Way Off Broadway Critic Is Way Off Base

The Way Off Broadway Playhouse (WOB) has been in Orange County for four years. Our troupe’s diverse efforts have met with both positive and negative responses--par for the course for anyone involved in the performing arts. However, Jan Herman’s sarcastic, condescending stage review of “Rain. Some Fish. No Elephants” (Friday, March 20) was a blatant, unprofessional attack on WOB’s existence, and it has angered and insulted the integrity of our performers, staff, crew and patrons.

In all honesty, this is not the rebuttal of a director scorned. I have no problem with a constructive negative critique. But I do have a problem with journalistic negligence, misrepresentation, naivete and inaccuracy. This sort of undignified deliberate assault gives everyone a reason to be concerned with the future of intimate theater in Orange County.

The following quotes are taken from Mr. Herman’s review:

Paragraph one: “The Way Off Broadway playhouse has always impressed me with its ability to draw crowds--overflow crowds, in fact, who buzz with excitement on opening nights and don’t have the cookie-cutter look of suburban playgoers out for an evening of ‘kulcher.’ They know (at least I think they know) that there’s no chance of getting that at WOB.”

The reason the theater draws such crowds is that WOB has established itself as a unique off-Broadway style theatrical experience. WOB, with a mailing list of 8,000, has no problem selling out.

How does someone who has attended only five out of close to 1,000 performances qualify to know if “cookie-cutters,” transients or aristocrats are attending our shows? I, on the other hand, have been at almost every performance and would like to state for the record that our audiences include a true cross-section of Southern California theatergoers. It is an insult to the intelligence of our patrons to imply that there is no chance of getting an evening of “kulcher” at WOB. Maybe it is not Mr. Herman’s cup of tea, but many have gotten and do get an evening of real “culture”!

Paragraph two: “They don’t go there for the stellar performances (at least I think they don’t). In five seasons there haven’t been any.” Again, what qualifies anyone who has seen only four of the 30 productions to know this, let alone print it in an article?

Mr. Herman himself, in his review of “Times Square Angel” (December, 1991), praised our lead actress for the way she “carries the show, with strong support.” Many of our performances have received strong critical acclaim.

Still paragraph two: “They don’t go there for the literate quality of the plays or the expert production values.” Mr. Herman implies that our productions are illiterate and only someone who is illiterate would enjoy them. Mr. Herman has attended “Frankenstein,” “Psycho Beach Party,” “Times Square Angel” and now “Rain,” all essentially campy comedies. Once again he has summed up WOB’s history based on his limited experience. What about literate shows he has not attended, such as “Hunting Cockroaches,” “Women of Manhattan,” “An Act of the Imagination” and “Alone at the Beach”--all praised by his fellow reviewers at The Times?

Occasionally, a writer falls into a powerful, influential position and feels qualified to make an overall judgment on something about which he or she has only limited knowledge. My whole point with this reply is to urge a closer look at the individuals who are selected to be theater reviewers and their credibility. It may be helpful if they actually would study acting, directing, set, sound, light, makeup, costume design. I think if Mr. Herman had some insight into the extensive hard work that goes into mounting a production with a limited budget, he might not be so quick to characterize our theater with quick “witty” one-liners designed to amuse himself. Maybe WOB isn’t for everybody, but a reviewer’s job is to evaluate the play.