#26
Posted: 10/14/22 at 5:48pm
Non sibi sed patriae
Updated On: 10/14/22 at 05:48 PM
1776's Sara Porkalob Brutally Honest Vulture Article — Page 2
#27
Posted: 10/14/22 at 5:51pm
@PipingHot
Yes, as I said in my most recent post, I’ve adjusted my stance slightly. What I’m trying to say is, I stand by my wish that actors had more opportunities to express themselves with this degree of honesty when it’s called for. But after some reflection, I agree that the circumstances and setting for that honesty definitely could’ve been better in this case.
But I still disagree with your last 2 statements. (A) no one forced her to take this job, but she’s not claiming that. She literally states her reasons for taking the job and staying with it. (B) I simply don’t agree that “trying to sell tickets” comes with the job. Certainly many actors behave that way, but I don’t think it’s right. The actors are hired to perform the role, and yes, even be a team player is some regards. But not to sell tickets. That’s what the marketing team is for.
#28
Posted: 10/14/22 at 5:56pm
Maybe the last couple years have totally jaded me, because my first thought was a Lucille Bluth “good for her.”
No matter what you think, or how this turns out, this is another fascinating moment in what has been an absolutely WILD year for theater news.
I could use a prince to save me from my prince.
#29
Posted: 10/14/22 at 6:01pm
I don’t understand what would drive her to do this. She was seen as one of the production’s highlights, now she’s the least likely of these actors to ever work on Broadway again. I don’t disagree with all these criticisms, but publicly lambasting a production you’re currently involved in while admitting to half - or three quarters - assing your job is absurdly unprofessional.
Updated On: 10/14/22 at 06:01 PM
#30
Posted: 10/14/22 at 6:13pm
JBroadway said: "@PipingHot
Yes, as I said in my most recent post, I’ve adjusted my stance slightly. What I’m trying to say is, I stand by my wish that actors had more opportunities to express themselves with this degree of honesty when it’s called for. But after some reflection, I agree that the circumstances and setting for that honesty definitely could’ve been better in this case.
But I still disagree with your last 2 statements. (A) no one forced her to take this job, but she’s not claiming that. She literally states her reasons for taking the job and staying with it. (B) I simply don’t agree that “trying to sell tickets” comes with the job. Certainly many actors behave that way, but I don’t think it’s right. The actors are hired to perform the role, and yes, even be a team player is some regards. But not to sell tickets. That’s what the marketing team is for."
It’s not about selling tickets in the literal sense, there is not an expectation that actors go door to door but press and promotion, is contractual. Actors are very much supposed to do their part in that respect. There will also be a clause in the contract about not bringing the production or producers into disrepute. That article is very much in breech of that.
#31
Posted: 10/14/22 at 6:17pm
JBroadway said: "@PipingHot
(A) no one forced her to take this job, but she’s not claiming that. She literally states her reasons for taking the job and staying with it. (B) I simply don’t agree that “trying to sell tickets” comes with the job. Certainly many actors behave that way, but I don’t think it’s right. The actors are hired to perform the role, and yes, even be a team player is some regards. But not to sell tickets. That’s what the marketing team is for."
(A)-- so we agree she CHOSE to do this job, CHOSE to be in this show, and now complains about how its being directed, presented, etc. etc. So we agree she's free not to do this show, and we agree shes free to have a drink with her friends and vent her opinions. But shes doing a very public interview in a major NY publication for a reason. So I just bristle at the idea that this is some issue of "artistic self-expression"- you act as if she was overheard griping about the show and then put on blast. She chose to be in it, and now chooses to piss all over it (and Diane Paulus), and will eagerly snap up her paycheck along the way. What a hypocrite.
(B)-- ill agree with you that it isnt her job to try and sell tickets-- meaning, her job isnt to go out and promote the show (though, again, EVERY SINGLE JOB in the world rewards those who help the Team, but fine). She isnt declining to promote the show- shes actively trashing it, and announcing that she isnt giving more than 75% on that stage. How can anyone defend that? Beanie missed a show to attend a wedding on Long Island and was raked across the coals; this ingrate announces she's not really giving it her all and gets applauded for being brave. Its offensive in every way.
#32
Posted: 10/14/22 at 6:20pm
My contract with my firm (management consulting) has a clause related to conduct disparaging or reflecting poorly on the firm, its reputation, its value in the marketplace, and/or its ability to attract business. Basically, don't do anything that may cost the firm business if you want to avoid disciplinary actions.
