Criticism: Dance and otherwise

[dirac]

Moderator's note: This discussion, originally on an NYCB review thread, deserves its own thread.

--carbro

* Recently, I listened to a podcast in which a panel of print media reviewers whined (there is no kinder way to put it) about the ongoing cut back in independent book reviews in newspapers and how this will inevitably lead to the death of American cultural and intellectual life.

Kathleen, "whining" aside, I have viewed with regret and some anger the ghastly cutbacks in the stand alone book review section in my own local paper, The San Francisco Chronicle, which used to have a very good one. Perhaps one day the Internet will make up the deficit, but we are nowhere near that eventuality.

[Helene]

At one point, Joan Acocella exclaimed “Who reads reviews on line!” apparently under the impression that the sum total of on-line reviewing consists entirely of amateurs posting their musings on blogs. “Dance View Times! Dance View Times!” I shouted, much to the bemusement of the gentleman standing next to me while we waited to cross Broadway.

Perhaps one day the Internet will make up the deficit, but we are nowhere near that eventuality.

As long as "real" reviewers -- i.e., those paid by print publications -- continue to have this attitude, it is unlikely that the Internet will make up the deficit, at least with "real" reviewers. Ironically, given the small number of print publication jobs, those who still have them become an even smaller elite, at least in their own minds.

I guess no one has ever read Tobi Tobias's blog, for example.

And I rarely read any reviews in print; 99.9% of what I read in print publications is online.

[dirac]

I can only speak for myself, but I subscribe to two newspapers and a goodly number of magazines. Dinosaur that I am.

[Kathleen O'Connell]

I can only speak for myself, but I subscribe to two newspapers and a goodly number of magazines. Dinosaur that I am.

Oh, I susbscribe ... but mostly I just end up reading the articles online anyway or printing out what I want to take with me to read on the subway or in the dentist's office or whatever. (Oh, OK, I read People in the dentist's office just like everyone else.) There are a few magazines that are genuinely pleasurable to read in print form, but in many cases I suspect I'll switch over to subscribing to just the digital version at some point and save a few trees. However, since reading the Sunday Times at the breakfast table with my husband is a cherished ritual of many years duration, I'll never give up the hard copy.

Re book reviews: The quality of the reviews New York Times' Sunday book review section is pretty hit-or-miss -- I prefer The New York Review of Books or BookForum or "the back of the book" of the New Republic and the New Yorker. The Times could discontinue book reviewing altogether and I don't think I'd miss it, frankly. Paid book reviewers are essential to have; whether it's essential that they write for newspapers (which is what Acocella et al were asserting) is a different question.

[Leigh Witchel]

Joan needs to take a good hard look at what's happening in her own home town, and also look at where the younger critics are getting their starts.

[Kathleen O'Connell]

Don't rely on my assessment of Acocella's comments or of the rest of the discussion -- I was put off by much of what was said and was frankly stunned by her exclaiming "Who reads reviews on line!" (I admire her writing) -- but others may respond more favorably. It is a subject on which reasonable people may disagree.

I'm not adept enough to post a link, but you can find the discussion in WNYC's archives for the Leonard Lopate show. Look for the May 8 broadcast.

[Leigh Witchel]

It is a subject on which reasonable people may disagree.

In all honesty, it isn't.

There are fewer and fewer jobs in print and less and less space being devoted. Top critics in the city have lost their jobs and migrated . . . to the web.

It was a highly insular remark.

[carbro]

Personally, as someone who tends to hoard printed materials and who lives in a small, New York apartment, I rejoice in the internet. I have stopped buying newspapers altogether, but I subscribe to two weeklies and a monthly magazine.

I don't feel like I miss anything except smudgy hands.

And the Times' crossword puzzle. But I buy them in book form.

Does it make a difference whether I read Acocella electronically or ink-on-paper? Isn't the importance of criticism the content and not the medium? Or was MacLuhan right?

[kfw]

I susbscribe to four magazines and a bi-monthly audio magazine, and read the NY Times online, but I still buy the Times or the Washington Post at least once or twice a week. Free online content is great, but holding the magazine or newspaper in my hands, being able to feel it and smell it and turn its pages, affords so much more pleasure.

[Mel Johnson]

Just remember, if you read it online, then print it in order to take it with you to ruminate, it isn't online any more - it's hardcopy.

[Hans]

The only periodical I read on paper is DanceView; everything else is online. Dragging all that paper to the recycling bin every week is a pain.

Acocella is extremely out of touch. I get the most reliable dance reviews here on BT, not just from the members but from the Links forum.

[dirac]

I susbscribe to four magazines and a bi-monthly audio magazine, and read the NY Times online, but I still buy the Times or the Washington Post at least once or twice a week. Free online content is great, but holding the magazine or newspaper in my hands, being able to feel it and smell it and turn its pages, affords so much more pleasure.

And the layout of newspapers makes the comparing and contrasting of stories much easier. They've had hundreds of years to work on such things, of course, but right now the hard copy is still far superior.

Don't rely on my assessment of Acocella's comments or of the rest of the discussion -- I was put off by much of what was said and was frankly stunned by her exclaiming "Who reads reviews on line!" (I admire her writing) -- but others may respond more favorably.

I certainly don't agree with what Acocella said, and it's quite true, printpeople can be obtuse when it comes to the web.

A closely related topic was actually raised awhile ago in the Writings on Ballet Forum, and there are a number of posts worth reading:

http://ballettalk.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=20948