You’ve changed my mind about “After Miss Julie.” I was considering it an adaptation of a play and a new piece of work, as its author described it. (No one would have argued that “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead” was a revival of “Hamlet.”)
But I actually saw “After Miss Julie,” and it could just as easily have used the name of Strindberg’s play and called itself a loose translation of the original. The author shouldn’t have been eligible to win a Tony for best play for that. I think you (and the committee) were right.
