Critics have long been the bridge between the stage and the audience. Their reviews can guide theatergoers to unforgettable productions or steer them away from lackluster attempts. But beyond simply reviewing, the most influential theatre critics have shaped the world of drama itself—championing new playwrights, introducing bold interpretations, and critiquing the conventions that define theatre. This blog explores the lives and work of famous theatre critics, examining how their words left an indelible mark on the art form.
How Theatre Criticism Became Essential
Theatre has always been a reflection of society, celebrating its successes and critiquing its flaws. But how did criticism become such a key part of this dialogue?
Theatre criticism began as informal commentary during the early days of drama in ancient Greece and Rome. These discussions gradually evolved with the rise of print media, solidifying around the 18th and 19th centuries. By the time modern writers like Henrik Ibsen and Anton Chekhov were reshaping the theatrical landscape, critics were essential to contextualizing and interpreting their work for audiences.
The role of critics was more than evaluative. They became cultural tastemakers, deciding what deserved attention and paving the way for the experimental, controversial productions we celebrate today.
Prominent Critics Who Shaped Theatre Criticism
1. Clement Scott
Clement Scott, often viewed as one of the founding fathers of modern theatre criticism, emerged in the late 19th century as a dominant voice in British theatrical discourse. Writing for The Daily Telegraph, he captured the public’s imagination with vivid reviews that blended analytical depth with emotional resonance.
Scott championed the works of Henrik Ibsen, whose plays were revolutionary for their time, addressing complex issues like societal expectations and individual freedom. However, Scott’s relationship with Ibsen’s work was complicated. While he recognized their significance, his reviews often spawned heated debates, reflecting Victorian England’s clash of tradition and progress.
His influence extended beyond his reviews. Scott played a pivotal role in nurturing a heightened respect for theatre as a cultural institution, helping show that criticism wasn’t just opinion—writing about theatre was a craft in itself.
2. Walter Kerr
Walter Kerr’s work as a critic in mid-20th century America for publications like The New York Times and The New York Herald Tribune was defined by his sharp intellect and lyrical prose. Unlike his more caustic contemporaries, Kerr wielded a rare kindness in his critiques, aiming to uplift the field rather than tear it down. This positive perspective didn’t make him any less influential—rather, it broadened his reach.
Kerr wasn’t afraid to call out a production’s flaws, but he often highlighted its potential too. His reviews illuminated the intricate interplay between dialogue, staging, and performance. For budding playwrights and directors, his insights often served as valuable lessons for their craft.
Beyond his reviews, Kerr was a playwright, which gave him an empathetic understanding of the challenges of theater-making. His dual roles enriched his criticism with nuance and made his praise all the more meaningful.
3. Frank Rich
Nicknamed “The Butcher of Broadway,” Frank Rich’s tenure as a critic at The New York Times defined an era of theatre. From 1980 to 1993, Rich wielded unparalleled power with reviews that could make or break a production overnight. His words often became cultural events in themselves, dictating the fate of a show before the curtain rose on its second act.
But while his nickname suggests harsh critiques, Rich was also known for his deep respect for the art form. He engaged with theater on an intellectual level, deftly dissecting performances and stressing the importance of storytelling. Rich’s work championed bold productions, such as Tony Kushner’s Angels in America, which challenged societal norms and brought discussions of AIDS and gay rights to the forefront of American consciousness.
A single review by Rich could send audiences flocking to tickets—or left theaters grappling with why their productions failed. His legacy lies in setting the bar high for excellence, pushing the industry toward greater creativity and seriousness.
How Their Words Impacted Playwrights and Audiences
Theatre critics don’t just react to the work; they shape it. Playwrights and directors often revisit their feedback—even the harshest reviews—to refine their craft. Clement Scott’s debates around Ibsen inspired deeper philosophical discussions about the evolving nature of modern drama. Frank Rich, through his provocative critiques, motivated creators to aim higher, producing riskier, more thoughtful works to challenge him and the audience alike.
Critics have also acted as cultural historians for theatergoers. They contextualize works, linking them to social movements and historical currents, which helps audiences understand a play’s broader resonance. Walter Kerr, for instance, taught readers how to view productions as holistic pieces of art while appreciating their individual components.
And then there’s their role as gatekeepers. By shining their spotlight on lesser-known productions or new playwrights, critics open doors that would otherwise remain locked. Think of Frank Rich’s support for the early works of directors like Mike Nichols, who later became industry titans.
The Future of Theatre Criticism
With the rise of digital platforms and social media, the landscape of theatre criticism is shifting. Traditional print reviews, once the backbone of the theater world, now share space with amateur blogs, YouTube essays, and even tweets. On one hand, this democratizes criticism, giving more people voices in the discussion. On the other, it makes it harder for professional critics to command the same authority their predecessors once held.
However, the importance of thoughtful, knowledgeable criticism hasn’t waned. We still need individuals who can analyze theater at a high level, helping separate enduring works from ephemeral trends. The next generation of critics will likely blend traditional expertise with the accessibility of digital media, keeping the art alive for a broader audience.
Final Curtain Call
The work of critics like Clement Scott, Walter Kerr, and Frank Rich shaped theater into what it is today—a dynamic, evolving space for storytelling and societal reflection. Their insights pushed creatives to innovate and helped audiences engage more deeply with the art.
For aspiring critics, there’s enormous potential to make an impact. Whether through traditional or digital platforms, criticism remains a vital part of the symbiotic relationship between theater, its makers, and its viewers.
As you continue immersing yourself in the world of drama—whether as a performer, audience member, or budding critic—remember to ask questions, provoke thought, and never stop exploring the boundaries of art.