning up for our monthly
eOpera newsletter atcoc.ca/eOpera.
Julie McIsaac (53:55):
Thank you to all of our supporters for making Key
Change possible. This week wewant to especially thank every
COC member, subscriber, anddonor for coming on this journey
with us as we explore new waysto share opera's unique power.
Robyn Grant-Moran (54:09):
So, to make sure you don't miss an episode,
subscribe to Key Change.
wherever you get your podcasts.
Julie McIsaac (54:16):
Key Change is produced by the Canadian Opera
Company and hosted by RobynGrant-Moran and Julie McIsaac.
Robyn Grant-Moran (54:23):
To learn more about today's guests and see the
show notes, please visit ourwebsite coc.ca/KeyChange.
Hi, everyone.
Welcome to Key Change (00:00):
A COC Podcast, where we explore
everything about opera from afresh perspective.
Robyn Grant-Moran (00:17):
We're your hosts, Robyn Grant-Moran
Julie McIsaac (00:20):
and Julie McIsaac.
Robyn Grant-Moran (00:24):
Hello again, and welcome to Episode 15.
Julie McIsaac (00:27):
It's really hard to believe we're nearly at our
last podcast for the spring.
Robyn Grant-Moran (00:32):
We've had such [a] great time connecting
with so many amazing guests overthe last few months, and we've
loved hearing from you. Thereviews you leave on Apple
Podcasts are great for helpingother people find their way to
us at Key Change.
Julie McIsaac (00:44):
Yeah, we'll be taking a break at the end of
this season, but please keepthose comments and questions
coming. You can tag us anytimeon social @CanadianOpera, or
email us at audiences@coc.ca.
You can also send us a voicememo; there's instructions for
how to do that atcoc.ca/KeyChange.
Robyn Grant-Moran (01:03):
So, today we wanted to revisit a topic we
explored e (01:05):
opera and criticism.
Julie McIsaac (01:09):
Yeah. So, back in March, we spoke to longtime
writer and music critic AnneMidgette. Now as someone whose
career has spanned severaldecades and positions with the
New York Times and WashingtonPost, she gave us a lot to think
about when it comes to thechallenges of critiquing art,
the particular challenges ofcritiquing opera, and what kinds
of skills and considerations arerequired to be a quote-unquote
(01:31):
"good critic."
Robyn Grant-Moran (01:32):
We stepped back and took a long lens view
at the value of opera criticism,and one thing that really stuck
out for me that Anne had saidwas that it's important to be
really honest about aproduction. So, if a production
was just so-so, you need to saythat for many reasons, one of
which being if someone's new toopera and they read a review
(01:54):
that this was a greatproduction, but it's only a so
so production, it might alienatenew listeners and new audiences
unnecessarily. That was thething that I hadn't really
considered and she had a lot ofgreat thoughts like that.
Julie McIsaac (02:08):
And for anyone if you happened to miss that
podcast and this recap ispiquing your interest now's a
great time for us to mentionthat all of our episodes can be
found coc.ca/KeyChange forlistening anytime.
Robyn Grant-Moran (02:21):
Today we're sharing our chat with theatre
critic Karen Fricker.
Julie McIsaac (02:25):
Karen Fricker is Associate Professor of Dramatic
Arts at Brock University, she'sa theatre critic with the
Toronto Star, and author of the[Robert Lepage's] Original Stage
Productions (02:34):
Making Theatre Global. Karen is also regularly
involved in a number ofinitiatives around the future of
theatre criticism in the digitalage.
Robyn Grant-Moran (02:52):
Hi, Karen, thank you for joining us today.
Karen Fricker (02:55):
Thanks, Robyn.
And lovely to meet you, Julie.
Julie McIsaac (02:58):
You, too, Karen.
Robyn Grant-Moran (02:59):
So, Karen, I first met you at the Performance
Criticism Training Programthrough Generator, and that was
my introduction to theatrecriticism. And I'm wondering
about yours (03:10):
how did you get started in it?
Karen Fricker (03:13):
Well, it was long before then, Robyn. I guess my
start in theatre criticism was,kind of, organic, and lateral,
and a process of figuring outthat it was something that you
could do and that I could do.
Because I was a theatre kidsince I was 13, but I actually
didn't know when I applied touniversity and this is me
(03:36):
revealing my ignorance for whichI continually atone with my
students that, like, I didn'tknow you could study theatre
other than being an actor. So,because I'd been a good academic
student, I said, "Oh, well, Ihave to go study English." And,
so, I didn't really exploretheatre in university, but I
found that, during universityand after university, the thing
(03:59):
that I loved the most wastalking about it afterwards
that was just like the mostdelicious thing. And I went to
University of California, andthen I went to London, U.K. as
soon as I graduated, and Iwaited tables, and I just saw
everything, and went to the pubafterwards and argued about it
with friends, and, like, thatwas just so exciting. And then
(04:20):
through, kind of, talking tofolks and reading all the
newspapers, I was, like, "Well,maybe I could write some of this
down," and I started selling afew pieces to publications in
London and, you know, fastforward about a year and a half
in a bad visa situation, and Iended up in New York, and that's
(04:40):
when I really started trying tofigure it out about how to make
a career as a theatre writer.
So, it was a process of talkingmyself into believing that it
was something that you could do,that I could do as a woman, and
(05:03):
that I might actually get paidto do.
Julie McIsaac (05:07):
And from the vantage point of where you're at
presently, Karen (05:09):
what do you see the role of a theatre critic
being?
