Ballet Critic tells ballerina she looks fat

[TurtleDove]

Sabbyfrog, we do not disagree.    I don't think it was a good critique and I have never defended the critique as written.  I have defended the reviewer's right to make his critique, whether it makes him and his opinions seem brilliant or ridiculous.  My comments were about whether a reviewer has a "right" to mention a dancer's size/shape, and I think a reviewer has a right to do so when critiquing a dance performance. 

[Sabbyfrog2]

Sabbyfrog, we do not disagree.    I don't think it was a good critique and I have never defended the critique as written.  I have defended the reviewer's right to make his critique, whether it makes him and his opinions seem brilliant or ridiculous.  My comments were about whether a reviewer has a "right" to mention a dancer's size/shape, and I think a reviewer has a right to do so when critiquing a dance performance.  

Oh. Yes. I can see that now...
Well then... Carry on...  

[Jan74]

As I said, I think he has the right to mention her body even with a lame pun. The right is not up for argument. Nor do I think he needs to apologize.

I do, however, think he is a very incompetent critic, but people don't have to apologize for being terrible at their jobs.

[jimithing]

Sabbyfrog, we do not disagree.    I don't think it was a good critique and I have never defended the critique as written.  I have defended the reviewer's right to make his critique, whether it makes him and his opinions seem brilliant or ridiculous.  My comments were about whether a reviewer has a "right" to mention a dancer's size/shape, and I think a reviewer has a right to do so when critiquing a dance performance. 

But has anyone argued that he didn't have a *right* to say it? In the U.S., most things fall under free speech. We all have a right to say most things. We are discussing the etiquette of the situation, not the legality.

[TurtleDove]

Jimithing, the question in the OP was should he have to apologize. I don't think he should under any theory, etiquette or legal. I POD Jan24's post.

[TurtleDove]

I would add that no one has been forced to read the review or to give it any merit. I find many of the comments about the reveiwer to be rude, and to be malicious in nature. Why are those comments excused on an etiquette board? Should those posters apologize to the reviewer? (I think the answer is no).

[Granny Takes a Trip]

I would add that no one has been forced to read the review or to give it any merit. I find many of the comments about the reveiwer to be rude, and to be malicious in nature. Why are those comments excused on an etiquette board? Should those posters apologize to the reviewer? (I think the answer is no).

I am confused here. Do you mean comments left on the newspaper's webpage? I believe that there was a huge furore, and I am sure that some people who defended the ballerina were less than poilte in their opinion of the reviewer. However, I feel that is a side issue, as no one here said anything unjustified about the reviewer. They said he was not very professional in his style of writing, which is a more than fair comment.

[jimithing]

I would add that no one has been forced to read the review or to give it any merit. I find many of the comments about the reveiwer to be rude, and to be malicious in nature. Why are those comments excused on an etiquette board? Should those posters apologize to the reviewer? (I think the answer is no).

What comments are you referring to? No one has called him any names, but have said that his comments were insulting, juvenile, and his writing style wasn't professional. All valid criticism. Which is how he could have provided criticism as well.

[Twik]

Sabbyfrog, we do not disagree.    I don't think it was a good critique and I have never defended the critique as written.  I have defended the reviewer's right to make his critique, whether it makes him and his opinions seem brilliant or ridiculous.  My comments were about whether a reviewer has a "right" to mention a dancer's size/shape, and I think a reviewer has a right to do so when critiquing a dance performance. 

Yes, just as people have a right to say he's full of baloney. Why, exactly do you find that "malicious" and rude, but his comments are within his rights, even if they are rude, unfair, and in my opinion, quite likely to be physically damaging?

[TurtleDove]

Yes, just as people have a right to say he's full of baloney. Why, exactly do you find that "malicious" and rude, but his comments are within his rights, even if they are rude, unfair, and in my opinion, quite likely to be physically damaging?

