Threaded Order Chronological Order
| So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? | |
| Posted by: theaterbear 02:17 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: Actors Equity worse than Republican Party - Al10chim 04:19 am EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| This posting, while making a few good points, was undermined by white privilege and flat out racism. Just because YOU weren't offended by the name of the robe makes it a "waste of time and money" in renaming it. That's not how that works. And are you seriously suggesting white actors be cast in minority roles? What world do you live in where there are an equal amount of white and non-white roles out there? Seriously? You're privilege is showing and it ain't pretty. | |
| reply to this message |
| re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? | |
| Posted by: seenenuf 06:49 pm EDT 07/15/18 | |
| In reply to: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? - theaterbear 02:17 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| It has nothing to do with Privilege. Its called Acting Make Believe How Daring |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 07:16 pm EDT 07/15/18 | |
| In reply to: re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? - seenenuf 06:49 pm EDT 07/15/18 | |
|
|
|
| I guess some of us just don't want to make believe that we live in a world of only white people. To some of us, that sounds like the fantasy of erasing all the people of color from this world. Daring indeed, but not a daring that we should be encouraging. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? | |
| Posted by: seenenuf 08:21 pm EDT 07/15/18 | |
| In reply to: re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? - Singapore/Fling 07:16 pm EDT 07/15/18 | |
|
|
|
| It does NOT imply that we want a world of only white people. It does imply that anything is possible. It in no way implies erasing people of color. Alarmist. Hate Monger. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 09:12 pm EDT 07/15/18 | |
| In reply to: re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? - seenenuf 08:21 pm EDT 07/15/18 | |
|
|
|
| I see your optimism in the power of make believe, but unfortunately we do not live in a world in which anything is possible, and we never have lived in that world. What may have seemed like limitless possibility to one group of people meant that another group of people were being excluded from the stage. I'm sorry to have to burst your fantasy, but when you bemoan the loss of the opportunity for white people to put on wigs and make-up and play people of color, you are bemoaning the loss of a world in which people of color were erased from the popular culture. That may not be what you intend - you're welcome to wrongfully accuse me of hate mongering, but I will not make any presumptions about your intentions - but that is the reality. A production of "The King and I" in which the Thai people are played by white folks is a production that has erased Asian people. It is as zero sum as that. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? | |
| Posted by: seenenuf 11:09 am EDT 07/16/18 | |
| In reply to: re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? - Singapore/Fling 09:12 pm EDT 07/15/18 | |
|
|
|
| I am not bemoaning the loss of the opportunity for white people to put on wigs and make-up and play people of color. I totally embrace the notion of anyone playing anyone. I am saying that theatre should be about PLAY. No boundaries, No borders. Theatre allows us to create a world where there are more possibilities. Hence, its great power to teach and educate. If I wanted to produce The King and I, because I love the story, craft, and score and hope to extend its beauty to others, and lived in a community with few Asians, should I not? Should not some school in Thailand produce The Sound of Music? |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 09:45 pm EDT 07/16/18 | |
| In reply to: re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? - seenenuf 11:09 am EDT 07/16/18 | |
|
|
|
| For this conversation, it's important to keep in mind that theater is specific to the location and the culture in which it's made. The theater practice in Thailand has no bearing on our practice in The States, because Thailand and other Southeast Asian nations are operating from a different cultural context than the US and other Western nations that practiced colonialism. We could get into a whole side conversation about how the cultural needs of East Asians are not the same as - and are often diametrically opposed to - the cultural needs of Asian Americans, but that's for another time perhaps. If you live in a community without enough East Asians to perform "The King and I", then, yes, sadly, you should not produce it, unless you can find a way to transplant it to a different time and place than 19th Century Bangkok. In the same way that I'm presuming you wouldn't produce "Porgy and Bess" if you didn't have black or brown people to be in it, you shouldn't do "The King and I" with all white people. One is blackface and the other is yellowface. They are the same thing, and they are historically related to practices that created boundaries and borders that prevented actors of color from having a place in the culture or that seriously limited the access they had. If you are aspiring to a world in which there are no boundaries or borders, then the first job is to create an entirely border free playing field for people of all color, and we are a far way from that in America and the West right now. Performing "The King and I" with white people in make-up sends a message, however subliminally, that Asian bodies are expendable or otherwise unreal. It sends a message that they are imaginary and make believe. That phrase may not strike you as fair, but it is on that many, many people of color would agree with. In respect to their wishes, and in observance of the structural barriers that have prevented people of color from accessing Broadway and Hollywood as easily as white people, the least that we can do is not have white people playing non-white people. Theater should be about PLAY, absolutely, but that PLAY must be channeled in a direction other than race. Let's do "The King and I" in an underwater sea colony, or as a story of Leopards and Lemurs, and PLAY all we want. But don't play Asian people if you're white, at least not right now, and possibly never. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| THIS!!! (n/m) | |
