Fw: Encyclopedia and Debate

[Gaetan Charlebois]

>Delivered-To: blajeune at toolbox.total.net
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Date:         Tue, 3 Nov 1998 08:04:10 -0400
>Reply-To: Peter Freund <petereff at MAIL.GEOCITIES.COM>
>Sender: Canadian Theatre Research <CANDRAMA at hermes.csd.unb.ca>
>From: Peter Freund <petereff at MAIL.GEOCITIES.COM>
>Subject:      Re: Fw: Encyclopedia and Debate
>To: CANDRAMA at hermes.csd.unb.ca
>
>I don't see why this debate revolves around deciding who is or is not an
>"artist."
>
>Doesn't your encyclopedia have a place for people who have made or are
>making significant contributions to theatre who would never describe
>themselves as artists. Managers and administrators might be one example -
>academics and theorists might be another.
>
>Peter Freund
>Her Majesty's Theatre
>Ballarat
>Australia
>

Good point. But in many cases, the reputations of people are marked down
some where (or I am aware of them as a critic). How, exactly, does one
calculate the acheivement of a person who, in the artistic process, is
virtually invisible (ie: unreviewed, unrecorded, etc...) By the number and
importance of plays he/she has participated in? In the case of others, the
contribution is there to see. Rarely in the case of the SM.

Gaetan Charlebois