Karen Fricker (05:14):
That's always the biggie. I mean, I think at its
base, the role of the theatrecritic is to respond to artists;
it's to respond to an offer thatis made in the form of an
artwork. And, for me, it's alsoimportant to say that it's the
continuation of a conversationthat artists start up they
(05:39):
say, "Here's something, we gotto say, we wanted to say this,
we wanted to express it in thisform. Here you go, audience,"
and a theatre critic is a memberof an audience who says, "Oh,
thank you for that offer. Here'ssome things I think about what
you did." And, like, that, tome, is the heart of it. When
you're a professional paidtheatre critic for a mainstream
(06:01):
outlet, it isn't just anexchange with the artists; it's
an exchange with your readers,and with your editor. So, what
you say is elevated over that ofother audience members who might
still be talking about it in thepub. And so it's public speech,
(06:22):
it's speaking about theatre inpublic think about the arts in
public and it's feedback forartists. It is a forum when
you're talking about amainstream outlet like the
Toronto Star that I write forit's a form of consumer
guidance, or that's how it'spositioned, right? Like, in the
real times, there's lots ofstuff to see in Toronto, how are
(06:43):
we going to choose? Well, maybewe're going to go read some
reviews in The Star and havethat help us figure out what we
want to see. And the other pieceand this is super important to
me as an academic is it's thehistorical record, and that you
are writing stuff down becausetheatre disappears, and opera
(07:04):
disappears, and if we didn'thave the written records of
critics from the past, then we'dreally have massive holes in our
understanding of performancehistories.
Robyn Grant-Moran (07:14):
So, has the job changed since you started?
Karen Fricker (07:18):
For me, it has. I mean, I'll speak quite
subjectively about my own work,and then I'll, kind of, talk
more broadly. The way my careerhas played out, I've always been
a foreign correspondent. So,when I first started reviewing
in New York through a series ofhijinks, I ended up being the
New York theatre critic for theFinancial Times newspaper in
(07:38):
London. So, I was writingnotices from Broadway to a
readership that was mostly, youknow, international business
people, which was, kind of,weird because I was, like, 25.
And then I moved to Ireland andI started writing for The
Guardian, which is aLondon-based newspaper about
Irish theatre. So, this currentmoment for me, where I'm writing
(08:01):
about theatre in Toronto for theToronto Star, is something I
always really wanted and I'm soglad I've gotten to have that in
my career, which is that I'mactually writing in the market,
which means I feel like therelationships are really acute
and, for me, the stakes arehigher because it this is my
(08:23):
theatre world; I'm not saying topeople over there, "This is
what's happening in Torontotheatre," I'm saying, "This is
our world." So, there's a senseof investment and
responsibility. I feel like thejob's changing because we are
now and I hate the wordcompeting but now "everyone's
a critic," right? Now, thanks tothe advent of the internet and
(08:44):
social media, there's a lot ofpressure on this question of
whether expertise which iswhat I've always understood is
what the professional critic ismeant to bring is that they know
their field inside out I feelthat that continues to be very
important, but that's always theconversation I find myself
(09:05):
having is, "Do we really needquote-unquote "expert opinion"
anymore given that so manypeople are out there on Twitter
and Instagram and everywhereelse posting their points of
view?" And, I mean, I have a lotof things to say about needing a
whole multiplicity of points ofview from folks from all kinds
of backgrounds and we can getto that I'm sure but, to just
(09:29):
finish answering your questionof like, "How is the job
changed?" those are some of thefactors that I see are really
affecting the field at themoment.
Robyn Grant-Moran (09:38):
And now to follow up with the really
obvious (09:39):
how's it stayed the same?
Karen Fricker (09:42):
Well, right now it has because, I mean, what's
been super interesting duringCOVID is the fact that
responding to work that's comingthrough Zoom, or another media
platform, is different thanresponding to work that's live
on a stage. So, when I'mteaching my students theatre
criticism as I continue to doat Brock University we're
(10:04):
having to take on board a wholebunch of different factors in
terms of how they're using thecamera, how acting is different
if you're acting in a Zoomcontext, etc. But bracketing
that, when I'm a working criticin the real times, I still am
turning up at 7 (10:23):
30 [p.m.] or 8 o'clock and having that rush of
adrenaline, and that moment oflike, "It's me and the work."
And no matter how much researchI've done, no matter what kind
of day I've had, no matter howannoying that person sitting
next to me is, that sense ofbeing in relationship with
(10:48):
something that is live and infront of me, is what always drew
me to it, and that still is thesame when live theatre is
happening.
Julie McIsaac (10:58):
And you may have touched on some of this, Karen,
but we're curious about (11:00):
what are some of the biggest
challenges that you've faced orface presently as a theatre
critic?
Karen Fricker (11:07):
I mean, I think the biggest challenge facing the
field of performance criticismright now is its incredible
whiteness. And I think thatisn't just that most of the
people that I've ever knownwho've practiced this craft are
(11:27):
white, university-educatedfolks; it's all of the
structural, societal, historicalfactors that have made that be
the case. And this is somethingwhere I feel, like, I am in a
period of deep reflection andchange about this work, and it
(11:49):
has to do with the times thatwe're living in; it has to do
with the year that was 2020; ithas to do with BLM [Black Lives
Matter]; and it has to do withIndigenous resurgence on this
land. And I think a lot of uswho are thinking about theatre
criticism in Canada right noware asking the question, "Why
aren't there more voices thatare representative of all of the
(12:14):
communities and experiences inToronto?" for example, because
so much of the exciting work,and the important work, and the
timely work is coming fromvoices that were historically
underrepresented. And, I mean,I'm going to mention something
that would be well-known tothose of us within the theatre
world perhaps less-known inthe opera world: about this time
(12:37):
last year, an Indigenous theatremaker named Yolanda Bonnell I
wouldn't say, "disinvited," butshe requested that when she did
a show at Theatre Passe Muraillethat Indigenous, Black and
People of Colour critics andotherwise minoritized folks,
(12:57):
particularly queer folks sheinvited them to come and respond
to her work, and she preferrednot to have others come respond
to her work. And this caused ahuge hullabaloo with reporting
on it as far as away as London,U.K., and I think it was an
incredibly importantintervention that Yolanda was
making, because it disrupted awhole bunch of conventions,
(13:21):
because it's a convention thatwe get free tickets to go see
work and write about it; it's aquid pro quo; it's a
relationship that Canadian OperaCompany has with The Globe and
Mail, and the Toronto Star, andthe CBC. But it was not always
thus, and I think Yolanda'sintervention was on behalf of
(13:43):
herself, but I feel also itraised a question which is, "Who
who can really speak and respondto this work in a way that is
from a place of understanding,and sympathy, [and] resonance,"
that if she's offeringIndigenous ceremony which is
what I understand she was doingRobyn, as an Indigenous person
(14:04):
has a way into that work, and Iwould go so far as to say,
almost a right, to speak or tobe present to see that work that
might not be as I feel Robyn'sis a more important voice to
hear about that piece than mine.
