stage door demo for Ripley's FAG slur Thurs. at 10 pm — Page 13

Mister Matt, I'm not a personal friend of Alice's. But, I've certainly met her at parties and while she was in Rocky Horror Show revival on Broadway, which was directed by one of my close friends, Chris Ashley...who, like me, is gay...I was at the show a lot, hanging out. I "name-drop" his name because he is gay and one of the most intelligent and powerful theater people I know. He directed the movie, "Jeffrey" - all about gay people, for the younger crowd on the boards. If there was 0.1% of homophobia in Alice, he would not have worked with her so much.

And I'm close friends with plenty of people who know her well. Again, the purpose of my telling you that is so you understand my point-of-view is informed.

It is absurd to think she didn't mean the apology. It is absurd to think she is homophobic. As has been stated in numerous places by numerous gay people who know her very personally -- she has performed at events supporting equality, spoken about it, etc. for YEARS.

Look at her facebook page, you think all these Broadway gay boys and lesbians and colleagues are deluded idiots, like Scott Nevins, Harvey Fierstein, Max von Essen, Lea Delaria, etc...and all the rest of us professional entertainment people?

I'm not a groupie of hers. She isn't perfect...I'm not worshipful of her, as is clear in my facebook note.

I made the points I thought were important in that note I posted that you read -- and I very much appreciate your reading it. Part of why I wrote the note is because several of the issues I brought up in it I've been thinking about for some time now, and had intended to write about them prior to all this.

I really think people just don't understand how complex our psyches are...as I elaborated on in that note.

Let me share something, I think Rush Limbaugh is a racist. I think virtually all the signs about Obama at those ridiculous town-halls: racist. Birthers: racists. It seems like almost ALL racism to me. That is how sensitive I am to racism. I'm constantly arguing with educated friends about this...me saying, IT IS RACISM. But, here's the point, I am a performer who views performance as the process of increasing consciousness. Therefore, there is a part of my imagination that is RACIST. It's in ALL of us. There is a part of me that could do what the Nazis did, it's in ALL of us. I can think racist thoughts and be a racist with full commitment if I'm called to as a performer. And any great performer knows these things.

So, to act like it's some shock that an actor who has been playing a MENTALLY ILL CHARACTER for months and months and months, says one word while she's hurting and angry is just utterly absurd to me, as a person who spends all day long working with people like her...it makes total sense. And she's not homophobic. Of course, we have to separate our characters from our lives, but we're not perfect, as performing artists.

And I won't re-state all the other points that I made in my Facebook note, but this current note should be viewed in the context of what I wrote there, or it won't be fully clear, I think...

Thanks for your response, civility and time!

---

Updated On: 6/10/10 at 08:02 PM

I know you love me, Jordan. Trust me, I love you just as much!


Why so I see this picture when I Google Jason Bennett?

---

Welcome, Jason! Gotta say, you're makin' me laugh ...

---

HAHA, I love to laugh. And whatever I can do to bring you pleasure... - Jason

---

Updated On: 6/10/10 at 08:33 PM

Jason,

I was just Googling you, not specifically for images.


Frankly, I like the twins more.

---

Ms Ripley, I am sorry this has blown up this big. Respect the power of the internet!

Jason, it is also silly to use the argument that she can't be homophobic because she is around Gay men, like constantly... so are the counselors of Exodus International. Just sayin'

Has Alice's agent removed the computer from her home yet?

---

Thanks for your post Phyllis, there is an incredible amount of research now that within everyone lies the ability to kill...and even enjoy torturing. There is also extensive research that we all have aspects of our psyche that are tribal, or stereotypic in terms of how we view others. We can bury all these things deeply in our unconscious, and most people do, and remain unconscious like this their entire lives.

But the parts of our brain capable of these things does not die and you cannot kill it off within yourself. These aspects of our psyche are always still within us...

Check this study out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

And especially this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

The fact that we all have the capacity to enjoy being cruel or even torturous is why things like Abu Ghraib are not at all surprising to psychologists...or to great performers, I would say...

