Raul Esparza Interview in Sunday Times- Page 10

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/28/06 at 10:42am

I'm nervous about the reviews, because my inclination is to think that they're going to go one way or the other entirely, with very little middle ground.

I know that Brantley saw an absolutely killer performance, which gives me hope, as long as he still has some semblance of a soul.

[PeachesCat]

Posted: 11/28/06 at 11:05am

I love Raul. He can do anything and I will never ever say anything bad about him. However, I was not thrilled about the play. I also do not think it was Raul's strongest performance.

This could be do because of my age. I am 38. The people in the audience were older than me, my parents age. They loved it. I am hoping that I did not find this play wonderful because of a generation gap.

I will be very interested in the reviews.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/28/06 at 11:13am

The age divides are really interesting to me, because I'm so young -- young enough that I assumed a show like this would not move me at. all. But for a reason I can't yet really figure out, the result was the complete opposite. I guess I feel like whether you've been there or not, the story (especially as Doyle has interpreted it) is just... heartbreaking. I don't think any other show has ever gotten to me as viscerally as has this one -- and his performance.

Updated On: 11/28/06 at 11:13 AM

[ken8631]

Posted: 11/28/06 at 11:18am

Thanks for the link - just sent it to my wife, the big Raul fan.

Hoping to snag tickets to opening night!

[PeachesCat]

Posted: 11/28/06 at 11:18am

And here I am, 38 and unmarried, and the story didn't move me at all. Maybe because the majority of my friends are not married and have chosen not to be married, and it is no big deal...

[Danielm]

Posted: 11/28/06 at 2:07pm

The show--while it does focus on married couples--is not just about "marriage" but commitment. It's about choosing how to live your life and who to live it with. It's about choosing not to live it by other's wishes but by your own.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 2:27pm

Scandelous!

[Danielm]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 2:41pm

I'm not Namo bwaysinger but I would answer your question "yes". If you choose to do so you would have the right and you would have to take the impact of whatever fallout comes your way. You would have to shoulder the responsibility of your actions but you would have the right.

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 2:57pm

I don't understand the mindset of so many gay people (men and women) that "coming out" has to be a process in which there is no consideration for the feelings/processing of anyone else involved. Take me or leave me - immediately! - and oh by the way, so and so is gay too! They're part of MY story, so I'm outing them.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 3:06pm

I guess I'm a bit more regimented in how I feel about it. As far as potentially, this guy's only hurting himself and, I guess, his wife (unless she knows. some people DO make those kinds of arrangements), so, unless he suddenly wins and Oscar and begins a Patricia Heaton-like anti-gay campaign, I think he's free to go home to his wife after nights hooking up with guys in bars.
If he were really campaigning against something which I knew to be ingrained in his heart, though, I'd be right up there against it.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 3:12pm

bwaysinger, you wouldn't have to out him just to tell your story. In fact, by referring to him as someone who is becoming a film star and "a married guy whose appeal is somewhat largely based on his sex appeal", you were no more descriptive about this man than Raul was about the man he was referring to. He didn't name names and include a picture. He talked about his relationship with him. I don't see where the crime is in that; based on what he COULD have said, he was very respectful of the man's privacy.

[Danielm]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 3:13pm

Raithnet--are you gay?

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 3:14pm

Rathnait - and yes.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 4:24pm

I think I see the issue here as being that the way bwaysinger puts it, people are going to have a hell of a hard time finding out who this person is. In Raúl's case, a minimal amount of research could probably yield a decent amount of information about the identity of the professor.

I still think that people brush off all too easily that while there's a communal notion to knowing what it's like to go through coming out of the closet, every case is different, and you do what -- based on your situation -- you think is right. And nothing's perfect. A lot of times, the "right" thing to do comparatively has a lot of things about it that are not good or "right" in some ideal objective sense. That's just the way it is. There's no way to really tap what goes into that unless you're in that person's head. Maybe that's naively sympathetic, but I think it gets glossed over. For the record, Raúl is very aware of the pain he's caused and certainly isn't displaying some lack of regard for the people this process is hurting. But at the same time, you do what you think is right, and he did what he thought he had to do.

