|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2021 0:21:01 GMT
What does me not going to the Globe for a few years have to do with my comment about you and the daily mail?
And because you HAVE been to The Globe, you can't be criticised??
Regardless of that, we have now come full circle and back to the comment you made originally, which i, and others in this thread, didn't understand. Regardless of what other posters might claim, it was a genuine question when i asked what you meant by:
"It is Woke HQ and has been hijacked by the radical left and has lost its spark"
Honestly, if someone doesn't know what you're referring to, how can someone form an opinion on that same thing.
|
|
223 posts
|
Post by Kim_Bahorel on Oct 4, 2021 6:49:52 GMT
It is Woke HQ and has been hijacked by the radical left and has lost its spark. What does woke mean when you are saying it in these terms about the Globe? How has it been hijacked by the radical left? Please can someone who just tell me the facts what is it about the productions/venue. |
|
1,863 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Oct 4, 2021 7:06:40 GMT
There was some idiotic press that Romeo & Juliet had been hijacked by the woke left due to its focus on mental health, patriarchy and youth violence which was picked up by the right wing twitterati who believe that the National Trust is evil personified and statues are more important than what they represent.
It was obviously written by someone who had no appreciation of Shakespeare as the article said politics has no place in Shakespeare which for anyone who has even only touched the edges of Shakespeare knows he is one if not the most political playwrights if not the most and all of his plays have a political edge that can either be magnified or submerged.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2021 8:15:46 GMT
It is Woke HQ and has been hijacked by the radical left and has lost its spark. Comments like that are the reason this thread (and to an extent this forum) has derailed. Throwing around terms you clearly don't understand as insults to people who think progressively (as well as a generalisation about the wrong group of people) is never going to be left without comment. It's the same reason no sensible, forward-thinking person reads (or at least takes seriously or pays any heed to) the Daily Mail anymore - it is all laxy and mostly inaccurate generalisations and insults by commentators who aim to cause controversy that do nothing to forward any debate and instead succeed only in making the person using them seem intolerant and unable to think for themselves, regardless of whether that is actually true or not. |
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Oct 4, 2021 9:20:01 GMT
Well I live streamed midsummers' last sat and there were a few little glitches so they shared the recording again last week which I thought was very decent. I re watched over the weekend and it made my evenings most sparky.
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Oct 4, 2021 11:58:11 GMT
The kerfuffle over the recent R&J was not thr focus on youth violence or anything else in the play.
It was the warnings about the play featuring suicide and the provision of support line numbers to audience members
Providing content warnings on a piece that old and well known does seem unnecessary to me.
It is actions like that which feel very well-meaning on the part of the theatre that will provoke remarks from certain media outlets. Perhaps that is what the Globe wanted. It is certainly what the Globe should have expected.
I genuinely do not believe that warnings are necessary on a piece like R&J. New writing is different. But a 400+ year old play that has been performed in every part of the world and adapted into every conceivable art form cannot come as a surprise to audience members at the Globe.
30 seconds on Google tells you whether or not you would find the content genuinely triggering.
|
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Oct 4, 2021 12:35:24 GMT
The kerfuffle over the recent R&J was not thr focus on youth violence or anything else in the play. It was the warnings about the play featuring suicide and the provision of support line numbers to audience members Providing content warnings on a piece that old and well known does seem unnecessary to me. It is actions like that which feel very well-meaning on the part of the theatre that will provoke remarks from certain media outlets. Perhaps that is what the Globe wanted. It is certainly what the Globe should have expected. I genuinely do not believe that warnings are necessary on a piece like R&J. New writing is different. But a 400+ year old play that has been performed in every part of the world and adapted into every conceivable art form cannot come as a surprise to audience members at the Globe. 30 seconds on Google tells you whether or not you would find the content genuinely triggering. But... even that doesn't sound like a reason why they should be lambasted tbh. It may help people in the audience who connect with the show and who have those feelings, and need support in some way. A lot of people will have their first R and J experience at the globe, and not everyone will read up about plays beforehand A well meaning resource being offered to their audience members doesn't make them 'woke central and captured by the radical left' ( not that you're saying that i appreciate!). Most theatres nowadays offer content warnings and trigger warnings. I think thats positive overall. |
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Oct 4, 2021 13:22:18 GMT
That will come as a surprise to the Young Vic. I was sitting next to a 13-year old at the weekend and there were no warnings about depictions of extreme knife violence, or any warnings at all. And we were sitting almost within lunging distance, in the second row. The Young Vic is about as en pointe on current trends as anywhere.
|
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Oct 4, 2021 13:39:37 GMT
That will come as a surprise to the Young Vic. I was sitting next to a 13-year old at the weekend and there were no warnings about depictions of extreme knife violence, or any warnings at all. And we were sitting almost within lunging distance, in the second row. The Young Vic is about as en pointe on current trends as anywhere.