| Posted by: showtunesoprano 11:00 am EDT 07/17/18 | |
| In reply to: re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? - Singapore/Fling 09:45 pm EDT 07/16/18 | |
|
|
|
| n/m | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? | |
| Posted by: Al10chim 09:16 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? - theaterbear 02:17 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| I know it did sound racist. I really am not. Equity will not release the racial breakdown of membership and I think the scales have tipped in favor of minorities. My point is play any part just put on the make up to look it. What would happen if there was an all white production of a Martin Luther King musical? Riots in the streets. A regional production had to be cancelled because an all white cast was singing Gospel music. Yet no one has a problem with "Hamilton". Let's find a fair balance for everyone. Equity has played a big part in messing up this whole issue. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 09:58 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: re: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? - Al10chim 09:16 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| A) What is your source/evidence for Equity being majority non-white (something that seems unlikely, considering that the adult population of the country is not yet majority non-white)? B) Are you seeing your perceived non-white majority reflected in the casting of professional stage productions (which still look majority white to my eyes)? C) What would be wrong with AEA being majority non-white? D) What show was canceled over gospel music? Robert LePage's show was canceled because he had white people dressed as Southern slaves singing negro spirituals. I'm sure you can appreciate the difference in those two scenarios. E) I'm also sure if you give it some thought, you could find many differences between white people playing the black slaves that historical white people owned versus Americans of all colors playing the historical figures that birthed America. While both scenarios would spark a profound conversation, I'm sure you can see the problem with white people casting themselves as slaves. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: White privilege | |
| Posted by: Gustave 03:49 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: So MAGA to MEGA - Make Equity Great Again? - theaterbear 02:17 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| "White privilege" is an offensive, racist phrase suggesting that ALL white people are granted certain privileges. The heart of diversity is (or is supposed to be) the recognition of individual differences, not group labeling. Gustave | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| That's not what it means | |
| Posted by: MockingbirdGirl 04:01 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: re: White privilege - Gustave 03:49 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| To quote someone more eloquent than myself: White privilege doesn't mean your life hasn't been hard. It means that your skin color isn't one of the things making it harder. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That's not what it means | |
| Posted by: Gustave 05:00 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: That's not what it means - MockingbirdGirl 04:01 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| You miss the point. How do you know my life hasn't been harder because of the color of my (white) skin? Maybe I was raised in a Black neighborhood. Or passed over for promotion in favor of a less-qualified "diversity" candidate. You're choosing to label an entire group of people based on the color of their skin, i.e., racism. Gustave | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That's not what it means | |
| Posted by: whereismikeyfl 05:08 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: re: That's not what it means - Gustave 05:00 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| You name suggests that you might not be an American. I can assure you that in America, every white person who has ever gone on a job interview, dealt with cops, shopped for jewelry, etc. knows the advantages they have because they are white. You have to be brain dead not to notice it if you live in the US. It may be different in Europe or Africa, but in the US "white privilege" is very real. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That's not what it means | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 05:38 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: re: That's not what it means - whereismikeyfl 05:08 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| You[r] name suggests that you might not be an American. Ok, so I know what you mean to say, but how you said it really could be easily taken as a microaggression. I've become more sensitive to this lately due to some tensions in my workplace. It's a very easy trap to fall into, but it can also come across as very offensive to the person you're specking to, whether you intended that or not. Gustave could very well be an American citizen, despite their heritage. Don't jump to conclusions just because the name may not be the most obvious common one. For that matter, it absolutely could simply be a screenname, just as mine is Chromolume. Just as "mikey" may make some people think you must be a kid. But clearly you're not. ;-) Careful the things you say...posters will listen... |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That's not what it means | |
| Posted by: Gustave 05:33 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: re: That's not what it means - whereismikeyfl 05:08 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| And you know this? EVERY American? Really? Gustave | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That's not what it means | |
