John Lithgow is a man well aware of cancel culture and its ability to destroy careers in the blink of an eye.

The Oscar-nominated actor tells Sky News: “It is terrible to be so careful about what you say. Even in an interview like this. It goes into the world, and you can get misconstrued and misrepresented and cancelled in [the click of a finger].”

It’s a theme that runs parallel with his latest work – the stage show Giant – which through the lens of one explosive day in children’s author Roald Dahl‘s life, poses the question, should we look for moral purity in our artists?

The writer of great works including The Witches, Matilda and The BFG, Dahl revolutionised children’s literature with his irreverent approach, inspiring generations of readers and selling hundreds of millions worldwide. But his legacy is conflicted.

Lithgow describes Dahl as “a man with great charm, great wit and literary talent. A man who really cared about children and loved them. But a man who carried a lot of demons.”

Specifically, the play – which explores Palestinian rights versus antisemitism – deals with the fallout from controversial comments the children’s author made over the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982. Its themes couldn’t be more timely.

Lithgow explains: “Things are said in the play that nobody dares to say out loud… But God knows this is a complicated and contradictory issue.”

‘It didn’t start as an idea about Roald Dahl at all’

So controversial are some of the play’s themes, the 79-year-old star admits his own son warned him: “Prepare yourself. There’ll be demonstrations in Sloane Square outside the Royal Court Theatre.”

Indeed, the play’s first run carried an audience warning flagging “antisemitic language; graphic descriptions of violence; emotional discussion of themes including conflict in the Middle East, Israel and Palestine; and strong language”.

But it didn’t put audiences off. Following a sold-out run at the Royal Court, the role won Lithgow an Olivier. Now, it’s transferring to London’s West End.

The play was written by Mark Rosenblatt, a seasoned theatre director but debut playwright.

He tells Sky News: “It didn’t start as an idea about Roald Dahl at all. It was about the blurring of meaningful political discourse with racism, specifically when, in 2018, the inquiry into antisemitism in the Labour Party started to come out.”

Rosenblatt describes Dahl’s Revolting Rhymes and Dirty Beasts as the “wallpaper” of his childhood, and says he had no desire to “smash the Roald Dahl pinata”.

But despite the fond recollections, he was conflicted: “Understanding that [Dahl] also, possibly, didn’t like someone like me because I’m Jewish felt complicated.” It was Rosenblatt’s exploration of “how you hold those two things at the same time” that led to Dahl becoming the play’s focus.

‘He’s not cancelled in our home’

Rosenblatt describes him as “a complex man, capable of great compassion, great passionate defence of oppressed people, and also incapable of enormous cruelty and manipulation. He was many things at once”.

And as for Dahl’s place in his life now? Rosenblatt says: “I still read his books to my kids. He’s certainly not cancelled in our home.”

It’s likely that Dahl’s comments, if uttered today, would lead to swift social media condemnation, but writing in a pre-social media age, the judgment over his words came at a much slower pace.

Dahl died in 1990, and his family later apologised for antisemitic remarks he made during his lifetime. But the debate of whether art can be separated from the artist is still very much alive today.

Earlier this month, Lithgow found himself drawn into a different row over artists and their opinions – this time concerning author JK Rowling.

‘A matter of nuance’

Soon to play Dumbledore in the Harry Potter TV series, he has been criticised by some fans for working with the author known for her gender critical beliefs.

Lithgow told Sky News: “It’s a question I’m getting asked constantly. I suppose I should get used to that, but JK Rowling has created an amazing canon of books for kids…

“I have my own feelings on this subject. But I’m certainly not going to hesitate to speak about it. Just because I may disagree… It’s a matter of nuance… I think she’s handled it fairly gracefully.”

The actor ignored calls not to take the role.

He goes on: “Honestly, I’d rather be involved in this than not. And if I’m going to speak on this subject, I’m speaking from inside this project and very much a partner with JK Rowling on it.”

Demanding an eight-year commitment and a move to the UK for the part, the stakes are high.

And with a legion of Harry Potter fans watching on from the wings, only time will tell if the Lithgow-Rowling partnership will prove a magical one.

Giant is playing at the Harold Pinter Theatre in London until Saturday, 2 August.

