The Johnny Cash musical, Ring of Fire, which began life at Buffalo’s Studio Arena Theatre, did not triumph on Broadway. Indeed, critics responded to its opening at the Ethel Barrymore Theatre this week with some of the most scathing reviews of the season. The Reuters headline, “Ring of Fire Cashes and Burns,” about sums it up.

Though the show delighted Buffalo audiences and was undeniably not without charm, the New York critical reaction is not much of a surprise. Even in Buffalo, the show needed some serious work, which it was never to receive. Lulled into complacency by the effusive response of Studio Arena audiences, the producers cancelled a San Francisco engagement in favor of a direct run on Broadway.

I have been somewhat bemused by the inflated local euphoria over the project. Studio Arena does have the distinction of being the first theater to present the show, but their artistic contribution to Ring of Fire was minimal to non-existent. This is not the same as Broadway-bound shows that started with Des McAnuff at LaJolla Playhouse, or with Jack O’Brien at the Old Globe. Studio Arena does not even have an artistic director of record. Ring of Fire was, for all practical purposes, booked in.

Having said that, I would quickly add that the impulse to open the resources of Studio Arena Theatre to a project like Ring of Fire was a good one. There is no guarantee that any new show will be successful and Ring of Fire was very good to Studio Arena. It has been a long time since a director with the credentials of Richard Maltby, Jr. has worked at Studio Arena. As the creator of Ain’t Misbehavin’, he is arguably the inventor of what have come to be known as “Juke Box Musicals.” His presence here enriched our theater scene, and the show generated more excitement at Studio Arena than we have seen for some time. Though it was a Broadway failure, Ring of Fire was a Studio Arena success.

A theater cannot be judged on the relative merits of individual productions alone. In that vein, I would reiterate that the impulse to offer audiences a chance to see Ibsen’s Ghosts was a good one too, despite the disappointing production that resulted. Studio Arena has drifted far from the mission of theatrical excellence upon which it was founded, and Ghosts, at least, is undeniably one of the great plays. The possibility that Studio Arena offered a production run amok—over-designed and under-directed—was symptomatic of a lack of artistic leadership at the institution which has been in evidence for some time.

Of course such topics do beg the question, what in the world is going on down at Studio Arena Theatre? Word is that we are nearing a decision on the choice of an artistic director and that there are finalists. A lot rests on this choice and we can only keep our fingers crossed.