Very Impressive! Mr. Daisey deserves accolades for his level-headed and thoughtful handeling of a truly bizarre and unexpected audience reaction. You could read some real emotion in his voice and hear the intelligence behind his language as well. His show is billed as "Adult Fare, w/ racy monologue" and yet the obviously ignorant and uninformed portion of his audience held Mr. Daisey in contempt for it. As a progressive, liberal Democrat my bet is that the members that were so angry and left in protest were white, anglo, Republican, conservatives...who apparently don't take the time to gather any info on their entertainment choices!? Kudo's once again to Mike Daisey, who could've reacted w/ anger, hurt and disparaged those that disrespected him and his property, but instead he took the time to adjust and speak rationally and almost eloquently to gain back his show. He must really love what he does...wow.

Lack of communication and overreaction. The high school group had no business being here in this type of forum, however the speaker upon hearing that there were going to be high school groups out there in the audience, should have warned them that there was going to be foul language spoken and if they couldn't handle that, they should immediately leave, no hard feelings. What happened is both parties' faults and shame on both of them for the way they handled it. Throwing water at the speaker is uncalled for, but so also is the later rantings of the speaker, intonating that he had been victimized. Those who throw out the big words in public like "fuck" and some of the others better learn how to better handle the situation when people get offended, even (especially) if it is a setup by a religious group to make a statement, or to demonstrate to their fold what to do when they are offended by a public speaker, which is not out of the realm of possibilities that played out in this situation. Mikey, if you're going to talk the talk under the guise that it is adult language, act more like an adult and not a whining child when someone gets offended by it.

Jim Woods: You must be one of them there alien folks who can be in two places at once! Is this a physical thing, or is it mental, also? Seriously, if the show is billed as "adult fare w/racy language", the folks who walked out were nothing more than confrontation-baiting idiots with an agenda that differed from that of the entertainer. Shame on them for their immature antics, and double-shame on them for their "better-than-thou" responses. I feel that Mr. Daisey should file charges against them for assault and battery, and would be totally within his rights to do so. It's about time that folks who disrupt, terrorize, and physically accost those with whom they disagree be held accountable for their reprehensible, childish reactions.

Jee-zus! Some people are waaaaaaaaay too uptight. If they didn't like it, they could have walked out quietly (which most did), which is embarrassing enough and gets a point across the the speaker. No need to embellish it like they did. If you(the supposed chaperones) don't like free speech and want to "protect" the "children," take them to china. You may not agree with communism but it is far more important for kids to be censored(read protected) from the filth and decadence that is allowed to run rampant here in America. If it weren't for this Daisey fellow, these students may not have ever heard and/or learned the "F-word" or thought about Paris Hilton engaging in any type of adulterous act. His seditious monologue and those others who likewise abuse their right to free speech must be stopped and held to account.

Oh my....moralizing hypocritical Christers acting offended yet again....next story please!

Pardon me Mr. Woods, but lack of communication? Hm.... If one is purchasing a book, renting a video or even so much as going to a movie these days, one *does* generally know what they are about to see and live theater is no different. We know what we are about to see because, odd though this may sound to those such as yourself but there are a myriad of ways that shows do this little thing called "advertise." You *do* know the meaning of that term, do you not, Mr. Woods? In this case, it is the little things like- the rating given over the phone by the ticket seller, the warning posted on the marqui, not to mention the warning on the playbill handed out to every single audience member as they come in the door. Some these days, also put them in the advertisements in the newspaper and even (would you believe?) at the top of and within any critic's treatment of said show. In fact, odd though this may sound to someone as well-versed as yourself in the proper ettiquette of the theater, many shows even come to *rely* upon statements such as: "adult fare w/racy language" in order to ensure that those who *do* come to a show are capable of handling harsh language and adult content as much as to warn the audience. Ignoring these blatent declarations is liken unto going to see Peter Pan and then complaining that it's too childish! Now this is not to say that lighter, less adult oriented fair does not have its place, however, not every show up on the live stage is Disney on Ice either. This would be *why* shows advertise, Mr. Woods and why we as the audience are responsible for listening to these advertisments and honestly believing their declarations when they tell us that a show is adult fare. As for Mr. Daisey being hurt? Well, who can blame him for that one? After all, it was not as if he were standing on the street corner with placard in hand protesting something- or even, dare I say? Going door-to-door at seven in the morning asking people to convert to his particular faith. No, he was in a theater, doing a show that has been announced to one and all fairly and justly that he will be utilizing adult language and speaking about adult things to adult people who have dutifully paid an adult's price for the pleasure of seeing him speak when he was accosted by nearly a hundred people descending upon him en masse and coldly destroyed something precious to him that he has worked hard to create. Whether you like a show or hate it, that type of behavior is unacceptable. If you do not like the show that you entered, you leave. If an artist asks what the problem is, you certainly have the maturity to declare with honesty, "I don't like this."And, last, but not least, you *certainly* display the mental capacity to know what it is you have just purchased a ticket to see! So no, I do not see any lack of communication on Mr. Daisey's part. What I *do* see, is a group of supposed "adults" that are apparently incapable of understanding simple, basic english, or even, for that matter, common manners.

