Posted: 6/10/20 at 2:49pm
I don't disagree with anything that you are saying. I'm sure those are exactly their reasons. My comments aren't about failing to empathize with what led to publishing that missive that way. But that doesn't mean their method will be effective.
Posted: 6/10/20 at 3:04pm
joevitus said: "I don't disagree with anything that you are saying. I'm sure those are exactly their reasons. My comments aren't about failing to empathize with what led to publishing that missive that way.But that doesn't mean their method will be effective."
It doesn't - you're right. But you did criticize them earlier for the piece coming across as "bullying," and you said that it offended you. So those were the points I was trying to speak to with my post above.
But I would say:
Whether or not it's effective depends solely on how the industry reacts to it, and how they choose to move forward. So far it seems that the industry is responding positively to it. It remains to be seen whether or not any significant change will be made, but it's not some mysterious act of god that's out of the control of human hands. There are real people who have the power to make tangible change, and those real people are more likely to make the right decision if they feel the appropriate wake-up call. Some of them might make the wrong choice, or react badly, but those people most likely weren't going to listen either way, regardless of the tone. Because, in all likelihood, those same people have probably already heard these objections in delivered in a softer way, and have done nothing.
And even if it doesn't work - who has been harmed by this? At the very, very least, this is a means of listening to the Black artists in our industry. Even if this statement fails to inspire positive change, they have, at least, made their voices heard. And nothing bad will come out of it.
Updated On: 6/10/20 at 03:04 PM
Posted: 6/10/20 at 3:08pm
There are many important points made but this paragraph sticks out to me.
"We have watched you inadequately compare us to each other, allowing the failure of entire productions to be attributed to decisions you forced upon us for the comfort of your theater's white patrons."
I'm not going to name specific shows and I don't think every weakness in dialogue, characterizaton, lyric writing, overall structure, etc. can be attributed to pressure on the creatives. But there are a couple of shows that stand out in my mind and I do wonder if behind the scenes pressure on the non-white creatives resulted in a play that was worse than it might have been otherwise.
Posted: 6/10/20 at 3:48pm
JBroadway said: "joevitus said: "I don't disagree with anything that you are saying. I'm sure those are exactly their reasons. My comments aren't about failing to empathize with what led to publishing that missive that way.But that doesn't mean their method will be effective."
It doesn't - you're right. But you did criticize them earlier for the piece coming across as "bullying," and you said that it offended you. So those were the points I was trying to speak to with my post above.
But I would say:
Whether or not it's effective depends solely on how the industry reacts to it, and how they choose to move forward. So far it seems that the industry is responding positively to it. It remains to be seen whether or not any significant change will be made, but it's not some mysterious act of god that's out of the control of human hands. There are real people who have the power to make tangible change, and those real people are more likely to make the right decision if they feel the appropriate wake-up call. Some of them might make the wrong choice, or react badly, but those people most likely weren't going to listen either way, regardless of the tone. Because, in all likelihood, those same people have probably already heard these objections in delivered in a softer way, and have done nothing.
And even if it doesn't work - who has been harmed by this? At the very, very least, this is a means of listening to the Black artists in our industry. Even if this statementfails to inspire positive change, they have, at least, made their voices heard. And nothing bad will come out of it."
It is bullying. The intent is to frighten. That's the only way "we see you" can be read. And it expresses its intended bulling with glee. And that bullying is expressed towards all of "white Broadway" (again, what is that?). It presumes guilt and intentionality for all. That's just wrong. And counter-productive.
Is the level at which I'm allowed to criticize a statement the extent to which it harms me personally? Do we not, in public discourse, analyze and criticize written statements? Should I condescend because of the "feels"? No. I should respect the integrity the people involved enough to speak out when I think an approach or an idea is wrong. The idea of a monolith of prejudice is wrong. The effort to repair the real wrongs is flawed to. That's simple honesty.
Posted: 6/10/20 at 3:50pm
VintageSnarker said: "There are many important points made but this paragraph sticks out to me.
"We have watched you inadequately compare us to each other, allowing the failure of entire productions to be attributed to decisions you forced upon us for the comfort of your theater's white patrons."
I'm not going to name specific shows and I don't think every weakness in dialogue, characterizaton, lyric writing, overall structure, etc. can be attributed to pressure on the creatives. But there are a couple of shows that stand out in my mind and I do wonder if behind the scenes pressure on the non-white creatives resulted in a play that was worse than it might have been otherwise."
I hope if this is true, it comes to light. Now is a good time for people speaking their truth. I'd love for this sort of thing to be exposed.
Posted: 6/10/20 at 4:14pm
joevitus "It presumes guilt and intentionality for all. That's just wrong. And counter-productive."
Your imagining such a presumption is the product of your own flaw: you want to process the letter on an individual and personal level whereas it is plainly intended on a systemic level. That there may be white theatre people who are more attuned to the BIPOC experience does not contradict the systemic truths. Oh and by the way, the fact that you think you have some authority to opine on methods speaks volumes.
Posted: 6/10/20 at 4:24pm
HogansHero said: "joevitus "It presumes guilt and intentionality for all. That's just wrong. And counter-productive."
Your imagining such a presumption is the product of your own flaw: you want to process the letter on an individual and personal level whereas it is plainly intended on a systemic level. That there may bewhite theatre people who are more attuned to the BIPOC experiencedoes not contradict the systemic truths. Oh and by the way, the fact that you think you have some authority to opine on methods speaks volumes."
^^This.
Posted: 6/10/20 at 4:38pm
HogansHero said: "joevitus "It presumes guilt and intentionality for all. That's just wrong. And counter-productive."
Your imagining such a presumption is the product of your own flaw: you want to process the letter on an individual and personal level whereas it is plainly intended on a systemic level. That there may bewhite theatre people who are more attuned to the BIPOC experiencedoes not contradict the systemic truths. Oh and by the way, the fact that you think you have some authority to opine on methods speaks volumes."
The "systematic truths" that don't account for the number of works by black authors that get produced and black artists Tony nominations and awards..
I'm not the flawed one here.
Posted: 6/10/20 at 5:08pm
Yup. And your snark doesn't alter that.
Posted: 6/10/20 at 5:14pm
@joe, every post you make here has undercut your self-characterization and enhanced the notion that you are terribly in need of the learning you are so vigorously resisting. I hope you find enlightenment, though I am not hopeful.
Posted: 6/10/20 at 5:20pm
HogansHero said: "@joe, every post you make here has undercut your self-characterization and enhanced the notion that you are terribly in need of the learning you are so vigorously resisting. I hope you find enlightenment, though I am not hopeful."
They don't. But you're clearly hostile to someone who voices an alternate opinion on the statement (though one that still supports an all-inclusive theater and abhors bigotry), and Sutton has descended to snarky GIFs rather than engaging. So--hostility or non-engagement. You are the ones who should reconsider your responses. You won't of course. "Check yourself" is apparenlty a statement for others.
Posted: 6/10/20 at 6:03pm
joevitus said: "I genuinely can't believe they deleted that. Guess alternative opinions are not allowed here."
Joe, I've accepted that we are in the national, primal-scream phase, and no meaningful, rational discussion is possible at this time. And I surprise myself that I am okay with that: given the history, no doubt a good, long primal scream is necessary.
Posted: 6/10/20 at 8:48pm
GavestonPS said: "joevitus said: "I genuinely can't believe they deleted that. Guess alternative opinions are not allowed here."
Joe, I've accepted that we are in the national,primal-scream phase, and no meaningful, rational discussion is possible at this time. And I surprise myself that I am okay with that: given the history, no doubt a good, long primal scream is necessary."
You are, of course, absolutely right.
