offensive language
Printed From: Community Theater Green Room
Category: About the Community Theater Green Room
Forum Name: Polls
Forum Discription: Registered members can create polls of their own and vote in posted polls.
URL: http://www.communitytheater.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3644
Printed Date: 11/21/24 at 7:56pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 8.05 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: offensive language
Posted By: VPA1
Subject: offensive language
Date Posted: 12/08/08 at 9:43pm
|
Just curious. Some of our directors do, some of our directors don't. Our board turns a blind eye to the practice, but generally approves of attentuating offensive language as it tends to improve the bottom line.
We've never had anyone complain that our shows would have been improved had more offensive language been present, but we've gotten tons of complaints when it is present. Thanks! Larry |
Replies:
Posted By: tristanrobin
Date Posted: 12/09/08 at 11:54am
|
I am totally against it. I'm always against rewriting the playwright's words. I feel that if you are unable to present a play as written, you should choose a different play that is appropriate for your company/audience. There are thousands and thousands of plays to choose from. Choose one that will work for your group. ... not that I have strong feelings about this or anything  |
Posted By: VPA1
Date Posted: 12/10/08 at 1:36am
|
So, I directed OF MICE AND MEN. Our CT is in a lilly white area. The ONLY appropriate, willing and competent black man to play the role refused to be called "nigger" in the play, as Steinbeck wrote. I subbed in "darkie" for the few references we had and this tremendous show had its debut on our stage.
Tristan, should I have not directed this wonderful story for the sake of this substitution? |
Posted By: tristanrobin
Date Posted: 12/10/08 at 10:22am
|
Well, I believe that the actor should have the reason the word is used to him. Deriding them as “a
nigger an' a dum-dum and a lousy ol' sheep,” she viciously but accurately
lays bare the perceptions by which they are ostracized by society. By not using the offensive word, they make her and her prejudices less offensive. I would imagine that he would understand that bigotry and ignorant prejudice is not something we should white wash and make more acceptable for polite company. It's interesting that is the word that was an issue. Just last night I saw a production of The Meeting, which is a fictional historical meeting between Malcom X and Martin Luther King ... the n-word is thrown and it's like a bomb. There are few words in the English language which have the immediate impact as that word. In answer to your question, I can only repeat what I wrote in my previous post: I'm always against rewriting the playwright's words. Sometimes that means making tough decisions. I'm sure your production was wonderful - but imagine the electricity that might have happened when an all-white audience saw a pretty white woman toss that word like a molotov cocktail at a black man on stage. I can't tell you what you should or shouldn't have done. I can only offer my opinion on the subject presented. I don't mean to offend! |
Posted By: skoehler
Date Posted: 12/10/08 at 11:09am
|
I completely agree with tristanrobin. It is wrong to change the words of the playwright, not to mention that is illegal and a direct violation of your contract. Of course if you have written and received permission fromteh publishers to change the language (they will get permission from the playwright) then by all means. Words are very powerful, the playwright has constructed the play by (one would hope) very carefully selecting words that will have an impact on the audience. By changing the word(s) for whatever reason, you are probably diminishing the power of the show. ------------- Steven Koehler Managing Director Civic Theatre of Greater Lafayette www.lafayettecivic.org |
Posted By: VPA1
Date Posted: 12/10/08 at 12:39pm
|
No offense taken, Tristan. I understand your pov and thanks for your post. It's just that it came down to either take out that word or don't do the show. I had no choice whatsoever from that actor, and I could hardly blame him.
It is also wrong and illegal to speed or to copy a cd, yet these things are done commonly. The world is not black and white. I would rather present a show as tremendous as OF MICE AND MEN with 99.9% of its language intact than to not present it at all. My bet is that Steinbeck would concur. |
Posted By: tristanrobin
Date Posted: 12/10/08 at 3:20pm
|
well, LOL, these things that are done commonly also have their consequences if caught doing them! LOL I understand your POV - I just disagree. Wouldn't be much of a world if we all thought the same way!  |
Posted By: JohnEZ
Date Posted: 12/29/08 at 5:25pm
|
The high school that I help is in an amazingly conservative town where half the people don't speak English and nearly everyone else is over 60. Though I don't condone the practice-- I try to discourage it--the director often edits language at the request of the Board of Education.
They don't want to choose other productions, either, because to them, most shows in which the language is wholly appropriate draws images of sugar plums and Wizards of Oz. |
Posted By: imamember
Date Posted: 1/09/09 at 11:55am
|
I voted that changes are made occasionally but I agree with tristanrobin 100%. We recently did FAME and in addition to casting Tyrone as white (though done well) they completely cut the rap number and that was only the most glaring change. |
Posted By: whitebat
Date Posted: 2/23/09 at 10:18pm
|
We decided not to do a production of "Deadwood Dick" because of offensive (racist) language and/or stereotypes. I'm considering writing a play in which one of the characters uses offensive (politically incorrect e.g. "Oriental" for "Asian" and swearing) language. I'm planning to write a few different versions of her lines, with different levels of offensive language. The ethics aside from "is it legal" would depend some on whether the offensive language is "just" characterization (Person A is a bigot, or whatever and talks that way) and one instance of many, or whether a specific word or instance is being used for maximum impact (You know the Sunday School teacher is MAD when she starts cussing). Of course it's wrong to change the playwright's words without permission. With some plays, the publisher and playwright are totally willing to give permission to change a specific word or phrase if you ASK. |
Posted By: Rorgg
Date Posted: 2/27/09 at 4:19pm
|
Funny, we touched on this subject last week while discussing an upcoming show of one-acts. One the one hand is a very short comedy that has a character drop the f-bomb once (maybe twice?) during a 4-way crosstalk where everyone's yelling. During the auditions, you couldn't make out what anyone was saying.