Do Broadway performer contracts not have something comparable?
#33
Posted: 10/14/22 at 6:22pm
Easy way out: When she gets asked why she said those things, just tell them that before the interview, she was drugged with a magical truth-telling serum without her knowledge and was subsequently unable to control the words coming out of her mouth. Problem solved!
#34
Posted: 10/14/22 at 6:25pm
JasonC3 said: "Do Broadway performer contracts not have something comparable?"
Rudin had non-disparagement clauses. I doubt Roundabout has them.
#35
Posted: 10/14/22 at 7:05pm
She should’ve exited the show during rehearsals once she realized she no longer felt it was a right fit for her. That would’ve been the right thing to do for this performer. She should be fired.
OR, she could have just given the best performance possible with the direction given, collected a nice paycheck…and address her dissatisfaction when she pens her memoirs or whatever down the road. We’ve all heard stories of backstage problems and issues, but usually not at this point in a show’s run. She made a really bad move.
Updated On: 10/14/22 at 07:05 PM
#36
Posted: 10/14/22 at 7:14pm
For all those offended by the 75% comment...if you could give 75% effort at your job and do it at a level that everyone is not just satisfied with, but very pleased with, why would you give more? She's been getting rave reviews and called out as one of the highlights of the show, which is one of the reasons she got this interview in the first place. Have there been any notices about how it seems like she's phoning it in? If not, and she's able to leave audiences perfectly happy, and even thrilled, with what she's doing while expending what she considers to be 75% of her possible effort, then what's the problem? (And considering some of the criticisms of the show as trying too hard, if she really did give more than 75% some might think she was pushing too hard or being too much.)
Updated On: 10/14/22 at 07:14 PM
#37
Posted: 10/14/22 at 7:19pm
Something that not a lot of people are pointing out is the way she talks about 1776 as being a museum piece— Does everyone involved just hate the source material?? I can’t stand it being written off as some dusty thing about how all the Founding Fathers are perfect. Its progressive! It was banned at the White House! It was pretty explicitly written to call into question the ideas of American exceptionalism during the Vietnam War and Civil Rights movement!!
#38
Posted: 10/14/22 at 7:20pm
I'm not offended by it, but it isn't hard to imagine that such a comment isn't going to play well with a lot of people.
#39
Posted: 10/14/22 at 7:27pm
JasonC3 said: "I'm not offended by it, but it isn't hard to imagine that such a comment isn't going to play well with a lot of people."
There’s a lot of stuff here that’s very true and honest. I think viewing acting as a job that isn’t as glamorous as just “playing pretend” is very much a step in the right direction, but it’s an art form still and there should be SOME dignity attached to it, and the detached “I’m better than this” air isn’t a good look. if I were anyone else in the cast I’d be pissed about the 75% comment. “I’m phoning it in during everyone else’s parts in the show, except for my big solo number, in which case I am trying a bit harder”.
#40
Posted: 10/14/22 at 7:28pm
Does everyone involved just hate the source material??
It's really starting to feel that way.
#41
Posted: 10/14/22 at 7:52pm
cougarnewtin said: "Something that not a lot of people are pointing out is the way she talks about 1776 as being a museum piece— Does everyone involved just hate the source material?? I can’t stand it being written off as some dusty thing about how all the Founding Fathers are perfect. Its progressive! It was banned at the White House! It was pretty explicitly written to call into question the ideas of American exceptionalism during the Vietnam War and Civil Rights movement!!"
I believe it was actually performed at the White House, the Nixon administration requested a couple of songs be omitted, and the producers refused. "Cool, Cool, Considerate Men" was omitted from the movie though.
Elements of 1776 were progressive in it's time, but as an entire piece I don't think the musical holds up through a 2022 lens. They make up a lot of the facts, which is odd because the point of the piece was to make the founding fathers look human.
Other points, as Porkalob pointed out are just really cringe. Like Thomas Jefferson was a slave owner and a rapist. I couldn't care less that he played the violin (or the subtext of hooking up with his wife). They couldn't find anything more interesting to say in a song about him?
#42
Posted: 10/14/22 at 7:53pm
The 75% quote is also a massive slap in the face of the thousands of stage actresses across the nation who would KILL for a chance to be in a role like hers on the Broadway stage and would be willing to give 1,075% nightly just to make it happen. Just a massive level of self-entitlement and self-indulgence.
