Members of The Dramatists Guild of America, the organization of playwrights, of which I have been an active member for many years, was in an unusually feisty mood in a review they let howl at a theater critic in the Windy City. What was the occasion of the lambasting?

A long-time critic for The Chicago Sun-Times reviewed some musicals that were works in progress at Theater Building Chicago, a venue that has been attempting to nourish the struggling art form for many years. The critic, one Hedy Weiss, had deigned to review its showcase performances in previous years but apparently her opinions were not so flagrantly intolerant for the head of the theater to ask her to absent herself until one or more of the works might mature enough to be presented in a more critic-friendly manner. Not so this year.

The unsuspecting critic wrote: The eight deeply flawed new musicals seemed to suggest the art form has fallen on very hard times. She went on to maintain that none of the wannabe hits, whether in semi-staged or concert-reading style, was ready for prime time. Worse yet, she had the ill-advised temerity to admit that she had not sat through any of the shows because of their poor quality.

Enter the howling dramatists.

Edward Albee: Irresponsible.

Stephen Schwartz: Ignorant.

Tony Kuchner: Incapable of understanding standards of professional and ethical conduct.

And, as I noted in the Guilds latest newsletter, Stephen Sondheim weighed in with Art isnt easy. It becomes close to impossible when the creative process is violated as casually and unprofessionally as it was in this case, eight times, by Ms. Weiss.

John Weidman, the usually affable president of the guild, fired off a letter to The Sun-Times, accompanied by 22 emails from irate members. His missive called her review a shocking and irresponsible betrayal of one of the fundamental understandings which makes the creation of new work possible. He also called attention to the fact that the workshop process provides an opportunity for writers to evaluate their work as it evolves, protected from the consequences of critical appraisal.

From our viewpoint her transgression is not so much an occasion for vitriol but for lament, not for her lack of propriety but of wisdom.

If you look back at the very few critics weve had who one might generously apply the word great in describing, they have known we are all tending the same garden, and, while its fine to harvest in its time, it only helps create a famine to decide on the quality of the sprouts before they have time to mature. Whacking them precipitously means, not only less nourishment for all, but less produce worthy of the connoisseurs persnickety palate.

Ms. Weiss allowed herself a written response, stating that she had reviewed the festival in the past without objection and no one had told her she could not review it this time. She also called attention to her understanding that the festival is a public event, with an advertising campaign and tickets. If you are given a press kit and if you are given pictures, she asked a reporter of The New York Times, Campbell Robertson, via telephone, what are you supposed to do with them?

Meanwhile, Joan Mazzonelli, the executive director of Theater Building Chicago, finds herself in the uncomfortable middle of the squall. She is, after all, condemned to continue in Chicago and has, of necessity, distanced herself from her defenders. She has also admitted she hadnt made the festivals policy clear to Ms. Weiss: Call it an error of omission is the best I can tell you. She added the sad refrain, Whats in my hands is that Hedy Weiss, who is a major reviewer, is upset with me.

But probably not as upset as the librettists, lyricists, and composers at whose budding works she did most unwisely swing her sharp and heavy scythe.