A successful review needs a few key elements in order to persuade readers to trust in the reviewer’s judgment. Readers must be engaged through persuasive language and style, as well as be informed about the subject in review with a thorough yet concise summary of what are the best and worst parts to expect. The reviews, Excavations on Catfish Row by Ben Brantley and A Couple’s Big Break That’s Not So Lucky by Neil Genzlinger, are examples of strong and weak reviews.
Ben Brantley provides the readers with an engaging review of the opera “The Gershwins’ Porgy and Bess” through the usage of strong opinions and a great summary. His main argument is that the adaption of the classic American opera “Porgy and Bess” only shines because of the main singer was able to invoke incredible emotions, while the other singers were sub par compared to her. Also, he criticizes how the construction of the singing parts of the opera and the modernization of the opera did not meld into a smooth experience. In addition to the content, Brantley’s descriptions were superb and persuasive. For example, he described the main singer’s talent by saying “Ms. McDonald’s performance is as complete and complex a work of musical portraiture as any I’ve seen in years.” This is also evident in the final paragraph of the review. He adds credibility to his review by both highlighting the impressive and worst parts of the opera.
On the other hand, the article about the play “Temporal Powers” by Neil Genzlinger, should not have been labeled as a review at all. Genzlinger starts with a attention grabbing opener “What’s the No. 1 thing couples fight about? Money.” However, in the short, 8-paragraph review, Genzlinger spends 5 of the paragraphs summarizing the whole play. He does not reveal the entire plot, but he basically gives theatrical ‘sparknote’ on the general story of the play. He does not delve any deeper into the play, such as important aspects to consider and leaves the reader wondering “what should I look forward to?”
I believe that a review is great if it can persuade a person whether or not to go appreciate the arts. Brantley was able to make me want to watch and not watch the opera through his great description of Ms. McDonald’s singing and criticism of the rest of the play. Genzlinger was only able to tell me what to expect and that it would be a long but rewarding play. What would you prefer to read?
Interestingly enough, both of us used the review of temporal powers. I completely agree that the review was very bad. I think it summarized too much of the play without giving us too much of his opinion of the play except for one sentence.
You may have coined a new term, the “sparknote” review!
Why do you feel persuasive language is a key element in a review? After all the ‘reviewer’ isn’t trying to sell you anything…
I feel that a review and a summary border a thin line but are two different things. A bad review will be turned into a summary, with no opinion or thought. I think review is about how the critic feels about the topic at hand.