End of the Year and a Dance Hope for 2025

This is my first end of the year with LiftedLeg, and more than that, I can’t ever recall writing such a piece before!¹   However, I haven’t been running for a full year, so rather than summing up the 53 shows I’ve seen, I thought I would raise one thing that has really struck me recently. It concerns…

Dance Publicity and Programme Notes

Although many will book to see a show based purely on past experience of the company or choreographer, many others will look at the publicity materials about what to expect in the work, and some even look up reviews, if they are available. But it is the publicity words on the company and theatre websites that are the vital link in the chain designed to get you to book. And they should be accurate.

Of course, publicity materials are naturally bound to be very upbeat, and there’s no problem with that, but on a non-trivial number of occasions, the publicity material seems to be at significant variance with the actuality of what we see on stage.

That doesn’t of itself mean the show is not good or not enjoyable, but if you are lost or perplexed, then good pre-publicity and a quickly read programme note or synopsis can really help. However, sensible accuracy is paramount, and that can be missing.

I think the problem arises when the first publicity words for a show are generated — this will often be before the work is actually fully created. A lot can happen between a choreographer coming up with an idea and the finished reality; that’s the way of art. I suspect that too often, advance publicity for a work reflects the original aspiration, and once those words are generated, they rarely seem to be fully revisited. You get the feeling that nobody stands back and looks at the finished work to ask themselves if the existing blurbs really reflect reality.

I’m sure the publicity words will be reviewed, but that will be around honed smoothness and a set of sentences that primarily sell and encourage booking — accuracy about what’s being sold, perhaps not so much.

And if a work is successful and tours internationally, then you will often see the original publicity materials reused, whether they are accurate or (effectively) misleading.

For smaller works, publicity and progarmme often comes down to a choreographer’s brief note about the work. Sometimes such notes are deliberately obtuse, as creatives want the art to speak for itself and dislike telling people what to ‘see’. I understand the concern, but I would generally note that the shows which say least about the actuality can be the most perplexing and frustrating to watch — for me, anyway. Being as specific as you can about the intention behind the work and how it is structured, etc., is essential, really. Orientating people about what to expect should not be considered unartistic or prescriptive.

I’ve said enough, and I think in the coming year of reviews, I will briefly highlight how a show relates to the publicity words for it. And I’ll look to report back next year…