Robyn Grant-Moran (14:20):
Well, and to your point about expertise
one thing that came up in aprevious episode when we were
talking with HannahChan-Hartley, and I'd asked her
a question about Baroque opera,and she's like, "Oh, well, I
can't really speak to thatbecause it's not my specialty."
Like, that's totally okay to dogenre-wise, but the whole "bug"
(14:41):
situation, it became incrediblyclear that it wasn't about
expertise; it was about "Whofelt entitled to sit in that
seat, and get that ticket, andhave their voice heard?" But how
can you be an expert if you'renot part of that world, or
you're not actively involvedwith that world?
Karen Fricker (15:03):
Yeah. This is flashing me back to a really
interesting set of conversationsthat I had when I was teaching
and working as a critic inLondon, U.K.: when some of the
senior white male critics wentto review a musical that may or
may not have been "Wicked," butlet's just say it was "Wicked,"
and they just didn't get it. Andthe question was raised by my
(15:26):
students, like, "Why don't theysend teenage female-identifying
people or even teenagemale-identifying people? Like,
who's the work for and whyaren't we hearing their voices?"
And there has since been somereally fantastic musical theatre
scholarship that's been writtenby the critic Stacy Wolf in the
States about female responses,young female responses, the role
(15:47):
of fan discourses around certainkinds of art forms. That
question has been circulating,for me, for a while but it has
really landed in a really acuteway at the moment in Toronto
around "Why should somebody hearfrom me if they could hear from
Robyn about Indigenous work?"And I'm working on a project at
(16:08):
the moment around the ObsidianTheatre Company/CBC
collaboration "21 BlackFutures," which is an incredibly
ambitious and importantarticulation around the question
of the futures of Blackness, andwe commissioned 21 Black
university students to respondto the works because that's the
voices they are the future ofBlackness! And the "we" here
(16:31):
is York University, BrockUniversity, CBC and Obsidian
we said, "It's response. Itdoesn't have to be a
quote-unquote 'review,'" becausethere's all kinds of colonial
patriarchal histories aroundthis idea of the solo-written
review, where it's one personlaying it down in a really
(16:52):
authoritative and, kind of, endof conversation way. We said,
"response." And we've got poems,we've got songs, we've got
thought pieces, young peoplerecording themselves so you can
see their embodied personexpressing these ideas. And, for
me, that is the future oftheatre criticism. And this is
(17:14):
all happening, like, superreal-time, that 21 Black Futures
to me is proof of concept, andI've been so wanting this
concept to be proved, which iswhat kinds of amazing things
come out when you pull away theformality and pull away the
histories and pull away thepower differentials and just
(17:34):
say, "Here's an offer. What dyou think?"
Robyn Grant-Moran (17:39):
And I expect in, like, 10 years from n
Karen Fricker (17:57):
I think and I have a lot of conversations
about this with Carly Maga, withwhom I share the job of theatre
critic of the Toronto Star theconversations we get to have,
the rooms we get to be in, theaccess that we have, the sense
that we are part of a communitya particular part of a
community but, you know, that isexperiencing incredible growth
(18:19):
and change that we can helpgetting the word out about
what's going on on the scene. Ilove to be in the middle of a
scene, I just love it! And Ilove to feel like I have a voice
within culture and within thescene, and that's why I think I
underlined before, like, whythis has been such an exciting
(18:42):
five years at The Star isbecause we're in the community;
it's not far away, it's here.
So, I think my most memorableexperiences are feeling like we
get to say to our readers,"Guess what? This is so
exciting! This is so cool what'shappening! You want to know
about this!" and to feel like wehave agency in figuring out what
(19:02):
the important stories are thatwe want our readers to know.
Julie McIsaac (19:09):
Karen, I'm curious. So, in addition to your
work in theatre and theatrecriticism, I'm really curious
about your perspectives on operapractice and opera production,
and I'm told that you did see"Hadrian" at the COC so a
couple years ago and you'verecently published a book about
Robert Lepage and he and ExMachina have directed a number
of productions for the COC. So,we'd love to hear about your
(19:30):
connections to these works, andalso that theatre/opera
crossover and what you'vewitnessed in attending those
productions by [Peter] Hinton orby Lepage, for example.
Karen Fricker (19:40):
Right. I mean, I've been thinking back to I am
pretty confident that the firstoperas I ever saw were
"Bluebeard's Castle" and"Erwartung," which were COC
productions, Lepage's firstopera productions, which then
went to the Brooklyn Academy ofMusic [BAM] in New York, where I
was then living and, at thatpoint, I was quite interested in
(20:00):
w, this is gonna be an incredily memorable moment in your care
Lepage's work as a journalistand, so, of course, I would go
to see the latest Lepage at atBAM, and that was really
r. But, until we get there (20:06):
wh t's particularly memorable up u
exciting.
til this point being a criticour experience as a rofessional?
I had nothing to compare it toat the time, but I was like, "I
(20:26):
thought they were pretty good,"and I think they've held up.