#43
Posted: 10/14/22 at 8:24pm
JBroadway said: "@PipingHot
Yes, as I said in my most recent post, I’ve adjusted my stance slightly. What I’m trying to say is, I stand by my wish that actors had more opportunities to express themselves with this degree of honesty when it’s called for. But after some reflection, I agree that the circumstances and setting for that honesty definitely could’ve been better in this case.
But I still disagree with your last 2 statements. (A) no one forced her to take this job, but she’s not claiming that. She literally states her reasons for taking the job and staying with it. (B) I simply don’t agree that “trying to sell tickets” comes with the job. Certainly many actors behave that way, but I don’t think it’s right. The actors are hired to perform the role, and yes, even be a team player is some regards. But not to sell tickets. That’s what the marketing team is for."
But if no tickets are sold then you don’t have a job? So it would make sense to promote your show? They come off as very entitled.
#44
Posted: 10/14/22 at 8:37pm
I find it amusing how horrified people are by the "75%" comment considering she was being called a standout in the cast. Clearly her 75% is quite good if you didn't even notice.
#45
Posted: 10/14/22 at 9:41pm
In fairness, it is a standout role and a really well written part.
#46
Posted: 10/14/22 at 9:53pm
This production is a complete disaster on all accounts.
#47
Posted: 10/14/22 at 10:01pm
How many people, in their day-to-day jobs, would love to rant on social media about doing their jobs at 75% without the thought of being fired? If she thought during the rehearsal process that this show wasn't going to work out as she thought, she should have quit. I'm honestly surprised the producers haven't asked her to step away from the show and just have an u/s fill in.
A Chorus Line revival played its final Broadway performance on August 17, 2008. The tour played its final performance on August 21, 2011. A new non-equity tour started in October 2012 played its final performance on March 23, 2013. Another non-equity tour launched on January 20, 2018. The tour ended its US run in Kansas City and then toured throughout Japan August & September 2018.
#48
Posted: 10/14/22 at 10:02pm
Ke3 said: "I find it amusing how horrified people are by the "75%" comment considering she was being called a standout in the cast. Clearly her 75% is quite good if you didn't even notice."
For me, and probably a lot of others, "giving your best" is the maxim I follow in work life -- and this framing of "her 75% is good enough" doesn't sit well when many, regardless of industry, have professional pride and elevate their contributions as much as they can. And that's even if they have reservations or criticisms of what they do, or how they execute their job. The tenor of the piece just feels so negative to me that I would have departed the production, instead of subjecting myself to such a situation; it comes off a bit self-congratulatory about their "honesty".
#49
Posted: 10/14/22 at 11:48pm
I think it’s hilarious that so many people are offended by this interview. I think it’s really refreshing and honest. I wish we would stop pretending every actor—even the ones on Broadway—is walking into work every night feeling that they are deeply artistically satisfied. I wish we would stop pretending that every actor has to give their soul to every job in order for their employment to be valid, or even for their work to be good.
It’s just not true. Acting is a job. Every actor has jobs—even high profile ones—that don’t feel deeply fulfilling. That we take for a paycheck, or for the platform, the connections, the places it could lead our careers.
Giving 75% is not the same as phoning it in either. It just means that sometimes there’s a part of us that has not fully bought into the play or the director’s vision, but we show up anyway.
What does baffle me about this interview is why in the world she would give this interview now. Does she have a publicist? If she wants that Tony nomination, did she think THIS would help her? If she took this job to build her career, does she believe this interview would bolster that?
Maybe. I hadn’t heard of her until this article so maybe she’s doing something right. But an actor in this business has to know that people’s egos are sensitive and her cast and creative team will probably feel betrayed here. Not to mention: the rest of the industry is watching and there are plenty of people who wouldn’t want to work with someone who says things like this publicly.
So yeah…I personally found most of this to be very insightful and refreshing but I can’t for the life of me figure out why say all this so publicly now.
Updated On: 10/15/22 at 11:48 PM
#50
Posted: 10/15/22 at 12:03am
Everyone working in live theater were out of jobs for almost 2 years. So, yes, it is deeply offensive to see an actor whining in the media about a directorial choice. It’s absolutely disgusting.
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $70
Tickets From $106
Tickets From $65