Who's Afraid of Destroying Edward Albee?

[Sneelock]

http://www.vulture.com/2017/07/edward-a ... royed.html
Edward Albee was pretty clear what he wanted in his will:

“I hereby direct my executors to destroy such incomplete manuscripts … as soon as is practicable after my death,” the will reads, “and … to treat the materials herein directed to be destroyed as strictly confidential and to ensure that such materials are not copied, made available for scholarly or critical review, or made public in any way.” In short, that’s Albee being as explicit as possible: Get the paper shredder ready.

so, should he have the last say?

[Fonz]

Of course he should. His executor should get on the case like yesterday.

Anything else makes his executor a complete bum

[Charlie O.]

I'm with Fonz (except that I actually voted).

[sloopjohnc]

Albee's estate is very, very particular about his published stuff, and I'm sure his unpublished stuff too.

Every prospective production has to be run by his estate. A couple months ago, they wanted to do a big production of Virginia Woolf with a black actor in the male lead. Albee's estate nixed it because the professor's fair complexion is referred to during the play and his estate deemed it important to the plot. This happens quite frequently with Albee's works.

[Count Machuki]

I say publish it.
What if his final masterpiece is there? That's more important than last wishes in this case, says i

[Sneelock]

well, I'm glad somebody did. sure, it's easy to want to "respect the wishes" but JEEZ. See, I'm the guy who thinks they should let anybody of a mind to put on "...Virginia Woolf". Like most good theater it has a strong center which, I think, would stand up to any number of approaches.

I'm glad people are looking after his wishes. clearly he had no problem with this "perfectionist" reputation. I don't regard his plays because they are perfect, (even though a couple of them might be) I regard them because of his finger on aspects of the human condition. I'll certainly be interested if they see the light of day but I suppose it seems fair if they don't.

[Minnie the Minx]

I say publish it.
What if his final masterpiece is there? That's more important than last wishes in this case, says i

I couldn't disagree more.
This thread taps into my two bugbears supremely: the importance of respecting the wishes of the dead (you know, it's the last thing that you're ever going to do for them, that kind of thing) and people DOING WHAT THEY PROMISE THEY WILL DO.
Almost nothing causes me to lose respect more for someone than when they are flakey, or promise to do something, and don't follow through. I like people who do the things they say they are going to do. When someone has trusted you enough to get all legal about it, then you're a low snake to fuck that up.
They were his wishes. Fulfill that duty. It's not hard.

[Brickyard Jack]

The executors have to act in the best interests of the estate, not the testator. If he had said I hereby direct my executors to burn my house down no-one would think they should have to do that.

[sloopjohnc]

I just finished doing my living trust now that I own some property again and have some investments, but I didn't put the following in. . .

If any of you suckers want to take my posts from this board after my death and submit them to the Nobel literature committee or for a Pulitzer as the long-lost epistolary masterpiece I would think it is, you are happy to keep the check, throw one last JU and keep the rest if there's any left.

Signed

Sloop John C

[Sneelock]

(Sniff)
That's beautiful.

[take5_d_shorterer]

I say publish it.
What if his final masterpiece is there? That's more important than last wishes in this case, says i

I couldn't disagree more.
This thread taps into my two bugbears supremely: the importance of respecting the wishes of the dead (you know, it's the last thing that you're ever going to do for them, that kind of thing) and people DOING WHAT THEY PROMISE THEY WILL DO.
Almost nothing causes me to lose respect more for someone than when they are flakey, or promise to do something, and don't follow through. I like people who do the things they say they are going to do. When someone has trusted you enough to get all legal about it, then you're a low snake to fuck that up.
They were his wishes. Fulfill that duty. It's not hard.

No, it is.

[take5_d_shorterer]