The directors decided for that reason to ASK permission of the playwright to modify it, since it really isn't necessary.
On the other hand, the longer piece we're doing has 5 of them in it, but they're really just a piece of art and nothing else conveys the same reaction (4 in a row), so the director of that piece never even considered it.
|
Posted By: Chris Polo
Date Posted: 3/07/09 at 1:36pm
|
Tristan, I'm totally with you on this one; like some others here, different directors in our theater have changed language, but it's something I don't believe I've ever done as a director. I've certainly inadvertently rewritten lines as an actress, particularly as I've gotten older, but never deliberately as a director!
Interestingly enough, I just finished working as a consulting director (in our theater, that's an experienced director who works with anyone directing with us for the first time) on "As Bees in Honey Drown." If you're not familiar with the show, the F-bomb is dropped on page 3 and continues to be used extensively throughout, along with several other "naughty words," plus the hero is a gay man who thinks he's fallen in love with a woman, only to find his true life partner -- another gay man - by the end of the show.
We're in a small conservative community as well, so the board was understandably apprehensive about allowing him to do this show but didn't have a lot of choice, as very few directors had stepped up to the plate this season. Everyone essentially gritted their teeth and resigned themselves to very small houses (with a few less patrons by the end of each performance than had originally walked through the doors at the start of the evening), probably a few angry letters from offended patrons, and possibly some coward who didn't want to sign their name calling in to the local paper's anonymous "sound-off" column.
A few people walked out before the end of the first act on opening night, but we could tell that everyone else was enjoying it from the general audience response throughout the evening. Even so, the director and I were stunned when we heard the audience going "awww" and applauding when the gay couple wound up together, as well as by the wild applause at curtain call.
We saw the same thing every night through the run of the show, with the exception of the walkouts -- there were no more after the first performance. One regular patron, a very religious man in his 70's who is also a local newspaper columnist, saw it opening night, and yes, he used his column to chide us for putting it on. Probably in response to his column, we started receiving letters and emails from others who'd seen the show -- in fact, more than we've ever received in response to any show that I can remember, and I've been there for almost 20 years. Every one of them was positive, raving about what a different, wonderful show it had been and how much they'd enjoyed it. We even had the pleasure of seeing the local columnist issue a retraction and point out that his opinion had not been the norm, as several of his family members who had loved the show had jumped him for what he'd written about it.
I think every now and then, a theater needs to stick its neck out and test the waters to see what their audiences will tolerate. We're not about to offer a steady diet of edgy, profanity-laden shows, but I think we learned that our audiences are not as stodgy as we think we are, and that if a really good show is worth doing, it can be left intact and done as the writer intended it to be done. ------------- Chris Polo Visit Community Theater Green Room Originals at www.cafepress.com/ctgr "The scenery in the play was beautiful, but the actors got in front of it." -- Alexander Woolcott |
Posted By: tristanrobin
Date Posted: 3/07/09 at 9:47pm
| well, where have you been? I haven't seen you post in quite a while! |
Posted By: VPA1
Date Posted: 4/02/09 at 3:23pm
|
My, I'm honored to have Ms. Polo respond to this issue. Thank you for your pov, and yours as well Tristan. Interesting to note that over 80% of the respondents to this question favor adapting language to one extent or another.
Three years ago, I took over as AD for our CT. We were $27K in debt. The CT was going bankrupt, our board was making personal loans to cover the debt. We were on the verge of going under. I took over and, along with our treasurer who shared my vision, changed the way we do business. More family friendly shows, no cutting edge stuff and adapt offensive language when called for. In short, I paid attention to our community and what they were telling us by their letters, their attendance and their patronage. I kept the COMMUNITY first in Community Theater. That is the fundamental difference between my predecessor and myself. Now, and you may choose to believe this or not, we are out of debt and we have funds in the bank in excess of 6 figures. We are on the verge of expansion to a new performing arts building and our horizon is bright. Our community loves us and we are stronger than we have been in 34 seasons of community theater. A person may argue the relative merits of changing offensive language, whether it offends the playwright, or is illegal or not, or whatever. What is not arguable is that instead of being buried in debt and on the verge of total collapse, our CT now thrives. |
Posted By: Pandora
Date Posted: 4/17/09 at 7:50pm
| Sorry, but I'm a high school theater director who has done lots of shows myself where I used language that I wouldn't use in real life, yet would not use those same words on the high school stage. I tell my kids that i am violating our contract by changing, but that part of understanding relationships and dealing with others is understanding appropriateness. Our high school presents shows that our community expects to be entertainment for the family, including the four-year-olds who are old enough to sit through the performance. We did Footloose without a four-letter word and the audience loved it, and my kids understood that we were changing words to avoid offending the community. We did Music Man and changed "by-God stubborn" to gosh-darn stubborn." Yep, they may be baking me files in jail, but I will continue to both change language and to explain to my kids why I do it. |