The opinion of an objective (or at least partially objective) third party is always going to matter. The more cluttered the arts marketing is in your town, the more important the objective opinions are.
But that objective opinion doesn't need to come just from your local newspaper critic.
I'm still waiting for the arts organization that is willing to steal the rating and review systems of places like Amazon or Chowhound.
Imagine if someone could go to your website and read 10 reviews of your latest show that they really felt reflected the truth (good or bad) of your show or artistic product.
We are all critics.
Some of us are better critics then others.
Find those good critics, expose them to your work and let them talk.
The February issue of American Theatre is devoted to critics. Here's an excerpt from ED Teresa Eyring:
"In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, critics integrated art and social commentary in a way that inspired community discussion; later critics became consumer advisors (Eric Bentley’s term, I think), effectually instructing audiences to pull out their wallets for a ticket—or not; more recently, we have the phenomenon of scores of self-appointed critics who have nearly equal access to a hearing through Internet blogs and other forums—and with that, the possibility of a new wave of community engagement in the discourse on art."
The danger in a rating system is that it turns audiences into consumers and critics (amateur and pro) into product reviewers. I'd rather we focus on developing discursive forums, such as blogs, or moderated online forums like those hosted by the Chronicle of Philanthropy. Forums like that would help build audiences and interest, giving them ownership in both the art and a stake in the conversation.
Posted by: Chris Casquilho | February 21, 2008 at 07:33 AM