Has a show warning on the website www.youngvic.org/whats-on/hamlet-cush-jumboAlso, id say thats different to themes of R and J, which features suicide fairly heavily. |
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Oct 4, 2021 16:18:48 GMT
The kerfuffle over the recent R&J was not thr focus on youth violence or anything else in the play. It was the warnings about the play featuring suicide and the provision of support line numbers to audience members Providing content warnings on a piece that old and well known does seem unnecessary to me. It is actions like that which feel very well-meaning on the part of the theatre that will provoke remarks from certain media outlets. Perhaps that is what the Globe wanted. It is certainly what the Globe should have expected. I genuinely do not believe that warnings are necessary on a piece like R&J. New writing is different. But a 400+ year old play that has been performed in every part of the world and adapted into every conceivable art form cannot come as a surprise to audience members at the Globe. 30 seconds on Google tells you whether or not you would find the content genuinely triggering. But... even that doesn't sound like a reason why they should be lambasted tbh. It may help people in the audience who connect with the show and who have those feelings, and need support in some way. A lot of people will have their first R and J experience at the globe, and not everyone will read up about plays beforehand A well meaning resource being offered to their audience members doesn't make them 'woke central and captured by the radical left' ( not that you're saying that i appreciate!). Most theatres nowadays offer content warnings and trigger warnings. I think thats positive overall. I didn't say that they should have been lambasted but that it was somewhat inevitable that they were. I know trigger warnings are everywhere these days but I am not convinced that they need to be anywhere near 400 year old plays. People need to take responsibility for their own choice to go to the theatre. With exceedingly popular repertoire like R&J, it is incredibly easy to find out before booking whether you feel it is right for you. Theatres don't need to flag things in advance for well known texts. New writing is different and I can see some virtue in providing content warnings. However you will never flag everything that a potential audience member might find triggering. Theatregoers are on the whole adults making an informed choice to book seats. They are capable of doing their own research and making their own decisions. Children being taken to shows are a different matter. It is up to the adults making the bookings to be certain that the repertoire is appropriate for their whole party. But the emphasis should be on people doing their own research. Not on theatres trying to flag up everything in advance. Personally nothing would drag me to see another production of R&J. I find the play dull and most of the characters unlikeable or uninteresting. Nowt to do with violence or suicide. Everything to do with it being one of my least favourite plays by Shakespeare. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2021 16:52:49 GMT
Theatres don't need to flag things in advance for well known texts. But why shouldn't they? What harm is it doing to you or to anyone else who already knows the play? As opposed to the good it might do to someone not familiar with it at all? It is rather presumptive to think that everyone knows the plot of any Shakespeare play, even the most famous - the sad truth is that some (possibly even many) people worldwide are not fortunate enough to grow up in the type of environment where they would know of it. So I really don't understand why anyone has any issue with a trigger warning being on any piece, regardless of what it is. |
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Oct 4, 2021 17:00:22 GMT
R&J has been performed for 400 years with content warnings and I am not aware of any evidence at all of anyone suffering as a result.
The question is whether warnings are actually of genuine help or are a response to a culture of over-sensitivity that seems to exist in a certain groups.