What Lepage brings to the plateis an incredible visual sense
like. he creates total works ofperformance with incredible acts
of onstage transformation ofobjects and bodies. And I think
(20:49):
he chose well with those shortopera pieces where there were so
many transformations that hecould create on stage. I also,
at that time in New York, wasworking for a company called
Stagebill, which doesn't existanymore sadly, but it created
program magazines for performingarts organizations. And, so, we
(21:14):
served most of the constituentorganizations of Lincoln Center.
So, I got to go to The Met. So,I was spoiled super young
because I got to see, like, someof the most magnificent,
beautifully sung, beautifullyplayed lavishly staged operas.
But when I was thinking aboutopera experiences that have
really stuck with me, it isinteresting because it is the
ones that are, kind of, theatrecrossovers because I'm
(21:36):
remembering "Satyagraha," thePhilip Glass opera, that Phelim
McDermott directed withImprobable theatre at the ENO
[English National Opera] takinga form of theatre-making that I
very much identified with thisparticular theatre company, and
just blowing it out, like,sonically and logistically,
(21:57):
like, massive chorus. And, Iguess, my appreciation of opera
and it's, kind of, an obviousthing to say about opera is
that there's so many more levelsand elements of expressivity,
and theatricality, andmeaning-making that are
available to artists. I oftencan find opera challenging
(22:18):
because I'm so used to plot andcharacter, and when it takes,
like, 10 minutes to say onething and because I'm not
music people like you are, thatI can't appreciate the nuance of
the music and what "new" they'rebringing to the music and I
find that frustrating. But,also, we all have stuff to
(22:39):
learn, right? So, I mean, I feellike that's an area in my work
as a spectator, where I canreally grow: is learning more
about music.
Robyn Grant-Moran (22:46):
In our practice with Key Change, we,
kind of, look at conventionaltraditional roles and think
about deconstructing them orasking, "Why?" And I feel that
that parallels very nicely withthe work you do with Circus and
its Others is that correct?
Karen Fricker (23:02):
That's true.
Circus and its Others is ainternational research project
that I've been co-directing forabout six years, to kind of
question to what extentmainstream circus practices
continue to be heteronormative.
racialized, not progressive interms of the stories they're
(23:24):
telling, and the performancelanguages and the
representations in them. Andthis was, kind of, literally a
question that I asked with acouple friends in the foyer of a
theater in Montreal, and it'sturned into this international
inquiry because what we found isthat circus-makers and circus
scholars around the world arevery engaged with this question.
(23:45):
So, we've been doing digitalpanels during COVID. So, we just
had a panel about Australiancircus, we had an incredible
panel about how circus isaffecting theatre artists around
the globe, and we had about fivecontinents represented hearing
from African circus-makers,Middle Eastern circus-makers,
and it's all glued togetheraround this question of "circus
(24:12):
as a performing art form thatmakes meanings," and asking
questions about, like, "Whattropes are being circulated and
recirculated in question," and"How can circus be used to break
down some stereotypicalrepresentations?" So, I think
(24:34):
that it sounds like there is,kind of, a vibration there
between that and what you dohere on this podcast because I
know, as a Key Change fan, thatyou're constantly looking to ask
questions about representation.
Robyn Grant-Moran (24:49):
I've kind of had this niggling feeling for a
long time that there's just alot of parallels between
traditional opera andtraditional circus with the
various roles, the sort of highflying aerialist, the clown, the
you know and why certain peoplehave certain roles, and I just,
(25:12):
kind of, feel like, "Is theopera just aristocratic circus?"
Karen Fricker (25:17):
I have to say I don't know enough about opera or
traditional circus in order toanswer that question fully, but
I can take a little stab.
Because traditional circus is, Ithink, picture Barnum and
Bailey, picture Three-RingCircus, picture it's
vignette-based, right? It's,like, "Here's the animal act,"
and then "Here's the juggler,"and then "Here's the high-wire
(25:40):
act. Contemporary circuspicture Cirque du Soleil is
much more theatrical- It doesn'treally have a plot but it, kind
of, has a theme, and it'sbrought together through, like,
musical and scenic elements thatgive it a, kind of, cohesion.
What we have found incrediblypersistent in circus is that the
apparatuses and the acts aregendered, right? So, that aerial
(26:04):
is feminine, juggling ismasculine, clown tends to be
mostly masculine, andhand-to-hand which is anything
that's two performers, where oneis, kind of, the base and the
other one is lifted the basetends to be a dude and the
(26:28):
lifted person tends to be alight woman. And what's super
exciting that's happening insome progressive circus
practices is consciouslybreaking down those tropes by
having and I saw the NationalCircus School of Montreal has a
show every year where theirgraduating class does their act,
(26:50):
right? And seeing male-malepairings in trapeze is
incredible; and seeing a femaleas a base in a hand-to-hand act,
like, that is subversive,fantastic stuff. And, I feel
bad, kind of, saying that that'ssubversive in 2021 but the work
is still to be done to be reallybreaking down these stereotypes.
And they come for a reason: like, masculine bodies tend to (27:14):
undefined
be bigger and heavier sothere's a reason why there's the
base but how about a sturdygirl as a base? And what are the
aesthetic gendered what are theimplications of that? I find the
(27:34):
implications of that reallyexciting. Does that resonate
with you, Robyn, and what I'msaying?
Robyn Grant-Moran (27:39):
Yeah! Earlier in March, the four co-founders
of Amplified Opera, along withsome other artists, had a live
digital conversation aboutgender and opera. (And that's
actually still available forviewing online: it's at
coc.ca/GenderAndOpera.) Therehave been more non-binary and
trans artists getting a lot ofcredit where credit is due
(28:03):
finally. But those totallychallenge the norms like, you
have, like each vocal "fach" hasits, kind of, archetype, and its
story. So, yeah, it sounds likeI'm not far off but maybe not as
(28:24):
close as I thought either.