Yep, people have a right to state their opinions, and I did not say anyone should feel compelled to apologize.  You are choosing to ignore my point, which is that the reviewer wrote his comments as part of his job for a newspaper while the posters here are posting on an etiquette board. While I am not personally offended by anything posted in this thread I do see some hypocrisy in some of the comments that call out the reviewer for the way he conveyed his opinion by calling him "juvenile," "jerkface," "idiot," and mentioning sticks in his rectum, for example.

And, again, as I have stated throughout this thread, I do believe that it is valid for a dance reviewer to comment on the size and shape of the dancers (just how it is valid for posters here to comment on the reviewers writing ability).  That does not mean I think his comment was above reproach or that I agree with his opinion - I don't. 

[Flora Louise]

I actually think it's a fair game comment. In the same way, it is within a sports announcer's purview to comment that a player is too small for the NFL or too short for the NBA. Just this week, I heard a local guy here in Chicago make the comment that a Bulls player needed to bulk up to play his position effectively. I think it's the nature of the occupation and ballet seems like the same deal to me.

[TurtleDove]

I actually think it's a fair game comment. In the same way, it is within a sports announcer's purview to comment that a player is too small for the NFL or too short for the NBA. Just this week, I heard a local guy here in Chicago make the comment that a Bulls player needed to bulk up to play his position effectively. I think it's the nature of the occupation and ballet seems like the same deal to me.

POD.  I wonder if there are forums out there where jockeys dispute whether they should be judged for their size and shape.

[Jan74]

I actually think it's a fair game comment. In the same way, it is within a sports announcer's purview to comment that a player is too small for the NFL or too short for the NBA. Just this week, I heard a local guy here in Chicago make the comment that a Bulls player needed to bulk up to play his position effectively. I think it's the nature of the occupation and ballet seems like the same deal to me.

What he said would be the same as "Player X scored 87 points in the game, and dunked 3 times. However, he looks too short when he dunks." This means "Person is doing their job right, but I don't like how they look when they do their job".

A comment on how someone's size affects their performance, like "Player X did not dunk a single time, as opposite to the opposite team's player in his position, who dunked 3 times. His being shorter than the average player probably makes him unable to dunk", is perfectly ok.

[TurtleDove]

What he said would be the same as "Player X scored 87 points in the game, and dunked 3 times. However, he looks too short when he dunks." This means "Person is doing their job right, but I don't like how they look when they do their job".

A comment on how someone's size affects their performance, like "Player X did not dunk a single time, as opposite to the opposite team's player in his position, who dunked 3 times. His being shorter than the average player probably makes him unable to dunk", is perfectly ok.

I think this boils down to a difference between "sports" that are objectively "scored" and ones that are subjectively "scored."  In a running race, everyone agrees who won -- there is no room for a difference of opinion.  In basketball, the ball either goes in or it doesn't and there are no extra points for style (though people may be more interested in players with more style).  In a performance sport (like figure skating, gymnastics, or dance) there are many valid ways to "score" the performance.  Here, the reviewer did not like the performance, and felt that the dancer's size/shape affected his enjoyment of the performance.  Whether someone else enjoyed the performance, or even especially appreciated the dancer's size/shape, is immaterial to the reviewer's opinion about the dancer's performance.  Both opinions would be valid because dance is subjectively "scored."

[Twik]

I think the point is, he is calling a woman fat, and blaming it on self-indulgence - that is, lack of professionalism. That's very different from saying, "her overall form lacks the grace that I would like to see in a ballerina".

Turtledove, do you truly think this dancer's shape is from eating too much? You claim that your sole concern in these discussions is health. Do you think she would be healthier if she lost ten or twenty more pounds?

Furthermore, one would think that a professional critic would have the intellectual spauldings to consider more than "Ooooh, I like the leetle sticklike girls! That's what makes me happy! Don't show me anything else!" He might reflect on the gender politics of enforced waifdom, and maybe even consider the implications of developing an aesthetic that does not force more than half its professional practitioners into eating disorders.