Journal review fails to reflect DAN Studio Series
Dear Editors,
We are Kennedy Montanaro, ArtSci ‘24, and Sabrina Marques, ConEd, ‘25, and we had the pleasure of Co-Producing the Dan Studio Series 2023-24 season. We’re writing this letter in response to a recent review that was published in The Journal. As it fails to reflect what our team created, and the feedback we have received, we thought that there were some clarifications that needed to be made.
The Dan Studio Series (DSS) is a unique opportunity that fosters a chance for students to learn, grow, and hone their skills in a warm and supportive environment. The completely student-run installment brought five pieces to fruition, giving life to previously un-staged scripts. What a better demonstration of META in action. To us, META is about blooming and becoming the newest, most evolved version of yourself. It is marked by one’s ability to be better, to change. These stages of change are not always big or bold and can happen in between the quotidian moments of everyday life. Each show we chose offered itself as a space for audience members to consider the beyond, to look behind, and to feel the present.
From when audience members entered the front of house, dressed as a cozy home, they were invited to transcend with us. The show was performed with alleyway seating which evoked thoughtful, deliberate, and imaginative staging within each show. Audiences were seated facing each other beneath bulb lights, allowing for a constant view of one another. To us, this gifted the audience members with the “self-awareness” that they are immersed alongside others, experiencing the pieces uniquely. Our performers shined, breathing life and light into each line, movement, and transition.
It is disheartening to see something of this nature be given any kind of platform, especially coming from a DSS alum. While art requires constructive critique to develop and evolve, we feel as though this piece did nothing to facilitate growth. This opinion piece doesn’t promote student theatre, nor the artistic risks, challenges, and efforts it takes to come to life. Light should not be given to voices that discourage this beautiful process, especially in reference to work that is pulled together in such a short timeline. We couldn’t be prouder of the work that was shown to paying audiences.
We want to motivate readers to refer to the comments beneath the initial review, as they are reflective of community feedback. We thank those who have reached out in the wake of the review posting, and those who have used their voices, passion, and platforms to attempt to have changes made by The Journal.
Smear pieces do nothing but fray the relationship between the various art forms, which is the antithesis of what should be happening in a time of societal strain. We want to encourage those within the realm of artistic critique to remember that your words have impacts, and when used for good can promote pieces to bloom in newfound ways. We hope this acts as a catalyst for personal metamorphosis. While it was a challenging season, it was a magical run. The show was everything and more than we could have ever dreamed of.
Sincerely,
Kennedy Montanaro, ArtSci ’24, & Sabrina Marques, ConEd ’25
Tags
Dialogue, Letter to the Editor
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to journal_editors@ams.queensu.ca.