tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657288.post9031824841363612440..comments2024-01-07T06:59:04.212-05:00Comments on The Playgoer: Quote of the DayPlaygoerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02994724588504353485noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657288.post-62350758903166880142009-11-12T17:29:42.481-05:002009-11-12T17:29:42.481-05:00I agree with Bartlett but would go further by sayi...I agree with Bartlett but would go further by saying it's not good to go to church either.joshcon80https://www.blogger.com/profile/13493227172042089467noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657288.post-8476327341012314082009-11-10T12:38:50.153-05:002009-11-10T12:38:50.153-05:00Bartlett's quote resonates with an old theatre...Bartlett's quote resonates with an old theatre quote from Harper's that I came across last week: "It is the second-rate dramatist who keeps the theater going, and always has been." <br /><br />I also find this quote by Bartlett interesting: "Theatre about theatre is the most awful terminal nonsense." ...especially since British drama, in particular, has turned to metadrama for centuries as way to weed out bad drama and raise the bar for good drama. Perhaps, with so much emphasis on play development and with meaty online discussions of the state of drama, there is no longer a need for metadrama? <br /><br />I also find it interesting that the interviewer notes Bartlett's new play is about (homo)sexuality, but that Bartlett is evasive about his own sexuality. Why are people so hung up on the sexuality of an author who writes about homosexuality? Sarah Ruhl writes about sexuality in fluid ways in both "Late" and "Melancholy Play" but she is married to a man. Why does it matter? Sorry for my tangent.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com