Once again this week, I review a show I skipped out on during intermission and certain people are fuming. A non-fuming comment from a discussion about said review on Facebook:

As a Theatre Educator, I understand the importance of the critic. I think it is important that artists have some one to keep them honest. This is an important duty. But I do think that with this duty comes responsibility. The words you say will have great impact, you owe it to the artist to judge their work as a whole, to understand the nature of the intent and respond accordingly. The theme of a play can not be reccognized if you have not witnessed the denoument. By all means, be honest, but you can not accurately evaluate if you have not witnessed all the elements that have gone into the creation of a production.

In the hundreds and hundreds of bad productions I've sat through, "Theatre Educator," a good second act has never, ever redeemed an execrable first act. Never. But you have a point: It's not 100% fair to review half a show.

I've toyed with arguments to justify walking out on bad plays (would you force a food critic to eat the entirety of a meal she found repulsive?) but, ultimately, reason has nothing to do with it—sometimes I have to leave because I just cannot stand it.

The truly bad play inspires a cross between a panic attack and claustrophobia: I squirm, I sweat, I think desperate thoughts, my muscles feel twitchy and my skin feels raw and oversensitive. It takes everything I have not to jump up and run across the stage on my way to the exit.

My walking-out isn't a reasoned decision, or even a causal one. It's a visceral reaction.

For the record, my rules (as they currently stand) for walking out of shows:

1. Always admit to it in the review so people know they're only reading about half of a show.

2. Don't walk out on world premieres. New playwrights deserve a break.

You can read a short, trying-not-to-be-cruel review of the first half of the really extra-bad show—a production of Garcia Lorca's Blood Wedding—here.

And read David Schmader's manifesto for intermission escape artists (which applies more to paying audience members than critics) here.

A sample:

For theatergoers who find themselves staring at shameless crap, intermission exits are a perfectly legitimate response. If intermission doesn't come soon enough or not at all (is there a phrase with more potential for terror than "performed without an intermission"?), don't fret about slipping out mid-show, even if you have to cross the stage to do so. Extreme times call for extreme measures. And if alleged theater artists refuse to justify the attention they've demanded, audiences shouldn't feel bad about withdrawing it.