Newspaper reviews: why so mediocre?
Posted 24 September 2002 - 11:35 AM
The assumption is that the reviewer has the depth of viewing to substantiate his or her viewpoint. A reviewer with only opinions is telling you nothing, but a reviewer without any opinions isn't telling you much either.
Posted 23 September 2002 - 08:36 AM
I think the best ballet reviews in Boston are those published in the Phoenix. The Phoenix is a weekly, so their reviewer (often but not always Jeffrey Gantz) attends dress rehearsal and several performances before writing the review. Thus the review is generally more thoughtful and comprehensive than the reviews written against an opening night deadline. They are also available on the Phoenix' web site for longer than a day or week. The downside is that someone reading the review has only a few days to see the performance, since more than half the usual two week run will have passed by the time the review is published.
Posted 20 September 2002 - 12:44 PM
She's made it clear in her reviews that she doesn't appreciate "Russian Warhorse Ballets" (read that the wonderful classics that I want to see), and wishes Boston Ballet were more like San Francisco Ballet. Shockingly, her editor has permitted her personal preferences to replace what I beleive genuine reviews to be.
Now that Boston Ballet seems so obviously trying to imitate San Francisco Ballet, perhaps she feels obligated to congratulate them on listening to her wise counsel by giving pleasant if weak reviews.
I detest a critic who writes as if he or she has a personal axe to grind. Temin's views and reviews are like the sequel to the Emperor's New Clothes.
Posted 22 September 2002 - 09:03 AM
If she is going to claim that the ballet was a dud, she should substantiate the claim somehow. Did tickets sales miss their projected goal? Did audiences boo and throw tomatoes? Is it a dud solely because Christine Temin thinks it was?
I saw the ballet and it was typical of the Stevenson genre, and IMO it wasn't great...but to call it a dud in print requires some objective basis.
''Anything for Dance'' is also formulaic. It starts with Suarez watching a show in which she was supposed to star and ends with a ''triumph,'' as the often-trite narration insists, in Ben Stevenson's ''Cleopatra.'' There's no mention that the ballet was a dud: That would spoil the happy ending.
This story ran on page N3 of the Boston Globe on 9/22/2002.
© Copyright 2002 Globe Newspaper Company.
Posted 24 September 2002 - 11:03 AM
"Back to a point Susan B made at the beginning of this thread, about one one critic's "personal preference replacing what a good review should be," I think that's a good point. I also agree with Nanatchka that reviews are supposed to be personal opinions, but there's a balancing act."
Years ago I wrote for several daily newspapers and was a copy editor as well, and at the time I paid no atttention to the reviews and have no recollection of editing them.
However, I realized when Nanatchka made the point that reviews are supposed to be personal opinions that I always thought that pure opinion was limited to the Editorial Page or the Op Ed pages of the newspaper.
I always supposed that ciritics were more in the news category than the opinion category, and that their knowledge of the art form enabled them to write intelligently about a performance. I thought the parameters were closer to the newswriters' -- and that it would be important to substantiate.
Posted 21 September 2002 - 01:45 PM
I don't know about Boston, but for some time in some cities -- for so long now that the "tradition" has started to decay -- there's been better writing about dancing (and also about other arts) in the alternative papers, such as the Village Voice, the East Bay Express (in the Bay Area) than in such major metropolitan dailies as the Times or the SF Chronicle.
In fact, Arlene Croce started Ballet Review many years ago as a mimeographed sheet -- the ancestor of many 'zines -- with a glorious blast at the ...shall we say inadequacies of the critics in the great New York papers (If I've ever read the essay itself, it's been a long time -- but I've HEARD so much about it, I feel I must know it; still, I realize that all the phrases in my head are in fact her friend Pauline Kael's ridiculing "the ineffable Bosley Crowther" who was the fatuous movie critic at hte TImes.)
The problems at the dailies are just as often "editors" as they are "readers" -- for the editor decides who the ideal reader is, unless of course it's the marketing people who run the whole show and push everything so the whole paper is pitched to a certain demographic group, often thought to have a lot of disposable income, whose prejudices must be flattered and whose ignorance must be humored, even as their "needs are met" (i.e., they must be told how to spend their scraps of free time improvingly).
The cool thing about the alternative papers is that the readers are thought to be the intelligentsia... or at least, they used to be. The cool thing about this site, and about Alexandra's print magazines, is that the "reader" is assumed to have an informed concern about the art; in Boston, as elsewhere, the arts editor may not believe that anybody watches dancing except to look at sexy people and not believe that readers want to know much more than the whee-quotient of any performance....
The BAD news is 2-fold; A) ever since the paper shortage a decade ago tripled the price of newsprint, which was an emergency but it's been over a long time, there's been a draconian restriction on SPACE, which makes it almost impossible to handle a subject that requires considerable exposition (introducing a new company, or style; think of trying to explain what contact improv is aiming at to an audience who'd never seen it; that's the sort of thing the Village Voice was invented for) and B) there have been many hostile takeovers of alternative papers, and excellent writers like Ann Murphy, who used to have frequent pieces in the Express, are kept on the masthead but almost never allowed to write anything.... I've stopped reading the Express regularly (it's not really interesting any more; though it claims to make taste, they're just trend-spotting, not actually thinking), but I haven't seen anything of hers in a long time.....It seems to be mostly restaurants and movies and recorded music, though jazz and blues and indie music still gets good coverage.
