From: Jon A Conrad (conrad@xxx.xxx) Subject: Response from Marc Kudisch Newsgroups: rec.arts.theatre.musicals Date: 2001-07-08 08:29:44 PST I very unexpectedly received e-mail from Marc Kudisch last night (was I the only one)? As he asks at the end that I post it if I feel comfortable doing so, I am posting it without comment, just as I received it. (Some sentences now read oddly addressed to a newsgroup, but I thought it better not to exert any editorial interference.) Everything that follows the line is his e-mail. Jon =============================================== From < E-MAIL REMOVED FOR PRIVACY REASONS > Sun Jul 8 11:05:13 2001 Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 23:35:28 EDT From: < E-MAIL REMOVED FOR PRIVACY REASONS > To: conrad@xxx.xxx Subject: hopes of clarity Dear Mr.Conrad, i am writing to you as a way of a formal apology, an explanation for my words, and a hope at being clear. The apology is for what seems to be my attack on the history of our profession, and those that made that history. There is no one that can deny the brillance, creative force, and great influence of Alfred Drake. He was broadway's great leading man; the icon that we all follow. I have always been a huge fan. I have an original cast recording of Oklahoma on victrola, because to hear it the way they originally recorded it is a piece of real history. Kiss Me Kate is always playing in my laptop. There was no one before him. His contribution to music theatre history is immeasurable. I meant in no way to attack his talent. Nor do I hope to convince anyone that I am in any way superior. When I finally read the interview myself (five minutes ago, and only because of the controversy that it stirred), I was taken back by the way it sounded. Saying the words in the context of the discussion between two people is one thing; reading those words and thoughts out of context was another. I found myself sounding egocentric, superior, and arrogant. It scared me, because the discussion that the interviewer and I were having was so much fun; the exchanging of ideas and opinons of the crafting of music theatre, the joy of creation and exploration, the history of the developent of this craft over the years and it's progression from then to now. We talked for hours. I can't shut up about it; I just love the theatre and being, I hope, a creative part of it's development. And I love history. I believe you must understand the past to find the future. Ibelieve what we do is a craft, a discipline, and it is to be respected. And then I read the interview. And was dismayed at how it could be misunderstood. I am not faulting Zach, the interviewer. He's great. I am faulting the way I sometimes present ideas that makes them sound more like fact and less like the opinions that they are. I am writing you because you are a teacher of this craft, this history. I am writing you not to apologize for my opinions, but to apologize for the way that they can be taken to be disrespectful. I have great passion and strong opinons, and yes, great ego, but one that I continually strive to make about the work, the craft; not about me. I am not a self promoter. I am just so zealous about what we do, and believe that having a career in the theatre, a career as a stage actor, is a joy and priviledge. And possible. When talking of Alfred Drake as an actor, and Larry Kert, I was only drawing comparisons to the style of performance that these men had in their day, and the style of performance that we have today. In saying that they were personality performers, I meant that people were writing for their personalities and talents in a time when musicals were not approached in a realistic, play-like style that is the approach that we have today. Not to say that they didn't give great performances, but even plays at this time in our history were only beginning to approach a darker , more realistic style of performance with the actor's studio. And not to say they weren't brilliant. It was just a simpler, purer time; not as complex as today. And I absolutely believe in the openess and whole-heartedness in the musicals of the golden era even today. I have just found that getting a character to that simplicity and open vulnerability is a far more complex character study in the far more cynical, technology advanced, multiple choice world we live in today. We herald human flaw. We sensationalize disfunction. And I am digressing..... These are my very strong opinions. They are only that. But they are my foundation for further building and exploration. And they would not have even been possible without the past work of the greats to show the way. No, of course I was not there to see Mr. Drake perform; only on video and disk. And no, I was not there to see Mr. Chaplin perform, but recieved information from people that were there, first had, in the show and at performance of the show. And Betty and Adolph loved him. And so my opinions are educated guesses based on as much information as i could absorb from as many sources as i could gather from. But truly, no offense was meant. If anything, I must learn to edit my stream of consiousness. But I am proud to have a point of view that is my own. I cannot see how you can be truly creative , your own unique voice of creativity, without your own unique point of view. Isn't that what makes what is seemingly average extraordinary? So, I hope this helps to explain what I truly meant. Again, I have the greatest respect for those who have helped to shape history, and those who teach that history. This was not easy to write. Semantics and communication are important to me. I can only hope that this letter might spur the possibility of talking and sharing ideas person to person. That might be fun. If you feel I have communicated admirably, would you be offended if I asked you to post this? I was going to write the message board, but am afraid that trying to do this again would result in catastrophe. If not, thank you for taking the time to read this. I really do appreciate that. Sincerely, Marc Kudisch