I will take issue with your generalization that "if script is in hand, then it's a rehearsal and not a performance." There are productions where the aesthetic involves the presence of the script--Gurney's Love Letters, the 1950's version of Shaw's Don Juan in Hell, and so forth. I have no idea if that's the case with this show, but your "argument" (and I use that term VERY loosely) is an almost perfect example of a faulty syllogism:
Premise: A performance is only one where all roles are memorized.
Premise: Relevance uses scripts.
Conclusion: Relevance is not a performance.
Your major premise is not one that is universally accepted. Therefore, though you think you have made a logical argument, you have not. I would expect nothing less (or more?) based on your habitual postings in which you chide the NY theatre community for not scheduling shows at times convenient to you and, therefore, by your logic, inconvenient to all other theatre goers and destined to fail. Same with your ditherings about racism and other sins you perceive on stage. A refresher course in basic logic and argument might not be a bad idea--maybe you could invest in one until the subway work is done or the Shuberts decide to move all theatres to your neighborhood. |
