Letter from performer Rick Shipman offering his opinion about my review of Black Theatre Troupe's Sweet Thunder, and my response
Mark S.P. Turvin
Received 2/16/04, Responded to 2/19/04, and Return Response 2/22/04

From: "RICK SHIPMAN" <***@***.***>
To: Mark S.P. Turvin
Subject: Sweet Thunder
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 22:17:02 +0000

Hey Mark, just read your review of Sweet Thunder and while I agree to an extent with most of what you had to say I would like to point something out in defense of Mike Traylor. As actors doing historical figures we research our characters, to that end, Mr Traylor was only imitating the voice of Billy Strayhorn which we heard on CD singing "Lush Life". Turns out that Billy couldn't sing very well, hence your characterization of Mike's rendition is to say the least unfair. Mike was doing his best to give an accurate portrayal of the "croaked and warbling" voice of Billy Strayhorn. If you would liike to hear the original version of Billy "singing" the song I am sure we could get you a copy. As is sometimes the case with talented people, Billy was an unparalled composer but it seems that was the extent of his talent. It is unfortunate that although the actors are expected to research the characters they are playing, critics are not. As for my character, you are correct in saying that I was mostly exposition, but when I asked attendees to the play if they got the idea that Joe had a profesional admiration for Billy although there was a tension caused by his Homophobia, they all said that they understood that. I mention this because my "arc" was to let the audience see that side to thier relationship and I believe I was succesful. Thank you for coming to see this production and giving your honest opinion.

Sincerely,

Rick Shipman

Rick,

And thank you for your critique of my critique. I suspected (though I did not actually do the research for the review, as I reserve that for my Dramaturgical work only, and as an advocate for the audience, how many audience members will do the same research?) that this was the choice, but what I was trying to point out here was that it was in the end a bad choice. Also, a character arc that exists to show one character's feeling for another and to have that character also do a lion's share of the exposition is not a particularly rich one. Exposition is one of the playwright's hardest chores, but there are ways to have done this better.

Break a leg for the remainder of the run,

Mark S.P. Turvin

Hey Mark. You are welcome for the critique of your critique. Thanx for your response. I just wanted to get it out in the open that it was the "choice" and not Mike's singing voice you had a problem with. That would not have been clear from the original review. Also, I understand your point about being an audience member and that they wouldn't have researched it either, but as a professional, doesn't your obligation extend to providing facts to the readers that will help them understand what they have seen or (more importantly) are about to see? To be honest, I wouldn't have expected you or any other critic to have researched Billy or Duke or Joe for that matter, but in future it may help in making a clear representation of an actor's choices to your readers. Thank you for your honest opinion as always.

Sincerely,
Rick Shipman