Sir – I am writing regarding my play Bully Boy which was reviewed (Weekend, August 30) by Chris Gray who I am appalled to discover is actually your arts editor.
In his review, Mr Gray declares: “Confined to a wheelchair through injuries received during the Falklands conflict, Oscar is revealed to have his own issues to contend with, including the fact that he is a closeted gay with an obvious interest in Eddie.
“Toksvig indicates his homosexuality in a manner to which some might object, by showing he conforms to the stereotype in being good to his mum and especially fond of ballroom dancing and cheesy 1980s pop.”
There is nothing in the play whatsoever to suggest the character is gay.
Indeed the rather clear clue to his heterosexuality is when he talks about his wife. He likes ‘80s pop music because he was a young man in the ‘80s and he talks about dancing because he is in a wheelchair and can’t do it.
That Mr Gray cannot watch a play with two men in it without suspecting some sexual content is shocking. It may surprise him to learn that being good to your mother is not an exclusive trait of the gay community.
Reviewers may write what they like about a play except when they start making things up based on their own warped view of the world.
Could it be that Mr Gray believes that a homosexual writer cannot help but infuse their characters with their own sexuality? How deeply offensive.
May I suggest you find an arts editor who listens rather than fantasises when visiting the theatre or who, at the very least, leaves their own prejudices at the door?
Sandi Toksvig
Chris Gray replies: “What an outburst! It seemed quite clear to me that what was being suggested by Toksvig was a tendresse felt by the older man for the younger. And not just to me. Here is what Michael Billington had to say on the subject in his Guardian review last year: “Anthony Andrews, forever associated with Brideshead Revisited, reminds us that he is a formidable actor: he conveys perfectly the closeted major’s mixture of unarticulated love and quiet exasperation in dealing with the accused private, and shows the gradual unravelling of officer-class formality.”
Ms Toksvig clearly does not like being fingered for what seemed obvious to me was a stereotypical presentation of a gay. We twice hear of his dear old mum; there is much talk of dancing, and indeed the men drunkenly take steps together.
The younger man discovers through his researches that the major had not received his Falklands injuries in combat but by being attacked by fellow servicemen on a vessel returning from the conflict because they hated him, considering him a ‘ponce’ and a ‘poof’. That this is not true is never stated by the major when it is put to him. We are told of a wife but that she left 10 years earlier.
What significance marriage has with reference to a person’s sexuality, I fail to see, incidentally. I would challenge others seeing this play not to form the same (very warm) view of it that I did.