Theatre critics are under constant attack from two separate directions: from the practitioners whose work they critique, and from academics, who often use critics as stalking-horses. The Australasian Drama Studies Association Conference in 1993 was no exception to this. At a number of crucial points, academic speakers invoked critics for their use-value as villains. The mere mention of one prominent former critic’s name was always good for a light giggle and hiss, and another current critic was at times accorded a special kind of ridicule.

Attacks from the practitioners are similarly persistent. I know of two important directors who are particularly given to hair-trigger reactions – both directly to critics and in some cases behind their backs to arts editors, editors and/or editors-in-chief – at the first public sign of opinions they disagree with. Playwrights can be the same: some are notorious for their attempts to influence or neutralize critics both before and after the premieres of their plays. Jonathan Miller was right when he said that the only thing any theatre practitioner ever wants from a critic is an overwhelming avalanche of unadulterated praise.