|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2017 21:43:34 GMT
Out of Joint removed Max after the comments came to light which was several months ago. No other historic allegations have surfaced about MSC since, so you could assume the incident had been dealt with.
Are the Royal Court going to airbrush Max from all their history too I wonder for incidents which happened so many years after he left the theatre. It seems strange to deny people the chance to see a play due to an already reported incident which wasn't anywhere near the level of the Spacey allegations.
I hope another London theatre will pick up this production for disappointed patrons.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 14, 2017 21:59:48 GMT
Actually, I just read a vile article from Spiked articulating the same views as expressed here by Brendan O'Neill (who once wrote that Jimmy Saville's victims should just shut up and move on). former communist now libertarian (read, never got past being a student). You want a wider context then there you go, a number of men using Dunbar, in her absence, to complain about contemporary feminism and the #metoo movement.I am finding this complex debate very engaging, but when someone links my comments to such vile ideas as those above then it becomes odiously personal. I am sure (I hope) that the poster did not mean what is suggested here: That I - and any other woman - who expresses dissent of any kind is colluding with predators, Saville apologists or anti feminists. My comments were levelled at an institution (all theatre institutions, actually) which should be able to answer difficult questions from its audience/public. I am not going to offer unquestioning support to any AD's - not even the female ones. Behind the scenes some people have questioned the sexual harassment prevalent in theatre for years, but nothing was done about it. Theatres should not be given a pat on the back for drawing up guidelines that other workplaces have had in place for over thirty years. For me, what is happening with this issue may indicate that a lot of theatre personnel are out of their depth. And my question about "The Nether" remains. Of course I wasn't saying you were colluding but people like that are ready to jump on and twist such things around to their own ends. Should that stop anybody expressing them? Of course not, but it should make us wary of how our words and actions can be turned against us.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2017 23:08:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2017 23:12:11 GMT
|
|
5,413 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Dec 15, 2017 11:25:20 GMT
Roy Williams - a respected writer - is also not happy with the RC decision
Roy Williams Yesterday at 08:45 · I love the Royal Court, but their decision to cancel Rita, Sue and Bob Too is so wrong I don't know where to begin.
(from Facebook)
|
|
2,339 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 15, 2017 11:56:21 GMT
Out of Joint removed Max after the comments came to light which was several months ago. No other historic allegations have surfaced about MSC since, so you could assume the incident had been dealt with. Are the Royal Court going to airbrush Max from all their history too I wonder for incidents which happened so many years after he left the theatre. It seems strange to deny people the chance to see a play due to an already reported incident which wasn't anywhere near the level of the Spacey allegations. I hope another London theatre will pick up this production for disappointed patrons.
Nope there have been a few actresses who have spoken out about him since then.
He co-directed it. He was involved in the specific production
|
|
5,413 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Dec 15, 2017 12:50:19 GMT
He left 3 days into the rehearsal process from what I have read - so it would be wrong to consider him a co-director on the whole project. Certainly OOJ are not listing him as being involved in that capacity now.
|
|
167 posts
|
Post by paplazaroo on Dec 15, 2017 18:59:17 GMT
So now VF has done a dramatic U-turn and is allowing it back! Can't tell if she's just a people pleaser or a good leader
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 15, 2017 19:19:30 GMT
So now VF has done a dramatic U-turn and is allowing it back! Can't tell if she's just a people pleaser or a good leader Weak leadership and that's a shame, bowing to the those who don't really understand the context. They'd better put on a whole lot of events to make sure that the audience gets that context as putting on a play that was sheperded by a director who has abused his power with women, in that very same theatre, and with its content shaped to be as it is by that director is asking for trouble. Saying that 'we tried not to have it here but people disagreed' is not nearly enough of an excuse.
|
|
5,413 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Dec 15, 2017 19:44:48 GMT
I understand the context perfectly well and the original decision was still flawed. The play was the perfect opportunity to continue and expand the conversation - and could have been surrounded by events and education to examine so many issues.
The RC leadership now do look weak.
If they really thought the play and the production was so problematic, the rest of the tour should have been pulled - not just the RC leg of it.
Their attempt at a half-way house approach failed to satisfy on so many levels. It is very hard to articulate why they thought the play was fine to be seen on other stages but not by audiences at the Royal Court. They failed to make that case and there was an inevitable backlash.