|
|
1,127 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Oct 4, 2021 17:25:43 GMT
R&J has been performed for 400 years with content warnings and I am not aware of any evidence at all of anyone suffering as a result. The question is whether warnings are actually of genuine help or are a response to a culture of over-sensitivity that seems to exist in a certain groups. You could easily just go and ask actual rape survivors, people who have been sex trafficked, people who have lost loved ones to homicide or suicide, people who have been in mass shootings or lost loved ones to masks shootings, people with PTSD, people who grew up in war zones, or people who have experienced any other form of trauma. Because if you bothered to actually talk to a single person who these content warnings are aimed at, you’d quickly learn that not only are they a “genuine help” to actual rape/violence survivors, they literally save lives. I have a close friend who was kidnapped and escaped sex trafficking as a young teen, now has C-PTSD, who attempted suicide after seeing a play that was triggering and feeling physically trapped in the middle of a row. When I was at doing my A Levels one of the set texts was about incest, several students requested a change of text. I was a teacher for a few years, every time I taught a classic text that had violence or suicide in it, I’d have at least a couple of students who became very distressed because of personal experience. I live in an area with high gang crime. Two teenagers were stabbed to death right outside my house and this isn’t rare. I bet those kids’ friends would have a very different reaction to R&J. I could give a hundred examples of people suffering real mental health problems due to PTSD triggers. The idea that in 400 years of performance, not one single teenager who’d lost a loved one to suicide or homicide was dragged on a school trip to see R&J, is simply implausible. To say “I’m not aware of it” is just plain weird - how much first hand contact do you have with kids living in areas with high rates of gang violence?! The fact that oppressed groups are most likely to have experienced violence, rape, gang violence, etc. means they are the most likely to need content warnings. It’s only ever people (usually men) from safe comfortable backgrounds who go around whining about how people are special snowflakes. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2021 18:16:19 GMT
R&J has been performed for 400 years with content warnings and I am not aware of any evidence at all of anyone suffering as a result. The question is whether warnings are actually of genuine help or are a response to a culture of over-sensitivity that seems to exist in a certain groups. Are you aware of everyone on the planet? No. So I ask again, what harm does it do to you to have trigger warnings? Because right now your responses are astonishingly selfish and ignorant, never mind I could list a whole load of things that were acceptable 400 years ago that aren't now, because funnily enough times have changed. Who are you to decide what is over-sensitive and what isn't? Good grief. |
|
|
|
Post by eua78 on Oct 4, 2021 18:36:53 GMT
Who minds if there is a trigger warning, doesn’t affect the play in anyway and doesn’t add to run time etc. It’s just a note on the website or programme. Adding a trigger warning isn’t ‘woke’ 😂
|
|
5,062 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Oct 4, 2021 20:32:47 GMT
It is Woke HQ and has been hijacked by the radical left and has lost its spark. Comments like that are the reason this thread (and to an extent this forum) has derailed. Throwing around terms you clearly don't understand as insults to people who think progressively (as well as a generalisation about the wrong group of people) is never going to be left without comment. It's the same reason no sensible, forward-thinking person reads (or at least takes seriously or pays any heed to) the Daily Mail anymore - it is all laxy and mostly inaccurate generalisations and insults by commentators who aim to cause controversy that do nothing to forward any debate and instead succeed only in making the person using them seem intolerant and unable to think for themselves, regardless of whether that is actually true or not. I didn't create the thread, so all is not well in Lambeth and certainly don't read the Daily Mail, neither did I bring up the Daily Mail. I do read the Guardian though. Someone else on here brought up the recent attendance, which has dropped alarmingly. Theatre is like a restaurant, in respect to if the customer doesn't like it they just don't write in to complain, they simply don't go back. I have been to all 5 of the Globe's production this year, I suspect though you haven't, so I have got some form and can comment, the wooden benches are not the only thing that was uncomfortable. I stand by what I said and the Globe theatre is all about Shakespeare done brilliantly. I saw Romeo and Julliet at the Globe which I despised, I also saw the same play at the Open Air which I enjoyed and Isabel Adomakoh Young who played Juliet was astonishing and should be nominated and if not win the Olivier. |
|
5,062 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Oct 4, 2021 20:35:31 GMT
Having trigger warning is a very good thing and if someone wants to click on the link on the shows page, I don't have a problem with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Oct 5, 2021 19:28:53 GMT
It is Woke HQ and has been hijacked by the radical left and has lost its spark. Comments like that are the reason this thread (and to an extent this forum) has derailed. Throwing around terms you clearly don't understand as insults to people who think progressively (as well as a generalisation about the wrong group of people) is never going to be left without comment. It's the same reason no sensible, forward-thinking person reads (or at least takes seriously or pays any heed to) the Daily Mail anymore - it is all laxy and mostly inaccurate generalisations and insults by commentators who aim to cause controversy that do nothing to forward any debate and instead succeed only in making the person using them seem intolerant and unable to think for themselves, regardless of whether that is actually true or not. Sounds like you read the Daily Mail a lot though as you’re so familiar with what’s in it ? Why ? They should print trigger warnings. Personally I regard the Daily Mail and the Guardian as two sides of the same bigoted coin. |
|
