too harsh?

[Evan Young]

A little nameless friend I know didn't like the proposed schedule for the spring touring schedule he was sent. In the schedule he noticed that the part time performers were going to be getting more work than he was (a full time performer). He considered this a violation of his contract, so he wrote an email. the email also covered another problem he noticed.


"how is this gonna work. Isn't a set of props gonna be tied up in shipping a week before and a week after ______? I'm still not happy about switching out props, it's one of those things that I put in my letter last summer and I put it there for a reason (I'll do it, but I'm not cool with it). and how did the other troup wind up with six weeks of solid touring while ____ and I have five? Are we gonna be booked up ten shows a week at home in between tours? You hired me on this year as a full time performer, I expect you to treat me like one."


this flustered the companys program director because she percieved it as harsh. she "won't be talked to that way". I looked it over and thought it was just very direct and blunt, not harsh. what do you think?

(btw, the problems being adressed in the email are being resolved.)

[jester]

I once had trouble getting a local community arts director to consider a project I was running. It had a problem, it was struggling along and needed a resource which was available.

However, months went by and the director simply was too busy to come and look at the project.

So I wrote her a letter, and I got other people whom she respected to sign the letter to say that the project was worth considering and was surviving despite being "homeless."

She took this very badly and felt that I had raised a petition against her. And I could not tell her otherwise.

She is a very good lady and does a very good job but even now 9 years on I am still angry with her as eventually the project failed, which was actually good news for me - it relased me, but not for the other 5 artists involved. involved

[martin ewen]

Respond to her indigestion as you would wish her you.

The points your friend made were valid, both as they addressed his sources of frustration and the incongruent fact that the part time/full time roles look reversed.
He writes in a conversational tone "but I'm not cool with it."

My suggestion would be to respond to her response.
She won't be talked to that way.
OK so talk to her another way, show her your adaptive.
Write something like. "on review I agree that my comments could have been more constructively presented and would like to take this opportunity to better explain my concerns."
List the points that cause you friction and list possible solutions, (plural, choices will not make her as defensive as straight demands and also give her the luxury of making 'managerial decisions')
Define the situation in terms of making efforts to address your concerns but hers as well as a manager/director/whatever.
I've re read your post and you state that the problems being addressed are being resolved so your question is simply. Was he too harsh?
My opinion is its not as relevant as the question, was it effective and the answer is obviously not as effective as he could have been. A rule of thumb with the higher ups is not to get them defensive.
If you make concessions you can make it pretty plain at the time that you are making them consciously in the interests of goodwill between the performers and management. This saves you from the situation where you simply put up with shit up to a point then say, I put up with this shit but I'm unhappy with this new shit. Or its close cousin, I put up with this shit and now this shit is the norm.
Bottom line if you can define frictions and offer solutions you do their job for them and they like that.

Oh and possibly the most important thing, Language.
Higher ups respect formal language, informal language infers either a lack of education or effort or intelligence.
Its not fair but there it is.
All that stuff your prissy english teacher tried to teach you, that stuff is useful when you want to get respect from comparitively powerful people. Its not important in itself. Its a social code.

[firegirl]

I think the points were valid; and, I (personally) do not perceive the language as "too harsh..." However, a point I regularly make to other theater professionals I work with is this:

You have to keep in mind who you're writing for.

Even when angry and frustrated.

For example - you cannot send a grant reviewer from the National Endowment of the Arts an email with "emotioncons" in the text. (This really happened... someone put a in the text of a response to the NEA Reporter - an individual who will decide if this person't theater company gets tens of thousands of dollars in grant money... and, it just looks unprofessional.)

Most program directors are twitchy. Truly - think about all the program directors you know... they are all a little neurotic, right?

Well, at least all the ones I know are.

Anyhow - there is that saying: "You catch more flies with honey than vinager."

If you write to your audiance & do so in a non-offensive manner then the person you're trying to persuade will be more likely to come over to your side to help you resolve your problem.

Whereas if you are antagonistic, accusatory and bombastic in your writing they are just going to tune you out.

[I say all this with persuasive writing being a goodly portion - at least 70% - of my "day job."]

Was it harsh? A little... too harsh? Not to me - but, what the author really needs to keep in mind is that things like "harsh" and "too harsh" are subjective issues.

More flies with honey than vinager.

So many people are tempted at this point to say - "No, man! I'm not going to censor myself so that some stupid person is less offended by my writing..."

Yeah, yeah, yeah... you're an individual - we get it.

But, if you actually want to *GET WHAT YOU WANT* you will think of making the changes to your language which will make that happen for you.

my .02 cents,
k

[Butterfly Man]

offstage ... not on

Precisely why I bought a wig.

[jester]

If you stick anybody behind a desk, anybody at all, for long enough (2 hours a day for a week will do it) and they will become incredibly pompous. And the more "fun" the field of work you are administrating, the more tedious and energeticly small minded you become. This is the inverse law of occupational fun to officiously fuckwittedness.

In insurance, the people behind desks are normally a lot of fun. This is because insurance isn't fun.

In arts administration the people behind the desks are frustrated sadistic bastards only matched by sad people in very important jobs such as Hospital Administration or Social Security. At one stage about 7 years ago, Salisbury Festval was famous for it.

Whenever I said I was from Salisbury artists would say: "Have you spoken to anybody from the festival..... they are so rude."

I worked behind many desks. I have seen colleagues actively obstruct peoples lives simply because the CV was on an annoying colour of paper, or a word was mis-spelt.

I have seen things go to the bottom of a pile, because somebody admitted they were into amateur operatics.

I have seen people desperately awaiting moneys, made to wait up to 14 days longer than necessary because they had been somewhere nice on holiday. Jelousy, mean mindedness, petty little hatreds are ever present in our sad little world.

Even here on Pnet I have seen an accomplished artist bitterly and ferociously attack the self esteem of another, simply because he was sat at a desk with his computer and his little sense of Pnet order was offended. These people pointlessly correct mistakes in grammar, demand to know why performers are discussing science on an arts forum etc etc. "Oh this is way off topic."

No it wasn't you little fuckwits. It was in it's own little thread and you are way off topic.

THis is why I want to be a Pnet administrator or moderator.

Pedantic bastards are everywhere. And I want them all shot. I am starting a pedantic bastards hotline, where you can phone in and snitch on any pedantic bastard who is pedantising officiously.

Dob them in. Prizes given to the best leads. I am totally opposed to the Death penalty, except for these soul destroying malicious bacteria that infest and septicly breed in our society.

Vote for me.. I can be shit too.

[the scarecrow]

Always remember, that everybody has feelings. Even officious upstarts who have power to make executive decisions.

Once you upset someone like that, apologise quickly, carefully.

Fuck pride. There are loads of proud people at the bottom.

[jester]

I got no fucking pride and I'm here at the bottom.