Response to Kaeshi & Brad—Part II: Perspectives on the Underdog

The day after I posted my critique of PURE's War & Peace performance in an Open Letter to Kaeshi Chai, she sent a response that I understand made significant rounds through the internet. Since it contains many false and hurtful statements about me and others, I feel compelled to respond.

What follows is the second part of that response. For further 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) 

(Kaeshi's Letter to PURE

Subject: My Perspective

First off, the subject line is strange.

Remember, this was sent to a group of people who, it turned out, had not seen what I had written. "Perspective" implies that the readers are already familiar with an initial perspective; it also indicates an awareness that one's own point of view is subjective—that there is a larger, more comprehensive vantage point.

But Kaeshi's email doesn't offer any such awareness. It demands the reader accept her version of reality as absolute truth.

Dear PURE,
I don't like to write or speak negatively about others, however I do feel the need to "defend" myself and the artistic vision of PURE regarding the recent procession.

She doesn't "like" to speak negatively, but will spend the next 1,230 words doing exactly that.... She will not address one single point of my critique, nor will she substantiate even one of her many false and hurtful statements about me.

Some of you know already know that I received an attack last night from a dancer named Carol Tandava Henning who is currently going on a completely unnecessary public Facebook and Blog denouncement (not the first). I will be leaving town tomorrow to go to China so I probably will not have a chance to speak with you in person so this e-mail will have to suffice.

First, describing my commentary as an "attack" to a group of people who had most likely not read it was highly inappropriate and served only to stir them into a defensive rally to stroke her ego. And while it may be legitimately described as a "denouncement"—the denouncement is of her behavior only, not of her character or mental health; she, however, makes such claims against me.

By insisting my actions were "completely unnecessary" she reveals her conviction that her opinions are more valid and important than anyone else's. Indeed, I and many others felt it was necessary, and I explained my reasoning here.

Lastly, her claim that this was "not the first" time I'd spoken out is false; I had said nothing directly and publicly beforehand.

In trying to comprehend and process her very strange behavior over the past year, however, I have posted hypothetical accounts of actions and statements relating to her treatment of me. But if this is what she is referring to, then that means she has been following my feed even though we have not been friends for nearly a year.

When I was growing up, I often felt like I was a square in a round hole, was never in the "popular" group or felt like I was good enough, so to this day, I have tremendous compassion for the underdog. This has given me more patience to deal with difficult people that are normally ignored and ostracized by others.

By relating her childhood difficulties, Kaeshi both plays on the reader's sympathy and highlights her claimed development of "compassion for the underdog" and "patience." (Kaeshi Good!) "Underdog" is a curious choice, though, as a characterization of both her younger self and my current self.

It is defined as (1) a victim of social or political injustice (which would then acknowledge that I have been treated unfairly here); and (2) a person who is expected to lose in a contest or conflict. Given that she and I are in conflict, and that she still considers me an "underdog" while she is no longer one, she implies she will easily win ... which makes her a bully.

She also implies I am a "difficult [person] that [is] normally ignored and ostracized by others" (Carol Bad!) yet gives no evidence of this. Further, her very need to "defend" herself indicates her belief that people have read and are perhaps considering that what I have written is truthful and reasonable, and therefore I am neither ignored nor ostracized.

Continued in Part III: Anger Management