Town Cancels Musical Over Language Concerns

[farmteam]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/01/theater/...CONCER_BRF.html

 

Script Concerns Close ‘Ragtime’ Production

 

Article Tools Sponsored By

Compiled by FELICIA R. LEE

Published: July 1, 2008

 

Citing concerns about racial sensibilities, officials of the Wilmette Park District in suburban Chicago have canceled a production of “Ragtime” set to open on July 10. According to a report on Playbill.com, The Pioneer Press, a Wilmette newspaper, reported that the Wilmette Park executive director, Tom Grisamore, canceled the show out of concern that passers-by on the park grounds would be offended by a racial epithet for blacks that is used several times in the script and in the score. “Ragtime,” an award-winning 1998 Broadway musical, is based on the novel by E. L. Doctorow. It tells the stories of three different groups that come together in 1906, and includes an exploration of racism. Playbill.com reported that a June 17 letter to the show’s licensing agent, Music Theater International, asked for changes in the script and included suggestions from Robert Bierie, performing arts supervisor of the Wilmette Park District. “I find this sad and also hilarious,” Lynn Ahrens, who wrote the lyrics for the show, told Playbill.com. “It seems to sum up the blind ignorance of people who sit busily cherry-picking bad words, while not even bothering to read the script they are producing to understand its ideas or the context in which these words are spoken.”

 

Thoughts?

[NorthSideSox72]

Dumb.

 

And even if they think its a valid concern, fine... just change that one damn word.

 

[Texsox]

Dumb.

 

And even if they think its a valid concern, fine... just change that one damn word.

 

Generally when you buy the rights to produce works like this, you are not allowed to make a change like that. You have to perform it as written. Some even go so far as to dictate staging, lighting, etc.

 

In this case it seems the venue is the issue. If you bought a ticket to the play, you presumably would be prepared for the language. Since there is a real possibility of someone accidentally, and without knowledge of the play, overhearing the language, it seems prudent to pick another play.

[EvilMonkey]

Generally when you buy the rights to produce works like this, you are not allowed to make a change like that. You have to perform it as written. Some even go so far as to dictate staging, lighting, etc.

 

In this case it seems the venue is the issue. If you bought a ticket to the play, you presumably would be prepared for the language. Since there is a real possibility of someone accidentally, and without knowledge of the play, overhearing the language, it seems prudent to pick another play.

Or to possibly warn people that this is a period piece and contains some strong language?

[farmteam]

Dumb.

 

And even if they think its a valid concern, fine... just change that one damn word.

 

They could be fined up to 150,000 per word if they did that.

[Texsox]

Or to possibly warn people that this is a period piece and contains some strong language?

 

From the article it seems that it is in a park setting, outside, and anyone in the park would be able to hear. I am assuming this is similar to Ravinia.

[Reddy]

f***ing bulls***.

[Reddy]

and it's a fantastic flippin' musical by the way. to cancel it over that word just basically denies the entire point of the SHOW. it's a show about racism in america and we're trying to be racially SENSITIVE? (in a bulls*** way btw). Come on now, why do people need to be babied. Chicagoans hear this s*** walking down the streets all the goddamned time.

 

 

[farmteam]

and it's a fantastic flippin' musical by the way. to cancel it over that word just basically denies the entire point of the SHOW. it's a show about racism in america and we're trying to be racially SENSITIVE? (in a bulls*** way btw). Come on now, why do people need to be babied. Chicagoans hear this s*** walking down the streets all the goddamned time.

 

But it wasn't canceled simply because of the use of racial slurs -- it was the fact that these words could be heard unintentionally by families, including small children.

[FlaSoxxJim]

But it wasn't canceled simply because of the use of racial slurs -- it was the fact that these words could be heard unintentionally by families, including small children.

 

And then of course their little psyches would be damaged for all time.

 

Or. . . it could lead to some much-needed family discussion about the history of race relations in America.

 

As a father, I'm as sensitive as anybody to people dropping F-bombs and such at ballgames or out in public, etc. Heck, The part in Catcher in the Rye, where Holden tries scratching out the curse-laden graffiti to protect little kids who might otherwise read it is among my favorite parts of the book. But, to deny a large audience the chance to see something of cultural and social value because a couple of kids might accidentally get an earful of derogatory history-informed language is treating dandruff by decapitation.

 

There's also almost no spoken dialog in the musical, most all of it is sung so it would be that much harder for an innocent passer-by to pick out words in a full musical production.

 

Finally, and most personally, there is certainly some irony in seeing the history-based work of Lynn Ahrens being given the gag treatment when so many in my generation learned their first real American history from her. She wrote more than half of the America Rock songs and performed several of them as well. "No More Kings", "The Preamble", "The Great American Melting Pot", and "Elbow Room" were all hers. Sadly, she never got a chance to do one along the lines of, "Hey You Freedom-Loving Douchebag Colonists, How the Hell Can You Own Slaves?" Because that might also have lead to some discussions that we're apparently still not ready for.

 

EDIT: I just noticed this is not in the 'Buster. Maybe it should be, yes?

Edited July 2, 2008 by FlaSoxxJim

[NorthSideSox72]

They could be fined up to 150,000 per word if they did that.

I don't think it would be hard to get that permission from the publisher, given the content. Besides, I don't see anyone suing the Wilmette Park District for changing a word to protect the audience in that scenario.

