Nina G. Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 'irredeemably pedestrian' : ouch! Hope Roberta doesn't read his review....ouch indeed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Newcombe Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Just another example of how he is past his sell by date 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nina G. Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I am getting tired of his pompous reviews. At best they make me laugh out loud! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMballet Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 Seriously this FT guy needs to go. Pompous is the word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloomsbury Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 I am finding my response to Jewels very unpredictable and I love this about it. I attended 7th January - the fourth time I have seen RB dance it. I very nearly did not arrive until after first interval because in the past I have NOT enjoyed Emeralds at all. Well I am glad I decided to see it - I absolutely loved Emeralds this time round and it was for me the standout ballet of the three. Rubies - hmmm - I have now seen Osipova three times (2 RB R & J and this night). I think I may be about to agree with dallas above in that I find her a little OTT or perhaps obvious/self aware is the thought I have about her. I am seeing her in Giselle and hope (trust) she will be more toned down and less self conscious (literal sense) in that. I know Rubies is camp and 'delighted in self' in the choreography which may explain her stage presence but I also found her first act Juliet skittishness a little too telegraphed for my taste (and I know most won't agree). There were also times during Rubies when I did think her dance in particular came close to gymnastics rather than dance and I have not thought that about the role when others have danced it . . (had quite a heated debate about this on way home with a new passionate covert to Osipova!). Diamonds was rather flat until last part which as ever is rousing and so very wonderful. Dancing was sublime throughout - I thought Rupert P in particular was magnificent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenK Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 Absolutely. We don't want anyone informed, erudite and interesting if they disagree with our view. (If in doubt, please treat this as sarcasm.) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenK Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 Couldn't get Quote to work, but my previous post was a response to Nina G and SMballet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aileen Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 Do dancers read their reviews? I'd be interested to know. The ENB dancers' twitter account certainly posts links to reviews and so I assume that some of the dancers must read or at least glance at some of the reviews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HPool Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 I adore reading Clement Crisp's reviews. Not because I always agree with them (because I often don't) but I love his clever and accurate use of the English language. My favourite was a review of Beatrix Potter a few years ago. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan McNulty Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 Some do, some don't Aileen. Re the FT critic, I used to admire his reviews whether I agreed with him or not. These days I find him more interested in his own clever wording than in the qualities or otherwise of a performance. I was somewhat jaundiced against him many years ago after an incident in New Street Station, Birmingham. We had just seen Stuttgart Ballet giving, to my eyes, a wonderful and deeply moving performance of Requiem and Song of the Earth (it was just after Sir Kenneth McMillan had passed away and it was obvious that he was very dear to the memories of the dancers we saw performing). My friend went over to the critic and said "Oh wasn't that a wonderful performance" to be responded to by what I can only describe as a pompous grunt. We then saw him and the lady with him glancing over at us and giggling! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMballet Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 (edited) Stephen K: I'm afraid I find him neither erudite nor interesting (though he is certainly informed). He's a pompous old ass, and, in my opinion, a terrible writer much given to run-on-sentences, overblown purple prose, some VERY mean-spirited opinions, and the worst sort of self-indulgent ramblings. Every time I read his stuff my eyes roll so hard I worry my contacts will fall off. I dislike his reviews whether I agree with his opinion or not; it has nothing to do with a difference of opinion. As I've said before on this forum, I like reading other critics like Judith Mackrell and Luke Jennings who seem genuinely interested in actually writing about the performance they saw, and provide sincere critiques, not shpw-offy reminisces about how it was all better a century ago when only HE had the privilege of seeing some performance in Moscow or Scala or where have you which none of us plebians would know anything about. Pompous, arrogant, elitist, insufferable. Sorry, I've hijacked this thread!! Needed to blow off some steam. If I didn't like the Guardian critics so much, I'd lead a call on this forum to an end to all "professional" critics. I've honestly learned more about the art form we all love from reading this forum, than I have from a 100 FT reviews by that guy. Edited January 11, 2014 by SMballet 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nina G. Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 Give me Luke Jennings and Judith Mackrell any time. Top dance critics! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrischris Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 He certainly doesn't do a huge amount to challenge ballets elitist image 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Newcombe Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 Certainly agree about Judith Mackrell and Luke Jennings 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Macmillan Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 SMballet: Well, you certainly came down off the fence there as regards Mr Crisp. If you've cooled down a little, might we now dissect your remarks? I ask as one who often admires his orotund style - I'm probably a good deal closer to his age than to yours - something to which I might aspire but of which I fear I am not capable. He undoubtedly writes very much de haut en bas on occasions, but I've found I can smile at that and, moderately secure in myself, not let it get under my skin. But that is not to say that I agree with all that he writes - by no means, for his views and mine on one of my favourites are very much at odds. So, is it too late for you to look upon him as one voice amongst others? You say you find him "neither erudite nor interesting," albeit "informed." I'd say there was an inconsistency there on the matter of "erudition," but we may choose to disagree on the semantics. Nonetheless, I'm concerned that you appear to denigrate his undoubted background in this art form, something he shares with Alastair Macaulay of the New York Times, for example, and I hope you are not seriously suggesting that my Links colleagues and I should end our daily trawl of the world's English-speaking press to bring you his work and that of others like Deborah Jowitt, Valerie Lawson, Roslyn Sulcas, Apollinaire Scherr, Laura Capelle, Allan Ulrich, and Molly Glentzer, to name just a handful of "professional"critics with an immense depth of background in ballet and dance generally. I rejoice in the contributions that you and others make here on this Forum, but please do not blind yourself to the contribution that writers of that ilk can and do make in a wider context. And, en passant, had you read any of Mr C's reviews of some of the street dance groups seen at Sadler's Wells in recent years? They have been enthusiastic in the extreme, just possibly because he knows whereof he speaks after some 65 years of watching dance performances. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mallinson Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 We should also remind members that highly critical postings should be made under your own name, not lurking behind a pseudonym. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenK Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 (edited) "Every time I read his stuff my eyes roll so hard I worry my contacts will fall off. . . I've honestly learned more about the art form we all love from reading this forum, than I have from a 100 FT reviews by that guy." Possibly it would be an option for you not to read it rather than demand he goes? I can only admire your commitment in reading so much of his output at such personal discomfort. Edited January 12, 2014 by stephenK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenK Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 He certainly doesn't do a huge amount to challenge ballets elitist image Oh no, not the "irredeemably pedestrian" elitist image debate again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aileen Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Ooh, I'm regretting mentioning 'irredeemably pedestrian'. I might use it myself some time though! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrischris Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 "Every time I read his stuff my eyes roll so hard I worry my contacts will fall off. . . I've honestly learned more about the art form we all love from reading this forum, than I have from a 100 FT reviews by that guy." Possibly it would be an option for you not to read it rather than demand he goes? I can only admire your commitment in reading so much of his output at such personal discomfort. Probably not an option the FT would like. They are struggling to get people to read their paper as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capybara Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 What is great about the art form we love so much is that it can elicit so many different emotions and such variety of opinion. Part of the enjoyment I derive is from both reading the range of perspectives among critics (some erudite and knowledgeable, some very pedestrian and perhaps no so well-informed) and seeing the interesting mix of what people have to say on balletcoforum. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 SMballet: As John Mallinson says if you want to take a large cricket bat to somebody, or some institution, you really need to do so under your right and proper name. Personally I like Crisp's style and don't necessarily warm to some others. But I don't absolutely agree with any of them all the time. But, admire their spirit or not, I absolutely applaud the skilled writing of critics and the slipping in of interesting insights from an often wider and lengthier perspective. None more lengthy than Crisp's. When I was young I used to get annoyed that so many of the performances reviewed were held up against dancers and production values I'd never seen. All I knew was that I'd generally enjoyed it! But with the passing years I too have my own memory and feel short-changed if the standard seems not so great. The forum and social media are really good at capturing heartfelt responses, usually of enjoyment, of the here and now. These are real and I don't discount, but it's to the totality of critics I look for deeper analysis of what's good and what's not. There is much to learn, even from reading those you don't necessarily warm to. To do a modern comparison I often think of Clement Crisp like Craig Revel Horwood (it should be visa versa really!) on Strictly Come Dancing. You might not like what he says, or the way he says it, but his view is the one the competitors really look for. It remains a tough standard in a world that increasingly values a breathless and loving recommendation in 140 chars. To be honest I think it's cause for enormous celebration that he is still writing and it will be a sad day when he stops - just as it was when John Percival stopped. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangorballetboy Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Probably not an option the FT would like. They are struggling to get people to read their paper as it is. Interesting you say that. Here's a press statement about the FT's trading report from 30 October 2013: "It reports that the FT, across print and online, has achieved its highest circulation in its 125-year history at nearly 629,000, which is up 5% year on year." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangorballetboy Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Here's a recent review by Crisp: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/cd669c60-4ddd-11e3-b15d-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2qBGf7IDV I'd be grateful if his detractors could point to the pomposity. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nina G. Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Here's a recent review by Crisp: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/cd669c60-4ddd-11e3-b15d-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2qBGf7IDV I'd be grateful if his detractors could point to the pomposity. "De gustibus non est disputandum" Not so much pomposity in this one bangorballetboy, but in some of his previous reviews. I greatly admire his rich use of language and knowledge but I much prefer reading Mr Jennings and Ms Mackrell's balanced reviews, that's all. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fonty Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Having read the Crisp review, it seems to me the only thing that anyone could object to is the phrase used to describe Marquez. And that really depends on whether or not you are a fan of hers. Apart from that, it is the usual Crisp review, written in his own very unique style. Other critics can be equally dismissive of a production or performer, but they don't have his ability to express their dislike so succinctly. You may gather from this that I love his reviews. Even though I disagree with him quite often, I always find them very entertaining. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrischris Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Interesting you say that. Here's a press statement about the FT's trading report from 30 October 2013: "It reports that the FT, across print and online, has achieved its highest circulation in its 125-year history at nearly 629,000, which is up 5% year on year." Ha ha exactly. 629,000 is tiny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMballet Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 (edited) Look, I don't want to hijack the RB/Jewels thread any further. Calling a dancer "irredeemably pedestrian" is, in my opinion, uncalled for and mean spirited..For me it was the straw that broke the camel's back. I thought Alistair Macaulay's last review of the RB was kind of pointless and rambling, but I usually quite like his pieces written for the NYT. I'll reiterate what I've already said above: I enjoy reading well-informed dance critics, and I look forward to reading their reviews, especially the two dance critics of the Guardian. When they dislike a piece they criticise respectfully and without disdain. I can't imagine Judith Mackrell calling any dancer "irredeemably pedestrian." If she did, I'd dislike her too. Having said that, I will admit to not thinking very highly of dance criticism on the whole, but then I don't think much of criticism in general, so I suppose it is a personal bias against those who "criticise" instead of "create." But the reason I dislike the FT guy is not because he is a critic, but because his style - at least how he comes off in his pieces these days, I obviously haven;t read him since 1980 or something - and because he really seems pompous and elitist. I'm not alone in that opinion, surely, as I didn't even start that thread. I will admit I wrote my last post when feeling unduly annoyed, and I really ought to have waited till I'd cooled down a bit. But I do think I've been far more polite than he is in his reviews, when he's carelessly dismissing some supremely talented hard-working dancer or the other who doesnt match up to the standard of some other dancer he saw in 1932. When I read his reviews I feel that he didn't even bother to cover the performance he saw; it always seems like an excuse to show off about how much he knows more than anyone else and how he can string together words in his own unique style which clearly pleases him very much. I realise many of you adore him, and, well, obviously he's a famous critic for the FT and I'm a nobody, so you should all ignore me. And no, I'd prefer not to share my full name. I don't on any internet forum, because I have my entire professional life ahead of me. If that means I can't be on this forum, well, so be it. I've been reading for a long while (and learning from ALL of you) without having joined in, and I'll just go back to that silent reader status. Thanks all. Edited January 12, 2014 by SMballet 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangorballetboy Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Ha ha exactly. 629,000 is tiny Yet, highest circulation ever and a 5% increase does not suggest to me they are "struggling". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrischris Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Yet, highest circulation ever and a 5% increase does not suggest to me they are "struggling". All relative. Up 5% year on year and your circulation is still only 629,000? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangorballetboy Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 All relative. Up 5% year on year and your circulation is still only 629,000? More than the Guardian I think... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrischris Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 More than the Guardian I think... That's not saying much. The Guardian (and Independent) are dying a slow death. The Guardian will survive if it can generate revenue from its comment section, but I don't think anyone knows how to do that, though Murdoch seems to think paid subscriptions are working well for his titles (in my opinion that's a slightly optimistic interpretation of what's happening). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billboyd Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 SMballet - Please, keep posting.... 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now