My biggest question is, assuming everything my sources say is factual (what I depicted was Lee's own recounting of the situation, so who knows any alterations she made / if her perceptions are altogether accurate) and this playwright never worked again, why did Lee feel the need to bring it up again years later at a moment in time that is centered around black and African-American experiences? I would sort of understand if it was some big playwright who was being produced every other season by major Broadway and off-Broadway houses, but to what end does Lee's tweet accomplish anything?
Harris tweeted "I hadn't brought this [Young Jean Lee's teaching at Yale] during these last two weeks bc this isn't about POC infighting or the theatre, it's about BLACK PEOPLE BEING DISPOSABLE IN THE EYES OF THE LAW AND THE EYES OF AMERICA" & "This is not open season for ever [sic] IPOC [Indigenous Person of Color] to jump on the internet and say here's the time I was racism'd. THIS IS ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE." So, he obviously felt Lee's tweet and the fact that she was bringing up the play again was calculated and in bad taste because of the cultural moment.
I haven't had many interactions with Oskar, but every time I have spoken with him, he has always been kind and interested in feedback regarding the work The Public presented. Obviously my positive interactions with him don't counteract anyone else's negative experiences, but Lee has never accused Eustis of anything inappropriate. So I do think it is a little in bad taste to publically air a scene where it appears Eustis is engaging in sexual predation. It would be different if it was a nameless producer, because we obviously understand the intent of the scene, but Lee was not the only person mentioned in the scene and probably should have taken that into account before posting it so publicly.
"Sticks and stones, sister. Here, have a Valium." - Patti LuPone, a Memoir