Judging someone's work is hard, but to give an honest review is even harder. I realize that many performers and crew members, especially those locally, put their all into a performance.

To tear it to shreds is not easy - at least, not if you're a nice person.

If I write mean things about John Travolta's movie or Nelly's CD, it may be resented by some fans, but it's not likely I will ever run into either of them. The chance of meeting Nelly's St. Lunatics gang, ready to beat me up, is slim. But locals are a different story.

I could be shopping in Meijer or walking on campus and get mean looks from an irritated audience member. Or, most likely, my e-mail inbox might be filled with hate-mail the next day.

What I dread the most though, is that the next time I have to go do a review, someone upset with a previous review might bark at me about what a "silly little reporter" they think I am.

I don't try to be hurtful in reviews, but I realize it is my job to give a forthright opinion, whether it's good or bad.

The "safe road" is always a healthier alternative to staying out of trouble - but that doesn't mean it's the smarter road, and it's definitely not my job.

Before I attend a performance, I do as much research as possible on the subject matter. I figure out what awards the play won (or didn't), as well as how popular it has been in the past. I also read plot summaries to make sure that I understand the play in full.

On opening night, I am an audience member.

I can't be a journalist, a friend or a foe - I just have to sit and watch as if it were the first time and I were the average student going out on the weekend.

Whatever the performance, I have to release any bias I could possibly have. I have to forget how excited the director was over the phone during an interview or how hard the actors told me they were working on their part. Whether or not the crew stayed up late hours rehearsing or came in early mornings to practice lines are factors that I sympathize with, but can't include in a review.

I have to get down the basic and fundamental question: Would I recommend the performance to you, the readers?

Theater is an art meant to be enjoyed on some level. It isn't always entertaining, but it is created for a purpose, and if that purpose doesn't captivate an audience or catch people's attention, I would not pass it on as "good work."

I make an assessment of a production that the average person can relate to, so that my opinion and advice can be taken and trusted by the average reader. And keep in mind - it's only my opinion.

I have to be honest. It's the only professional thing to do.

Although a month has passed since the beginning of the season, Lansing-area theatrical groups already have produced a great variety of work. Some have been good and others made me want to run through the back door.

I don't want to hurt anyone when I write something harsh, but I think it's my job to give a forthright review, whatever the consequence. Those who work on the productions shouldn't take it personally, but rather constructively.

Sometimes, criticism isn't taken into context the way it should be. Good reviews are always welcomed by the cast and crew, and often applauded (which is highly appreciated).

There is rarely room for constructive criticism, which is what I hope to change. Even when it seems there are only positive things to say, rarely ever are things "perfect."

There is always room for improvement and my goal as a theater reporter is to highlight that.