Updated On: 11/29/06 at 04:24 PM

[WickedGeek28]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 4:35pm

I, like Emcee, am very young and yet I loved this production. So I think the audience age is all over the spectrum.

I too hope it opens to warm reviews that it definately deserves.

[Danielm]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 4:52pm

Rathnait, I find it odd that you have so much sympathy for this instructor who was in a somewhat ethically sketchy relationship with Esparza and his family--who may not exist at all--and not so much with Esparza.

I suspect the reason that so many gay and lesbian people come out in the way you talk about is fear. They are afraid of rejection and so they adopt the take-it-or-leave-it stance as a defense mechanism. I can understand that even if I don't think it's productive or reasonable. Hopefully, though, with time and/or maturity they mellow out.

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 4:53pm

Let me try to make my point clearer.

The people who were in that school at that time, or in that theater program they went to after, will know who the professor was. They will then know without uncertainty that he was sleeping with a student. Whether that was consensual or not won't matter to some people.

I'm saying, the professor's family may not have wanted that to be public knowledge. If this was happening to one of you - if you were a family member of a person who was dead, and information like this was being shared publically, you might not be so forgiving and happy. In fact, I'm guessing most of the Raul supporters here would be screaming about privacy issues if something that personal and potentially inflammatory was written about a member of their family.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 4:53pm

What, what are you referring to with the "may not exist at all?" The professor?

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 4:56pm

Emcee, I thinkt hey meant the professor's family may not exist at all.

Thanks for backing up my point. I think it's VERY different for me to say what I said about someone in a field with TONS of fast rising "stars." I'll also say I need to re-read the article to recall word-for-word what Raul's quoted as saying about this professor but I'll warrant you this: our discussion here's probably made a LOT more people curious as to his identity than the mention in the Times.

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 4:56pm

Daniel, Esparza made the choice to come out himself. The professor is DEAD - he had no say in what Esparza decided to state publically ABOUT him.

[Danielm]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 5:02pm

So what Rathnait. The professor is dead. Does that mean he shouldn't be mentioned?--what's more he's not mentioned by name. He had a huge impact on Esparza's life--he's part of Esparza's life. I suppose if you wanted to go to all the trouble of figuring out who he was you could--but why would you? The information about him in the article all relates to Esparza. I'm not sure why you're so worried about the feelings of a man who is dead. Did you know the man?

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 5:02pm

Your point is clear, and it has been every time you brought it up. You don't think there's enough consideration for the fact that the professor's family and loved ones may not have wanted this published. I don't think it's really fair to pull the "well, what if it were YOU?" card, though, for many of the reasons I stated above, which are why, yes, I'm forgiving.

What would be preferable, though -- for him to have continued to suffer to keep damage from being done? I think you can stand by an argument that says he could have made major adjustments in his life perfectly well without putting it all in the press, but in a lot of cases, putting it in the press is a step in the process of digging through and taking responsibility for all of the lies you've told. I'm just sort of wondering if you really feel he should have not made this decision for the sake doing less damage to others? If you do, that's fine. I disagree, obviously, under the condition that it may have been a selfless decision, but he's the only one who could have -- and needed to -- deem is necessary, and to weigh the options knowing that people were inevitably going to be hurt.

Updated On: 11/29/06 at 05:02 PM

[Danielm]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 5:16pm

I also find it disturbing that Rathnait, as a gay person, you seem to find homosexuality so shameful. And I truly can't understand this specious argument about the feelings of this professor's family or former students--especially if you doesn't know any of them or even if they exist or what their feelings are. I do not believe in any sanctity of the closet. I'm reminded of the AA saying that we're only as sick as our secrets.

[aspiringactress]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 5:29pm

Nothing Rath said paints homosexuality as shameful.

[Danielm]

Posted: 11/29/06 at 6:27pm

Rath paints homosexuality as shameful by saying that the family of this professor would be so devastated at the knowlege that he was gay that it shouldn't be mentioned. That somehow that is more important than the effects he had on Esparza.