Jump to content

Town Cancels Musical Over Language Concerns


farmteam
 Share

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 05:53 PM)
As I stated in the post above the play in its entirety is not nearly as offensive as you seem to be under the impression it is. It's not like we're talking about an episode of South Park here.

 

It's not, but a respect their right to not stage the play. This was not a case where someone wanted to stage it and was told no. The same group that looked into it, decided against it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 05:55 PM)
what a silly loaded last line. They aren't putting on a musical version of Paul verheoven's Showgirls, this is a fantastic piece of theatre that would be very intellectually stimulating and entertaining for the crowd.

 

And I think some of you underestimate the importance of funding cultural programs.

 

Let's assume it is the single greatest musical ever produced in the history of theater. Does ever theater have the responsibility to stage the musical? Again, the same group that looked into it, decided against it. Why are they more wrong then groups that never even considered it?

 

And is every play appropriate for every audience and every venue? What is wrong with deciding that this is not suitable for children and staging something else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 11:57 PM)
It's not, but a respect their right to not stage the play. This was not a case where someone wanted to stage it and was told no. The same group that looked into it, decided against it.

 

Well I respect that they have a right not to stage a play but that doesn't mean I have to compliment them and pat them on their back, tell them this production of High School Musical was wonderful for EVERYONE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 06:57 PM)
It's not, but a respect their right to not stage the play. This was not a case where someone wanted to stage it and was told no. The same group that looked into it, decided against it.

And I'm fine with that. But we're not talking about like KKK propaganda here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 05:02 PM)
Well I respect that they have a right not to stage a play but that doesn't mean I have to compliment them and pat them on their back, tell them this production of High School Musical was wonderful for EVERYONE.

 

How many musicals will be staged by park districts this summer at out door venues in the US? Would you also condemn those theaters that never even considered this work? So applaud those that stage this musical and condemn everyone else.

 

If you were staging a play outdoors, in a park, you would not be concerned about EVERYONE? Is there any venue you would? I would think that a park, open to the public, should have GP rated entertainment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jul 3, 2008 -> 12:01 AM)
Let's assume it is the single greatest musical ever produced in the history of theater. Does ever theater have the responsibility to stage the musical? Again, the same group that looked into it, decided against it. Why are they more wrong then groups that never even considered it?

 

And is every play appropriate for every audience and every venue? What is wrong with deciding that this is not suitable for children and staging something else?

 

do you really think there is a point to these bolded questions when you ask them?

 

What most of us are disappointed in not showing this play, is that they are doing it for a not very convincing reason, to me. And the people of the town are missing out on an opportunity to see a truly great play because of 1 sentence in it. A play that is thought provoking and allows to think about history and culture in different frames.

 

If they switch it out for a different musical that has these qualities, I'm fine with it. BUt if they put on some awful andrew lloyd webber musical they are doing a disservice to the town.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 06:09 PM)
do you really think there is a point to these bolded questions when you ask them?

 

What most of us are disappointed in not showing this play, is that they are doing it for a not very convincing reason, to me. And the people of the town are missing out on an opportunity to see a truly great play because of 1 sentence in it. A play that is thought provoking and allows to think about history and culture in different frames.

 

If they switch it out for a different musical that has these qualities, I'm fine with it. BUt if they put on some awful andrew lloyd webber musical they are doing a disservice to the town.

Agreed.

 

If this play was a movie I'd classify it PG-13, only because of that line. Well there is another time where the same guy refers to Coalhouse Walker's girlfriend as "his whore and his whore's baby" but that's still PG-13, IMO. Whatever else happens just reflects the reality of the 1910's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jul 3, 2008 -> 12:08 AM)
How many musicals will be staged by park districts this summer at out door venues in the US? Would you also condemn those theaters that never even considered this work? So applaud those that stage this musical and condemn everyone else.

 

what is this great argument you think you are making? Yes then, there is a difference between starting to stage a musical then stopping because the award winning musical that families can go see "RagTime" has the N word in it.

 

Because another theatre might not choose it for legitimate reasons like staging or cost, not because they are worried about a hypothetical scenario that would be easily explained anyway.

 

If only the play had just excessive violence, then it'd go on without a hitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 05:13 PM)
what is this great argument you think you are making? Yes then, there is a difference between starting to stage a musical then stopping because the award winning musical that families can go see "RagTime" has the N word in it.

 

Because another theatre might not choose it for legitimate reasons like staging or cost, not because they are worried about a hypothetical scenario that would be easily explained anyway.