Julie McIsaac (28:26):
Talking about, like, what's on the horizon or,
like, this exciting stuff that'spercolating. Karen, we're
curious about how do you seecriticism evolving over the next
few years?
Karen Fricker (28:35):
Well, if I have anything to do with it, um, I am
really excited to see what isgoing to happen when more
Indigenous, Black and Person ofColour voices and otherwise
minoritized voices find theirway into theatre criticism as I
believe they will. I'm workingon a few projects trying to I
(29:01):
feel like the biggest thing thatwe can do right now, in Canadian
theatre criticism, is lowerbarriers for participation in
theatre criticism. I know thisis sounding very top-down and
"white savior-y" and I don'tintend it that way those of us
who are professional theatrecritics in Canada do tend to be
white, college-educated folks,and how can we be using our
(29:26):
privilege, our responsibility inways that might lower those
barriers and might offeropportunities, find pathways for
folks that might not previouslyhave thought that this was
something that was available tothem, or they even wanted to do
to try it out? Because I'vealways said to my theatre
criticism students and I'vebeen teaching theatre criticism
(29:47):
for 25 years "I don't thinkI'm going to turn you all."
Like, there's going to be one ortwo students out of a class of
30 that want to do this; it'snot for everyone. But there
might be others who might findthat they really love this; they
might have the experience that Ihad, like, figuring out, like,
(30:08):
"Oh, this is a job. Like, I canrespond to the arts and people
are gonna want to hear what Ihave to say." And, so, I think
the for want of a better word"diversification" of of the
field is something that I'mreally, really looking forward
to seeing happen.
Julie McIsaac (30:26):
You already spoke to us about that project in
response to 21 Black Futures.
But, just wondering (30:27):
is there anything else that's giving you
hope right now, that's gettingyou excited about what's to
come?
Karen Fricker (30:35):
Totally. Well, 21 Black Futures, there's a lot of
momentum behind that and, so,I'm working on a project with a
couple of academic colleagues tohave a BIPOC [Black, Indiginous,
People of Colour] critics labthis summer and intensive, and
we're talking to a few Torontotheatre organizations. The
question for us was, "How are wegoing to find these young
(30:57):
folks?" Right? Well, theresponse that we had to 21 Black
Futures, to the student responseproject, we got three times as
many students who wanted to doit as we could take, which was
an unexpected bounty. And,again, this is one of these
weird things that's positive outof COVID: it was not
location-based. So, we hadresponses from all over the
country. So, I'm looking forwardto reaching out to those young
(31:19):
folks and other young folks, andbringing people together to
start to have them work withsome more established IBPOC
critics, writers, artists, andjust starting to stir that pot
going to start putting a lotmore energy into seeing what
this summer project is going tolook like.
Robyn Grant-Moran (31:43):
Welcome to the bonus question round! First
question (31:48):
in your operagoing experience, is there a
production that has really stoodout?
Karen Fricker (31:52):
I spoiled because I already said it
I've really enjoyed, since I'vemoved to Toronto, getting to see
a number of shows at the COC.
The opera experiences that standout to me are the ones where
theatre-makers, like PeterHinton, move into opera-making
and you get to see themstretching themselves and
embracing all those forms ofexpression.
Julie McIsaac (32:13):
Yeah, it's always so exciting to see someone at
the precipice, or at thatthreshold between what they do
typically and, like, that newform of expression. So exciting.
So, this might be hard to choosefrom but: what theatre
experience has had the greatestimpact on you?
Karen Fricker (32:27):
No, that's easy because it was life-changing. It
was in 1990 and I was in London,U.K., in the "waiting tables and
seeing everything phase," and Iwent to the National Theatre to
see a work by this Quebectheatre artist that the quotes
in the paper were amazing, andit was Robert Lepage and the
piece was called TectonicPlates, and this was, kind of,
(32:48):
his second major international,big show, and it was
astonishingly fresh to me (32:54):
his stagecraft, the transformational
nature of the staging, the useof multiple languages on stage
because, of course, he's alwaysplaying with as a bilingual
Francophone Quebecer but therewas semaphore, like, there was,
you know, flag-waving semaphoresigns in the show, was another
(33:16):
form of expression. And he wasin it as an actor; he played a
character who was, what we wouldnow say, trans, although we
didn't have that language backthen. And Robert Lepage is an
astonishing actor. He underplayseverything, that's his M.O.
[modus operandi], and just hedraws energy by not over-emoting
(33:39):
but under-emoting and this ispart of his philosophy of acting
and I was like, "What, what,what was that?" And that was the
beginning, the germ of whatbecame a PhD, and what became a
book, and what's now been mostof my career following, and
chronicling, and engaging withthe work of this artist who's
(34:01):
sometimes controversial, and whohas made a really significant
contribution to performing artsin the world over the past 40
years.
Robyn Grant-Moran (34:10):
Which theatre artist do you most admire right
now?
Karen Fricker (34:13):
Oh, my goodness, I made a list! Crystal Pite,
amazing Canadian choreographer;Taylor Mack out of New York
incredible drag artist; MichaelKeegan-Dolan, who is an Irish
choreographer who had aproduction of "Swan Lake" that
was here a few summers ago atLuminato. It's interesting
because I found myself saying alot of people who work at the
(34:35):
boundaries of theatre and dance,because a company that my friend
and colleague Carly turned meonto is rockbottom dance here in
Toronto. Alyssa Martin is achoreographer, unbelievably
fresh, millennial dance company,theatre dance company love their
work! And basically anyone inthe 21 Black Futures project
(34:55):
like, that's 63 amazing BlackCanadian theatre artists.
