I recently received two very different reviews on a piece I created with a sound artist, Alberto Gaitan. The first one is flat, descriptive, and doesn't enlighten the readers. The second one is much more articulate, poetic, and well thought. They feel like two completely different performances. It made me wonder what the role of a critic should be. How much subjective/objective view should he incorporate in the writing? How much information should be there? 1) DC City Paper

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/02/source-festival-mashes-art/

2) DC theatre source

http://dctheatrescene.com/2009/07/07/source-mash-ups-group-d/