ITW Controversy: Broadway Actress Disses Show — Page 2

...as Morgan James quickly adds hailed as "the next Patti LuPone!" to her website...

I kind of get the feeling that some bad blood already existed between James and the "community" members who originally scolded her. (And maybe even with Playbill.com, whose not necessarily warranted "news story" is what really kicked this into high gear.)

---

Updated On: 7/27/12 at 08:23 AM

Please don't misunderstand me, I wasn't trying to be an apologist for her, I was just throwing out some underlying questions that transcend this particular event, and I generally agree with the answers being given here.

She was definitely tactless. However, I do think what she did is forgivable, especially in light of Sondheim's pre-opening (even before he saw it) diatribe on Porgy and Bess, more tactful perhaps, but much more damning given the source, a deliberate slam, rather than a spontaneous regrettable outburst; and I don't agree that it being on twitter versus the Times makes a difference. Most of us both because of the domino factor online fallout, not because of the forum in which it was originally posted.

And really how significant is it that this kind of thing comes from a little known Broadway performer - young, tactless, highly impolitic, and, perhaps most impressively, overly mean, granted - versus an anonymous poster or a Broadway powerbroker like Reidel who acts as a clearing house for pre-opening gossip? (Again, here I'm asking a question which sounds leading but I am asking it for the sake of stirring discussion, and to mirror the debate going on in my own head - not because I have strong convictions either way).

Updated On: 7/27/12 at 08:34 AM

"That's the real underlying reason for this Mt. Vesuvius explosion of holier-than-thou outrage, and also for the absolute, hard-as-nails unwillingness to forgive this woman, despite her apologizing several times over. Were it up to them, they would force her to wear a scarlet S for the rest of her life."

Speaking for myself, that's a ridiculous assumption. I don't like Sondheim. I'll say it in stronger terms. I can't stand Sondheim. l view what this woman did unfavorably, and it has nothing to do with friggin' Sondheim.

To echo Reg, who is echoing others, because people just aren't getting it:

"Once again, no one is saying that she doesn't have the right. They're saying that it was a) insensitive and b) stupid."

I don't see how these are arguable points.

Responding to Henrik's post will take a little more thought.

Sounds like she will turn back and forswear her foolish ways... day by day of course... we beseech her!

The anti-Sondheim obsession is so weird to me. Like him or don't like him, but the conspiracy theories are getting bizarre.

"I think those who suggest that this is all a reaction from pretentious Sondheim fans just don't get it"

No, you don't get it. Nor do those who think like you. Nor, it would seem, do you want to.

I believe that however untoward her conduct in this matter, the level of outrage here would not have been nearly as huge if the tweet had been about a clunker like Leap of Faith or Glory Days.

Then we would have heard snickering agreement.

Do you get it now?

Yes, but why don't we split the difference. Let's say it was neither what you think of as a "clunker" nor a show by someone whom you think garners blind devotion.

Let's say this woman had walked out of the first preview of, oh say, "Memphis," and announced that acting and muscianship were dead.

I think there'd be a similar reaction. I might be wrong, but I think so.

Then add in the fact that multiple Tony winners are involved and it does get a little more disrespectful. But I still don't see how it has anything to do with the author of the show.

It HAS to do with the author, unless you just don't get it, Reg. Or don't want to get it.

---

"As is the Sondheim obsession to me."

Well sure. All obsessions are weird. But being negatively obsessed is still to be obsessed.

I might not care for "Wicked," say, but to go into every thread that I suspect might discuss it to say how much I dislike it would be a waste of time to me. But that's just me.

The boards, like the rest of the internet, are open to everyone to make use of as they see fit. And folks can react as they see fit.

The funny thing is there is no, "level of outrage" or "unwillingness to forgive". I personally haven't thought about the woman herself since shortly after this began. The only reason the conversation continues is the constant flow of people who keep parroting that they don't understand why people are mad at her and trying to take away her right to tweet. We keep trying to explain that we are not mad at her, and don't deny her right to tweet whatever she wants. We just think she used poor judgement in what she did and now there are consequences, just like in any other business or in any other show.

So nobody is continuing to harp on her. People are just continuing to debate the issue in general...which, BTW, has nothing to do with this specific show or who loves Sondheim. So it's confusing when you keep bringing it back to that, particularly when no one is mentioning the show or Sondheim at all.

---

Reginald,

Haven't you learned by now?

I'm always right. :)

In any event, I wish I could stay and continue our conversation, but I have a luncheon engagement, during which time I can hopefully not think about Sondheim or any other unpleasant matters.

Cheerio.

I think it would have met with the same derision.


Reg -- there are INDEED people that will go into EVERY thread to include their hatred of show. Even when that specific show isn't being discussed.

---

Reg -- there are INDEED people that will go into EVERY thread to include their hatred of show. Even when that specific show isn't being discussed.

That definitely happens.