Because, as we speak, thosemonodramas have all dropped on
CBC Gem and CBC Arts websiteand, so, I'm still making my way
through them. I mean, I'mborrowing what Carly said, which
is, like, "Since COVID, it's theone time I've felt, like,
(35:16):
literally that excitement of thelights going down." Like, it
really feels, like, such it'sso visceral, what they're doing,
and it's such an incredibleshowcase for incredible Black
Canadian theatre artists.
Julie McIsaac (35:29):
Fantastic, thank you. Lightning round! So, just
the first thing that comes tomind Karen, go with your gut!
Who is your favouriteplaywright?
Karen Fricker (35:40):
Caryl Churchill.
Robyn Grant-Moran (35:42):
Favourite director?
Karen Fricker (35:44):
Robert Lepage!
Julie McIsaac (35:46):
The last show you saw in-person?
Karen Fricker (35:49):
I kind of want to say it was "Hamilton." I mean, I
think there might have been afew since then, but that was the
last major opening I attendedbefore it all crashed.
Robyn Grant-Moran (35:59):
Favourite pre- or post-show meal?
Karen Fricker (36:02):
I have to say, when I'm reviewing, what I do
after a show is (36:05):
I go home and have a glass of wine and read
the play again. So, I'm, kindof, boring like, that's you're
asocial answer but I will say,right now, I would gnaw on a dry
crust of bread in front of atheatre if it meant that I was
going in there to see livetheatre. Like, you know, I'd
just do anything to be back livein a theatre again.
Julie McIsaac (36:23):
Do you have a least favourite theatre trend?
Karen Fricker (36:27):
The fact that there isn't any right now.
Julie McIsaac (36:31):
Yeah, we got to stop doing that! We gotta get
out of that!
Robyn Grant-Moran (36:33):
We got to fix that trend!
Julie McIsaac (36:34):
This silly habit!
Robyn Grant-Moran (36:36):
So, intermission or one-act plays?
Karen Fricker (36:39):
Ah. I do like a tight 80 minutes, I do have to
say. But I also because I, youknow, am somebody who's been
following Robert Lepage's workfor 40 years, no, 30 years I
also like an epic. Like, I satthrough all of Einstein on the
(37:01):
Beach, I had a transcendentexperience. So, like, really
tight and short or super long,so that it's an event and you
spend the whole day, and you getto know the people sitting
around you, and it's, like, lifein the theatre.
Julie McIsaac (37:15):
What do you consider to be the best seat in
the house?
Karen Fricker (37:18):
Ah, well, where the critic sits, of course! And
this is, of course, gonnacompletely undermine everything
I've said about how we need todiversify, democratize
criticism, but criticshistorically sit on the aisle,
and the reason for that isbecause, back in the day, they
would literally need to run outof the theatre as the applause
(37:39):
was happening because they couldmake a deadline for that night's
edition. And, so, now,typically, critics are sat on
aisles, and I have gottenincredibly spoiled because you
can throw your legs out into theaisle, and you don't have
another person next to you. So,for me, like, 12 rows back on
the aisle is a super happy spacefor me.
Julie McIsaac (38:02):
Karen, this has been great. It's been lovely to,
sort of, talk about that theatrestuff and the opera stuff and
just your enthusiasm for things.
Like, 21 Black Futures isgetting me excited and
enthusiastic to then dig in andjust, sort of, find that spark
again because I know it's been ahard year.
Karen Fricker (38:16):
Yeah. And thank you so much for being interested
in talking to a theatre criticbecause I know this is an opera
podcast, but I know from havinglistened to the podcast that you
were coming at it from suchinteresting angles.
Julie McIsaac (38:35):
Robyn, it was so great to meet Karen. I've heard
about her a lot through you andshe's even more wonderful than
you described. So, a greathonour and really fascinating to
have that chat with her.
Robyn Grant-Moran (38:45):
Yeah, it was really fun to actually get to
bring someone who helped me findmy voice
Julie McIsaac (38:51):
Right!
Robyn Grant-Moran (38:52):
into our space.
Julie McIsaac (38:53):
Right!
Robyn Grant-Moran (38:55):
I just want to take a moment to say thank
you to Generator, which is anincubator in Toronto that
focuses on mentoring, teaching,and innovation in the theatre
arts or performing arts. Theyran the Performance Criticism
Training Program. The programwas targeting BIPOC, queer and
women's voices those arevoices historically
(39:16):
underrepresented in general butespecially so in criticism. So,
it was really a great initiativeand without it I wouldn't be
here. So, it was cool to talk toher.
Julie McIsaac (39:29):
Well, and really cool that Karen, she reviews
theatre, but she has this greatinterest and knowledge about the
work of Robert Lepage, who's anartist that COC audiences might
be very familiar with due to thefact that he works in the opera
field as well.
Robyn Grant-Moran (39:43):
I read her book cover to cover a couple of
weeks ago, and [it] was a veryfascinating read. I don't know
that it's casual light readingfor anybody who is not in
academia, but one thing Ilearned that really, really
recontextualized Robert Lepageand how I look at his style of
(40:04):
production, I don't know enoughabout Qubcois culture: as an
Anglo, I don't recognize thatthere is maybe some
self-deprecation and some humourin it, because it's a piece I'm
missing not being so close tothat culture. So, it was really
important to hear someone whocould translate that for me.
Julie McIsaac (40:28):
What I'm hearing is that the critic has an
important role to play, or canplay a really important role, in
adding this additional contextand knowledge, and they can do
some research and unpack thingsfor us so that, as we receive
the work, if we're lacking forwhatever reason whether it's a
cultural barrier or a linguisticbarrier if we don't have that
knowledge for ourselves, thecritic can be a guide for us, an
(40:49):
aid for us through that process.
Robyn Grant-Moran (40:51):
Yeah, absolutely. And that's the
importance of having critics whoare really knowledgeable about
wh (40:58):
it's more than just, "I like this," or "I didn't like this."
