Out on a limb

Dance is the artform of the 21st century. So why has the LA Times decided it no longer needs a critic? By Judith Mackrell

Lewis Segal, chief dance critic of the Los Angeles Times since 1996 and a regular contributor since 1984, has just lost his job. It's a decision that doesn't, apparently, reflect on Segal himself: while he is an often controversial writer, his sharp, eclectic columns have been widely credited with raising the profile of dance and dance writing in the city. Rather, it reflects depressingly on the value that the paper places on dance as an artform. Although Segal will be invited to contribute on a freelance basis, the LA Times last Friday dismantled the full-time position of dance critic.

It would be wrong to overplay the importance of dance in LA itself. New York remains the undisputed epicentre of the American dance world, home to most of the country's major choreographers and companies. Then there are cities such as San Francisco, which has a much longer history of dance performance than LA. Yet even the most cursory look at Segal's recent critical output reveals that he regularly reviews dance three or four times a week, ranging from classical and modern to Asian dance (of which Segal has made himself a passionate advocate). All these performances are serious enough to deserve the oxygen of publicity, appreciation, and even negative criticism.

Critical comment carries more weight when it is anchored around the views of a chief writer. While everybody - performers, audiences, the press - benefits from having access to a range of opinion, it's easier to navigate when that debate is centred around a few strong voices. Sam Sifton, arts editor of the New York Times, believes that the authority of a chief critic is irreplaceable. "As an editor, I wouldn't want to rely on critical coverage of dance that was manned by freelancers."

For Los Angeles itself, this is a particularly damaging time to lose its best-known critic. The city has just seen the launch of the Los Angeles Ballet, after two seasons still feeling its way in terms of audience and repertory. It deserves and requires the attention of at least one well-informed, local critic to judge and observe its progress on a regular basis.

Of course, there are some who may feel that Segal is not the best person to judge, particularly given that one of his more controversial articles was titled: "Five things I hate about ballet." Yet, while Segal's polemic caused some of the LA Times's readers to call for his removal, the article also generated an international debate within dance magazines and on blogs (and to be fair to Segal, his wrath was directed more at bad touring productions of the 19th-century classics than at ballet itself).

Every critic worth reading has their likes and dislikes, their blindspots and their crusades. The point is that if they write regularly, their readers get to know them and can interpret or decode what they say. If Segal is to be replaced with a variety of freelancers, or if some of the Los Angeles dance coverage is taken over by other papers - as Sifton believes it might be - it becomes far more difficult for readers to get a feel of where any given review or reviewer is coming from. Lisa Fung, arts editor for the LA Times, says: "We will miss [Segal] but hope he will contribute to the paper's dance coverage in the future. No decisions have been made regarding the position. However, the paper plans to continue to review and cover the lively and exciting dance scene, particularly in southern California." She disputes Segal's claim that he was dismissed, and says he "opted to take the voluntary buy-out programme".

It is not yet clear whether Segal is the only critic on the LA Times to lose his permanent position. If he is, it may be a question of last in, first out. Dance criticism is a relatively young branch of the profession, and, until the second half of the 20th century, it was common for reviews to be passed on to music or drama critics, or simply given to hack journalists with an eye for a pretty pair of legs.

But at the beginning of the 21st century, dance now ranks as one of the fastest expanding artforms. Los Angeles may not rival other main centres in the diversity or sophistication of what appears on its stages - but the west coast's main newspaper (and a major US website) deserves a permanent dance critic. In London (where the British national press are based) we have, god help us, at least 12.