Threaded Order Chronological Order
| Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: portenopete 11:47 am EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: "After Scott Rudin expose there are mostly crickets" - Billhaven 10:29 am EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| I have no connection to Mr. Rudin other than being acquainted with some people who have been in his shows so I have no personal insight into his behaviour. From what I've heard the accusations amount to him being an a**hole who yells at people- his employees and others- and is an emotional bully and general no-goodnik in human terms. I can well understand that there are a lot of people who would choose not to work for Mr. Rudin- myself included- if abuse and belittlement came with the gig. But the same held true for David Merrick, Jerome Robbins, Arthur Laurents, Jed Harris and countless other producer/director/creators. And the American Theater would be wildly poorer if they had not been a part of it. Just like the current Broadway culture would be poorer without Rudin's contributions, power and money. I have no problem with people calling him out on it and talking about it in the press and if he chooses to pursue libel claims against them, then that is his business. But until there are serious and credible reports of physical or sexual assault, then I don't know why it's a thing. Otherwise we are well on our way to a world where if a director says to an intern assistant "That's a bad idea", they will be publicly flogged for emotional battery and silencing their voice. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Last Edit: mikem 01:33 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| Posted by: mikem 01:32 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: Maybe deservedly so? - portenopete 11:47 am EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| The Hollywood Reporter article opens with a report of an assistant's hand injured by being smashed by a computer monitor because of Rudin. The article implies that it was a deliberate act, but no witnesses are interviewed, so we don't actually know. Even the horrified co-workers feel that the physical assault was unexpected and somewhat out of character, although they give plenty of examples of him throwing things around and smashing objects while having a temper tantrum. That's the only physical assault I noticed in the article. My personal guess is that the physical assault was unintentional, that he was throwing things around and didn't intend to hit the assistant, although that doesn't negate the fact that he did hit him. Many years ago, I had to interact at work with a mini-version of Rudin for a couple of weeks. Like with Rudin, everyone knew what he was like but no one would do anything about it because he was a top earner. One day, he was throwing things around the room in a temper tantrum, and one of them hit me. It had a sharp edge and drew blood, although it was a minor injury that just needed a bandaid. I am sure he did not intend to hit me, although he never apologized and actually tried to get me fired when I made a complaint about it. And his boss, after he received the complaint, called me into his office to threaten me, saying, "I very strongly advise you not to take this any further than you already have." I was about the age of the assistants in the article. I have a different kind of strength today than I did then. If it happened now, I might have filed a police report so that there was a public paper trail, but at the time I was young and easily intimidated. My time with the guy and his entire department was coincidentally coming to a close anyway, and I didn't pursue it any further. I never saw him or his boss again. Nothing happened to the guy, and I'm sure he continued to behave horribly. I have complicated feelings about Rudin. On one hand, IF we believe the physical assault was unintentional (reckless behavior rather than intentionally trying to hurt someone physically), he isn't breaking any major laws, and his assistants are adults who took the job with their eyes wide open. I'm sure they had other offers. I think that’s why there hasn’t been much response. He’s a jerk, he’s not a criminal. On the other hand, his behavior is really not okay, and I strongly disagree with the contention that, because he is producing something of value, it's okay that he treats people terribly. As someone earlier said, he's not throwing things at Hugh Jackman. He has the ability to control himself but chooses not to. And a Rudin (or Robbins or Merrick or...) with more self-control would still be able to contribute to the theater world in the same way, without being an asshole to powerless people around him. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: portenopete 04:02 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - mikem 01:32 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| I really appreciated your thoughtful, personal and nuanced account. I am so glad you contributed! I'm glad you emerged from your own Boss from Hell situation relatively unscathed and seemingly with your dignity and sense of self-worth intact. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: mikem 12:15 am EDT 04/12/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - portenopete 04:02 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| portenopete, thank you for your kind words. I was really debating whether to post my experience, and I'm glad you found it was worth reading. I was lucky that my time interacting with the guy was short, so it did not have as deep an effect as it would have if it had been a prolonged experience. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: Billhaven 01:51 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - mikem 01:32 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| A complicated subject. People always reference Jerome Robbins but there was a seemingly long tradition of directors in the 50s and 60s who were known to be difficult. John Dexter and Alan Schneider to name two. They were mean. Cutting and sarcastic. I have worked for a few directors like that. They usually single out some young defenseless actor to heap withering scorn upon. Greg Boyd at the Alley Theatre in Houston was like that. They wouldn't dream of directing their contempt on their mature and confident stars. Only the ingenues or apprentices. Unfortunately, that behavior is not criminal. Just plain crummy. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: scoot1er 10:00 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - Billhaven 01:51 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| I worked with Greg Boyd many years ago, in 1987 actually, and I never witnessed any abusive behavior toward any of the actors in the show. Yes, it was a long time ago and perhaps he changed, but at that time he was always a gentleman and a terrific director, ready to listen to an actor’s ideas and willing to try them out. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: Billhaven 10:54 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - scoot1er 10:00 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| The Houston Chronicle wrote about " the abrupt retirement of longtime Alley Theatre Artistic Director Gregory Boyd, the Houston Chronicle reported today that more than a dozen current and former Alley employees have said that under Boyd, the theater had a “toxic, bullying atmosphere.” https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Alley-theatre-houston-gregory-boyd-allegations-12492467.php |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: portenopete 04:11 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - Billhaven 01:51 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| Yes, Dexter was certainly legendary. Other British expats as well. That class of directors who emerged- many from the public school system- in the mid-20th century were inculcated in that classist, rapacious mindset where boys were taught to, first, bury any dignity or strength in service of their "superiors" and then learn how to wield it, presumably in service of Queen & Country. This weekend we have been remembering The Duke of Edinburgh, for whom Gordounston was a revelatory experience; unfortunately for his son it was not so felicitous. I never worked with Dexter or Schneider but I did work with other Tony-nominated Brits who could do a good job in making an actor feel small and worthless. Fortunately I was never a whipping boy but I certainly spent the rehearsal period in fear. Perhaps it was this "training" that has corrupted me? But I still feel that I would do it all again if those guys were still alive and creating the productions I saw that were so brilliant and smart and meaningful. The part that troubles me is the way the pendulum has whipped so forcefully the other direction. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: larry13 04:23 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - portenopete 04:11 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| Just a small clarification: don't know if you meant to say he too was a Brit, but, for what it's worth, Alan Schneider was NOT; he was American. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: ryhog 01:45 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - mikem 01:32 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| Intent is not required for assault in NY. Recklessness is sufficient. Also worth noting that there is a separate misdemeanor called harassment, which requires a course of conduct and a purpose (but nothing physical). In a case like this, it would likely be charged also. I am surprised anyone finds any of this excusable for any reason but so be it. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: mikem 04:01 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - ryhog 01:45 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| I would personally make a distinction between what is excusable and what is criminal. None of his behavior is excusable. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: ryhog 04:03 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - mikem 04:01 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| More to the point, all of his behavior is illegal. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Last Edit: KingSpeed 01:22 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| Posted by: KingSpeed 01:20 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: Maybe deservedly so? - portenopete 11:47 am EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| So it’s ok that Michael Jackson sexually and emotionally abused children because he’s talented and has brought so many good songs and performances to the world. Got it. And physical, verbal, and emotional abuse is just as bad as sexual abuse. Trauma is trauma. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: Michael_Portantiere 12:11 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: Maybe deservedly so? - portenopete 11:47 am EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| "Until there are serious and credible reports of physical or sexual assault, then I don't know why it's a thing." Incredible. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: portenopete 12:27 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - Michael_Portantiere 12:11 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| "Incredible" that I don't think that Scott Rudin should be banished from the theatre and put in jail because he is mean to underlings and yells at people and occasionally throws things? I'll own that opinion. Because what is "unacceptable" behaviour for a superior has become warped beyond recognition. Having said that, if there are charges against him, then ethically the Times should cover them and not protect him because he spends money for their ad space. And I would hope that the public coverage of Rudin's regrettable behaviour- whether or not it is deemed to be criminal- has some effect on him and makes him rethink his actions. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: ryhog 12:05 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: Maybe deservedly so? - portenopete 11:47 am EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| "But until there are serious and credible reports of physical . . . assault" There are, which kinda takes the wind out of your sails. We don't let criminals do lots of things that would make the (theatre) world better. We didn't let Drabinsky (another producer who did some great things amidst his criminality) and we should not let Rudin. The difference is that there has not been a Mike Ovitz to face Rudin. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: portenopete 12:13 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - ryhog 12:05 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| As I have read the accounts- not forensically, I admit- wasn't the "physical assault" the result of Rudin throwing something and it inadvertently breaking and hitting somebody? Not nothing and perfectly subject to whatever laws he broke. But not the same as him jumping on someone and beating them with a hammer. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: Michael_Portantiere 12:21 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - portenopete 12:13 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| ***As I have read the accounts- not forensically, I admit- wasn't the "physical assault" the result of Rudin throwing something and it inadvertently breaking and hitting somebody?**** According to the story in the Hollywood Reporter, that is totally incorrect in at least one very notable, alleged case. Perhaps you might want to re-read that article -- or read it for the first time, if you haven't -- before commenting further. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Hey! I just read the article in full! | |