None of this undermines the great work that has been done at the RC in the area of harassment and bullying. As I said in my first contribution to this thread, I am using their documentation as the basis for my own policy review and I am grateful for their championing of these issues.
I am sure their intentions have been honorable throughout - but they have mishandled things twice.
|
|
717 posts
|
Post by Latecomer on Dec 15, 2017 19:45:59 GMT
I think it was the correct decision and she deserves credit for listening to the arguments and changing her mind! It was a woman playwright for heavens sake and it provided a strong voice for women on how they see/react to abusive relationships of all kinds! I saw it at Oxford and thought it added greatly to the debate about women's place in society and the power they do/do not have in life. Well done VF! It is not weak to change your mind when you have judged the arguments and listened...the world would be a better place if changing your mind was not always considered weak!
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 15, 2017 20:09:49 GMT
Far too in thrall to middle class hand-wringers who wouldn't know a working class existence if it hit them, they really are tone deaf to such issues now. They managed to screw up Road, making it into a museum piece (at times, literally, in a glass box) with no warmth and little wit, but the nice, comfortable audience they have could remain so at a nice distance, so job done, I suppose.
Dunbar, if people don't know, spent her earliest years in a refuge because of a physically abusive father and was led into prostitution while still a child, it's not about 'voices being heard', it's about how those voices need to be forcibly taken away from that type of abuse - completely, not as part of a supposed 'debate'. Any amount of patronising about 'working class voices' doesn't cut it either, when they can't seem to find any contemporary working class writers and have to resort to a couple of eighties retreads to fill the gap. It became a cosy middle class ghetto under Cooke (really, one of the most depressing of regimes in a major British theatre) and now this crumbling in the face of people who've probably only seen a sink estate in a TV drama. I thought, for once, that they'd finally realised the above and might just be trying to recalibrate, but clearly not.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2017 20:21:53 GMT
I spoke to her
You can all thank me
You will be seeing it in London
|
|
367 posts
|
Post by MrBunbury on Dec 15, 2017 20:39:33 GMT
I think it was the correct decision and she deserves credit for listening to the arguments and changing her mind! It was a woman playwright for heavens sake and it provided a strong voice for women on how they see/react to abusive relationships of all kinds! I saw it at Oxford and thought it added greatly to the debate about women's place in society and the power they do/do not have in life. Well done VF! It is not weak to change your mind when you have judged the arguments and listened...the world would be a better place if changing your mind was not always considered weak! I agree. Admitting that one is wrong is not so obvious (not that we see much of that on this forum :-)). They had not yet refunded my ticket so the RC wrote me that I can keep it for the original date.
|
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Dec 15, 2017 20:45:12 GMT
I think ultimately Royal Court has to choose whether it is a theatre that puts on plays with a message or a social justice warrior that has its own agenda.
By cancelling it was a understandable decision if you believed Rita, Sue and Bob Too was MSC's work and not Dunbar, a woman who lived her work and is no longer here to remind people what it means.
The issue is the cancelling of Dunbar's worked looked like a censorship of her, and not a desperate white washing of MSC/OOJ's relationship of the Royal Court.
Even if it was worried about triggering then firstly not everyone is going to see this play and at least put on this two week production in London so people have the choice.
The decision was always undermined by the fact that this work was acceptable to be seen outside the Royal Court, which has become the subject when a conversation about harrasment in the industry needs to had and has been overshadowed
|
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Dec 15, 2017 20:49:40 GMT
There is something about this that leaves a nasty taste. Others have pointed out plays that complicate the debate and which were programmed during VF's "reign". I'll add another one: "The Nether". I believe this play, that imagines a virtual world where paedos are allowed to safely indulge their fantasies, even transferred to the West End. They might well say that they wouldn't programme such a play today and my question is "why not?" If indeed they wouldn't programme this play today it makes them complicit in what happened before the whole sexual harassment stuff came to light. If theatres are going to start censoring they'd better take a good look at themselves and their own culpability in the process. It was recently revived by Sedos amdram and the audience were mostly baffled. I like the play because it is so challenging. Theatre is not TV, you can protect people from being of ended by continuing to make tickets highly priced
|
|
1,845 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Dec 15, 2017 23:26:43 GMT
The right decision, cancelling only hurt the cast crew and people who wanted to see the play, not the intended target.