 

If only the play had just excessive violence, then it'd go on without a hitch.

 

I thought I was writing clearly, but since you still don't understand my "great" argument, let me try one more time:

 

I believe that not offending people in an open air public park is a legitimate reason. It use to be called manners and civility. You obviously disagree.

I believe that parents have a fair expectation when visiting a public park to not have their young children exposed, by a staged event, to concepts that may be beyond their understanding. You disagree.

It would seem that you think anyone should be allowed to subject your children to whatever language, concepts, etc. they want. I disagree.

So they decided, for their audience, a different musical would be better. You disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, first, you didn't address the comments you continued to make about asking us why we weren't condemning all the theatre groups who had never thought about putting on Ragtime over this one who tried and lost...

 

and two, I'm to believe this is the situation they are preventing. They are worried that during the performance outside the bandshell a family could walk by overhear the line that has the n word, in song form - if I recall but lost also confirmed - and the kid too young to understand this overhears. That's a lot of variables there, they have to walk by during this line, understand what was said, and be too young to understand the context. This isn't a Jerry Springer show. If the line was like in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles where Rafael screamed "DAMN" after he lost is weapon. The profanity doesn't drive the dialogue. So, they are preventing hypothetical situations of people walking by during that time out of context and being irreversibly offended. So I can make my reasonable hypotheticals, at a fair like this you have hundreds if not thousands of people and a high population of teenagers. I can make the reasonable assumption that many of them have foul mouths. I'm willing to go ahead and say they will use profanity in ear-range of children, and that is a safe bet. Does that mean they should cancel the entire outdoor festival? And there is no redeemable aspect to the foul-mouthed dialogue, and the explanation can only be to ignore or instruct not to say these words.

 

And another problem I have is you are forcing me to have the argument that because I think shutting down this play because of the situation is wrong, I'm for every play or musical to be put on wherever, whenever, and in the spirit of the arts it shouldn't matter if it's obscene. But I don't believe that. I believe in the criticism for pulling this because I've seen this play and it is not a play that in anyway would be characterized by obscene dialogue. No one would leave this play saying "well, that was dirtier than I anticipated!" And I don't think the themes would be over the heads of many children. I've been aware of, have had discussions, or at least instructions, on race since kindergarten or perhaps pre-school. I don't think ragtime is over the heads of a young audience. I don't think it is targeted to kids, obviously, but it's a great example of the magic and power of theatre to show a child to with their parents.

 

It's a great musical. It's a shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 05:57 PM)
It's not, but a respect their right to not stage the play. This was not a case where someone wanted to stage it and was told no. The same group that looked into it, decided against it.

 

I won't continue debating the societal pros and cons of proceeding with the production or not, but you are being way too simplistic about the ramifications of the decision being made.

 

Quite the contrary of what you are suggesting, I think this is exactly a case where someone wanted to stage it and was told no. Well, actually, they were told yes and then much later thy were told no. And this isn't the decision of the creative team putting on the production. This is a snap decision by a high-ranking official of the Wilmette Park District.

 

And it's very different and monumentally worse to have greenlighted the production and then to kill it, versus your alternate scenario of never considering pursuing the production. This decision was made on or around July 1st, and the production was set to open on July 10th. That means that dozens of actors, musicians, costume and set designers, the director, the choreographer, the producers, etc., who have by now spent months mounting the production and rehearsing the show are SOL because a Park District superintendent only now decided to read the script and lyrics. It also represents a hell of a lot of money laid out only to cancel the production barely a week before opening night.

 

And you don't think that's any worse than the hypothetical theater group who never considered pursuing this particular production, never tied up the time and talents of dozens of people, never wasted how ever many thousands of dollars on a production that never sees the light of day?

 

Seriously??

 

Well then, yes, I disagree.

Edited by FlaSoxxJim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 04:37 PM)
I do not believe that every park district that puts on a play needs to follow that same mission statement of enlightening, offending, creating change, etc. I believe there is room for non controversial, family entertainment, and that is what a park district should be involved in. GP rated events that the entire family can enjoy. Believe it or not, there are volumes of plays by Simon, Williams, Shepard, O'Neil, Miller, etc that could be staged.

 

But I've come to accept that around here the consensus is that insulting, offending, is always preferred to something less controversial.

 

that are family friendly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A town decides to not spend the town's money on a play that the town's citizens may find offensive. People outside the town, demand that the play be staged "for the good of those citizens". :lolhitting

 

That is civility and manners. Too bad manners and civility are no longer in fashion.

