Why is it that academic writing is so completely devoid of personality? Objectivity? Hardly—everyone has their biases, and those biases ALWAYS make their way into the writing. There is this great thing now called literary nonfiction. It’s nonfiction with, gasp, personality! Incorporating some color (via character sketches, syntax, adjectives, metaphors, humor, etc.) keeps the reader engaged and makes the writing more effective. I’d also like to point out that academic writing more often than not is exclusive rather than inclusive and therefore fails to accomplish the goal of educating. OK, harangue over, but if you’re interested in this topic, particularly with how it pertains to art criticism, I recommend Dave Hickey’s “Air Guitar: Essays on Art and Democracy.”
So, clearly, this book was written in an academic style. Also not a mystery is the fact that I’m not crazy about that kind of writing. However, this book provided a decent overview of the history of ballet and modern dance in the West. Certain figures in the development of the art are mysteriously given more weight than others (to be fair, a lot of ground is covered in this book, so inevitably some things do not get the development they deserve). It succeeded in giving me the time line of how things unfolded, but it almost read like a list, so not particularly compelling. This project could have been more sophisticated.