Only issue I have booked another play on the original Saturday night as the refund has come through, will have to try for another night, have a feeling interest in the play will be high and if not sold out will definitely be now.
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Dec 15, 2017 23:48:07 GMT
Public booking opens on Thu 21 Dec at 12noon.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2017 1:03:44 GMT
Wait, what? She changed her mind?! I’m surprised but I think it is a good decision. It is not going to be easy because the play is problematic, but they just need to hold their nerve and be prepared to defend Dunbar’s work and legacy.
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Dec 16, 2017 7:54:49 GMT
|
|
Xanderl
Member
Not always very high value in terms of ticket yield or donations
|
Post by Xanderl on Dec 16, 2017 8:08:20 GMT
Feels to me that running post-show talks as they now are doing would have been the sensible decision in the first place - show the play but then put it in context and discuss the problems.
|
|
3,019 posts
|
Post by Rory on Dec 16, 2017 9:04:36 GMT
Feels to me that running post-show talks as they now are doing would have been the sensible decision in the first place - show the play but then put it in context and discuss the problems. Totally agree.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2017 10:05:32 GMT
Feels to me that running post-show talks as they now are doing would have been the sensible decision in the first place - show the play but then put it in context and discuss the problems. Totally agree. Again My idea
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2017 10:25:06 GMT
I spoke to her You can all thank me You will be seeing it in London I don't know whether to be perversely excited or rather frightened that P has so much influence over London theatre . . .
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Dec 16, 2017 10:42:43 GMT
I spoke to her You can all thank me You will be seeing it in London I don't know whether to be perversely excited or rather frightened that P has so much influence over London theatre . . . Now to see if P leaves at the interval
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Dec 16, 2017 10:47:21 GMT
There is no interval!
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Dec 16, 2017 10:51:40 GMT
National Express are profiting from this scheduling, cancellation and reinstatement with post-show talk.
First, I purchased a ticket to travel back home straight after the play.
Then, I bought a second ticket to travel home in the early evening because of the cancellation.
Now, I may choose to stay for a talk, and would need to get a third, later, ticket home.
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Dec 16, 2017 10:53:13 GMT
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 16, 2017 11:00:50 GMT
I don't know whether to be perversely excited or rather frightened that P has so much influence over London theatre . . . Now to see if P leaves at the interval Well you can’t believe a word of it, although with the complete tin ear to working class concerns at the expense of the bien pensant clientele and ‘censorship’ as a cover to get around the inconvenience of having to go further than Sloane Square to see it, maybe it does explains a lot. It does show how the class issues that dog the Court now are being overridden and the idea of that same clientele sitting around having a chat after so everything can be alright is pretty sickening. Parsley will secretly hate it, as the characters are the the type he constantly and virulently rails against, behaving in ways that make him apoplectic. They should take coaches down from the Buttershaw and similar estates to pack the audience with people who have a real life connection with it, now that really would be a radical answer to the problem, starting a real conversation. Much better than the usual audience having a bit of a debate amongst themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2017 11:09:47 GMT
Now to see if P leaves at the interval Well you can’t believe a word of it, although with the complete tin ear to working class concerns at the expense of the bien pensant clientele and ‘censorship’ as a cover to get around the inconvenience of having to go further than Sloane Square to see it, maybe it does explains a lot. It does show how the class issues that dog the Court now are being overridden and the idea of that same clientele sitting around having a chat after so everything can be alright is pretty sickening. Parsley will secretly hate it, as the characters are the the type he constantly and virulently rails against, behaving in ways that make him apoplectic. They should take coaches down from the Buttershaw and similar estates to pack the audience with people who have a real life connection with it, now that really would be a radical answer to the problem, starting a real conversation. Much better than the usual audience having a bit of a debate amongst themselves. Yet interesting How many of my favourite plays Are those by or about angry people Often from difficult backgrounds Shouting out about inequality or injustice Rita Sue and Bob Too Don’t Look Back In anger Many of the sarah Kane plays A taste of honey (when staged properly) Port Ecstasy Recently Boy at Almeida Are a few which pop to my mind I am highly understanding of true deprivation And lack of real opportunity And social inequalities As opposed to simple diotic behaviour which many people demonstrate and try to excuse by the above issues There is a distinction between the two
|
|