Critic, playwright are seeing stars

In what Britain’s Daily Telegraph dubbed “a lovely tiff,” a war of words has developed in recent weeks between Michael Billington, theater critic for the Guardian of London, and celebrated playwright David Hare.

Billington wrote in the Guardian of his fear that British theater was becoming too “American” by acquiring the mentality of instant hits and flops that seems endemic to Broadway. Hare, whose plays include “Plenty” and “Amy’s View,” responded by charging that Billington had no business criticizing American theater for crassness while the Guardian continued its “militantly philistine policy” of allocating ratings of stars -- from none to five -- to presentations of music, theater and film.

Billington admitted in print to feeling somewhat ambivalent about the five-star system, but he noted that a four- or five-star review can nurture a good play. He also noted that refusing to hand out stars might result in his being transferred to the gardening page.

Billington then invited readers to offer their own opinions of whether the fault lies in the stars -- leading to a flurry of letters in which one detractor called the star system “lazy, bleak and degrading” and a staunch stargazer described Hare as “ludicrously purist.”

One correspondent suggested an alternative: Readers should be invited to rate the Guardian’s reviewers. “I can think of one or two that would struggle to get more than half a star a week,” this armchair critic opined.

-- Diane Haithman