One of Harvey Weinstein’s accusers broke down in tears and swore on the witness stand as a sexual abuse trial continues.

Warning: This article contains references to sexual assault

Miriam Haley claims the former Hollywood mogul forced oral sex on her in July 2006.

The case is being retried after the appeals court overturned his conviction last year.

She was working as a production assistant at the time.

Weinstein has strenuously denied all allegations, and Ms Haley also testified at Weinstein’s initial trial.

The 48-year-old was testifying in a Manhattan court when Weinstein’s defence lawyer Jennifer Bonjean questioned her account of the incident.

In court, Ms Bonjean asked why Ms Haley would agree to Weinstein’s invitation to his apartment after testifying about his previous behaviour, including her alleging that he barged into her home.

Ms Haley then became emotional after being asked how her clothes came off before Weinstein allegedly pulled out a tampon and performed oral sex on her.

She said Weinstein took off her clothing, but she didn’t recall the details, before Ms Bonjean asked: “You removed your clothes, right?”

Read more:
Harvey Weinstein retrial: ‘He had all the power’
Weinstein accuser felt ‘the unthinkable was happening’ during alleged assault

Ms Haley then told jurors that Weinstein “was the one who raped me, not the other way around” – to which his lawyer said: “That is for the jury to decide.”

She then started crying and said: “No, it’s not for the jury to decide. It’s my experience. And he did that to me.”

Sky’s US partner network NBC News reported that Ms Haley said during the exchange: “Don’t tell me I wasn’t raped by that f*****g asshole.”

Judge Curtis Farber then halted questioning and sent jurors on a break. Ms Haley’s eyes were red and her face was glistening as she left the witness stand.

In February 2020, Weinstein was found guilty of sexually assaulting Ms Haley – along with raping former actor Jessica Mann in a New York hotel in 2013 – and sentenced to 23 years in prison.

His conviction for the two crimes was overturned in April after an appeals court ruled the trial judge unfairly allowed testimony against Weinstein based on allegations that weren’t part of the case.

After the appeal ruling, Weinstein was charged with raping one woman and forcing oral sex on two others.

Two of the charges are those he faced during the original trial, while the third – one of the charges of forcing oral sex on Kaja Sokola – was added last year.

Weinstein denies all allegations, and his lawyers argue his accusers had consensual sexual encounters.

Regardless of the outcome of the retrial, he will remain in prison over a 2022 conviction in Los Angeles for a separate count of rape. His lawyers are also appealing this sentence.

Russell Brand has been granted bail after appearing in court charged with sexual offences including rape.

During the brief hearing at Westminster Magistrates’ Court, the 49-year-old spoke only to confirm his name, date of birth, and address, also confirming to the judge that he understood his bail conditions.

Brand, who has been living in the US, was charged by post last month with one count each of rape, indecent assault and oral rape – as well as two counts of sexual assault – in connection with incidents involving four separate women between 1999 and 2005.

The allegations were first made in a joint investigation by The Sunday Times, The Times and Channel 4 Dispatches in September 2023.

The comedian, actor and author has denied the accusations and said he has “never engaged in non-consensual activity”.

Appearing before Senior District Judge Paul Goldspring, Brand stood to confirm his name and address. He then sat down while the charges were read to the court.

Brand is charged with the rape of a woman in 1999 in the Bournemouth area. She alleges that after meeting Brand at a theatrical performance and chatting to him later in her hotel room, she returned from the toilet to find he’d removed some of his clothes. She claims he asked her to take photos of him, and then raped her.

The court also heard of another of Brand’s alleged victims, who has accused him of indecently assaulting her in 2001 by “grabbing her arm and dragging her towards a male toilet” at a TV station.

Brand is accused of the oral rape and sexual assault of a woman he met in 2004 in London. He is accused of grabbing her breasts before allegedly pulling her into a toilet.

The final complainant is a radio worker who has accused Brand of sexually assaulting her between 2004 and 2005 by “kissing” and “grabbing” her breasts and buttocks.

The judge referred the case up to the Crown Court – informally known as the Old Bailey.

Brand was asked to supply both his US and UK addresses to the court.

When asked if he understood his bail conditions, he replied, “Yes”.

The case was adjourned and Brand, of Hambleden, Buckinghamshire, was told he must appear at the Old Bailey on 30 May.