THEATER: Insurgo wears out its welcome

The Las Vegas Review-Journal, until further notice, will not be offering publicity to the Insurgo Theater Movement, and I thought it would be only fair to theater lovers to explain why.

As a critic, my critiques of Insurgo have sometimes been stinging. I believe in being tough on mediocre productions so that we can more easily separate them from the good. If you look closely, though, in the three-and-a-half years Insurgo's been in town, I think you'll find I've often been enthusiastic about some of their work. (Nothing requires me to be enthusiastic about anyone's work, but it just so happens Insurgo has gotten plenty of positive reviews.)

The review that seemed to anger founder John Beane most was one in which I suggested he was at a time in his artistic life when he should consider training, perhaps at the Nevada Conservatory Theatre, where he would get the chance to work with Equity actors and lessen sloppiness and sharpen his skills. (You can find the review at lvrj.com/living/-salome--proves-insurgo-s-beane-needs-to-be-saved-from-himself-101862178.html) Beane's reaction was to post on my Facebook account a scolding that included the word "womanly" and an obscene word for homosexual. Steve Friess, a well-known freelance journalist, wrote in the Las Vegas Little Weekly that some gay actors said they would refuse to work with Beane, and a local gay publication — The Las Vegas Bugle — would no longer give him publicity.

I was prepared to go ahead and review their plays as usual.

But a second thing was bugging Beane. I am also a theater writer for "Theater Chat" which appears every other Friday in the Neon. I express opinions there as well, and report on the state of the art. I ran at least two items within the last few months that angered Beane (as far as I can tell from his e-mail reactions). One had to do with a community college producer saying he would never have Insurgo at the college again. Another had to do with a local producer claiming he could not go forward with his new season because Beane hadn't paid the licensing bills when his troupe was housed there. Both items merited press attention and for both times I asked Beane for a comment.

After months of friction over what Beane saw as my abuse of power, I received this e-mail from him over the weekend, which read, in part: "We have met officially … and decided not to participate in your reviews. … Though we think you are capable of theatrical insight, your need for gossip undermines your authenticity and we are concerned about your professionalism. If your superiors need more information on this ban, please let them know we can forward the e-mails to them that we have received from you over the last couple of months which we believe speak for themselves."

There are several ways this could be fought. For now, though, I think I'll give Insurgo a breather. The downside is the Review-Journal, in reaction, will not list the Insurgo in their calendar, nor will they do any feature articles on the troupe. The feature section had already put on hold preshow articles because of the theater's habit of changing their opening dates and titles. The R-J did not want to publicize events that might not take place. That hold was going to change once Insurgo got its act together.

I'm not gloating over any of this. I've stayed in Vegas for more than 20 years because I've wanted to be a part of the growing theater scene. But when a theater tries to put pressure on what a critic says — something no one at the Review-Journal has ever done to me — the line has to be drawn. Discussion can always be welcome, but not bans and threats and sexual slurs. Beane is throwing away many thousands of dollars of potential publicity and denying his actors a chance to get wider exposure in the state's biggest newspaper. This is sad stuff, and it has nothing to do with what I appreciate most about my job: the spiritual uplift in watching good theater.

Posted in response to comment received after original blog posting above:

Mr. Beane:

I make clear in my blog that your banning of me was a reaction to two things about my work. One was my reviewing (which prompted your homosexual and womanly remark), the other was about my asking you to respond to potential news items I was working on for Theater Chat.

Three examples: You dropped out of the Beckett Festival several years ago at the last moment. I asked you why. Joe Hammond, producer at College of Southern Nevada, asked me to have lunch with him to discuss why, after working with your group, Insurgo, he would never allow a community theater to work in his college. He had also sent me a copy of an e-mail in which you referred to the folks at CSN as "peasants." Since space is at a premium in this town, I thought this was a story and asked for your reaction. Again, you thought I was trying to "stir the pot." Finally, Mike Morse, the producer of the Onyx, told me — without me asking him — that he was having trouble going ahead with his season this year because of monies you owed on licensing fees when you performed at the Onyx. He said he had decided to go ahead and pay your bill. Again, it would have been wrong of me to not contact you as a theater reporter for a reaction. You told me this matter was between you and Morse and that there must have been some confusion. Morse's reaction: "John may have been confused, but I am not confused."

I don't work for the theater community. I work for the readers of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. If there is an item to be written about, I write it, whether it makes the theater community look bad or good. I am not a public relations person.

Unfortunately, you are mistaken when you say no one in your group gives me comments on Insurgo info. Every group in town has people who want to "spill the beans" to the press. I always take that with a grain of salt. But sometimes rumors will, down the road, lead to facts. Sometimes a responsible person I know will ask me to make him an anonymous source, and it's usually for an obvious reason. But in the case of Hammond and Morse — and given time, I could probably research a few more — people did talk on the record.

You said you had e-mails which would prove to my "superiors" my lack of professionalism. I hope you will share them with me as well.

It's sad that so much time is being wasted tending to this sort of nonsense.

Anthony Del Valle