Berto_Tony_201307_PhD .pdf - University of Guelph

148
escape tactic, removing the possibility that his drag is a part of his sexuality or sexual
identity. Both these reviews identify social constructions in the public consciousness at the
roots of the play’s violence.
Anne Fleming’s piece (in the Georgia Straight) comments on the play's relevance to
levels of violence in youth culture, touching on school shootings and the Virk case. When
she refers to Elliot's bullying, she contextualises him as a "swan-loving sissy boy," using a
pejorative that conflates homosexuality with effeminacy and thus evokes the Wildean
model. However she never mentions homosexuality per se in the review. She does,
however, discuss Len's trial as an artist who uses naked children in his work, without
referring to it as pornography. In this manner she engages in one of the debates the play
probes. Leanne Campbell (from The Globe and Mail) articulates these ideas as well,
suggesting the same didactic approach towards the subject apparent in the play. However,
neither of these reviewers mentions the child pornography that Derrick and Malcolm create.
Campbell also refers to Elliot as a “drag princess,” accentuating his effeminacy and youth.
She does not reference homosexuality in her review, other than to mention that the play will
resonate with persons of “any orientation.” If her reference to drag is intended to code the
presence of homosexual themes in the play, the reference then conflates effeminacy with
homosexuality.
Jo Ledingham (from the Vancouver Courier) identifies the social issues of “bullying
and gay bashing” together in the play, but does not explore their politics beyond teens’
struggles with their own sexuality. She addresses Len’s photography as “not pornographic”
but artistic. However she seems to read Len as having a paraphilia, in that his work
“captures what he cannot have: young boys” (Ledingham, “Gays”). Her reading appears to