Gia Kourlas’ review of “Tape” by Kenneth Kvarnstrom was less praise and more dissatisfaction for the dance piece. Kourlas comments on the theme of the tape in the piece, as a grid and series squares on the ground or that the live (not taped!) music played for the dancers. There are moments in the review in which one could mistake the comments for positive remarks and a sense of enjoyment. However, any such remarks are quickly followed by an off handed putdown. The dance is described as looking like a fabric freshener commerical, the cast being talented but ultimately no more remarkable than any other dancer or even the floor, and facets of the performance are referred to as “worse intrusions”. Even the term whimsy is being used with a sense of mockery; the musician playing instruments through the dancers is whimsical, a dancer telling a cake recipie is whimsical, an non-sequiter about almonds being a nut, the title of the review itself- it’s all so whimsical!
Now, the review does not follow much of what Wendy Oliver describes in her writing. There is very little semblance of an actual description of the performance in the review. As the reader, I had little to no idea of what this dance must have been like to watch except for that it was not very impressive. In addition to that, there is hardly any analysis or interpretation of “Tape” in the review. All that this review consisted of was the author’s evaluation of the performance, a less than pleased evaluation that stood on the borderline of mocking and insulting, and a garden variety of general observations about the performance. This review was enough to make me not want to see “Tape”, not because of scathing remarks, but because I learned hardly anything about it and so it leaves me with a feeling of apathy… perhaps, however, that is what Kourlas intended?

Mary Yanez