The Emperor, so a parable runs, has sent a message to you, the humble subject, the insignificant shadow cowering in
the remotest distance before the imperial sun; the Emperor from his deathbed has sent a message to you alone. He has
commanded the messenger to kneel down by the bed, and has whispered the message to him; so much store did he lay on it
that he ordered the messenger to whisper it back into his ear again. Then by a nod of the head he has confirmed that
it is right. Yes, before the assembled spectators of his death--all the obstructing walls have been broken down, and
on the spacious and loftily mounting open staircases stand in a ring the great princes of the Empire--before all these
he has delivered his message. The messenger immediately sets out on his journey; a powerful, an indefatigable man; now
pushing with his right arm, now with his left, he cleaves a way for himself through the throng; if he encounters
resistance he points to his breast, where the symbol of the sun glitters; the way is made easier for him than it would
be for any other man. But the multitudes are so vast; their numbers have no end. If he could reach the open fields
how fast he would fly, and soon doubtless you would hear the welcome hammering of his fists on your door. But instead
how vainly does he wear out his strength; still he is only making his way through the chambers of the innermost palace;
never will he get to the end of them; and if he succeeded in that nothing would be gained; he must next fight his way
down the stair; and if he succeeded in that nothing would be gained; the courts would still have to be crossed; and
after the courts the second outer palace; and once more stairs and courts; and once more another palace; and so on for
thousands of years; and if at last he should burst through the outermost gate--but never, never can that happen--the
imperial capital would lie before him, the center of the world, crammed to bursting with its own sediment. Nobody
could fight his way through here even with a message from a dead man. But you sit at your window when evening falls
and dream it to yourself.

[hippopotamus]

I say publish it.
What if his final masterpiece is there? That's more important than last wishes in this case, says i

I couldn't disagree more.

Yup!

Otherwise, at what point do the public own you, your ideas and your work?

Admittedly once something is published, an author still has some rights over a piece but it's in the public domain. If sloop writes something on here, I can do with it what I will, he put it up here. But to go against someone's wishes, after death, into things not finished or sanctioned by the creator. That seems an Awful violation.

And as Minnie said, surely there must have some respect for the dead... Or the law (though admittedly I'm not up on the relevant intellectual property law. But I should hope it would protect an artist's rights).

[toomanyhatz]

The executors have to act in the best interests of the estate, not the testator. If he had said I hereby direct my executors to burn my house down no-one would think they should have to do that.

Can't agree with this at all. An estate's motivation is likely to be financial whereas Albee's attempting to, as he sees it, protect his work. I say it's his right. Of course if that's what you want, don't hire anyone you don't completely trust to carry out your wishes. Perhaps with threat of haunting.

[Brickyard Jack]

The executors have to act in the best interests of the estate, not the testator. If he had said I hereby direct my executors to burn my house down no-one would think they should have to do that.

Can't agree with this at all. An estate's motivation is likely to be financial whereas Albee's attempting to, as he sees it, protect his work. I say it's his right. Of course if that's what you want, don't hire anyone you don't completely trust to carry out your wishes. Perhaps with threat of haunting.

Whatever you think, the executors still have to act in the best interests of the estate. He had his whole life to destroy what he wanted to destroy. But I go back to my analogy - would you insist on burning his house down?

[Brickyard Jack]

I say publish it.
What if his final masterpiece is there? That's more important than last wishes in this case, says i

I couldn't disagree more.

Yup!

Otherwise, at what point do the public own you, your ideas and your work?

Once you are dead, someone else owns all your assets.

[toomanyhatz]

would you insist on burning his house down?

Don't see how this would apply unless he built his house. And the proper metaphor would be the right to insist that it be destroyed, not the manner by which it's done. To which I'd answer yes. If he owned the house and its destruction was written into his will, his executors would have a duty to destroy it.

[sloopjohnc]

I say publish it.
What if his final masterpiece is there? That's more important than last wishes in this case, says i

I couldn't disagree more.

Yup!

Otherwise, at what point do the public own you, your ideas and your work?

Admittedly once something is published, an author still has some rights over a piece but it's in the public domain. If sloop writes something on here, I can do with it what I will, he put it up here. But to go against someone's wishes, after death, into things not finished or sanctioned by the creator. That seems an Awful violation.

And as Minnie said, surely there must have some respect for the dead... Or the law (though admittedly I'm not up on the relevant intellectual property law. But I should hope it would protect an artist's rights).

I'm pretty cavalier and easygoing about most stuff, but if someone wants to put limits to how their work is used, distributed or published, and takes the time to set it down legally, then their executors should have the right to exercise the deceased's wishes. That I think the public should have more right to it is tough cookies.

[Quaco]

Pro-choice vs. pro-life? I tend to believe in the right to choose. We were fine without it before.

But I do wonder why artists who wanted lesser or unpublished works burned wouldn't do it themselves, though. Why wouldn't they? I suppose it's meant to cover things they might not have access to but which someone at some later date might find.

[Quaco]

I'm pretty cavalier and easygoing about most stuff, but if someone wants to put limits to how their work is used, distributed or published, and takes the time to set it down legally, then their executors should have the right to exercise the deceased's wishes. That I think the public should have more right to it is tough cookies.

Ah, but what if it were a scientific formula that would cure some terrible disease!