Letter from Pam Duty concerning my review of Valley Youth Theatre's Oliver!, and response.
Mark S.P. Turvin
(home office) (602) 912-0117
I can be reached for comment via e-mail at: mspt@goldfishpublishers.com
Received 6/20/01

From: PAM DUTY <***@***.***>
To: "'mspt@goldfishpublishers.com'" <mspt@goldfishpublishers.com>
Subject: Your review of Oliver
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 11:08:24 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0

Mr. Turvin,

I was quite perturbed by your review of Oliver, Valley Youth's current production. Though I concur with many your observations, your comments regarding Mr. John Sankovich's role of Fagin are most cruel. While you compliment Mr. Sankovich's portrayal of Fagin, you slander him personally by your comment of "...Fagin with a strong emphasis on the first three letters of his name." How dare you or any person reviewing the arts, make such a remark. You have no right to make comment towards the person rather than the actual acting which was so marvelously displayed on the stage. If your goal in this paragraph was to indicate that Fagin was not portrayed accurately, then you should have said this rather than questioning the actor's choice of gender identity. How dare you bring such slander towards a person -- do you know that Mr. Sankovich is a homosexual, or are you simply wanting your reader's to assume you to be an expert on the ever-so-famous "I can just see he's gay?"

It would be my suggestion that you print an immediate retraction on the first page rather than bury it somewhere in the middle of your site. My only hope is that the ACLU comes after you personally rather than professionally for your slanderous, unethical, and irrelevant comments.

Wishing you enlightenment,
P. Duty

Ms. Duty,

I'm sorry that you believe I was slandering the actor rather than commenting on the choice that actor made. The exact quote is "John Sankovich plays the character..." I said "plays." I did not say "is." I am aware of Mr. Sankovich's sexual preference, though that is both unimportant and irrelevant. All I saw was an actor making a choice about a role that is ordinarily played with an emphasis on his Judaism, and instead playing the role with an affected, effeminate style that greatly implied homosexuality to me. I have since heard that the choice was intended to be more "foppish," an endearing eccentricity of Victorian England, but that is not how I saw it translated.

I enjoy Mr. Sankovich's work, and was surprised by what I saw as his choice. While it is not one I would have made, I did compliment him on some of the unexpected turns this choice gave him in his interaction with the character of Bill Sykes. It was jarring, not wrong. I consider myself to be more of an "expert" on theatre than human sexuality. It is with that tone that I made the remark.

I will not be writing a retraction. I stand by my assertion that the character seemed to be played in a homosexual style. I did not intend to comment on Mr. Sankovich personally, and I hope Mr. Sankovich realizes this. My only regret now is that I attempted to be clever in the way I expressed my opinion on the choice. If there is anything I am guilty of, it is crassness, not slander.

Sincerely,
Mark S.P. Turvin
Goldfish Publishers, LLC

Note:

I have since removed this review from the website. I had hesitations about reviewing Valley Youth Theatre, as it has been my standard practice not to review any youth theatre productions. Obviously, my concerns about being able to review this type of production were well-founded. I should never have written an adult-toned criticque for a youth production. I assure you this will not happen again.

MSPT

PPS:

I have since reposted the review in response to letters from Jean Sidden and Ron May. I deeply regret this whole situation, and any offense my crass comment has made.

You are visitor number to this site since 4/14/99.