| Posted by: portenopete 03:54 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - Michael_Portantiere 12:21 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| And I kinda feel the same way. Yelling at people, forcing them to work ungodly hours, humiliating them. It's awful behaviour that deserves to be known and- as the article points out repeatedly- HAS been known in the industry and beyond for years. Any 20something coming out of NYU or UCLA should be forewarned and forearmed if they accept a gig in his office. Just the way I imagine anyone was who went to work for David Merrick fifty years ago, or Jed Harris before that. Ultimately he is being judged by the court of public opinion for his work, both for its quality and for its profitability. He is almost inevitably associated with top-drawer art and has good taste in assembling creative teams. That should in no way stand in the way when he has broken a law and if charges are laid and stick and he goes to trial, I'd shed no tears for him (although I'd mourn the quality projects he ushered to the stage and screen). I felt the same way about Garth Drabinsky twenty-five years ago. In my opinion, the assistant who was fired was not fired "because of her diabetes" and her assertion that she could have "100 percent sued him" sounds like a child and that kind of overly-dramatic claim only lessens her position of strength. But to me this article reeks of a trade publication angling for national prominence in the Ronan Farrow/Kantor & Twohey vein, hoping to vault Ms Siegel into that class of ubiquitous cultural commentators who are perennial pundits on CNN and MSNBC or the subjects of vilification on Fox. But the good that can come out of it is to reinforce for all but the hardiest souls that perhaps Mr. Rudin is not the wisest person to hang your hat on career-wise and to scale back your desire to be at the pinnacle of power. Because anyone who wants to work for him that much must have a real taste for it. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hey! I just read the article in full! | |
| Posted by: ryhog 04:08 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: Hey! I just read the article in full! - portenopete 03:54 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| I would say that the good that can come out of this is a set of laws (the most recent amendments being a good start) that don't make someone choose between their aspirations and conduct like that described here. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hey! I just read the article in full! | |
| Posted by: portenopete 04:26 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Hey! I just read the article in full! - ryhog 04:08 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| I totally agree with you but I still have a nagging worry that the decline and disappearance of those awful, hurtful people is not making the theatre a better place for the audiences. I have LOVED the work of- for instance- Rachel Chavkin and Tommy Kail and understand them to be nothing but upstanding people in life as well as superior artists. I just prefer a theatre community where there is a variety of types running things and I can make my own choices about whom to work with and whether or not to wear protective gear when I come to work. And if the work of the monstres sacrés finally has no audience it will bite the dust and it will be an inevitable bit of evolution. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hey! I just read the article in full! | |
| Posted by: ryhog 04:44 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Hey! I just read the article in full! - portenopete 04:26 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| I think we can facilitate that evolution just as we have passed laws against various forms of discrimination, for instance. One thing I am pretty sure I know about Rudin: if the choice were between producing theatre (or movies) that bring him accolades and awards and perpetuating his pathological misconduct, I think he will find a way to chart the former course, even if it costs him tons in therapy fees. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hey! I just read the article in full! | |
| Posted by: larry13 04:31 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Hey! I just read the article in full! - portenopete 04:26 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| Who's talking about whether "the decline and disappearance of those awful, hurtful people is" or is "not making the theatre a better place for the audiences?" You or anyone else in the AUDIENCE? It's the people who are working with these ogres who deserve decent working conditions. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: portenopete 12:28 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - Michael_Portantiere 12:21 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| I will. Thanks! | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Maybe deservedly so? | |
| Posted by: dramedy 12:11 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - ryhog 12:05 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| Being sent to the hospital is enough proof for physical abuse. And consistently yelling at employees is actionable abuse. The example of dismissing a suggestion does not rise to actionable abuse. What rudin is accused of doing is. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Except... | |
| Posted by: MockingbirdGirl 12:10 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Maybe deservedly so? - ryhog 12:05 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| ... it seems like those assaulted have been happy to take the cash rather than filing charges. According to the HR story: "The wounded assistant headed to the emergency room, and Rudin called his lawyer..." | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| That's not an "except." It's what I said. nm | |
| Posted by: ryhog 12:55 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: Except... - MockingbirdGirl 12:10 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| The voices in your head don't count (nm) | |
| Posted by: MockingbirdGirl 01:12 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: That's not an "except." It's what I said. nm - ryhog 12:55 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| ;) | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| And what point are you making? | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 02:46 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: The voices in your head don't count (nm) - MockingbirdGirl 01:12 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| It's okay to assault your assistant as long as they get a good pay out? Not really following your line of argument, and also surprised that you didn't call straw man, since this actually IS a straw man argument. smh |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: And what point are you making? | |
| Last Edit: MockingbirdGirl 03:30 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| Posted by: MockingbirdGirl 03:29 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: And what point are you making? - Singapore/Fling 02:46 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| The point I'm making is that while there are indeed "serious and credible" accounts of assault, someone has to actually be willing to press charges against him instead of being buyed off. Not sure why you believe that's a 'straw man' argument in the slightest. It seems to be exactly what's been happening. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: And what point are you making? | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 12:10 am EDT 04/12/21 | |
| In reply to: re: And what point are you making? - MockingbirdGirl 03:29 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| Ok, cool, that got lost in translation. And the OP of this thread was the straw man argument, and even continued insisting no abuse had happened *after reading about the computer smashing*. Just surprised you didn't call that out. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| That isn’t any different than sexual abuse | |
| Posted by: dramedy 12:13 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
| In reply to: Except... - MockingbirdGirl 12:10 pm EDT 04/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| Pay off the victim to not cooperate with the investigation. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.091144 seconds.