Today, theatre criticism in Moldova is in as much crisis as the theatre sector itself. There are premieres which do not get any reviews and, worse still, even the awarded best production of the year is not given any media reviews. Interest in theatre criticism is low because of several reasons – precariousness of the job, the lack of publishing platforms, the lack of a diverse theatre industry, a weak alternative scene, a weak theatre school, the lack of dialogue between theatre critics and theatre makers, the lack of international theatre events, etc.

Writing about theatre is not at all a privileged job; it is more like a hobby, which you do when you have nothing else to do.

I’ve started publishing my works in 2011 in theatre journals, weekly newspapers and my personal blog since I was a student. To begin with, the blog was intended more for my writing exercises and opinions about some events, nothing too serious. However, as time went by, it became the main platform where I could publish my texts, mainly because I've started writing more critically about the situation of Moldovan theatre, and I came to realise that no other media would accept my work. The printed media and serious online platforms are still conservative, and they don't publish really critical, subversive or provocative contents.

A major reason I manage to remain critical is that I am being my own editor and censor. Censorship starts at the moment when you are employed by an authority to write a review, when you have an editor who is asking you to be more neutral, informative and joyful, when you know who your audience are and what they like. Sometimes I would ask myself: What is important for me as a professional critic? To have my work published in journals/magazines, or to be honest with myself? Eventually I chose both ways: write for journals, and create my personal blog where I have the freedom to write what I want.

But soon, I found out that maintaining a personal platform requires a lot of complementary knowledge. Now you are not only the one to produce the text, but also to manage the web page, design the layout to make it easy to read, take beautiful photos, edit them with Photoshop, select target audience, market your work on social media platforms, etc. A multitasking critic, in a word.

Being a self-publisher also makes you think more about your readers: For whom are you writing? This is the question that slightly changed my attitude. Do you go for an academic discourse, or do you want to make it accessible to the general public? Somehow, the online medium is suggesting to you the form and the content of your writing. I am trying to take an intermediate form – to be interesting for both the public and theatre professionals; but there is a grave danger of slipping into the journalistic commercial style. Taking this intermediate format means that I have to be less analytical. Long reads are a turnoff for the general reader. Every time you write you have to have this marketing mind.

Another issue of being autonomous is vulnerability. When you are employed as a writer, you have behind you the brand, the reputation and the redactor as a shield. But when you are by yourself, no one protects you at all. Usually, I have to face aggressive remarks and hate speech all on my own from other critics, theatre professionals or the public at large, because Moldovan theatre makers are allergic to criticism. To play safe, even if you have the rightful liberty to express your opinions, you cannot help censoring yourself. So as an employee you are censored by the redactor, in self-media you are censored by yourself. Without doubt, as a self-publisher you can always edit or delete the content whenever you want. So it is also about taking responsibility for what you write, about your attitude, tone, language, etc. That said, you also have more time to work on the texts, you do not have deadlines; you may risk publishing a long article if you want to, or just three sentences about a production; you can experiment with the form, you can be totally subjective, romantic, or eclectic. It all depends on what YOU want and how YOU feel.

One of my main goals as a critic is audience development. This blog offers me the chance to build a closer relationship with my readers, to have direct dialogues with both spectators and theatre makers. The comments upon my reviews are like mini reviews. You must also be able to generate concise and substantial feedback, to structure your thoughts clearly as a Facebook post or comment. In other words, I am creating some content (the review), which is supplemented by the public who create some other content via their comment. This directness totally changed my way of writing. I can predict how others may react and design my text accordingly, depending on what I want to achieve.

At the same time, I am also asking myself these questions: Who validates my authority as a theatre critic in self-media? What makes my theatre blog special among the countless others worldwide? What impact do my articles have on public opinion or theatrosphere in general? Your reputation hinges on the content, its form, and your relationships with the audience.

I know that this platform is my portfolio, my entry card for all international and national theatre events I attend. It’s a pity that my blog is the one and only online platform dedicated to theatre criticism in Moldova. And I have to admit that there is enormous work behind it – to always make sure the content is of high quality, to keep up with trends in world theatre, to invest time, effort, energy and money in managing this platform. Still, I am doing all this, despite the fact that I am doing it for free.

While analysing site statistics I found out that I have visitors from different countries, including USA, England, Germany, Georgia, France, Italy. So I decided to translate some articles into English, which is a great opportunity to go global, to share my work with a worldwide audience.

In conclusion, it’s worth having your own publishing platform if you don’t have the chance to say what you are thinking in other media outlets. In particular, in a country where you may be banned from entering the theatre because you have written a negative review, where no criticism is tolerated, where the only accepted form of theatre criticism is hand clapping, it is really advisable to manage your personal blog – the feeling of freedom that comes with it makes it all the more worthwhile.

作者簡介：Rusanda Alexandru Curca is a theatre critic, cultural manager and cultural journalist , former junior scientific researcher at the Academy of Science From republic of Moldova.  She graduated Theatrology  at the Academy of Music Theatre and Fine Arts from Chisinau in 2011, and master degree in The History of Audio Visual Arts at the same institution in 2013. She is co-founder and the artistic director of the Center for cultural projects Azart, with the main focus on supporting and promoting contemporary Moldovan dramaturgy.

Since 2011 she is the coordinator, author of articles and interviews of the blog theteatru.worpress.com and is collaborating also with newspapers and journals from Moldova  such as: Arta, Teatru, Contrafort, Jurnal de Chisinau, Timpul, Flux,  writing mostly about theatre and documentary film. Participant at several International Seminars for Young Theater Critics organised by IACT (Varna, Bulgaria 2013, Bucharest, Romania 2013, Cluj-Napoca, Romania 2016) and at the V4 Theater Critics Residency, Nitra, Slovakia 2016.  As a theatre critic she attended several International Theatre Festivals from Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Turkey, Belarus, and Poland.

照片由作者提供