It's being able to articulatewhere it fits
Julie McIsaac (41:06):
in the larger conversation, maybe.
Robyn Grant-Moran (41:09):
Exactly. So, that just changed my
relationship, that little tinypuzzle piece changed my
relationship to Robert Lepage.
There have been a lot ofdifficult things about him that
I don't want to be an apologistfor but I do feel that maybe
there are things I miss notbeing an expert, being an
(41:30):
outsider to his work, and to theculture that his work is created
within.
Julie McIsaac (41:38):
Well, it makes me wonder about when I attend a
production, who else is there inthe room, in the audience, that
has a different lived experiencethan I do, and therefore might
be receiving or viewing the workdifferently. And when I attended
"bug," which is that productionthat Karen referred to so,
Yolanda Bonnell's performancethey (Cole Alvis and Yolanda
Bonnell) before the productionbegan, they took a moment to
(41:58):
honour the Indigenous women inthe room, and so it brought my
attention, as an audience-goer,to the fact that Yolanda wanted
to share this performance tohonour these women, and it
brought our attention to that,and it placed me in a different
position to the work knowingthose women were there, and that
that work was for them. Theseare just really wonderful,
innovative, forward-looking,empathetic, community-based ways
(42:22):
of encouraging response to work,and encouraging audience members
to think about how they arepositioned in relationship to
the work. And all this is to sayI think this is a really
exciting time to be an audiencemember receiving work.
Robyn Grant-Moran (42:35):
I like how it challenges our notions of
expertise, and what expertiseis. Like, conventionally you
talk about in journalism andcriticism, objectivity is a
really big thing. But how canyou be both objective and an
expert, and not too close butclose enough to understand? It
(42:59):
ends up erasing a lot ofproximity that I think is
necessary to fully appreciatevery culturally specific works.
Julie McIsaac (43:09):
And not to diminish the importance of what
you're saying, Robyn because Ithink it's increasingly a big
part, an important part of theconversation but I also
appreciate what Karen said interms of ages: what is the age
of the person who's receivingthis work, and how does that
affect their proximity, like yousaid, potentially to the work
and their response? So, shespoke about Wicked and I know I
(43:30):
had an experience seeing the"Jane Eyre" musical in Toronto
when I was about 16 years old,and I wept, and the collar of my
shirt was just completely soakedthrough with tears, I had this
transcendent experience. Andthen that show goes to Broadway,
has some revisions but never hasquote-unquote "success" you
know, it wasn't received verywell by the critics, and it
wasn't received very well by,you know, Jane Eyre experts in
(43:52):
their 40s, or people who lovethe novel, and all of that is
okay. But in my 16-year-oldexperience, it was this
beautiful, transcendent momentthat was ultimately
transformative and supersuccessful in terms of the
impact it had on me.
Robyn Grant-Moran (44:06):
How is the criticism positioned? Because
clearly, it was ideal forteenagers. It should be okay for
a critic to say, "Hey, you knowwhat, I'm a 40-year-old white
dude, I'm whatever I didn'tappreciate it because I was not
the intended audience. However,this seems to be ideal for
(44:31):
teenagers," and it would begreat to then follow that with a
teenager's response, and forthat to be accessible to the
audience to potentialaudiences or just anybody who's
interested in the concept of theJane Eyre musical and is it
worthwhile or not?
Julie McIsaac (44:51):
Right, right!
Robyn Grant-Moran (44:53):
Because, like, there's a power in saying,
"I don't know," Like, "I am anexpert but this is a thing that
I am not an expert in. Let'shand it over." Just to get on my
soapbox for a moment (45:07):
without that, one runs the risk of
dismissing productions that canhave a great impact for certain
audiences in this case,teenage girls. And returning to
the notion of objectivity (45:18):
if the majority of critics are at
such a distance from theintended audience, critics can
wind up judging the value ormerit of something based on a
set of stereotypes ormisunderstandings, and maintain
the status quo, which onlyserves a small portion of
audiences especially whengetting into really culturally
(45:39):
specific works. It's also justunreasonable to ask a very small
number of writers to be expertsin so much when we're in a city
like Toronto, which has so manydiverse people and cultures.
Having more voices means moreaccurate representation and
understanding. Sharing iscaring!
Julie McIsaac (46:00):
Yeah, I remember seeing Spring Awakening in New
York on Broadway, and I wasolder at this point I was no
longer a teenager but Iwatched the teenagers who are
receiving that show, and whowere cheering and so moved. And
I could see that and it was areally neat experience to be
there, experiencing the show inthe way that I was, which was
disparate, which was differentthan what they were
experiencing, and to see both ofthose happening both of them
(46:22):
being real, and true, andlegitimate reactions to the
work, and yet they were verydifferent. And I'm reminded of
what Anne [Midgette] said in ourprevious criticism episode about
a successful review for herleaves that space for the
audience members to read it andgo, "Okay, I would have liked
it," or "I would not have likedit," but to have enough
information in context. Andthen, like you said, isn't it
(46:42):
beautiful to think, "Can we openup who is responding," so you
get that 40-year-old White man,but then you also get, like, a
bunch of different voicesspeaking to the work.
Robyn Grant-Moran (46:53):
One thing I wanted to mention, just as a
note of housekeeping, in theinterview, I referenced to
Hannah Chan-Hartley's interview,and talking about me asking a
question about Baroque opera,and her saying, "It's not my
specialty." I did not mean toconflate her as a critic that
(47:14):
is not her job however, I justwanted to use that to exemplify
that, in professional circles,it is totally okay to say, "I'm
not an expert in that, I doright now." And that was my
intention (47:29):
not to conflate her or her work with Karen or Anne.
Just wanted to put that outthere because I realized
afterwards, it sounded like Imight have done that, and that
was not my intention, just thatif there's space for it, in
Hannah's world, there's spacefor it in our world, too.
