|
Post by stagebyte on Nov 2, 2021 13:48:27 GMT
I’ll preface this by saying I’m not in favour of cancelling shows. I’m just really interested in peoples thoughts here where shows written in the past have content modern audiences consider should be ‘cancelled’ . I was watching a production of little shop of horrors recently where everyone onstage acknowledges that Audrey is getting beaten up by her sadistic boyfriend. References to sex games (the handcuffs are right in my bag) she sings a song about her arm being in a cast and having a black eye. She’s miserable with him but her self esteem doesn’t allow her to think she’d be worthy of love from someone else. Following the revival of Carousel and the debate it triggered over content (with some on Twitter demanding it be cancelled for its outdated themes and possible glossing over of domestic violence) I’m wondering why some shows catch heat and not others? For context on Broadway Carousel was staged in 1945 and LSOH in 1982 with a revival running now. In both cases Billy and the dentist die (‘retribution’for their deeds?) Is it because LSOH is a comedy?
|
|
4,806 posts
|
Post by Mark on Nov 2, 2021 14:04:20 GMT
I think the difference between Carousel and Little Shop is that in Carousel, it is the abuser that finds redemption (albeit, whilst having died, he still is taken to his heavenly reward) whereas in Little Shop it is the abused who finds it (albeit briefly, before being eaten by a plant that takes over the world).
|
|
19,794 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Nov 2, 2021 14:10:20 GMT
At the point where I saw Carousel at the OAT Billy wasn’t redeemed.
|
|
|
Post by stagebyte on Nov 2, 2021 14:19:30 GMT
I think the difference between Carousel and Little Shop is that in Carousel, it is the abuser that finds redemption (albeit, whilst having died, he still is taken to his heavenly reward) whereas in Little Shop it is the abused who finds it (albeit briefly, before being eaten by a plant that takes over the world). Interesting take. In the song ‘it’s just the gas’ sing by the dentist just before he dies I can’t find any self awareness that what he did was wrong? He is fed to the plant afterwards opportunistically by Seymour who chickened out on killing him for his awful deeds. Even in death poor Audrey can’t escape him In Carousel I’ve seen many productions of the years. Billy knifed Billy possibly taken his own life Billy happy that Julie and Louise are ok without him but there’s still been that scene where he hits Louise I didn’t think he was in ‘heaven’ as such I thought it was between where there was a real possibility he could go up or down if he didn’t put things right?
|
|
4,993 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Nov 2, 2021 14:53:16 GMT
It's so long since I've seen Little Shop so I can't really comment. However I've never found it or Carousel to be a problem. Depending on the piece and with the right creatives, actors and a mature, sensible and reflective stance then it may not be a problem and lead to "cancelled" headlines.
If an audience feels uncomfortable then it can be a good thing. Theatre should hold a mirror upto society and make us think.
|
|
1,863 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Nov 2, 2021 15:10:26 GMT
The world is an imperfect place.
Saw Carousel at the Open Air and the domestic abuse made me uncomfortable as it should, I don’t believe it normalises the issue but gives a platform to show it is not acceptable behaviour and maybe if done correctly give the strength of someone in that position to make a difference in their life.
The difficult play on domestic abuse is Taming of the Shrew and it’s intent is difficult to pin down, is Shakespeare glorifying or holding up a mirror to the guilty in the crowd.
Theatre should accommodate difficult subjects with the caveat that the behaviour is not shown in a positive way, Greek Tragedies are extremely troublesome if taken on face value and therefore should have been cancelled centuries ago if we go down this route.
|
|
|
Post by cavocado on Nov 2, 2021 15:15:34 GMT
Carousel has a clear historical setting, which maybe LSOH doesn't because it's more of a fantasy show? I saw the ENO Carousel a few years ago and, while there were bits that made me feel uncomfortable, it was very much in the context of 1940s social attitudes.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2021 15:25:37 GMT
Not long after I first saw Carousel I encountered someone who was saying "Back then they didn't understand that domestic violence was wrong, but we know better". Nonsense. Carousel certainly has its iffy bits — "It doesn't hurt at all" is cringeworthy today — but of course people "back then" knew that domestic violence was wrong. Right there in the show an outraged Carrie says "Did you hit him back?", making it clear that Julie was absolutely not expected to accept violence as her lot in life. In dramatic terms the whole point of Billy hitting Julie is that he had to do something that both the character and the audience would see as unacceptable. If the audience reaction had been "What's he whining about? All he did was rough her up a bit" then the story wouldn't work. He had to do something so dreadful that he could never forgive himself for it, and the audience had to be able to relate to that.
More generally, what concerns me about this sort of thing is that there seems to be a simple-minded arrogance to it all, as if we're the lucky people who have reached the pinnacle of moral evolution and are uniquely granted the right to pass judgement on everyone from the past. The people a hundred years from now are going to look back on us the way we look back on the people of a hundred years ago, and as those people looked back on the people who came a century before them, and so on through history in both directions. We are all morally deficient in the eyes of people from other times. Judge not lest ye be judged and all that.
|
|
5,707 posts
|
Post by lynette on Nov 2, 2021 16:00:28 GMT
Not long after I first saw Carousel I encountered someone who was saying "Back then they didn't understand that domestic violence was wrong, but we know better". Nonsense. Carousel certainly has its iffy bits — "It doesn't hurt at all" is cringeworthy today — but of course people "back then" knew that domestic violence was wrong. Right there in the show an outraged Carrie says "Did you hit him back?", making it clear that Julie was absolutely not expected to accept violence as her lot in life. In dramatic terms the whole point of Billy hitting Julie is that he had to do something that both the character and the audience would see as unacceptable. If the audience reaction had been "What's he whining about? All he did was rough her up a bit" then the story wouldn't work. He had to do something so dreadful that he could never forgive himself for it, and the audience had to be able to relate to that.
