I wish I could pour a bottle of water on the New York Magazine blog that misrepresents my writing about Mike Daisey.

“And debate still rages over the Mike Daisey affair! Nick from Rat Sass thinks Mike staged a walkout from his own play for the publicity. “

Actually I wish I could drink a bottle of water, bodily process the liquid, and go piss on the author’s shoes. Of course I could probably be charged with assault, but I already have my defense planned.

Your Honor, the plaintiff left me no choice. He does not have a comments section on his Vulture blog where I could rebuff his false statement. His slander caused me extreme emotional distress, triggering my relapse into my sanctuary of Rat Sass beer. So I had drunk myself into a stupor on my walk to his office and there are no public toilets en route to New York Magazine on Madison Avenue.

Your Honor, a man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do. I realize that the plaintiff claims that his shoes were one-of-kind handmade fetishes and that my Rat Sass piss ruined them. I am confused by both the nature and validity of this claim but I will not dispute it. I am willing to take responsibility for all property damages incurred. I also realize there may be some emotional distress. But, as outlined in my countersuit, I feel that all damages are tit-for-tat. The irreparable damage to the Rat Sass brand name as a direct result of New York Magazine’s slander is significant and I have already explained my relapse into drunken stupors. As a result of the emotional impact of this incident, I may never be able to write or perform again.

My Name Is Not Rachel Corrie. How does one escape the prison of one’s own representation?

I haven’t really fallen into a stupor and I figure the author of the new Vulture blog is probably just a slow learner. I won’t piss on his shoes this time but he needs to learn to differentiate between gossip and slander.

What bothered me most about the Mike Daisey incident was the instant polarization with accompanying Fascist Christian chants that arose throughout the theater blogosphere. Mike claims he didn’t invent the appellation “Christian” but he definitely exploited the term in his rendition of the incident. His later apology to the high school students tainted by his broad brush is insincere at best. In fact, he labels them more THEM by finding an article that supposedly proves Norco High is something red and rotten in the blue state of California.

Mike by no means staged the incident. But he has been spinning the PR on it. I find nothing particularly abnormal in this. Many if not most artists nowadays are directly involved in the PR of their work. And the phenomenon of the blogosphere has kicked this self-promotion into high gear. From my observation, one of the negatives of this immersion into their own hype is that many artists no longer attempt to differentiate between a box office and an audience.

I have examined the spectacle of the Mike Daisey incident as it unfolded, not Mike per se, although he is obviously the main character. I actually find the concomitant flaunting of bigotry by the two theatre editors of the mainstream press more interesting and pertinent than Mike’s comments. The virulent anti-Christian prejudices as represented by David Cote and Leonard Jacobs are the tip of an iceberg that needs to be examined concerning theatre and its relationship to its audience in a country where 80% of its citizens identify themselves with that faith.