Last month a question on TD’s Facebook page got me thinking. In response to Kirsten Kaschock’s This is not  a review., Ashley Lippolis, while appreciative, also wished “that someone had given Tori Lawrence’s evening of dance a critical review.”

I see the value of more traditional reviews, of course! But also value other kinds of responses, something TD makes possible. Here’s what I wrote on Facebook:

“TD has spent a good deal of time considering what directions dance writing is moving in now. Many of us are dissatisfied with traditional review formats–description and opinion from author-as-authority. Tommy DeFrantz in his workshop with us encouraged us to consider the temperature of the room, the complete experience surrounding a performance and the questions posed by the performance. It seems to me that focusing on the question of how this work of art relates or does not to our up-to-the-moment reality falls within this brief. While one of the motivators for starting thINKingDANCE in the first place was an awareness of the insufficient response in print to serious contemporary work in PHL, and while, as an artist, I completely understand the wish to be reflected in full, I also fully support the genuine research of authors reflecting the dance they see in alternative ways. Edwin Denby rarely gave a complete picture of anything (to look to the past) and he is held in high esteem…. Because TD is not the only game in town, and because we offer our writing to the public for free, we reserve the right to pursue the art of dance writing in a way that challenges tradition and points to new possibilities.”

Sounds kind of hard line rereading it now. But how else will dance writing grow? What do you think?