SO maybe check out the alternative papers in Boston -- maybe especially the Gay papers. And to console yourself, check out the newspaper writing from the great days of the New York Herald Tribune, when theideal reader was I suppose understood to be a graduate of Bennington or Yale or Black Mountain or maybe a man from the motor trade, but the respect for the reader's intelligence and general culture was unbelievable by today's standards -- Edwin Denby's dance reviews are all collected and published -- you can find them cheap secondhand under the titles "Looking at the Dance" and "Dancers, Buildings, and People in the Street"; while you're at it, check out the music reviews of the guy who hired him, Virgil Thompson, they're collected, who sets the gold standard for giving you the real deal.
I pick one at random -- 3 paragraphs, published March 4, 1941:
I repeat, this was published IN THE PAPER one day....
"Revueltas" by Virgil Thompson
Europe has often produced composers like the late Silvestre Revueltas, the Americas rarely. Our music writers are most likely to do the light touch with a heavy hand. Revueltas's music reminds one of Erik Satie's and of Emmanuel Chabrier's. It is both racy and distinguished. Familiar in style and full of references to Hispanic musical formulas, it seeks not to impress folklorists nor to please audiences by salting up a work with nationalist material. Neither does it make any pretense of going native. He wrote Mexican music that sounds like Spanish Mexico, and he wrote it in the best Parisian syntax. No Indians around and no illiteracy.
The model is a familiar one of the nationalist composer whose compositional procedures are conservative and unoriginal but whose musical material consists of all the rarest and most beautiful melodies that grow in his land. Villa-Lobos is like that and Percy Grainger; so was Dvorak The contraries of that model are Josef Haydn and Satie and a little bit Georges Auric -- certainly Darius Milhaud. These writers use the vernacular for its expressivity. But their musical structure and syntax are of the most elegant. Their music, in consequence, has an international carrying power among all who love truly imaginative musical construction.
Revueltas's music could never be mistaken for French music. It is none the less made with French post-Impressionist technique, amplified and adapted to his own clime. It is static harmonically, generously flowing melodically, piquant and dainty in instrumentation, daring as to rhythm. He loves ostinato accompanying figures and carries them on longer than a more timid writer would. He orchestrates a la Satie, without doubling. He fears neither unexpected rhythmic contrasts nor familiar melodic turns. His music has grace, grandeur, delicacy, charm, and enormous distinction.
That's how people used to write in the paper.... o tempora, o mores....... I read these guys for company. Nobody writing in the paper or the magazines today that I know of can tell you that much in so short a space, nor has such faith that you'll KNOW WHAT HE MEANS....
Posted 22 September 2002 - 07:57 AM
Posted 23 September 2002 - 02:10 PM
Could you pos a link to the Phoenix site? -- I know I've seen VERY thoughtful reviews in that paper before, but couldn't remember the name of hte paper.... I'd like to bookmark it.....
Posted 23 September 2002 - 04:42 PM
of course, THAT's who Marcia B. Siegel writes for......
well, she's one of those you can think about in the same sentence as Denby and not have to sigh......even when you don't agree with her, you -- at least I -- find I always want to know what she thinks......
Posted 23 September 2002 - 09:46 PM
[Warning -- if this starts to sound very self-centered to you, it'll probably just get worse -- so maybe if it seems that way, just skip it; Iím offering it to anybody that's interested in why somebody writes, what I know about my own case. I don't mean to offend you.]
Thank God people ask me. For I'm certainly like Alexandra, I do it because I have to -- on the way home from the show, I'm still talking about it when everybody else is changing the subject, and I say a lot of things and then wonder if that 's what I really think, or was it a version of that, it wasn't totally wrong but well, really it was MORE LIKE THIS .....
TO sort it out, I really have to write it down....and rewrite it....
Sometimes I find myself going around for the rest of the week doing a dance I've seen (monkey see, monkey do....), like after Billy the Kid I kept doing that thing where he rolls his torso up through the spine and his shoulders mantle like a cobra and then he throws his head forward and looks like Defiance on a monument..... it was like a catchy song that had gotten into my head except it was a dance...'why am I "singing this song"? What about it has gotten so deep under my skin, and I think about it and think about it..... and that sort of thing makes me think Billy the Kid is a great ballet, it's on my mind.......
But then I had to share that, partly because it makes me feel like "am I crazy?" would anybody know what I mean? It's like Billy the Kid's like Dracula with the cape, he's becoming like a vampire, every time he kills somebody he does this weird thing with his back and becomes all glorious, magnificent, it's horrifying, but it's fantastic, look how gorgeous this is, he's becoming "Billy the KID" the one and only, ever more isolated, ever more famous,, lonelier, deadlier -- you know what I mean? Am I crazy for thinking this? And so on.... that feeling like you're BIG with some understanding, some conception, which is the offspring of the understanding that's in the ballet, which makes it pregnant, important, great in a way that other ballets like Filling Station are not...... And you want to see if anybody agrees....