When first-world living conditions deteriorate, there is a very, very rapid adaptation that occurs in people that allows them to steal, lie, cheat, kill...and even torture...if it seems circumstantially necessary...Hurricane Katrina, Vietnam, Rodney King riots, Haiti, what's going on in Iraq.

I have met many veterans who were stunned, shocked and appalled at some of the things they personally did in combat, or saw done in combat. And what was most shocking of all, to them, is that often they found themselves and others enjoying it...

It's adaptive. If life's circumstances are such that you are required to kill or even torture to survive, psychologists would say that rather quickly it is to your advantage to first feel neutral about it, and then to even enjoy it.

My question back to you is this: How exactly would you play a Nazi if you couldn't imagine hating jews and simultaneously access "fascination" or even "enjoyment" of ordering people to their deaths?

My thoughts on this are not exactly controversial. I mean as an actor, you can either go there or not...if you can't go there, than yah, when it comes to THAT character or ENERGY COLOR of a character, it will be missing from your abilities...

Ask great actors: When you're playing an evil villain do you fake it? I don't think they'll say yes...They'll say they find it within themselves and their imaginations...

OUR IMAGINATIONS ARE PART OF US. OUR IMAGINATIONS ARE REAL. Thanks for your posts and consideration. I love discussions about process and creativity.

---

Updated On: 6/10/10 at 08:48 PM

My method is to learn my lines and not bump into the furniture.

I get what you're saying with those studies and whatnot, but personally, I've always thought I'd just commit suicide if the sh*t hit the fan like that.

"...I am a performer who views performance as the process of increasing consciousness. Therefore, there is a part of my imagination that is RACIST. It's in ALL of us. There is a part of me that could do what the Nazis did, it's in ALL of us. I can think racist thoughts and be a racist FULL-OUT if I'm called to as a performer. And any great performer knows these things.

So, to act like it's some shock that an actor who has been playing a MENTALLY ILL CHARACTER for months and months and months, says one word while she's hurting and angry is just utterly absurd to me, as a person who spends all day long working with people like her...it makes total sense. And she's not homophobic. "


Whoa Jason, i think youre taking your stanislavski a little too seriously. I do not believe that mass genocide or murder is something we are ALL capable of. Yes some actors do use things within themselves to help garner amazing performances. But there are also those who can just DO IT. Its a bit of a scapegoat to say that because Ripley is playing a crazy character, that its not shocking she is crazy in real life. The job of an actor is to separate...hence ACTING...not BEING. Actors are expected to leave their personal baggage at the door when arriving to work. Likewise they are expected to leave the baggage of work, AT WORK. Same for any other career. You can't go wigging out at starbucks and expect them not to call the police because youve been playing a tough role. (Not saying Ripley did that.)

Whatever the case may be, im glad there was an apology (forced or sincere). The word was obviously used in malice. Otherwise there would have been no reason to say "I won't say Fag." ...You wont say it...but ya just did. And she didn't SAY anything. She typed it...meaning she had time to consider her actions. And that consideration, or lack there of still led to the action of posting something hurtful. If youre a public figure, ya just HAVE to do better. However, If you can't do better then at the very least, your apology should be quick and sincere the first time. Anything else suggests a flippant attitude towards those involved. We all know too well how things can be misinterpreted when read online. As a public figure, you should leave nothing to chance.

I'm also glad this post exists. It shows that people aren't complacent about hate speech. Its not ok for anyone to use any slur word. No matter how close to that community they might be. Maybe if everyone stopped using slurs they'll disappear from our culture. Then everyone who justified the use of the "F" word wont have any more hate speech to defend. One can only hope.

Enjoyed reading this thread

SNAFU, I'm not sure what you're speaking of...

TheatreDiva90016, thanks for giving me a good laugh. I don't take myself too seriously: I think I felt your google...it was slightly electric, slightly orange, with a touch of maple syrup.

Mister Matt: We're shifting away from the topic of this discussion, but I guess that's ok: I love dialogue like this, of course, and the subjects you've brought up are obviously involving what I do for a living -- so, I've spent many years thinking about such things...Let me take a couple moments to respond to you:

No modern psychologist would recognize a solid "line" between the imagination and "reality." This is an old distinction still taught in some acting classes and promoted in pop culture.

