Raul Esparza Interview in Sunday Times- Page 5

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 9:15pm

Yes, plenty of people do it with less detail, which he would have been able to do if he were just saying that he was struggling with his sexuality. But I'm saying that I think the detail is necessary in order to pull from this the story that it seems pretty set on telling. That makes it press for the show, too. I don't really have a problem with it because it wasn't done without reason, it seems.

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 9:20pm

I can't agree.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 9:23pm

Okay. :)

[miss pennywise]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 9:23pm

It's not just his own personal life he is being "open" about. He's basically "outed" everyone for their role in his being at this place today.

He's gonna catch major sh!t from his mom!

[Shiksa Goddess2]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 9:49pm

I'll admit I felt a bit uncomfortable reading the article, mostly because I have seen Raul as such a private person, and reading this seemed like something I shouldn't be doing. I just had to keep telling myself that he sat down for this interview, and it's not some hear-say gossip that some sleezy columnist thought up.

That said- I would never put someone at fault for telling personal details of their life. Some people feel like they need to put it all on the table because they are tired of hiding, of pretending, it's part of their therapy. Is this a good route for everyone to take? Of course not, that's a personal decision, but if he felt okay with telling the world about his life, then more power to him.

[Jane2]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 9:52pm

Well, this news is nothing new to his wife.

What I think about this interview-TMI

I'm glad I just know him the way I do-just as an extremely talented person and a lot of fun to work with.

[aspiringactress]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 10:43pm

It is a lot of information, but ultimately he doesn't end up really trashing anyone else, and those mentioned know how they've been a part of his life in this respect...

This interview seems to be tying up loose ends from various other interviews over the years more than anything.

[Sondheim Geek]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 10:47pm

My jaw literally just dropped when I saw this interview. I was completely shocked by his actions. I have no idea why he'd do this. He wouldn't do it for publicity, and I really wouldn't see it lower ticket sales.... why would he? Why would such a private person come out to the New York Times days before his show opens?

I'm just confused.

[Jane2]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 10:52pm

" days before his show opens? "

these are the key words. It's all about ticket sales.

[Sondheim Geek]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 10:56pm

Updated On: 11/26/06 at 10:56 PM

[fflagg]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 10:57pm

I think the piece in the Times will be more interesting than the production. Looks cheap with a B-level cast. You will never be able to top the original.

Is the show taking place in 2006 or in 1970? If the former, the book will seem awfully dated without changes.

[Jane2]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 10:59pm

I really think that this interview can cause more interest in the show. That's what I think about this whole thing.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 10:59pm

You people are so cynical! Must there always be an ulterior motive?

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 11:00pm

Maybe I'm too much of an optimist, but that seems a bit cynical. I mean, yes, it is something that I suppose has the potential to up ticket sales, but it could just as easily have no effect on the show's sales and hurt his career in the long run. It's a gamble in that respect. I think that this is probably something that he felt he needed to do, and the subject matter of Company being what it is, this provided the perfect opportunity to talk about these things.

From what I've read, Raul has always been fairly candid in interviews, though he'd previously avoided or skirted around any of these issues. I didn't feel that the article was too personal... it was at about the same level of detail as any in-depth actor profile that I've seen, although people seem to be less comfortable about the subject matter.

[Sondheim Geek]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 11:00pm

Fantastic time to bring up an irrelevant, negative opinion, fflagg.

If you had done a bit of research on this production, you would find that part of Doyle’s brilliance is that he has created a Company that is completely dateless, unlike the 1995 revival.

[aspiringactress]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 11:01pm

fflag, the aesthetic of this show is anything but cheap. Everything in the design screams New York chic.

[Jane2]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 11:10pm

"Must there always be an ulterior motive?"

Well, yeah!

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 11:16pm

This move has been kicking around since before the transfer, so I have a very hard time subscribing to the cynicism that says he's only doing this for publicity.

I don't think someone who is clearly dealing with a lot of very difficult and repressed issues would suddenly go and do something so hard -- or possibly give in to pressure to do so -- just as a publicity stunt. I DO however see the timing as being pretty well-played. Look at what Raúl's story says for the emotional impact of which Company is capable. Look at how emotionally accessible and available his story says the show is. That's great press for a show that's about to open, and a much better spin on the marketing aspect of it than to think Raúl just did this for attention and to get people talking.

Why would he do it? Why does anybody do it? There are a lot of reasons, but as I understand it, there's a general sentiment that says it's just a good move personally, not to feel like you're hiding who you are. Yes, it is a public statement but it is a very personal choice, obviously. There's also the advocacy standpoint, too, which I'd imagine is a factor. I think those are probably reasons just as valid as the ones being given by the cynics who say that it's all strictly business. Plenty of people do it for themselves; I think there's a mixture here, but the publicity aspect is mostly in the timing.

He obviously set himself up for a lot of backlash, but I find it kind of awful that the default assumption with something like this is "oh, ticket sales!" Maybe I, like sweetestsiren, am too much of an optimist and too forgiving, but I have a very hard time entertaining the idea that this is all a marketing trick.

Updated On: 11/25/06 at 11:16 PM

[Jane2]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 11:23pm

WEll, I may as well just come right out with it-I AM MRS. CONSUELA LUZ ESPARZA-as in Raul's mother!

So stop it this instant! Leave us alone! Get on with your lives! We're busy lining up sitcom auditions here~

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 11:26pm

... *snort*

[StageManager2]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 11:28pm

Mama Consuela, I never realized...

[Sondheim Geek]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 11:56pm

*double snort*

[Sondheim Geek]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 11:56pm

*double snort*

[Sondheim Geek]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 11:57pm

*double snort*

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 11/25/06 at 11:57pm

Not sure what to make of all of this....
But some people have way too much time thinking about other people's sex lives.
I am all for Gay Actors coming out so young people will have it easier, but Raul's story may make it harder for young people, after hearing what he is still going thru.
And the timing is suspect, as the show is about to happen and coming on the heels of Neil Patrick and TR Knight, though they seem much more together as Gay Men (but I don't know them personally so I really can't say)
I for one think it will mostly hurt his wife who is probably going through enough as it is.
Wonder who he will take to Opening Night?