Threaded Order Chronological Order
| re: Here's a link | |
| Posted by: chriscurrie 07:45 am EDT 06/29/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Here's a link - Michael_Portantiere 09:56 pm EDT 06/28/20 | |
|
|
|
| Except that Grissom did not write that--he quoted another playwright, also black, who is said to be going public with a piece about Nottage's insistence on remaining on the board of Second Stage. | |
| reply to this message |
| re: Here's a link | |
| Posted by: whereismikeyfl 09:01 am EDT 06/29/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Here's a link - chriscurrie 07:45 am EDT 06/29/20 | |
|
|
|
| Leaving aside questions about the veracity of Grissom's "quotes," he included that statement. When a writer thinks his interviewee says something irrelevant, they leave it out. So in what way was this comment on her being married to a white man relevant? So did Grissom leave this in to undercut the credibility of he interviewee? Probably not. Did he leave it in to show how even Nottage's critics are so blinded that they criticize even the most innocuous things she does? Probably not. In the absence of any clear reason for leaving this in and given the absence of comment, it seems likely that Grissom is including this because he feels he it is a valid point. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: Here's a link | |
| Posted by: sirpupnyc 09:23 am EDT 06/29/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Here's a link - whereismikeyfl 09:01 am EDT 06/29/20 | |
|
|
|
| And yet believing something to be a valid point doesn't make it one. People who call out mixed-race couples presumably believe their argument, but that doesn't make their argument valid. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Here's a link | |
| Posted by: ryhog 09:55 am EDT 06/29/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Here's a link - sirpupnyc 09:23 am EDT 06/29/20 | |
|
|
|
| Agreed. Nowadays we hear statements constantly from people who presumably believe their utterly invalid arguments about all kinds of things. The subject of intermarriage (whether racial, religious, or even just ethnicity) has always been popular. That does not make this sort of judgmentalism morally (or intellectually) defensible. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Here's a link | |
| Posted by: whereismikeyfl 09:43 am EDT 06/29/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Here's a link - sirpupnyc 09:23 am EDT 06/29/20 | |
|
|
|
| Yes, that was the whole point. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Here's a link | |
| Posted by: AC126748 08:18 am EDT 06/29/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Here's a link - chriscurrie 07:45 am EDT 06/29/20 | |
|
|
|
| Except that Grissom did not write that--he quoted another playwright, also black, who is said to be going public with a piece about Nottage's insistence on remaining on the board of Second Stage. Allegedly. At this point, I'm not convinced of the veracity of any anonymous quotes Grissom has included in either of his pieces. Also, whether or not the quote is real, Nottage's marriage and the ethnicity of her husband have nothing to do with the points Grissom is trying to make. Including a quote that calls out Nottage's interracial marriage as a way to discredit or devalue her status as a Black woman and artist was a deliberate choice. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Here's a link | |
| Posted by: chriscurrie 03:22 pm EDT 06/29/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Here's a link - AC126748 08:18 am EDT 06/29/20 | |
|
|
|
| It is common for people to discredit sources when what they say doesn't comport to what a reader believes, but leaving that aside, re-reading the piece shows to me that the race of Nottage's husband is relevant because it might (MIGHT) explain why Nottage is not repulsed by the accounts of racism about Carole Rothman of Second Stage, and why she is ignoring calls from other Black artists to resign from the board of that theatre and place her play somewhere else. If she is listening to Rothman and her husband, that may explain a lot about her actions, or her lack of them. Neither her race nor her status as a Black woman were devalued, but her judgment and empathy were questioned. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Here's a link | |
| Posted by: ryhog 11:07 pm EDT 06/29/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Here's a link - chriscurrie 03:22 pm EDT 06/29/20 | |
|
|
|
| I don't really want to interrupt the discussion, except to satisfy my curiosity about one thing: how is what Grissom is doing here distinguishable from what Joe McCarthy did that caused Joe Welch to ask him "Have you no sense of decency?" Your claim of relevancy is not predicated on a fact, but on a supposition bereft of factual basis. Reckless character assassination (by him, not you), isn't it? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Here's a link | |
| Last Edit: AC126748 03:53 pm EDT 06/29/20 | |
| Posted by: AC126748 03:53 pm EDT 06/29/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Here's a link - chriscurrie 03:22 pm EDT 06/29/20 | |
|
|
|
| It is frankly insulting to suggest that a Black woman is inclined to tolerate racism because she is married to a white man. And when a writer pens two essays that rely entirely on anonymous sources (with one exception) and all those sources happen to be in lock step with his own worldview, it makes sense to call their veracity into question. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Here's a link | |
| Posted by: chriscurrie 09:09 pm EDT 06/29/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Here's a link - AC126748 03:53 pm EDT 06/29/20 | |
|
|
|
| I see. This is done, of course, by many writers of editorials, which these pieces are, and is accepted by newspapers you probably read and trust and quote. Also, to assume that Blacks do not have racist viewpoints, or vision problems around racists if it helps their careers, is to simplify and define Black people to suit your own beliefs. Which is, I think, racism. Glad you cleared that up for us. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Here's a link | |
| Posted by: whereismikeyfl 03:50 pm EDT 06/29/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Here's a link - chriscurrie 03:22 pm EDT 06/29/20 | |
|
|
|
| " the race of Nottage's husband is relevant because it might (MIGHT) explain why Nottage is not repulsed by the accounts of racism about Carole Rothman of Second Stage" I cannot understand the point you are making. Are you saying his race is relevant because people in interracial relationships are more tolerant of racism? Or because people in interracial relationships are blind to racism? Are black artists calling on Nottage to resign form Second Stage's board? Grissom says there is surprise, but does not actually say there was any direct engagement. Grissom leads the reader to assume many things without actually making a statement. He never says there is anything wrong with interracial marriage but from the first paragraph on keeps referencing the race of Nottage's husband. (Even here people say he did not explicitly write anything judgemental--but did he have to?) He also gives the impression that the actors from the Guthrie were fired from the New York production---but they finished the Minneapolis run. They played their full contract. I am with the commenter who says they feel like taking a bath after reading Grissom. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.028023 seconds.