Writing is where I figure things out like this -- I mean, it's like I've got to think about it and think about it and get my mind to slow down enough so it gets in synch with my hand -- me, I think best with a pen and paper, I can spell in longhand, and besides, there's something so kinetically pleasing about having my shoulder and elbow and hand going in synch that it calms me down, and my thoughts start to line up and come out in order, like dancers in a figure, and they've got an order to them that I don't know about till I see it but it's basically a paragraph, and as Gertrude stein said, "a sentence is not emotional, a paragraph is" -- and they come out and it's not until they do that, that I know what I think, and then I wonder if what I've written IS what I think, sometimes it's not, but often, dadgum it, it IS, or it's CLOSE.....
What Watermill asked that twigged me was in asking if there's a sense of power in reaching a large audience, and I think s/he asked it in a more innocent way than Alexandra took it -- well, in any case, I'd say there IS that for me, in that it UNDOES a feeling of powerlessness generated by the introspection -- when you get so inward that you actually approach the truth, and grasp it, or some of it, you've got a treasure, but you can't stay that deep inside yourself, -- especially not with this new burden, it makes you so much heavier, and anyway you've GOT to come back, but you've already used so much of your strength getting IN there -- Tovey said playing the late Beethoven piano sonatas was like rock-climbing, and he's RIGHT -- your fingers are swollen, you've just been clawing at the piano and hauling yourself along-- and writing is in its own way, like that, even if youíre not bringing back what Beethoven brought back, still, it's what your strength can get at, and-- bringing this back and offering it to the community gives you a function in the society that feels like it's something close to what you OUGHT TO BE DOING WITH YOUR LIFE, and that makes you feel good and tired, tired and good, and like you've got some virtue you can point to when the angel of death comes...... and if it's only the angel of sleep, well, then you get to wake up and see if anybody is grateful..... and in the morning how many stupid things it looks like you said along the way, you didn't mean that of course, and anyway it's not the POINT but if you read certain phrases in another mood, it looks like you meant something you didn't mean at all and don't believe and wouldn't say, so you've got to change the phrasing so it doesn't suggest that. Or maybe you made some silly mistake, and maybe it's not too late to change the Amores to the Heroides (the mistake I made in my last piece in ballet review, it's too late, that's in print).
Every piece has got a mistake in it. Denby, whose soul is with God, once confused 2 dark-haired ballerinas -- Nora Kaye and Alicia Alonso, I think -- wrote about the wrong one IN THE PAPER--o lord how did he ever live that down? -- he must have been mortified, but anybody can do it. Roger Angell, in his obit for Eudora Welty only a year ago in the New Yorker, his last paragraph began "Mrs. Welty" which he certainly knows better than (if ever a lady went to her grave a virgin it was Eudora Welty). Some copy-editor did that to him, but it happens to us all...... and how do we go on?
Well, Denby stopped as soon as the man he was replacing returned from the war -- kept on writing "more considered pieces," but that gig was up..... Because he no longer had the invitation? To leave the terrors of writing for the dailies to the journalists???..... I wonder about that. But what a loss for the rest of us. Walter Terry wasn't bad, not at all, but he couldn't use the idiom like Denby. Grace under pressure......
Posted 20 September 2002 - 07:38 AM
Just read the Boston Globe's review of Boston Ballet's opening night. Not to beat up on this particular writer, who for all I know also has to cover community theatre and 4H fairs, but why is so much main media coverage of ballet so mediocre?
I think I read better reviews of performances in this forum!
I'm stewing about this because when I moved to Portland (from NYC, mind you) six years ago, Martha Ulman West, president of the Dance Critics Assoc was reviewing for the Oregonian. Since her retirement...let's just say I miss her desperately.
And the Seattle critic writes like she was a PNB board member.
What is it like in your hometown paper?
Outside of the pundits in the London and NYC papers, does anyone know of a critic they feel rises above the low average of most dailies?
A Cranky Watermill Who Hasn't Had His Coffee Yet...
Posted 21 September 2002 - 10:03 AM
Dancers going "Wheee!" (!?)
Let's put it this way: If the Boston Ballet company danced like she wrote, you'd probably have to move!
Posted 23 September 2002 - 07:13 PM
Alexandra, I realize nobody who writes about the arts is actually making a living off it (except for a chosen few). I have several freelancer friends and have heard how difficult it is. Here's a question, then: Does that mean the chance to affect public taste, the power to reach so many readers, is part of the reason to write?
It's not for the money, then what is it for?
Posted 21 September 2002 - 12:51 PM
So you end up with either part-time dance critics who also cover God knows what else, or non-staff freelancers who may or may not be very good. On the newspapers I've worked at, there's always one or two people who love ballet (I'm one of them!) and can write about it well on deadline, but it can be hard to fit it around your regular duties. :eek:
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users