The Critics: Bashing critics

[dirac]

Barnes seems to feel pretty strongly about this. Perhaps they received a lot of anti-Martins responses, and Barnes chose to respond to one?

 

 

I note he reiterated the point that it isn't so much Homans' opinions he's objecting to, so much as the forum and manner in which they were offered. As he observes, Frago is entitled to her views, but gratuitous insults to Kisselgoff don't help her cause, IMO.

[Alexandra]

On that latter point, I definitely agree. Gratuitous insults NEVER help one's cause.

[Guest Calliope]

I don't know, I'd agree that far too often the "reviews" do feel a bit like p.r., especially when I read about how much a dancer turns in a fabulous performance, meanwhile she fell out of turns and on the floor a couple of times.

I took the good Dr's critique of Kisselgoff to be more of a exasperation of frustration.

I think people like to feel "vindicated" by reviews.

"I hated that movie...oh and look Mr. X Critic hated too" (phew, I'm not the only one)

 

And Homan's article was contradictory to what Kiselgoff usually prints.

[Guest Manhattnik]

Ya gotta admire a guy who can write "obfuscating panoply," though!

[Dale]

Didin't Homans go to New York University? Looking for a connection between the two, I searched for Emily Fragos in yahoo and only found that she's a poet and creative writing teacher.

[dirac]

I don't think a personal connection would be a factor here, even if it exists – many people seem to feel as Frago does. No need for sleuthing, I imagine.

[Guest cargill]

The whole thing seems odd to me. There were lots of reasons to criticise Homan's article, but the fact that she did not parrot Kisselgoff on the state of NYCB isn't one of them. Barnes is the one that brought up Kisselgoff and now the whole things seems to be turning into a pro and anti Kisselgoff argument, not pro and anti Homans. Good for Dance Magazine, though, to have published the letter.

[Farrell Fan]

I remembered this thread after reading Gottlieb's review of "The Inevitable, Awful Eifman" in the New York Observer of April 21. He asked, "Why do knowledgeable dance reviewers consistently praise this mishmash of misguided ambition and relentless posturing? (Where's their conscience?)"

 

I enjoyed Eifman's "Who's Who," but now realize this was due to serious moral failings and character deviancies on my part. My enjoyment lies heavily on my conscience.

[dirac]

I don't think Gottlieb meant to attack anyone's character; he just thinks critics should know better.

[Guest Leigh Witchel]

What dirac said.

 

I'm not sure Gottlieb's beef is with people who enjoy the performances. Whether he's right or wrong can be discussed here, but I think the analogy for his objection might be be if a critic talked about Phillip Glass as if he were Mozart.