A controversy has erupted within the Danish revue industry, highlighting a growing aversion to critical reviews and a preference for curated publicity. This shift raises concerns about the future of the genre and its commitment to freedom of expression, a value the revues themselves often champion.

The conflict centers on Morten Buckhøj, a seasoned revue reviewer, who allegedly faced repercussions from Lars Arvad, director of Odense Summer Revue and chairman of RevyDanmark, for an unfavorable review. Buckhøj’s experience is not isolated, as other revues have also shown reluctance to invite critics whose opinions they fear. Some revues even attempt to dictate which reviewers are deemed suitable, citing concerns about competence or a perceived bias against the genre.

While revues, as private entities, are entitled to choose their guests, this trend suggests an industry intolerant of criticism and determined to manage its public image. This defensiveness is particularly ironic given the revue’s historical role as a platform for social commentary and satire, holding power to account through humor. The revue’s very foundation is built upon the freedom of expression, making its sensitivity to scrutiny all the more troubling.

The situation underscores a deeper issue: the Danish revue’s struggle to evolve and adapt. By clinging to outdated formulas and resisting constructive criticism, the industry risks stagnation. Instead of attempting to silence dissenting voices, revues should embrace critical feedback as an opportunity for growth and innovation. A healthy dose of self-reflection would serve the genre far better than shielding itself from honest assessment.