Earlier this week, we examined how it is human nature to make judgments based on first impressions. Now I would like to address an adjoining part to this same issue: namely, the problem of acting upon assumptions when we have no real basis behind them.
As a writer for a local newspaper, one of my jobs is to write theatre reviews. This year’s Master Playwright Festival in Winnipeg was Churchill Fest, so my task was to attend several of Caryl Churchill’s plays over the course of a couple weeks and review them. Reviews tend to be uncontroversial pieces which don’t ignite any particularly strong reaction from readers; they generally are simple opinion pieces describing whether or not the play is worth seeing and why. Because of this, it took me by surprise when one of my theatre reviews elicited one particular comment on the online copy of my newspaper article: the commenter wrote an accusatory response which was twice as long as my article. Her main issues with my review involved 1) my lack of insight into art and culture; 2) my lack of knowledge of 1970’s England; 3) that I do not notice anything around me besides my supposed studies and whatever job I am working, and that I have not studied any form of sociology. In short, she did not approve of my writing style or of my interpretation of the play.
Although the comment took me by surprise, it also fascinated me that someone would have felt so compelled to respond in this manner to a theatre review. More than that, I was intrigued by the assumptions that she made about me; I have never met her before and know virtually nothing about her, but she seems to be quite convinced of a number of things regarding my own capabilities as a writer and theatre reviewer. We often make assumptions about other people when we know very little about them- and these assumptions are not always entirely correct. For example, here is some background regarding the issues that the commenter had about my writing and reviewing capabilities:
1) Lack of insight into art and culture: I have been starring in plays since the first grade. Moreover, I won several awards in Dramatic Arts in high school and played the lead role in a play directed by an actress from the Prairie Theatre Exchange; I have also been studying and analyzing plays since the fifth grade when I first began reading and picking apart Shakespeare’s works. I have been a season’s ticket holder at the Manitoba Theatre Centre for years, and I have attended theatre performances and art galleries around the world. I have also written several plays myself (although admittedly they have yet to be published or performed), and I have been writing for the Arts & Culture section of the newspaper since last summer. Granted, none of this necessarily means that I do have special insights into art or culture, but I think that I am no less qualified than anyone else to write a theatre review. No one needs to have any particular “expertise” in order to watch a play and form an opinion on it, either.
2) Lack of knowledge of history in Great Britain: I attended a British school for three years. They definitely covered history lessons in there.
3) Lack of awareness beyond my studies and my job, and lack of sociological studies: My purpose in university is to study rhetoric. This means that it has been ingrained into me to analyze absolutely everything. I wouldn’t be able to stop it if I tried. So perhaps I am too focused on my studies- but considering my studies involve studying everything, particularly communication and relationships, I think that’s a good thing that I am constantly analyzing everything around me.
I make all of these points not in response to the comment left on my article, but to demonstrate that although we cannot help but make assumptions about others around us, we should always remember that we are seeing through a very specific lens. Assumptions can be refuted. We enhance our rhetorical awareness of the world by being open to having our assumptions challenged.