Time Out reviewer and feature writer Tamara Gausi, 26, spends most of her days watching plays – good and bad – for a living. She tells Joy Francis how she moved from nearly studying history to being an arts critic and how she copes with adverse reactions to her less than glowing reviews.

July/August 2008

Tamara Gausi

What made you decide to become a journalist?

A friend of mine recently saw an old friend who used to go to my middle school who asked, ‘is Tamara a journalist?’ I obviously showed signs that I wanted to be a journalist from way back then. I used to read Harriet the Spy – she was a journalist - and I thought I could do that. I loved creative writing, talking to people and travelling. After my ‘A’ Levels I went to Manchester University to study history, but I hated the course and hated Manchester. So there I was, thinking, what do I want to do with my life? Then I heard about this new degree course at City University [Journalism and Contemporary History]. It was a mixture of the two subjects that I liked so I relocated to London at Christmas in 1999 and worked until I started the course in September 2000. I had a talk with some of the tutors and felt excited as they had all worked in journalism for many years.

Who are your favourite journalists and what type of journalism appeals to you?

I like journalists who can write and think about what they put down on paper. I also like mouthy opinionated people like AA Gill. Anything that has his byline, I will read from food reviews to features. He is dyslexic and has his words transcribed as he speaks into a Dictaphone, which is impressive. There used to be a guy who used to write for New Nation [Ross Slater] because of the depth of his articles and the subjects he used to write about, and John Pilger who is a leading investigative journalist. Karen R. Good is another of my favourites - she used to write for Essence and is a great writer. In terms of my own writing it is features. Feature writing gives me the space to really get into a story. I’m one of those journalists for whom meeting word counts is a problem. Writing reviews has been good for me because you have to be succinct. I love investigative journalism and I have started to work with riceNpeas, an independent production company. It has produced a documentary on the civil rights movement in Australia and is working on a documentary on Darfur.

You were a press officer with the Young Vic Theatre and worked closely with playwrights such as debbie tucker green who doesn’t give interviews to journalists. How did you deal with this and other such challenges?

One of the challenges was pitching what I thought were excellent ideas to journalists that were not taken up. Now I am a journalist I see that there are time constraints behind those decisions. In some cases you may not have a journalist bite because you don’t have Jude Law in a play. So it has been useful for me as a reviewer to know what is involved in putting a play together. As a result I am more measured in my critiques than some of my reviewer colleagues. It was a high point to work on Generations with debbie tucker green, who I love, and to be part of an experience that bought a South African township into London.

When did you decide to become a reviewer?

I never really decided to become a reviewer. A colleague of mine at the Young Vic told me about a job at Time Out which I went for and got. I did listings for six months before an opportunity to review came up about a year-and-a-half ago. It has been a great learning experience for me and I’m really glad to be a reviewer as it is important to have a diversity of voices in the role. I may know different slang without having to refer to urbandictionary.com to understand the terms!

What is it like being a reviewer for Time Out?

What I appreciate is that I go to venues to see shows that I wouldn’t see on my own initiative. I saw a play at the Old Red Lion in Islington called Colourings. It was really good. It was about a middle class school boy who had some deep seated anger issues. The lead actor is still in acting school and was riveting. To see shows like this for free is a privilege. They take me to different worlds and I can bring that experience to my features and the documentaries that I want to work on.

How do you deal with adverse reactions to a review that you’ve written?

You have to take it on the chin because you are putting an opinion out there and people are entitled to their opinion about your opinion. It hurts if the reaction is about your ability to do the job or about your reasons for giving a show a less positive review. I recently didn’t give a show five stars and I got a lot of flak for that. It was said that I gave the play a low review because it was a black show and I am a black reviewer, which is a load of nonsense. It is one person’s opinion and people need to remember that. But because it is online where people can blog as well as in the magazine people can respond more widely – which is a good thing.

What about your own writing ambitions?

I will definitely not write a play and definitely not write a film script. I was on a Royal Court writing course for budding playwrights and knew it wasn’t for me. I think there is a book in me, but I have a few more stories to tell about others before I can tell my own.

What advice would you give to anyone who would like to review gigs, film, plays or books for a living?

At the beginning there will be a sizeable amount of writing for free, but if you love what you are doing then that will not be a problem. Send your reviews in but look at the publication’s word count, the language you use and the publication’s house style. Set up your own blog and review the shows that you want to see. Reviewing is moving towards that kind of online democracy and there are some brilliant theatre blogs out there. You have to make your own luck.

back to top