Julie McIsaac (47:50):
Right, that we all have the right to say, "You
know what, I don't know; that'snot my wheelhouse. That's not
what I know best but maybethere's someone else who does,
who can offer something." Andfor anyone who's curious,
thanks, Robyn, for taking thetime to clarify that. And that's
in Episode Two [Sounds LikeOpera]. So, anyone who wants to
check out Hannah's interview,you can go back and do so. Now
another thing we talked aboutwith Karen, which I think is
(48:12):
very important to flag, is the"critics as keepers of the
historical record," and what animportant role they have to
play, so that decades from now,centuries from now, they provide
us with this way of looking backon what was accomplished during
this period.
Robyn Grant-Moran (48:27):
I had never really considered the importance
of criticism or writing aboutperformances as a historical
document until I was in my 30sand doing my undergrad. And I
was doing a presentation on"Tristan und Isolde," and I read
a review that said and Ibelieve I'm quoting pretty
(48:52):
directly that it was "sonicpornography." And it's silly and
it's a little salacious but itreally solidified, in that
moment, the importance ofcriticism and writing about
performance as historicaldocuments. In reading that, I
(49:12):
could understand that this operathat I listened to, and I hear
so much longing, and so muchsensuality, and sexuality, and I
take for granted that it's thisreally intense, sexy, longing
opera, but it was scandalouslike, when they heard that for
the first time. So, I couldunderstand it very differently
(49:33):
than I do now. Like, it wasn'talways, "Oh yeah, that's that
hot opera."
Julie McIsaac (50:12):
And, likewise, I think it gives us insight into
what it takes to createsomething great or something
enduring. For example, thereviews around the initial
reception of "Madama Butterfly"tell us that the Madama
Butterfly that we know here andnow and we could have a whole
episode about Madama Butterfly,and the complexities there, and
the things to unpack, andthere's certainly a lot but
(50:35):
when it was first performed, itwasn't received very
rapturously; there was a lot ofpeople who pointed out that
there were problems. And, so, alot of revisions happened before
it became the work that achievedgreater success. And the
critics, and what they wroteabout at the time, are part of
our record of that and part ofwhy we know these works, what
had to happen in order for themto become what they became.
Robyn Grant-Moran (50:56):
Yeah, as a, sort of, funny sidebar
like the original, from whatI've read of reviews, would
actually be more entertaining insome ways now I mean, just to
speak to the character of KatePinkerton, that she was largely
cut out entirely. And what'sinteresting about it now like,
(51:18):
how would that fit in today'snarrative? How would the critics
respond if that wasn't cut outtoday?
Julie McIsaac (51:25):
Well, and that makes me think, Robyn, that
whether these critics areoffering conversations here and
now or whether we're lookingback 200 years ago on what the
critics were writing about anddocumenting, to me, it's a
really good reminder that we'reall participating in the ongoing
story of opera production ortheatre production, and that
we're just one chapter of it oreven just one little paragraph
(51:47):
of one chapter in it, and thatwe're all part of this
constantly evolving whole entitythat will continue to move
forward beyond us.
Robyn Grant-Moran (51:56):
Thanks for joining us in our small little
paragraph.
Julie McIsaac (52:08):
We're so glad you joined us for Episode 15. And a
special thanks to Karen Frickerfor being our wonderful guest on
this one.
Robyn Grant-Moran (52:15):
We also wanted to share a happy update
ab (52:17):
since we first recorded this episode, Yolanda Bonnell's "bug"
has been nominated in the DramaCategory for a Governor
General's Literary Award.
Julie McIsaac (52:28):
Some very well deserved recognition and
congratulations to all thefinalists.
Robyn Grant-Moran (52:32):
Yes, congratulations. Next time on
the podcast we're throwing thespotlight on a building that's
been key to so many of thestories and topics discussed so
far on the show (52:42):
the Four Seasons Centre for the
Performing Arts [FSC].
Julie McIsaac (52:46):
That's right. Our Toronto venue was the first
purpose-built opera house inCanada and has served as a local
and international stage forartists of all kinds as well as
a community hub.
Robyn Grant-Moran (52:57):
We'll connect with the architect behind the
venues distinctive design, JackDiamond, co-founder of Diamond
Schmitt Architects.
Julie McIsaac (53:05):
We'll also be speaking with Janice Oliver, who
oversaw the building of theopera house.
Robyn Grant-Moran (53:10):
And if you'd like to know what it's like
performing in that incrediblespace, we'll hear from an artist
who's no stranger to the COC'smainstage, Sondra Radvanovsky.
Julie McIsaac (53:20):
Yes, the star soprano last performed at the
FSC in a stunning production of"Rusalka" in 2019, and we're
sure she has many stories fromthat stage.
Robyn Grant-Moran (53:30):
Oh my gosh, I don't doubt that at all. It's
going to be a great one, so makesure to join us.
Julie McIsaac (53:36):
Bye, everyone!
Robyn Grant-Moran (53:43):
Be the first to find out about free events
and concerts from the COC bysigning up for our monthly
eOpera newsletter atcoc.ca/eOpera.
Julie McIsaac (53:55):
Thank you to all of our supporters for making Key
Change possible. This week wewant to especially thank every
COC member, subscriber, anddonor for coming on this journey
with us as we explore new waysto share opera's unique power.
Robyn Grant-Moran (54:09):
So, to make sure you don't miss an episode,
subscribe to Key Change.
wherever you get your podcasts.
Julie McIsaac (54:16):
Key Change is produced by the Canadian Opera
Company and hosted by RobynGrant-Moran and Julie McIsaac.
Robyn Grant-Moran (54:23):
To learn more about today's guests and see the
show notes, please visit ourwebsite coc.ca/KeyChange.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.