 

In any case, it shouldn't be an issue. The play is what it is.

 

Also, plays and scripts are changed on the fly all the time, all over, in performances of all kinds, and people don't get sued for it.

 

[Soxy]

I've seen this musical (and read the book), and it's a shame they won't be putting it on. It really is a pretty affecting story about race relations (with some women's rights issues thrown in). It is kind of interesting, because it isn't just white versus black, but also has a little bit more nuanced white on white issues. Shame.

[Texsox]

Shall we also condemn every theater group in the country that has not produced this musical? I believe publicly funded projects like this should stick to entertainment not social education. I think it is reasonable for a family to be able to walk through the park without a government funded musical singing racial insults.

[Reddy]

Shall we also condemn every theater group in the country that has not produced this musical? I believe publicly funded projects like this should stick to entertainment not social education. I think it is reasonable for a family to be able to walk through the park without a government funded musical singing racial insults.

 

whoa i think you're way off base this time. as an actor, the POINT of theatre is not just to entertain but to provoke discussion, create change, enlighten, etc. The point of theatre, just like any art, is to SAY something. Fluff musicals do serve a purpose, and that's what Broadway's mostly become these days, but why should governmentally funded projects be limited to this fluff? I'd argue it should be the other way around. The gov't should fund theatre that is educational and teaches us something or at least opens our minds up to looking at something in a different way.

[JorgeFabregas]

Shall we also condemn every theater group in the country that has not produced this musical?

What does this mean? How did you draw this inference?

 

Shall I also stand on my head while drinking water?

 

Shall I also wear yellow clothing?

 

Why should the government fund entertainment, but not education?

[EvilMonkey]

Shall we also condemn every theater group in the country that has not produced this musical? I believe publicly funded projects like this should stick to entertainment not social education. I think it is reasonable for a family to be able to walk through the park without a government funded musical singing racial insults.

Can we then stop funding 'art' like the piss christ and other things that may offend a family and children in a public museum? I'm all for stopping government funding of these things. Especially 'art'.

[NorthSideSox72]

Can we then stop funding 'art' like the piss christ and other things that may offend a family and children in a public museum? I'm all for stopping government funding of these things. Especially 'art'.

Well, I think there is a key difference between federal funding and local funding. I don't want to see any federal dollars spent on art programs either - its not their place. But if some local park district serves a community that wants it, they should be able to go ahead.

 

[Reddy]

Well, I think there is a key difference between federal funding and local funding. I don't want to see any federal dollars spent on art programs either - its not their place. But if some local park district serves a community that wants it, they should be able to go ahead.

 

why the f*** not!? where the hell else are the arts supposed to get their money from? private donors? yeah that works only so well. we get it from grants and such which are mostly funded by the government.

[southsider2k5]

why the f*** not!? where the hell else are the arts supposed to get their money from? private donors? yeah that works only so well. we get it from grants and such which are mostly funded by the government.

 

For the exact reason that is kept from any religious displays. It implies government endorsement of things that they have no business being involved in, especially when you get into things like the prior mentioned piss Christ.

[NorthSideSox72]

why the f*** not!? where the hell else are the arts supposed to get their money from? private donors? yeah that works only so well. we get it from grants and such which are mostly funded by the government.

I think you misunderstood my post. I personally am OK with my local community (town, county, homeowners association) funding art and entertainment. Just not the federal government. I think there is a key difference there.

 

And yes, I think that most of the money will need to come from private funding. I think that's the way it should be with something like art.

 

I will acknowledge, though, that there are some grey areas. Schools for example. I think education should include art, music, drama, etc., for many reasons. But note that most school funding comes from local, state and private funds as well.

 

[Texsox]

No one was demanding they stage this musical. During the process, they decided it was not right for the venue. So they are being criticized here for being sensitive to people. It wasn't as if someone wanted to stage the play and were told no. The same group that originally thought they would, then decided not to. Are they any worse then groups that never even considered the play?

 

It's a shame when being considerate to citizens feelings is the wrong thing to do. There are thousands of musicals they can show in place of this. Ones that the group performing are more comfortable with.

[Texsox]

whoa i think you're way off base this time. as an actor, the POINT of theatre is not just to entertain but to provoke discussion, create change, enlighten, etc. The point of theatre, just like any art, is to SAY something. Fluff musicals do serve a purpose, and that's what Broadway's mostly become these days, but why should governmentally funded projects be limited to this fluff? I'd argue it should be the other way around. The gov't should fund theatre that is educational and teaches us something or at least opens our minds up to looking at something in a different way.

 

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.

[lostfan]

I think it is reasonable for a family to be able to walk through the park without a government funded musical singing racial insults.

FYI - I saw the play a long time ago dozens of times since I used to work at the Oriental Theater on Randolph when Ragtime was the play that re-opened it, across from the Chicago Theater (used to work there too). IIRC, there was only one line in the play that had an overt racial slur, a little more than halfway through the first act, where one of the characters sings "Does he think only n*****s get s***/We Irish had to get used to it!" The article makes it sound like the show was laced with profanity and racial slurs, where it's not like that at all unless they've changed the dialogue, which I doubt.

 

Obviously, if heard out of context, it's offensive, but when watching the play it's clearly part of how they're portraying social conditions at the time, and this particular line is relevant to the story. It's a really good story too, btw.

[lostfan]

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.

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.

[bmags]

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.

 

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.