It certainly seems to be the silly season for letters. Enclosed is a letter I received recently (with my reply) from Mervyn Thompson the artistic director of Downstage. I would like to publish the letter if only to demonstrate the fatuity of Mr Thompson's arguments, and the odd notions he seems to hold about the function of the reviewer.

I am pleased that you have no quarrel with the substance of my reviews, that in fact the only quibble you have is with the derogatory comments I have to make about the typical efete Downstage: audience.

By typical I mean the people, ubiquitous at the Hannah Playhouse, who pay $12 a double ticket, and whose sole interest in being there is to disport themselves, in your expensive nightclub atmosphere. You are kidding yourself if you think their interest in theatre is genuine.

To argue that your anticipated Maori audience, the gambling public, factory workers, and "various prisoners, school children and pensioner groups" are typical audiences is pure sophistry. You haven't played to them yet!

I have reviewed several of the other productions you mention, and I have commented on the audience before. Perhaps you did not write then because the reviews were favourable.

I am puzzled by your postscript. I was reviewing two productions, not your entire "Come Together" programme. Nor, I believe was there any onus upon me to do so. I might say however that two friends of mine, a woman and a child, were mightily annoyed at being forced to pay $12 for compulsory dinner and show to see the Aboriginal dancers, who subsequently performed for free at various venues about the city.

Might I suggest, Mr Thompson, that instead of flailing ridiculously at your critics up and down the country, you do something to ensure that your work does indeed reach the imaginary audiences you refer to.

I have just read with interest your review of the first part of the Downstage "Come Together". Your description of the audience which went to see "Sweet Mr Shakespeare" quite intrigued me. Fur stoles, well maybe one or two. But lorgnettes.' We've been trying to get one for our prop collection for some time, but since none of us has ever seen one in Wellington, we are naturally agog with interest that you should report some at the Hannah. Perhaps on the night you saw the play there were also a few Daliks? We'd like one of those for our collection as well.

I can't wait, by the way, for your review of "the typical Downstage audience." Does it consist - I ask only as a matter of interest - of the people who saw "Gallipoli?" Is it by chance the group of people who come to see Theatre Action, Blerta, the All-Stars show from Dunedin, Marat/Sade, Equus or First Return? Is it perhaps the factory workers who will see Uncle Scrim at their workplaces this year? Or the various prisoners, school children and pensioner groups who will see the same play? Is it the Maori audience that will turn out later this year to see Tomorrow Will Be a Lovely Day? Or the gambling public which will see our show on the T.A.B.? Or are you yourself the typical Downstage audience?

There is an obvious reply to this letter, but unfortunately it consists of yet another of those cliches so rife in our houses of learning. One of these days you must look at the Downstage operation objectively instead of trotting out the quarter-truths which in so many student reviews masquerade as objectivity.