Why do people still publish John Simon?
« Quick Debate Thoughts | Main | Oh, DaBrooks, how We Missed Thee »
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
God, I wish I knew. It boggles my mind that a man who has literally gone on the record saying that Shakespeare should only be performed by white, British people has his defenders. His racism and misoginy wouldn't be quite as bad if they weren't accompanied by the aesthetic judgement of your average bigoted grandpa. He basically uses a lot of fancy words to do little more than tell girls they're ugly, put black people in their place and whine that the theatre makes him cranky.
Posted by: Ben TS | October 03, 2008 at 11:20 AM
I am not, for the nost part, a fan of Mr. Simon's, but I don't see what's terribly wrong with this article. (Or is it the link of choice simply because it's most recent?)
Posted by: Seth Christenfeld | October 03, 2008 at 01:24 PM
I thought the article was maddeningly vague and boring--it should have had much more specific information about things like the songs included on the compilation. Now I don't know which is worse: the old vitriolic John Simon, or the new wishy-washy John Simon who wrote this useless article?
Posted by: Marissa | October 03, 2008 at 03:48 PM