More generally, what concerns me about this sort of thing is that there seems to be a simple-minded arrogance to it all, as if we're the lucky people who have reached the pinnacle of moral evolution and are uniquely granted the right to pass judgement on everyone from the past. The people a hundred years from now are going to look back on us the way we look back on the people of a hundred years ago, and as those people looked back on the people who came a century before them, and so on through history in both directions. We are all morally deficient in the eyes of people from other times. Judge not lest ye be judged and all that. So right.
|
|
5,062 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Phantom of London on Nov 2, 2021 16:21:35 GMT
Inadvertently I booked back to back to see Tina: The Tina Turner Musical, the tour of Waitress and The REP/National Theatre’s production of East is East, I never connected the dots but all 3 contain heinous scenes of domestic violence, I had to take pause. However it was the story Tina wanted to tell about her abhorrent and abusive childhood no sugarcoating here. In Waitress Jessie Nelson created Earl the most despicable character in theatre, he had no redeemable features, but the story wouldn’t work without the douchebag, so it is good he gets hoisted by his own petard at the end. Ajub Khan-Din masterpiece East is East is a snapshot of live in Pakistani family life, where men were unfortunately patriarchal and women have little rights, where forced marriages are unfortunately common, this is also very brutal (I’m not saying this happened in every family) but there is a reason why Ajub Khan-Din wrote it.
All 3 although took my breathe away and I have seen all 3 before, I don’t like domestic violence and see it as egregious, but it is a necessary story that these playwright wanted to tell.
Hopefully it will be told intact in the future and we can say how great times have changed, but I fear not. So no it shouldn’t be cancelled, but serve as a barometer how times have moved on.
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Nov 2, 2021 16:31:09 GMT
Perhaps this is the right place to ask what Adele means in the first line of this verse >
|
|
|
Post by marob on Nov 2, 2021 16:39:40 GMT
Perhaps this is the right place to ask what Adele means in the first line of this verse > She’d probably tell you to ask Bob Dylan, since he wrote it. 😉
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Nov 2, 2021 16:44:05 GMT
edit: Thanks. She sings it, including to young girls from what I saw of her Albert Hall audience.
Perhaps we can get a provisional ruling from the Committee for Cultural Re-Programming.
|
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Nov 2, 2021 20:50:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nick on Nov 3, 2021 8:20:48 GMT
It's so long since I've seen Little Shop so I can't really comment. However I've never found it or Carousel to be a problem. Depending on the piece and with the right creatives, actors and a mature, sensible and reflective stance then it may not be a problem and lead to "cancelled" headlines. If an audience feels uncomfortable then it can be a good thing. Theatre should hold a mirror upto society and make us think. I think this is the key. No reason why, for example, domestic violence shouldn't have a place in the theatre so long as it is put in the right context. I have a problem with one song - tits and ass from Chorus Line. It's such a great tune that I often sing it but it's really not a good song to sing out loud any more. Whether that means it should be cancelled? Don't know. I think most shows can be done as long as the director is mindful of modern sensibilities.
|
|
4,993 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Nov 3, 2021 8:51:41 GMT
It's so long since I've seen Little Shop so I can't really comment. However I've never found it or Carousel to be a problem. Depending on the piece and with the right creatives, actors and a mature, sensible and reflective stance then it may not be a problem and lead to "cancelled" headlines. If an audience feels uncomfortable then it can be a good thing. Theatre should hold a mirror upto society and make us think. I think this is the key. No reason why, for example, domestic violence shouldn't have a place in the theatre so long as it is put in the right context. I have a problem with one song - tits and ass from Chorus Line. It's such a great tune that I often sing it but it's really not a good song to sing out loud any more. Whether that means it should be cancelled? Don't know. I think most shows can be done as long as the director is mindful of modern sensibilities. Today, aren't folk more body obessesed than ever with the so called body beautiful? What happens in the song isn't how I want society to be but I can't deny it exists.
|
|
7,190 posts
|
Post by Jon on Nov 3, 2021 10:07:30 GMT
Dance Ten, Looks Three is still relevant today as it was in 1975, there are performers who do go through procedures in order to improve their chances of getting jobs.
|
|
|
Post by craig on Nov 4, 2021 10:22:17 GMT
Audrey in LSOH is one of the most wonderful characters in any musical for me. OK, I'm not sure the handcuffs joke holds up all that well these days, but I find Somewhere That's Green (and Suddenly Seymour) is so beautiful and affecting precisely because of all that she has endured during her life.
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Nov 4, 2021 23:45:49 GMT
Michael Billington really didn't like "Young and Beautiful" from 42nd Street and actually dedicated over a paragraph in his review saying so. Which was strange from such a usually tight and focused critic. Although I strongly suspect there might have been editorial creep in some of his later reviews
|
|