I do think using the F word like it's the word 'the' is stupid, however, the morons that ignored all the signs and brought the teens into the show, are just that: MORONS. I probably wouldn't watch the show myself, but were they a group of blind adults and children, and there was no announcement in Braille? Because seriously, that should be the only excuse that people didn't expect anything 'naughty.' I have four young boys (the oldest being 8), and my husband and I censor what they watch-that is our responsibility. If that group had shaperones, then they should have taken the responsibility and NOT had them go to the show.

Well Done Mike Daisey! I just may look up your show if/when it comes to the Mpls/St Paul area.

Kudos to Mr Daisey. I've been involved in performances (as an actor or as an audience member) where the disruption was a cell phone or the popping of gum or whatever and the performer couldn't pull him or herself back into the piece. Anyone who thinks it's easy, has absolutely no idea. Think of it this way: if you are a surgeon and someone takes away your access to a scalpel, how do you do the surgery? While the comparison might sound fishy to some, we get medical attention because we might NEED to do so. We may go to a church because we are searching for spiritual enrichment and we NEED to do so ... and we go see live entertainment because we NEED to do so. While some might take issue with the form or content of the entertainment, the same can be said with the content, translation, interpretation or LEADERSHIP of the particular church/house of worship. If Mr Daisey, or a group associated with Mr Daisey, decided to make a point by going to a church service and interrupted a sermon by walking up to the preacher and pouring water on his paper because he disagreed with his/her interpretation, wouldn't people take issue with that? Would Mr Daisey or whoever be within his/her right to do so? According to the group that did this to Mr Daisy, I guess so. However, it would be no less appropriate than what was done to him.

What is happening to this country???? If you don't like something, DON'T GO!!! Read about the programs you are going to see!! If you don't want to hear some people on the radio, CHANGE THE CHANNEL!!! If some programming is offensive, DON'T WATCH!!! Commen sense people! Don't let the dubious due of Jackson and Sharpton hop on this one! Jackson now blames the Rolling Stones for the start of ignorant lyrics! He also blames the ceo's of the record labels for forcing rappers to include the n-word, the h-word and B-word!! He believes that they threaton rappers with lost contracts if they don't denigrate everyone in their raps! So basically it is all the white mans fault for everything! Grow up, and take responsibility for your own actions! Lets stop blaming everyone else and take responsibility ! Rappers write what they want without a care to their community! It is not a white conspiracy!

It takes guts to be a real artist ... well done Mr. Daisy

Who's the fizz-agg who poured water on Daisey's notes? Daisey should sue that little sum'biatch for damages (since his notes are integral to his act and his income). WTF is up with these Jesus freaks?

This was handled so much better than the "Kramer" episode. It could easily have become just as over-the-top as that one was. Several things that I noted. One - There was a true absence of judgment on the part of the chaperons. They, at least should have read the warning and if they weren't clear asked questions. Two - It looked to me that the water porer was a young person. Further evidence that the chaperons had insufficient control over their charges. Three - If they were going to leave the show in the middle, they at least should have had the fortitude to have one person take his invitation to discuss the reason for leaving. It could have been as simple as saying "I'm sorry, we didn't realize sufficiently the content of your program and feel obligated to remove our charges from the show at this time." And then THEY could apologized to the performer for disrupting his show, since it clearly wasn't his fault. Four - What kind of mean minded person would pour water on the "Set?" There was NO excuse for that. Finally, I think that the performer did a commendable job in talking through the situation and continuing his performance so that the balance of his audience didn't suffer the further damage of only half a show. Many people could learn a lot from this episode.

From all of us in the theater community, we feel Mike's pain and we support his right to freely perform his work. This situation is a two edged sword. The theater is supposed to provoke reactions and this obviously did so in this group...but hopefuly those reactions result in a DIALOGUE about the issues raised not an attack on the work itself for asking or generating these questions. The one edge is the very real danger that we as theater people put ourselves in in presenting works that are outside the "conventional". When we have to worry more about not offending somebody, we are not presenting theater that is worth anything to anybody. The other is that the reaction Mike's show got out of those misguided people has raised the awareness of his work and will certainly get him and his monologues more attention than they otherwise would have. So in a way, the people who walked out and moreso the individual who destroyed Mike's notes really have engaged in a self-defeating action by giving his message wider play than it would have otherwise gotten.

"white, anglo, Republican, conservatives"  what's up with the labels, Mr DeJack!  Well, maybe they were democrat Hilary Clinton lover's and did not like the NY comments.  I am anglo and republican.  The comments did not offend me and I agree the reaction was bizare, but then again - we live in America!

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):