Its good to see that Greg gets recognition for his work. He was stunning in a much better production at Rodger's Memorial Theater in Centerville but the D-News up and decided not to review productions there anymore. I'm sure it was a decision made to endear themselves to the theater going public, but given the choice of having to put up with the second rate journalism that goes into these reviews and no review at all, I will take no review.

Ditto! I saw the production, have a theatre background, and obviously didn't see the same show this "reviewer" saw. I thought it was delightful! And as for not reviewing "Rodger's" productions....that is unfortunate for the theatrical community. They do some of the finest theatre around. But, I agree with Hero...if this is the quality of "reviews" we have fallen to, it is better to have no review at all.

Um, is this a review? It reads like a first grader's book report. Wow--kind of an embarassment for the Deseret News and Ms. Whitney.

I would have to agree with the two preceeding comments. This review lacks substance. Having seen the show, I felt that the music was excellent, but the message was critical! Ivan Lincoln would have seen it for what it was. Huck's final conversation is not callous, but heartfelt. Let's step it up a notch for the next show. And a review for Rodger's would be great.

Actually, Hero and Pitty, you're both wrong.

Rodger's is still going to be reviewed. I had a friend in the cast and Rodger's Big River just came along while the Deseret News was filling their new slot. It was just bad timing - no slight to anyone.

Why does everyone always jump to the worst conclusions?

Ms. Whitney's review reflects an entire unfamiliarity with Twain's classic novel. What she sees as "Huck's and Tom's insensitivities" or "Huck's callousness" is actually an integral part of the plot, which focuses on the moral contradictions of the times. As a product of those times, Huck experiences conflicts between current societal values and his own feelings toward his friend Jim. The reviewer seems oblivious to Huck’s and Jim’s friendship and the sacrifices that Huck is willing to make, even if it means he will go to hell (which is where Huck thinks he will go for helping Jim escape). Instead of mentioning Huck’s callousness, the reviewer could have referred to the scene where Huck wipes the paint from Jim’s face, showing his genuine concern for Jim in spite of his status as a runaway slave. This is a great play based on a great book. The Grand Theater production is superbly done and well worth seeing. I note that the review in the Salt Lake Tribune was very favorable, being written by someone with a more apparent literary background than Ms. Whitney.

RE: Jane

The director @ Rodger's is my best friend and that's not the picture he painted at all so there must be conflicting stories out there.

I can appreciate it if Ms. Whitney is a new to journalism but there should be some standards in place or training that has gone on before a reviewer gets to get their article published in a major newspaper. If I wanted to read this 'first grader's book report' then I would go read the Standard Examiner's reviews...but that being said, I suppose anything is better than trying to read the drivel Ivan Lincoln put out.

Maybe we should review by commitee, it seems that those who have commented have a far greater understanding of literary genius and theatrical masterpieces than those paid to do this job.

Oh and Jim Christian is my idol!