This play would be great staged somewhere other than in a public park. So now public parks must be R-rated? :lolhitting When people cannot differentiate between a good time and a place for something and a poor time and place for something, the rest of the world should just go along with it? :lolhitting

 

I'm done. It's obvious why this place becomes such a hell hole at times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jul 3, 2008 -> 08:46 AM)
A town decides to not spend the town's money on a play that the town's citizens may find offensive. People outside the town, demand that the play be staged "for the good of those citizens". :lolhitting

 

That is civility and manners. Too bad manners and civility are no longer in fashion.

This play would be great staged somewhere other than in a public park. So now public parks must be R-rated? :lolhitting When people cannot differentiate between a good time and a place for something and a poor time and place for something, the rest of the world should just go along with it? :lolhitting

 

I'm done. It's obvious why this place becomes such a hell hole at times.

 

you sound like a completely different tex than i'm used to. No, we're not saying things in public parks MUST be R-rated. are you nuts? we're saying that after the go-ahead was given to do the show, it should have been done. to cancel it a week before it opens because of ONE GODDAMNED sentence is just absurd. what are the odds that someone is walking by to get "offended" during that one split second of the show? AND if its in a park, and the patrons who are there to see the show are paying, then i'll bet you certain measures are taken ANYWAY to keep pedestrians away so they can't see the show 'for free' ya know?

 

regardless, like someone else said, to pull the plug on a show after a month+ of rehearsal and all that energy spent putting it together is just unacceptable. i don't know what you do for a living tex, but imagine working for a month or two, every single day of the week, and then at the end, not getting paid for it. wouldn't that piss you off a tad? because actor's contracts at this level are usually a per performance pay. no performances = no pay. yeah. it's a b****.

 

and ya know what, when the hell will we stop coddling kids. "oh no, they'll hear the n-word!" big freaking deal, they'll hear it, like i said, walking down the streets of chicago. and a) they don't know what it means and B ) what better time to talk to them about it. oh yeah, i forgot, parenting really isn't as big these days. it's the musical's fault. instead of parenting lets just keep our kid's in a little plastic bubble. yeah, that'll help.

Edited by Reddy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is wrong with deciding that this is not suitable for children and staging something else?

Because we don't need the Government to be a nanny state and parents should be responsible for what material is exposed to their children.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure this quite fits the subject here but i found this last night.....it's a play and in Chicago so i figured it's close enough

 

The Chicago, Illinois production of hit musical JERSEY BOYS has been slapped with a smoking ban - following a complaint from an irate theatre-goer.

The play, which focuses on the rise to fame of 1960s pop group the Four Seasons, sees several characters light up on stage throughout the story.

But now the state's Public Health Department has cracked down on actors smoking on stage - and banned the production from featuring cigarettes.

Bosses behind the show have reacted angrily to the order, insisting it is detrimental to the reality of the play.

Bernard Stone, a member of Chicago's city council, was also disappointed by the news.

He says, "When you take it out of the production, you're changing history. If you want to be true to the times, you'll allow them to smoke on stage. To do otherwise is like blue laws in the Puritan times. That's what life was like then. You're denying those times existed."

 

 

Jersey Boys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (juddling @ Jul 10, 2008 -> 02:58 PM)
Not sure this quite fits the subject here but i found this last night.....it's a play and in Chicago so i figured it's close enough

 

The Chicago, Illinois production of hit musical JERSEY BOYS has been slapped with a smoking ban - following a complaint from an irate theatre-goer.

The play, which focuses on the rise to fame of 1960s pop group the Four Seasons, sees several characters light up on stage throughout the story.

But now the state's Public Health Department has cracked down on actors smoking on stage - and banned the production from featuring cigarettes.

Bosses behind the show have reacted angrily to the order, insisting it is detrimental to the reality of the play.

Bernard Stone, a member of Chicago's city council, was also disappointed by the news.

He says, "When you take it out of the production, you're changing history. If you want to be true to the times, you'll allow them to smoke on stage. To do otherwise is like blue laws in the Puritan times. That's what life was like then. You're denying those times existed."

 

 

Jersey Boys

 

A totally stupid move, imo. But following the reasoning Tex gave for disapproving of the outdoor Ragtime production – that incidental/unintended ears would hear unsettling language – you'd have to accept the same reasoning here. Theatergoers are paying to see a production but they do not expect to be subjected to hazardous second-hand smoke in the theater, no matter how diffused and diluted it is when it gets to them.

 

As I say, I think it's stupid and unnecessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...