Dear Mr. [Albert] Williams:
In conjunction, I also have to point out, Mr. Williams, that your review of your colleague’s work was obviously protective and biased and uncharacteristically kind, lacking the sharp-tongued, ready-to-attack tone customary of your review section. Frankly, it smacked of the worst kind of cronyism. Is the arts section one big club and fraternity, or is it a place where the public can expect worthy journalism?
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
This instance might not be so bad, or might even be overlooked, if it wasn’t for the fact that over the four years I have been a practicing theatre artist in Chicago, Mr. Langer has consistently proven to be a particularly acerbic, cynical, negative, mean-spirited, ill-informed critic and, judging by his reviews, clearly someone who is more interested in the sound of his own voice and his own turn of a phrase rather than serving the public with a well-observed, informed and–is it too much to ask?–astute opinion of a performance. I can assure you that within the theatrical community Mr. Langer is looked upon as something of a joke. And, yes, if you sense a mean-spiritedness in my tone, believe me, it is only the same medicine the theatre community has had to put up with from Mr. Langer all these years.
With all due respect,
The alternative press has traditionally been a forum for critics who also work in the arts they cover–or, if you prefer, for artists who also write criticism–and the Reader is no exception. Adam Langer is not the only critic here who also writes plays. So do Jack Helbig, Lawrence Bommer, and Justin Hayford (Hayford is also a director and performance artist); and Stephanie Shaw was employed as an actor while she wrote reviews here. I myself have worked in theater for 25 years as a librettist and lyricist, composer, performer, and teacher; and past Reader theater critics have included playwrights Bury St. Edmund and Terry Curtis Fox.
