Spare a thought today for Canadian dance critics, the few who are left, anyway. On Wednesday, the National Ballet of Canada announced its 2024-25 season, which will include a work by German choreographer Marco Goecke.
If Mr. Goecke’s name doesn’t ring an immediate bell, perhaps his encounter with a dance critic last February will. Wiebke Hüster had published a negative review of the world premiere of his work In the Dutch Mountains in a major German newspaper. So Mr. Goecke, director of the Hanover State Ballet, was shocked to see Ms. Hüster at a performance of the piece that evening.
In the review, she wrote that audience members would feel like they were either “going insane” or “being killed by boredom.” Mr. Goecke said it felt like a personal attack, yet another in a history of negative reviews from this particular critic.
He confronted her in the lobby, which led to a different kind of attack: Mr. Goecke pulled a bag of dog feces from his pocket and smeared the contents on Ms. Hüster’s face.
He was charged with assault and lost his job. Criminal proceedings were discontinued in November after he paid a fine. In the immediate aftermath of the shocking act, future prospects looked murky. He told The New York Times that he had had “so much applause” during his career. And that, “if it’s over, it’s over.”
It’s not over.
The National Ballet of Canada’s winter season will kick off with what it is billing as the world premiere of a work by Mr. Goecke. The piece was originally developed for the Stuttgart Ballet in 2021 and is being adapted for the National Ballet under a new title, Morpheus’ Dream.
Artistic director Hope Muir told The Globe and Mail that the company does not condone Mr. Goecke’s behaviour during the incident in question, “but feels he has since demonstrated sincere regret and apologized publicly,” she wrote. “This and time to reflect has informed our decision.”
This project has been in discussion since 2021, and subsequently postponed twice. Mr. Goecke has previously worked with the National Ballet, which Ms. Muir called a very positive experience. “He is an important and gifted choreographer and I feel that his work will enhance the repertoire of the National Ballet and should not be cancelled.”
I’m all for second chances, but you do have to wonder about the character of a man who would smear dog excrement on a woman’s face. On anyone’s face. Could there have been a better choice? I hate to be provincial about this, but maybe a new work by a Canadian choreographer?
In this atmosphere, where liking the wrong tweet can get you cancelled, why is the National Ballet of Canada giving this German choreographer, as extraordinary as his work is, another chance?
This was my initial reaction. Then I started thinking about the, er, poop that lands with great regularity in the inboxes of, if not the dance critics, at least the newspaper writers of the nation. And in social media mentions. Not only from anonymous trolls – and not from choreographers, generally, as far as I know, but from people who hold what would be considered respectful positions (usually male, in the case of my own inbox). The sticks-and-stones theory of bullying has long been disproved – names can hurt, and you should see some of the names we are called.
True, it would be a lot worse to be on the receiving end of an actual feces-laden attack, but in this environment where the discourse has reached new, often expletive-filled misogynist and racist lows, verbal smears also deserve condemnation.
Also, where can they lead? The Times reported that four other critics said they had received bizarre communications from Mr. Goecke after publishing negative reviews (which Mr. Goecke denied).
Mr. Goecke said he wanted to start a debate about what should be allowed in arts criticism; he said critics should not write in a “personal and hateful way.” He’s not wrong about that. But personal and hateful has become the norm – if not in arts criticism, then in the general zeitgeist.
Hateful words – including aggressive missives – are more than an unpleasant nuisance, especially if there is potential for this kind of behaviour to escalate – or descend – into another. And that could be a lot more dangerous than dog poop.