"2B," is case you’re wondering, is the baseball score-card notation for a double.  When somebody e-mailed me earlier this week his assessment that the reviews for The Farnsworth Invention had scored it a "FO" (fly out), I said I didn’t think it was that bad, more like a ground-rule double.  Happily, Terry Teachout at the […]

In any event, The New York Observer. doesn’t care much for the science lesson. Alas, The Farnsworth Invention is swamped by all its unstoppable science lessons (which are rattled off at top speed as if everyone onstage—and off—wants them over and done with). Mr. Sorkin explains far too much—including act two’s unnecessary, clichéd opening scene

Aaron Sorkin has e-mailed me with a response to this article which appeared in the New York Post on Friday, November 30.   His message appears  here  unaltered and unedited:

Paul,

I hope this finds you well. Below is one of the many positive reviews of the play and I think the reviewer says in his opening paragraphs what I was trying to say to you in a previous e-mail but, like most people and most things, he says it better than I’m able to. There are good forums for debating history–you and I participated in one and I would have been happy to participate in others with you. The forum you chose–the New York Post of all silly places–was, frankly, petty and spiteful. Moreover (and fairly ironically) the Post story got so many facts wrong. Not astonishing for the Post. (For instance, Pem not only smoked, she smoked in front of me and she was the one who told me the story about the smoke coming up on the screen. Since a brief lunch over sixteen years ago, I’ve never met, spoken or corresponded with Kent Farnsworth so it’s not clear to me how working with me this whole time could have been a bad experience for him. The Post piece failed to mention that Georgia Skinner is your ex-wife. The Farnsworth Invention isn’t even remotely based–as you’ve incorrectly suggested many times–on Pem Farnsworth’s book, Distant Vision, which I’ve never read. (The Post forgot to mention that if I HAD based a play or a movie on Pem’s book, Georgia Skinner would have made money.) Finally, Paul, this is between a deceased mother and her son, but shame on you for bringing Kent into this. You know as well as I do that Kent and Pem had deep, serious problems with each other for decades. Or maybe you don’t. We could have debated these things in a great place in front of a crowd that really wanted to know and didn’t just want to dish. You chose to do it in the same place we find out who Britney Spears threw up on last night. Your website seems to be about finding the truth. I certainly hope you’ll post this, along with one man’s take below

– – – – –

Aaron’s message was accompanied by a review which appears in its entirety in the continuation of this post.

So that I don’t get caught in the middle of this discussion, I have also posted the article, and Aaron’s response to the discussion forum at thefarnsworthinvention.com. Visitors will need to register in order to participate in that discussion.

Click "continue reading" below to read David Spencer’s review of The Farnsworth Invention.

New York Magazine wonders why Ben Brantley of the NYTimes was so hard on The Farnsworth Invention: Yikes, what did Aaron Sorkin ever do to Ben Brantley? The Times critic rips Sorkin’s play, The Farnsworth Invention, a new one today with a review so patronizing it seems as though it was written by Ratatouille’s Anton

Link: Steve On Broadway (SOB): Did Critics Enjoy Sorkin’s Invention?. Frankly, as much as I enjoyed the first act, I felt very cheated by the second, which clearly should have been labeled "The Sorkin Invention." Newsday’s Linda Winer is right to point out that there are plenty of people questioning Sorkin’s conceit in adding a

Sarnoff’s spawn covers The Farnsworth Invention: Who was the father of TV?With commercials, of course. Pretty much a puff-piece, but damn that "West Wing" theme still stirs the soul….

Aaron Sorkin Gives ‘Farnsworth Invention’ Its Dueby Jeff Lunden Listen Now