Dear India Lopez
I received note of a particularly unflattering review of my opening night at this year’s Comedy Festival. This is fine. Comedy is a hugely subjective art form and you are entitled to your opinion. The best comedians in the world, past and present, have all received and still do receive, negative and unhelpful reviews from writers, who feel it is their duty to put their opinions out there.
As much as I would like to dissect your nasty review, which twisted the context of my subject matter and made me question your knowledge of the genre, I will refrain from doing so. “Any fool can criticise and condemn, and many fools do.” That was written by Benjamin Franklin.
I hope you feel really good about yourself, writing a mean, unhelpful review which has been published on a platform that is hugely disproportionate to the scale of my show. Stuff is the most prolific news website in New Zealand. Your review of my small, low key show, will now be read by exponentially more people than could ever see my work in the flesh, thus drawing their own opinions.
This makes you a bully.
India Lopez. It costs thousands of dollars to produce even a small scale comedy show. Most performers are lucky to break even. The only way to recoup these costs is through ticket sales. To actively discourage people, all people, from attending a show that they might in-fact enjoy, is professional sabotage. My show was in an intimate venue with a seated capacity of 60. My show ran for 5 nights.
You may feel valiant that you tried to prevent people from seeing, what was in your opinion, a bad show. Tickets to ‘Pants are For Losers’ could be purchased from a meagre $10. If someone wasn’t a fan of my show, that small ticket price and 1 hour of their time is all they have lost. I estimate that 250 people saw my show during comedy festival. That is all. And these people are the only people who are able to make an informed opinion on my work. Everyone else has to rely on a review.
I have been told by numerous people, appalled by your interpretation, that they attempted to comment on the review. Unlike most Stuff articles that are open to debate, the comment section is closed.
I wrote a polite email to Mark Stevens, editor at Stuff, asking for the comments to be opened.
This is the exact email I wrote to him:
Dear Mark
I was wondering if it would be possible to open up the comments section after a review of my Comedy Festival show written by India Lopez?
This was a particularly negative review, which is absolutely fine; but in the interest of creating a balanced record of my show, I would greatly appreciate it if there was the facility for people who enjoyed the show to be able to say so.
I look forward to hearing back from you. Thank you very much.
Best Wishes
Sarah
sarah@sarahharpur.com
I did not receive a reply, I didn’t really expect to. But after this email was sent, the infamous review did not get the comments section opened. Instead, it has now been promoted to the top of the Comedy Festival page in Stuff. There are more recent, relevant reviews and articles on hugely famous and successful comedians on this page, but now someone has chosen to go out of their way to promote my this particular review of me, a relative newcomer. Again, bullying.
The review got ‘promoted’
When I write my shows, I make a deliberate choice to avoid mainstream, overdone subject matter and to develop innovative and imaginative ways of structure and delivery. When I make this choice, I am well aware that avoiding safe, tried and true paradigms will mean that my work has a more limited appeal. My shows are definitely not for everyone. But there are people out there, many more than you would like to believe, who love my work. I work extraordinarily hard at what I do, travel to many international festivals to perform and have no idea why the act of me creating a show that was not to your personal taste, should result in such vitriol.
I read an article you wrote recently entitled “Why are commentors so mean?” These were your personal insights:
“I’ve spent a lot of time wondering why the internet brings out so much ugliness in people.
As one of the editors of Stuff’s Life and Style section, I deal with hundreds of nasty comments, emails and tweets every day.
I don’t often admit this, but reading those hateful words is without doubt the most difficult part of my job. I know those people are strangers, I know they don’t really mean it when they say I’m terrible at my job (right?), and I know their unbelievably intense rage when confronted with typos is probably more to do with their own anger problems. But it hurts.”
Well, India, I will not hurt your feelings by suggesting you are bad at your job, but perhaps you should think about the repercussions of writing such negativity before clicking the send button. I am not suggesting you don’t write honest reviews. Freedom of speech is extremely important and I insist that you are welcome to your opinion.
Let’s finish this open letter with more valid points from your article.
“I indulge in some quiet bitching among friends. I’ve said things about other people that I know would upset them, if they could hear me. But the point is, they can’t.”
Hmm.
“So next time you read a story that riles you, pause a moment before you comment. Who’s going to read your words, how much impact will they have, and is the fleeting satisfaction you’re getting really worth it?”
Wise words, Miss Lopez.
Full Review By India Lopez below…
I struggled with how to approach this review. I’d love to say Sarah Harpur’s solid content was let down by her delivery, or vice versa, but quite frankly I don’t know which aspect was weaker.
Harpur’s Pants are for Losers and Other Theories was an “academic” presentation, wherein the lab coat-clad comic presented a series of “theses” on Mathematics, Religion, Science, Art, Public Policy and so on, aided by a PowerPoint presentation.
It could have been a good gimmick, but Harpur’s comedy was about as far from brainy as it gets.
As she made fun of sexual harassment, Christians, old people, food allergies and people with ginger hair, I found myself wishing my 12-year-old brother was in the audience.
The “PC gone mad” crowd might have got a few cheap laughs, but for the most part Harpur’s dumbed-down humour was just plain patronising.
This was aggravated by her performance, which brought to mind a ditzy, over-enthusiastic kids’ TV presenter. Dry it was not.
She overtold every joke, even inserting a little “Yeah!”, “Wooh!” and a fist-pump here and there as if to convince the audience they were actually enjoying themselves.
After a while, I tried imagining the lines written down, in case the onstage awkwardness was masking their brilliance. And I think there was some potential there.
But until Harpur loses the forced delivery and starts treating her audience like adults, I suggest you save yourself a pretty painful hour.
UPDATE: The Comment section on this review has now been opened. If you have something to say, please keep it classy, my friends! Believe me, you are not doing me any favours by insulting the reviewer. Be a lover, not a fighter! Click here to comment.
