Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Jerry Sadowitz plea to reporters not to quote his material

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 28 July 2008
Last week Jerry Sadowitz sent an open letter to all newspapers covering the Fringe, asking them not to quote his material. Was he just being precious? Absolutely not, says Kate Copstick
THE word "critic" is derived from Greek, meaning "one who discerns", and ancient Greek – "one who offers reasoned judgment or analysis". At the risk of sounding overly literal, there is nothing in the job specification that says "one who scribbles down all the best lines, accessorises a comic's set list with them as examples and calls it a review".

During the Edinburgh Fringe Festival, where the number of shows and their performers' desire for reviews mean that critics can be seeing five or six shows a day, the option of taking the easy route and simply quoting a comic's lines to give the potential audience an idea of the feel of the show is always there, and increasingly attractive to the lazy, the tired, the jaded and the inept. But doing this is not to review the show, but simply to report it. And those nice free seats (free to us, the press, but not to the performer) are for reviewers, not reporters.

This year, veteran comedian Jerry Sadowitz has drawn a line in the sand. In an open letter to arts editors across the land last week, he wrote: "Dear sir/madam. This email is a request to all newspapers/magazines, that if they feel they must review my show in Edinburgh, could you PLEASE not quote the actual material in the review? A very important element of comedy is surprise, and it can often make the difference between a show that works and one that does not."

There will be comics everywhere who will agree with him, because he is right. The good comics spend months writing their acts, honing them, road-testing them in front of their real critics: the public. Then a reviewer pops in, watches, scribbles and files their piece, a goodly percentage of which said comic has painstakingly written for him or her. The art and the craft of comedy criticism has to be better than that.

Many years ago in a review of a show by Simon Munnery I quoted a line of his because I honestly wanted to give people an example of his comic brilliance and I probably, with hindsight, wasn't a good enough writer to do it otherwise. I certainly didn't think enough about what I was doing, and being told afterwards by someone as smart and as reasonable as Simon Munnery that I had killed a line in his act was one of the most important lessons I have ever learned.

Jerry Sadowitz has suffered more than many at the hands of not only the quoters but the misquoters. One hack brought outrage from the comic by quoting only the first half of a close-to-the-bone but classic two-liner about Nelson Mandela.

Laughter is a much more fragile commodity than most people tend to give it credit for. Comedy is not just about the words; it is about the context, the timing, the tone, the voice, even the physicality of the comic in the moment when their words are let loose. All these factors determine the audience's response to the joke. And printing someone's line doesn't allow for that from those seeing the show after having read the review.

Added to which, quoting from a show sets an idea of the comic and the show in the reader's head. Supposing you were reviewing a Michelangelo exhibition and all you did was print a page of close-ups of penises. The guy was big on penises, people would conclude. If you go to see his work you will see penises. And this is true – David's has been a talking point for centuries. But it's not exactly what you'd call a review of Michelangelo exhibition, is it ?

Of course, giving an example is a fast, easy way to give a "taste" of someone's act. But we are, supposedly, critics. Shouldn't we be better than fast and easy? (Please, save the laughter, I have a weak finish.) In quoting a stand-up comic's material, the reviewer is not only taking from the performer his or her justifiably expected right to be the one to hit the public with their carefully crafted lines and garner the laughter – their laughter, their payback – but is also taking from the public their right to hear these carefully crafted lines in context and from the comic who crafted them.

Interestingly, the number of comics who don't want critics in their shows at all is rising – Daniel Kitson has been refusing to give out press tickets for years; this year Stewart Lee is joining him.

If this continues, comedy reviewers could find themselves out of a job. I suppose that at least some of us, if nothing else, have great skill at taking dictation. You can quote me on that.

• Jerry Sadowitz's latest Fringe show, Comedian, Magician, Psychopath II is at Udderbelly's Pasture, Bristo Square from 31 July to 25 August at 7:40pm. Kate Copstick will be reviewing Fringe comedy for The Scotsman from next weekend.


Page 1 of 1

 
1

Barney R,

London 28/07/2008 09:05:32
Thanks for your usual laughable pomposity Kate. If only Simon Munnery had taken you aside for a little longer and explained a little more about how good reviewing works. You ruined my enjoyment of Brendon Burns' show last year with the following bilge.

http://www.edinburgh-festivals.com/8048/Brendon-Burns-So-I-suppose.3313498.jp

The Usual Suspects?! Keyser Soze?! Well, thank God I'm not one of the many millions who saw this film, otherwise I might have been expecting a twist, thereby undermining the entire point of the show. Bravo. As ever, I learnt more about Kate Copstick in this review than the comic reviewed, so get off your high horse and accept that you're still part of the problem Sadowitz beomoans.
2

Herne the Hunter,

All of Scotland 28/07/2008 11:27:05
It takes a very special person to write about comedy Barney,it takes even more talent to be a constructive critic. After being aware of her work for more than 10 years,I believe that Kate Copstick has all these qualities and is indeed in my and many other peoples opinion, the Queen of Comedy Critics. Your comments obviously stem from a past review so you are not and cannot be objective. Personally I am not fond of comedians they are for the most part amongst the most arrogant egotistical manic depressive people you would ever wish to meet,off stage,I suppose it is a occupational disease.There are exceptions of course,as there are with critics,in some cases the similarities and parallels are amazing.
3

Barney R,

Being Hunted By Herne Apparently 28/07/2008 13:16:04
Sorry Herne, but I'm not a comedian, just somebody who follows comedy. You'll have to explain the process whereby you arrived at your deduction because it wouldn't be obvious to most people.

I've read enough of Kate Copstick to appreciate that she champions good comedy and has a genuine passion for the art. However, she is often ill informed, tends to make herself the centre of the review and prone to ridiculous hyperbole. In her defence, I would say she stimulates debate, as she is doing here, and is good for the Scotsman's profile during the Fringe, being one of the best known critics.

Is she one of the best though? Sadly not. I can think of many more I would rather read for a more accurate and illuminating critique.

That's just my opinion though as someone who doesn't insinctively buy the old cliche of all comics being arrogant, manic depressives.

If you dislike comedians so much, why would you go to watch live comedy? And if you don't see much live comedy, preferring to make your arguments from a point of pure ignorance, then how can you be so sure of Ms Copstick's abilities?

I'm just pointing out her hypocrisy.
4

Sadowitz Groupie!,

Scotland 01/08/2008 20:20:39
Interesting that it was Jerry Sadowitz who sent this letter to the press asking them not to print lines of his material in their reviews. I have seen Sadowitz many times now and he isn't above repeating material, but it's bloody good stuff and you could read a full transcript of his material and you would still be howling with laughter all the way through the gig because he is the funniest comic performing today and although the writing is fantastic as Kate says "Comedy is not just about the words; it is about the context, the timing, the tone, the voice, even the physicality of the comic in the moment when their words are let loose." This is very true with Jerry Sadowitz. Sadowitz is notoriously paranoid when it comes to his work and about who does and doesn't gain access to it and I can understand that because as a stand up comic you do make yourself very vulnerable but really he of all comics has the least to worry about even if other comics ripped off his work the way he feels they do he's still be infinitely funnier than them.
However although I do think his paranoia is completely unfounded I do agree that it should be possible for reviewers of comedy especially at the fringe where so many comics are trying out new shows to be less relient on quoting from the act to get accross the flavour of the act.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.