The day after I posted my critique of PURE's War & Peace performance in an Open Letter to Kaeshi Chai, she sent a response—not to me, but to the members of PURE—to "'defend' [herself] and the artistic vision of PURE regarding the recent procession."
That response was forwarded to me and, apparently, made significant rounds through the internet. Since it contains many false and hurtful statements about me and others, I feel compelled to respond.
So far I have broken my response into four entries (there may be as many as eight... much was said, and so there is much to which I must respond). For more info, please see:
My Q&A About Why the Critique was Necessary
Part I: Introduction to the Defensive Screed
Part II: Perspectives on the Underdog
Part III: Anger Management
Part IV: Sabotage
Part V: Kaeshi's "Red Zone"
Part VI: Violent Communications
Part VII: The Gangrened and Diseased Limb
Part VIII: Transgressions
Part IX: The Inner-Warrior
Part X: Brad's "Delusional, Revisionist History"
Part XI: Final Thoughts (or If Lenny Bruce Had a Blog)
Part I: That the theatrical narrative of the War & Peace choreography did not serve the stated goals of the piece to explore the cause of conflict, etc. or PURE's larger goal of healing and peace because it portrayed only a massacre; and
Part II: That Kaeshi inappropriately brought this work to PURE as an enactment of her unresolved conflict with me and Liz Free in which she "expunged" us.
Plus, it was posted on my blog and on Facebook which, understandably, caused unrest within PURE.
So, given that this was the case, one would expect Kaeshi's "defense" of the piece, and refutation of my critique, would contain three elements:
(1) "Here is how the piece did serve the goals of PURE; here is why Carol did not understand what we were doing," and ideally cite quotes from what I wrote that show how my interpretation missed the point.
(2) "Here is what occurred in my interactions with Carol which justified my expulsion of her from PURE," and then truthfully cite specific events and their negative aftermaths.
(3) "Here is why I take offense to a public commentary," and then list the negative consequences of such a commentary and if possible show how a similar commentary may have caused damage in the past, is such damage exists.
But it didn't.
Instead, she proceeded with a defensive screed that assassinated my character, making unsubstantiated accusations regarding my professional and personal conduct, as well as derogatory insinuations about my mental health. Further, she defamed Liz Free, PURE's most enduring member and Secretary/Treasurer since its inception in 2003 through December 2011.
And at every turn she praises herself. Indeed, nearly every paragraph can be summarized as: Kaeshi Good! Carol Bad!
Not surprisingly, the PURE membership rallied to her defense, chiming in with many emails effusively praising her—though, truly, words like: "Blessed is her name. Blessed is her spirit. Blessed are her works..." should probably not be said of any bellydance teacher no matter how great he or she is.
Further, these emails condemned my "negativity." The most shocking and damaging, however, came from Brad—Kaeshi's husband—whom I have known and worked with enjoyably for over six years.
Now, I completely understand his need to protect his wife, but his statements were so strange and contradictory—describing me "delusional" on the one hand, but then encouraging PURE members to "seek the full story" on the other—perhaps revealing a deeply conflicted conscience.
And so I will include a rebuttal of Brad's letter as well.
In my commentary on each letter, I will pay special attention to word choice as both Kaeshi and Brad are intelligent, competent writers with a good command of language. As Mitt Romney learned via the backlash from his description of "binders full of women," words often reveal hidden prejudices and agendas.
Continued in Part II: Perspectives on the Underdog
5 comments:
I don't know you, Carol, and I've only met Kaeshi once, but golly gee it's painful and embarrassing to eavesdrop on such private and personal failings between onetime friends and collaborators. I question why you feel the need to air dirty laundry in such a public way?
Yes, Anonymous, this whole thing has been terribly painful. Going public was a difficult decision, but one that I finally concluded was necessary last month.
I received many questions about it, and answered them as fully as I could here: http://tandavadance.blogspot.com/2012/10/war-peace-kaeshi-pure-and-me-q-blog.html
Bear in mind, also, Kaeshi's email was legally public as it went to an unknown number of people. So once the laundry is out, it's fully out and must be dealt with.
I whole-heartedly support Carol in her endeavors here. While obviously both painful and embarrassing, Carol felt the need to publicly defend herself. You see, one of the wierd things about a situation like this, is that by going public with this issue, Kaeshi is being handicapped.
It's been apparent, at least to those of us who have been involved in this whole mess from the beginning, that Kaeshi very much prefers to attack from the shadows, so to speak. She puts on a great public face (i.e., I don't like to speak negatively of others; woe is me, Carol is attacking me; whatever did I do to deserve this?), but then turns around and sends out a "public" message only to those she chooses.
Kaeshi, in her "defense" of herself, goes on to attack Carol and to whip up public opinion against Carol. Carol was difficult to work with. Carol has anger management issues. Blah, blah, ad infinitum. Typical hypocritical side-stepping of the actual issue at hand.
So, by airing this whole situation in full public view, Kaeshi has to also respond publicly, if she wants to keep any shred of credibility. This, of course, assumes that Kaeshi deigns to respond at all.
Thank you Anonymous 2; I appreciate your support very much.
Whistle-blowing is never fun for anyone, which is why it took me so many months to come forward (recall, the worst of Kaeshi's behavior was at the end of last year). Had it not been for the extremely inappropriate nature War & Peace performance (i.e. had she not done it at all, or had she allowed it to unambiguously fulfill its stated intent), I would not have come forward at all because there would have been no reason to do so.
Your comment of her preferring to "attack from the shadows" is striking and accurate. I can't help but draw a connection to other venerated abusers (from the Sandusky scandal to priesthood abuse), where those abused were terrified to come forward for fear of retaliation.
While this is nowhere near that level of severity, I have actually been told by a fellow dancer to "lay low for a while" -- which conjured images of pitchfork-wielding Kaeshi acolytes.
But of course that hasn't happened; mostly people have been polite, if somewhat confused. Many have not known what to make of this, but they are listening, and they are comparing it to their own experience.
And others are coming forward with tales of their own mistreatment -- by Kaeshi or others who used power to silence dissent.
I have to wonder how far back to "the beginning" you have been involved in "this mess" ... because PURE has been troubled for a while now, although the worst of it flared up last year. But clearly you were either on the original mailing list of Kaeshi's letter or you received a forward of it subsequently, as you refer to statements in it that I have not yet disclosed.
But yes.... I will respond to all of that.
One other thing... for Anonymous 1 ...
You say that you have only met Kaeshi once and have not met me. Yet I checked your stamp and see you are from Brooklyn.
The dancer community is very small, even in a large city like this. I find it difficult to believe you have not met me and know Kaeshi so little.
You question my "need to air dirty laundry in such a public way" -- but I stated the reason in the very first paragraphs: That Kaeshi had maligned me in her email to the considerably large PURE list.
Is it not reasonable to defend oneself against such a thing?
Further, although there is some considerable "dirty laundry" to come, there is very little in this first entry, which leads me to question your choice of such words in your public comment.
And I question just how much you know of Kaeshi's letter...
Post a Comment