If a show opens in a theater and a critic isn’t there to see it, will anyone care? The relationship of critic and theatrical artist or institution is one fraught with ambivalence, pathos and an element of romance. In the old days (and maybe still in New York), a bad review could break a show and a good one could save it, or launch an actor to stardom. But how necessary is criticism to Atlanta’s theater scene?
Artists prefer to believe they don’t need approval. They often will explain, “If you’re willing to believe the good reviews, then you have to believe the bad ones, too.” But that philosophy implies actors don’t need encouragement. In a career where there is often no measurable trajectory, encouragement may be the only thing that keeps them committed to such low-paying physical and emotional work.
Theater producers are more direct about why they need critics. “It is important to be reviewed for the publicity it might generate,” said one local theater’s artistic associate. However, when a review isn’t published on a show’s opening weekend, it’s difficult to drum up interest. “I know [critics] need to come when it’s convenient to them, but opening [night] has been de rigueur for years,” she adds. “If they come past the first week, why come? Why try to influence folks when [the run] is almost over?”
It may be argued that Atlanta theaters are lucky to secure any press coverage at all. Newspapers are struggling to stay alive. To remain economically viable they must focus on what sells either papers or ads. Layoffs have made it necessary for every staff writer to diversify, not just publish on one topic. Gone are the days when arts and entertainment sections stood alone. Now, readers are more likely to find theater reviews appearing side by side with celebrity news, comics and fashion advice or relegated to online blog posts.
The Sunday Paper’s theater critic Bert Osborne says the column space he has to work with is his biggest challenge. “There are two or three or even four shows that need to be covered, [and] I’ll still only have a half-page to work with, which sometimes means limiting my critiques to a paragraph or two apiece,” Osborne says. “That often forces me to be more blunt than I might want to be. It’s a tough call, but in the interest of (hopefully) gaining a broader overview of the Atlanta theater scene, I’d rather try seeing and covering as much as I can.”
Theater critic Curt Holman is the only full-time arts and entertainment staffer Creative Loafing has left. “A year (or 10 years ago), I’d often write two play reviews of 650 words apiece for each weekly issue,” Holman says. “[Now] I frequently only have space for one play story. And I [also] will write about books, dance, etc., as a general assignment arts writer.”
The vibrancy of Atlanta’s theater scene also taxes its financial supporters. At a recent arts funding meeting, artistic directors were told to consider merging their theaters because donors (and audiences) don’t want to have so many options; they would prefer to give their money to a handful of theaters, instead. It’s not what theaters want to hear, especially since many of them are struggling to stay afloat.
One artistic director believes that critics can help theaters turn things around. “The best critics want with all their heart for the work to be great,” he says. “They get involved in the life of the theater community and care deeply about their subjects. They evaluate the work without crushing the spirit of individuals or companies. They look for the gold, not the dirt. They champion their community to the public and help bring to light work that should be seen.”
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s critic Wendell Brock agrees, to a point. “I write for the public,” he says. “[But] the newspaper pays me to contribute informed, independent opinions, not to have relationships with theater artists.”
By expressing those opinions, critics become easy targets for disgruntled artists. “My issue with critics is they often view the world through one lens — theirs,” says an actor. “It takes intentional, careful thought for a critic to move beyond that.”
Another actor adds, “I am afraid the writing of good dramatic criticism died out in the 19th century.”
Osborne laughs at the criticism. “I’m only human!” he says. “By their nature, reviews are ultimately slanted this way or that by the individual opinion of the person who’s writing them. But, hopefully, they provide readers with information to decide for themselves if a show sounds like something they might like (no matter what the critic thinks of it).”
And theater does need its critics, especially now. “It is important for our work to be reviewed,” says another artistic director. “If we continue to lose the trained theater critics, then certainly the ecology of what [makes] theater possible will be even more threatened.”
Suehyla El-Attar is an Atlanta-based actress/playwright. She can currently be seen in Synchronicity’s production 1:23, through May 17.
