Jump to content

News from Germany, Austria, Switzerland


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

40 minutes ago, alison said:

Did he really "smear her face" with it, though?  That's not the impression I got from what's been said here - and absolutely disgusting, if true.

 

Agree. Sadly, it seems to be true.

 

He has now been suspended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until further notice. The theatre writes that they have to protect his dancers from him, which is outrageous - dancers love him wherever he works, because the work is so much fun.

May I also add that it was not one review he was angry about, but 15 years of bad reviews by this critic. And I'm sure that many other directors and choreographers in Germany could not suppress a bitter smile when they read about it. Enough said. I know it's unforgiveable.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Angela said:

Until further notice. The theatre writes that they have to protect his dancers from him, which is outrageous - dancers love him wherever he works, because the work is so much fun.

May I also add that it was not one review he was angry about, but 15 years of bad reviews by this critic. And I'm sure that many other directors and choreographers in Germany could not suppress a bitter smile when they read about it. Enough said. I know it's unforgiveable.

Yes, I do know how much dancers love to work with him! It's inexcusable what he did but so very very sad.

That being said: of course it's very hard to swallow that critics are protected by press law without being obliged to deliver a certain quality. And even personal offending is quite often tolerated/protected. I figure it's probably very difficult to defend against this legally.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC David Dawson reacted heatedly to the reception his Human Seasons at the RB received from the critics. But that was verbal rather than physical.

 

I actually ‘feel’ for choreographers and performers having to face reviewers. I read quite a lot of what is in Links (thank you Ian and Janet) and there are rather too many writers (worldwide) whose knowledge of dance appears limited.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, capybara said:

IIRC David Dawson reacted heatedly to the reception his Human Seasons at the RB received from the critics. But that was verbal rather than physical.

And if I remember correctly, the dancers as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Angela said:

 

Lucky Hamburg, getting Jane Eyre!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lizbie1 said:

 

Lucky Hamburg, getting Jane Eyre!

 

Exactly.  I love Cathy Marston's Jane Eyre.

 

The only thing is ... it was designed for smaller stages in smaller theatres.  I just hope it doesn't look swamped on the enormous stage at Hamburg.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sabine0308 said:

It wasn't just because of this one review, as the article states. She has been smearing his works in a personally derogatory manner for years. This is not an excuse for what he did, but it is an explanation that he blew a fuse. 

If this is the case, I would think he'd have figured out nothing he does will please her and stop caring.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, oncnp said:

If this is the case, I would think he'd have figured out nothing he does will please her and stop caring.

 

You're absolutely right. On the other hand, she can never again write about his works because no one will believe her that it is an honest opinion. IF he ever works again... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, bridiem said:

 

So we would only have positive or descriptive reviews? That would undermine the whole point of reviewing which is to assess a performance/work whether positively or negatively (and, ideally, educate readers in the process). Critics should be aware of their privileged position, and of the fact that they're writing about fellow human beings, but they must also be free to express their opinions honestly - they're writing as critics, not fans.

 

Exactly

 

I quote the dance critic Arlene Croce (who was speaking of the relationship between the critic and the dancer but could have just as well been speaking about the relationship between the critic and the choreographer):

 

"The critic doesn't exist to write for the dancer, but for the public. This is the point that (dance critic) Edwin (Denby) made better than I can: 'Criticism is a conversation that the audience has with itself, and if the performer wants to eavesdrop on the conversation, he does so at his own risk.' "

 

And:

 

"You (the critic) owe your audience some evaluation. I cling to that. They don't want a lot of impressionistic buzz. They want to know: Is it good? And I think you have a right, in your own dignity, to say, 'Yes it was, no it wasn't.' "

 

*Quotes taken from an interview Croce gave to Dance Ink magazine in the 1990s.

Edited by miliosr
  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I don’t have the actual quote.
 

It concurs with what others have written above that critics’ conversation is with the audience, not necessarily the creatives.  So yes I agree with their right to an opinion. 

 

My question in this shocking case … should an employer publish and pay for the reviews of a particular critic, if it is often at odds with the audience ?   As @Angelahas referred to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Jan McNulty said:

 

Have you got the actual quote from Ricky Gervais rather than from a meme site please?

 

I don't always agree with critics but I believe in their right to write their views.

Sorry, I did not imagine of this being my first post here, but I found the quote on twitter and would like to share it.

Edited by NiniGabriel
typo
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, FionaE said:

My question in this shocking case … should an employer publish and pay for the reviews of a particular critic, if it is often at odds with the audience ?   As @Angelahas referred to. 

But I think the only point of reviews is to hear the views of critics whether you agree or not. What does it matter if the views are at odds with the audience? What would the alternative be? Only critics who agree with the majority of the audience be allowed to review? It would then just be a giant echo chamber 

 

16 minutes ago, FionaE said:

I can’t believe the BBC is giving airtime to a critic who has caused such a response.   They should think about why that is.  


She is the victim and deserves to be heard. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Ricky Gervais quote is rather trite, I'm afraid. Good critical writing can be very creative and instructive. Besides which there seems to be the (erroneous) assumption that all critical writing is negative criticism. Critics consider and assess what they see, whether their conclusions are positive or negative (or, often, somewhere in between). 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, serenade said:

She is the victim and deserves to be heard. 

 

I was however surprised to hear her on the radio, because I understand the incident has been reported to the police and surely if there might be criminal charges this kind of public discussion of what happened would be prejudicial? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...