Hi --
I just wanted to say how much I appreciated Alexandra Tomalonis' analysis of the role of the dance critic. As a former dancer and current dance critic, it always disturbs me when reviewers take such a negative approach to a performance, even while praising the dancers (“the actors were good, but the play was crap”). Though Nilsen explained his point of view thoroughly, it told me more about him and his prejudices than it did about the dance in question.
Especially in markets that don’t have established audiences for the performing arts, it should be considered the reviewer’s job to tell something about a dance work — the plot, the context, why it’s important. Also, without resorting to blatant boosterism, if the local dance critic wants performances to review in the future, the audience needs to be cultivated and grown, or the critic will be without a gig.
My town (Las Vegas) is experiencing this type of growth in the community’s (non-Strip) performing arts. Although not at the level of dance found in San Francisco or New York, our local dance companies are using creative methods (like NBT's recent partnering with Cirque du Soleil dancers) to introduce new audiences to the art form. And our local stuff is getting better. Nevada Ballet Theatre is in its 36th year and has come a long way from being a part-time gig for dancers performing in feather shows on the Las Vegas Strip.
I passed the article on to my editor at the Weekly as he is one of the few that does have a mission to educate the readers. I thought he would enjoy knowing that others feel as he does.