So apparently reviewers don't like being reviewed.

Oops! My 'review of the review' seems to have landed me in a bit of trouble.

From my first piece of hate-mail (to my post-script of "was that way too bitter?" an anonymous person posted "yes it was you talentless hack", which by the way, might hurt if my daughter wasn't in the midst of a phase of calling me 'dung-head') to a reply from a rep from The Pun (a publication to which I have no ill-feeling whatsoever, having written for them myself) I really didn't mean to stir up a puddle of poo. Believe me, there's already more than enough floating around my den of toddler-dom.

Just in case you're one of those people who doesn't read comments, here's how the latest is panning out:

***

Chloe from The Pun said...

Jenny, you did a couple of reviews for The Pun, you know how hard it is to cover something in 250 words without generalising. In shows that feature several acts, that problem is amplified to the power of (n), with (n) being the number of acts in the show.

I reviewed The Lion, The Bitch and the Closet which was basically 2 and a half full length performances in one. I totally slagged off Christine Basil because I could only give her 30-50 words and I didn't have enough room to balance out what I was saying about her.

I said:

Hey Chloe,

Of course I know you can't possibly cover EVERYTHING in that number of words. And especially when you're reviewing a show-case, you can't really go through each individual comedian in turn. I do acknowledge that.

But saying that EVERY comedian did this, and 'IF ONLY ONE comedian' had done something other than complete crap (paraphrased) is just not true. I thought the review - especially given it was a 'new comics' night and seemed to lack any patience towards that fact - was pretty mean-spirited. As, you might say, was mine.

But what are we saying here: that we can review and slag off a show but not review and slag off a review??!??!

I've written nasty reviews in my time too, but I'm also subject to criticism and I do believe that what goes around comes around.

But I do think it sucks that most reviewers can dish it out without ever having to put themselves in a position where they have to take it.

I stand by my review. But thanks Chloe for taking the effort to comment with more eloquence than a 'you talentless hack'. :-)

***
So there you are, officially updated.

Ooh, and to think I never ever thought of myself as controversial. On the bright side, I think I may have inadvertently stumbled onto a fabulous title for my show next year: "My Life as a Talentless Hack."

Now if that ain't making lemonade out of a lemon, then I don't know what is.

****

LATEST UPDATE:

Here's an idea for the reviewer in question - how's about you review my review of your review, then I'll review your review of my review of your review.

Come on! You criticise me, I'll criticise your criticism and so on. It'll be just like marriage. ;-)