"Mark rocks..."
"...his classroom presentation is really engaging. I also appreciate the exploration of issues around what defines art and about gender & ethnic issues in contemporary theatre."
"Really funny and SUPER sarcastic..."
"Talked about himself most of the time."
"His lectures were interesting and he tells some funny stories."
"All he does is talk about his personal life and how wonderful theatre is and that film is satan."
"he is good overall...""Class is very easy."
"Condescending...Inflated ego."
"...thinks he's god."
"...a shameless self-promoter, when he actually shows up to class, he likes to spend class bashing organized labour and going on and on about how much he has contributed to modern theatre."
"looses papers, Man hater, Makes False Accusations."
8 comments:
How much is Mills paying you to promote his wisdom?
From everything you graciously published on your blog, this guy seems to have been tenured accidentally. Thanks for sharing your limited view of the situation.
You don't have to be abusive to be a good teacher. That's what bad movies and TV are based on, but then, that's probably the basis of your secondary education. Yes, you are a lovely writer. Go get a life and a job and quit re-victimizing his prey.
Actually, Mills' letter of reccomendation for tenure is in the court documents and makes very interesting reading.
Reading the documents in your links, it's clear that there is, to put it mildly, more than one point of view or interpretation of events. I guess that's why we require people to testify under oath in court (with consequences for lying), as opposed to the unlimited fabrication of stories in the media. Judges are usually pretty good at discerning facts and rules from feelings and fantasy.
With a little luck, we'll eventually discover via Professor Mills' lawsuit just who is victim and who is prey in this matter.
Did Mark Kuntz write that first comment?
Dear anonymous, post #1,
How much is Mills paying me? Solid question, but Mills is paying me nothing.
I read he was suspended in that lump of shit The Western Front, called him on the phone, and asked him to send me anything and everything.
Perry Mills did me a good turn. Partly because of his influence, I can always transform what's in my head into a sentence, often a paragraph, and sometimes a movie or a book.
Now he's been suspended, and I'm putting in my two cents because I don't like to see someone I respect having heaps of shit piled on his head and his livelihood threatened for reasons that smell real damn funny.
This blog might be useful in spreading the word of Perry's case to rip out the throats of the jackals who've attacked him, or maybe it won't, but in any case I intend to keep it entertaining, as Mills is a hilarious character, even aside from the present unfolding drama.
Since his suspension, Mills' former students have been coming out of the woodwork to celebrate him.
Will that happen for you? Will you have acquaintances (students maybe) from 10 or 15 years ago writing letters or starting websites to vouch for your character or methods, saying how you made them appreciate a ruthless opinion, a stylish barb, a poisoned compliment, or the giddy fun of raw intellectual swordplay? Will non-abusive, passive-aggressive, re-victimized thought personnel have the fire to even give a damn?
Enjoy your Christmas cards.
For lurkers: I hope to take the ambiguity out of the present "situation" and publish everything about Perry Mills I can get my hands on, for two reasons:
1) Though Mills' shenanigans are not often good for grandma, they consistently reveal him to be a man of humor, whereas his opponents are dead fish, and there is always something innately suspicious about humorless men.
2) Because I'm biased in this matter, I'll put the raw documents on the side for anyone who cares to read them. This is a far cry from the evasive, elusive, and secretive bias of the WWU administrators who are trying to steamroll this whole matter through with as little fuss as possible. I'm posting the documents (aside from the commentary) as a way of managing my bias, which is pro-Mills, and which "anonymous" #1 rightfully recognized as a matter best clarified.
Nick Johnson
bigdeadplace.com
Evidence here of a bit of shared pathology!
The apologist decries the injust heaping of shit upon the poor, downtrodden professor's head, hoping with the blog to help "rip out the throats of the jackals who've attacked him".
Almost precisely the charges the university lays against the abusive and intimidating professor. How dull!
And these guys are supposed to be academics?
You can tell the first respondent is from the university. First, he wonders that anyone would actually do something without getting paid for it. Then he dishes out denigration to everyone in sight, ending with a faint compliment and the advice, "Go get a life and a job". He obviously thinks the editor still lives in Bellingham, because that's how the elites there tell you they don't want you around. It actually means that they are uniquely in a position to influence whether you get a job or not, and you won't. The internet must be very threatening to that "school" of character.
I am almost sure the first respondent is the Kuntz (god, what a name!) featured so prominently in the documents. The give-away is his reference to "bad movies and TV". This statement reveals his lingering resentment toward both the professor and his fans, and closely parallels Kuntz'(god!-)preference for drama and condescension toward cinema reported in the documents.
Clearly, however, the professor's shortcomings far exceed not "sucking up". He is clearly offensive, and the university has a right and a duty to see that certain standards are met. Students also have a right to such standards. The professor might try thinking of the University as his employer and the students as the customers. It make seem coarsely economic, but could establish a basis for civil discourse.
The real question is where does the cycle of violence and abuse stop? Toward this end, it is often useful to identify where it begins. Maybe there is something Kuntz isn't telling about why the professor felt inclined to abuse him. Perhaps Kuntz is carefully sharing his own "limited view of the situation" for his own purposes.
Both the professor and Kuntz are wrong when they shit down the ladder. That's abusive. But when you see someone, like the professor, shitting up the ladder, then you ought to wonder. That's challenging, and risky. Usually there is a reason. Folks don't often volunteer for the kind of treatment the professor is now getting.
Let's see this blog get to the bottom of that question, eh?
How refreshing to see someone standing up to Mark Kuntz.
Post a Comment