NEGATIVE REVIEWS
posted by James Reel
The proprietor of Vineography, a wine blog I read, has explained why he rarely writes negative reviews. The world of wine criticism is rather different from that of performing-arts criticism, but there are times when I elect not to review something if the evaluation is going to be negative.
First, can the subject of the review, by its very nature, withstand critical scrutiny? Any professional performance is fair game, but student and amateur efforts can’t be held to the same standards. If I review an amateur performance favorably, I try to make it clear that I’m working on a sliding scale, and an impressive performance by a community orchestra wouldn’t be so impressive from the Tucson Symphony (unless the amateur performers really outdo themselves). But if the amateur performance doesn’t cut it, what’s the point of calling attention to this fact, rather than passing over the performance in silence? Amateur orchestras and theatrical troupes exist to give non-professionals a creative outlet; unless the artistic director is overly ambitious and misrepresents the company, these people aren’t trying to compete with the professional and semi-pro groups—they’re simply performing for their own amusement, for an audience dominated by their families and friends. If it’s clear that’s what the group is, and it isn’t putting itself forward as a real alternative to the pros, what’s the point of damning the results? Best to let them go about their worthy business without worrying about public criticism.
The case against negative reviews of books and CDs is quite different. There are a great many books and CDs coming out every week, and fewer and fewer venues for reviews. Space is limited, so why not focus on calling people’s attention to the best that’s out there, rather than condemning crap that they wouldn’t want to buy? In this instance, the focus is on the good of cultural consumer, not that of the producer. Of course, a book or recording by a high-profile artist deserves attention even if it’s bad, because of the heightened public interest. Otherwise, if space is limited, we should focus on the criticism that will do the public the most good.
