Critics versus Performers
an Institute of Ideas debate at the Fringe Club, Edinburgh
12August 2000

Brendan O'Neill

In contrast to the morning's polite-but-challenging discussion of the art of criticism, this second session in The Institute of Ideas' Who's Criticising Whom? day conference was a chat show-style clash between performers and critics.

Both sides were allowed to vent their spleens and wreak revenge for past wrongs. The performers went first - Ali Curran, director of the Dublin Fringe Festival, Hilary Strong, director of the Greenwich Theatre, Katherine, student producer of the Fringe hit Bearing Gifts, and the irrepressible Australian comic Brendon Burns, challenged the critics with clarity and vigour (and in Burns' case the occasional expletive).

Katherine questioned whether a critic, who is after all just an individual like everyone else, could be trusted to give a genuine opinion about a show - what if the critic had had a bad day or an argument with his wife? Wouldn't that cloud his judgement? Hilary Strong said that too often critics give in to their publication's editorial pressure and review something accordingly. Brendon Burns told some hilarious stories about his run-ins with critics (like the critic who said Burns was 'charming, good-looking, energetic, but not funny' - and Burns just lopped off the last bit and stuck the compliments on the top of his publicity poster), and argued that critics need performers for the survival of their craft, and so should be kinder to them.

The critics were having none of it. Michael Coveney, theatre critic at the Daily Mail, said he had never heard such a load of rubbish. He pointed out that the job of the critic was not to service the performer, but to service the audience, and sometimes that meant being unkind about a performance. Charles Spencer, theatre critic at the Daily Telegraph, Steve Cramer, comedy editor at The List, and Robert Dawson Scott, channel manager at scotsman.com, all defended their profession against the performers' charges, and called for some more robustness from the arts world.

Meanwhile, Claire Fox was roving around the audience with a microphone ('Go Oprah, go!' yelled Brendon Burns). The Fringe Club venue was packed with performers who wanted to give their views on the relationship between critics and artists, making for this year's most exciting and exhilirating debate on the Fringe. Performers in the audience attacked the critics for walking out of shows before they ended ('No respectable theatre critic has done that in 50 years', responded Michael Coveney), for assuming that their opinions are better than anyone else's ('We have actually studied and we love what we write about', retorted Charles Spencer), and for failing to provide performers with good copy ('We're not here to help your careers' was the critics' general response to this accusation).

'See', said Brendon Burns, 'the critics don't much like being criticised'. But in truth, the critics handled it well and put the case for being able to set standards in the arts and to give potential audiences a guide to the quality and worth of a show. An excellent debate.