The research is clear, "reality" is in large part a fantasy -- or total fantasy, depending on how you define the terms. No two people see the same world. Everyone experiences a different reality. "Reality" is dynamic, meaning that every second of every day our imagination is projected out onto everything we "see."

Fantasies of the future, past and present literally dictate how you "act" throughout your entire day. The dreams you have at night solve problems, game out solutions, and re-organize your "real" personality through the intra-play of your REAL imagination. It is a symbolic, imaginal, brilliant language that our imagination uses to talk to itself. WE ARE OUR IMAGINATIONS, quite literally. It's what we are made of.

I actually have the very humble belief it is destructive to believe one knows what "reality" is with certainty, because it requires one to tell many others they do NOT know what reality is. The best definition I've been able to come up with for reality is this: Reality is whatever most people, using spoken language or some kind of communication, agree it is. There is even debate among Quantum Physicists now about "laws of nature." Many scientists now believe "laws of nature" may be consciously evolving themselves.

You refer to "emotional recall." That is a term that gets thrown around and means various things to various people. I personally never need to teach my performers any kind of "emotional recall" anymore. The more contemporary actor training gets faster, better results, and much more reliably than that 100 year old technique.

I do not agree with you here: "When it becomes reality is when it is no longer acting and that is where so many actors get tripped up in their own psychology and begin to damage themselves." -- This is, again, the older way of understanding why some actors have problems. The more modern understanding is that actor training needs to be "consciousness training." What I mean by this is that a primary point of the work is for the actor to develop CHOICE and CONTROL over where they go energetically/emotionally/archetypally.

The problem with the old actor training methods is they did not cultivate this...those methods were based on "tricking" the psyche into archetypal areas. This is not choice, control or consciousness. As a result, actors who were trained in these methods would get psychologically de-stabilized because they had not developed the neurological muscles to go IN to an area AND OUT of area through conscious CHOICE.

The modern methods deal with all these issues. For example, I can access evil energy so much that my face starts to shake. And I can turn it off, instantly. I can bring in panic, vulnerability, joy, sexuality. I have CHOICE about it. It does not take me over, I'm in charge...It takes years to develop that kind of energetic ability. But all the greatest actors I know, who are leading happy, healthy lives, have this ability...

"The best teachers cover a spectrum of techniques and try to convey to the students the level of effectiveness each has on them." Not that I would expect you to or ask you to, butI basically agree with you

I just would just say, I, personally, don't teach a "spectrum of techniques." I certainly teach a wide variety of tools and processes... I've actually studied pretty much all the 20th century methods (not bragging, I just have...) and put them all together into a unified approach...combined with new creativity research, which renders many of the older "techniques" primitive, unnecessary and even dangerous, as you've commented on.

Thanks for your time and thought in your post. These are the kinds of subjects I think about all day. I'm one of the strange people who loves thinking about and studying these things. And I'm sure it's not that interesting to many people...I'm humble enough to know that...

---

Updated On: 6/10/10 at 09:12 PM

LIzzy, thanks for your feedback. I appreciate suggestions from people!

---

Updated On: 6/10/10 at 09:13 PM

Hi Phyllis, I'm sorry you're having difficult with the post. It's very hard to explain these things on a message board. I may just not be able to do it on here.

julesboogie: Thanks for your thoughts. I appreciate them. And I agree with most everything you wrote. Alice said "one word" she did not enter into a Starbucks and shoot people...and typing from phones often doesn't yield perfect posts, I don't think...I see countless thoughtless posts on facebook, etc.

As for Stanislavski, his books actually make little to no sense or are actually nonsense in many places, so I actually don't take him too seriously, so you know. There are far more modern thoughts about acting that go way beyond anything he was able to do back then, with how primitive psychology was at the time. Creativity research didn't even exist... I try to keep the gold and toss out the nonsense.

I take Carl Jung's work seriously, though...and the countless more modern psychologists and consciousness seekers who have taken his work much much further. And that informs some of my thoughts here.

Again, thanks for your time and thoughts. I love dialogue about creativity.

---

Updated On: 6/10/10 at 09:25 PM