Being Angry: Snippets of E-mails to friends

To K:

Have you come to any fast conclusions on the review? I'm working on a proposal today and sending lots of questions out to critics. It makes me angry that I see ballet making quiet but significant changes. Why aren't reviews changing with it? Why are reviews even written for shows that are completely sold out before they begin? Why are reviews even written for an art that is passed down orally, performed without words, and lacks a written history? What good is description when ballet companies now film their performances and post them online? Over and over, I sense that the definition of 'critical' has been misplaced. I tell myself it's about showing, not telling. And not showing the aesthetic of the performance, but showing — through the performance — the big ideas and questions ballet faces. It makes me angry when I read reviews in the Guardian or any newspaper that are needlessly descriptive. They are the wordled mirror of the performance itself. What does that add to the art? Has criticism become it's own art rather than a way of furthering another? So many, many questions. I think it's good, though, that I'm angry. It means something's not right. Are you angry? I'd love to hear your thoughts.