| Posted by: whereismikeyfl 06:38 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: re: That's not what it means - Gustave 05:33 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| When I hear of someone who can actually catalog systematic discrimination for being white, then yes. Even in your examples, you could only come up with a few idiosyncratic individual scenarios--and I suspect that really is all there is out there. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That's not what it means | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 11:17 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: re: That's not what it means - whereismikeyfl 06:38 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| I think the case of this hypothetical white kid raised in a black neighborhood is actually a great example of how white privilege works. In their neighborhood, this white kid will be in the minority, and it is possible that this white person would have a difficult time gaining entry to many of the social, cultural, and economic institutions of the neighborhood. By learning the codes and behaviors of their neighborhood, this hypothetical white person may also forfeit access to certain white institutions that judge people on markers of white performance as well as appearance. In these ways, we see where white privilege falls to help this specific white person. At the same time, when it comes to the police state in the USA, this white person is still less likely to be racially profiled, harassed on the street, and wrongfully arrested, and if they do commit a crime, they will likely face lighter sentencing than a black person would for that same crime. In this way, we see how white privilege has benefited this person, even though they grew up in a non-white neighborhood and may have had other disadvantages. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That's not what it means | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 06:27 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: re: That's not what it means - Gustave 05:33 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| What is the point you want to make? You seem to be insisting that because we can't vouch for *every single white person*, that negates the basic reality of systemic oppression and state violence against people of color in America. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That's not what it means | |
| Posted by: Gustave 08:06 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: re: That's not what it means - Singapore/Fling 06:27 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| I don't think this discussion is going anywhere, so this will be my last comment on the subject. I (obviously) agree that Blacks and other minorities in the United States have faced discrimination. In many cases, more than that. But speaking of "white privilege" has elements of the same kind of thinking, i.e., treating everyone in the group (substitute Blacks, Jews, Asians, gay men and women etc.) as if they all shared the same unsavory characteristic. As I wrote before, I believe the use of the phrase "white privilege" is racist and offensive. You do not. So be it. Gustave PS. As long as microaggressions have been brought up -- contributors should be careful writing "America" when they really mean "United States." |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That's not what it means | |
| Last Edit: Singapore/Fling 10:19 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 10:08 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: re: That's not what it means - Gustave 08:06 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| The discussion isn't going anywhere because you aren't discussing the issues you're raising. This branch of the thread has been respectful, but even when treated with respect, you are unable to engage in a conversation about race that asks you to simply explain your thoughts on anyone's terms but your own. The act that you have done is itself an expression of white privilege. White privilege is living in a world in which your ethnic identity is so central to the culture that you never have to think of race as something that applies to you. It is never being an other in the dominant culture, and never experiencing what it is to be an other while engaging with that dominant culture. It is being able to ignore race entirely unless it negatively affects you, and only havingit affect you because your previously limitless opportunities as a white man are now limited by people of other races. It is labeling anything that points to the existence of racial privilege in the United States of America, such as conversations of privilege, as racist, and then running away when the conversation starts to get a little real. And PS - anywhere you go in the Americas, being white will be to your advantage, that's one of the wonders of colonialism. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That's not what it means | |
| Last Edit: Chromolume 09:07 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 09:04 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: re: That's not what it means - Gustave 08:06 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| PS. As long as microaggressions have been brought up -- contributors should be careful writing "America" when they really mean "United States." The official name, of course, is both - "The United States Of America." (And of course I think of Thomson in 1776 commenting that that doesn't seem like a very good name for a new country.) But it's been called "America" as often as it's called "The United States" or "the US" or "The USA" or even "The US of A." I don't think that any of those titles are any more right or meaningful than another - no connotations, etc. We know from context whether someone is referring to New York as a state or a city - we know from context that one means either the state of Washington or Washington DC. This isn't Bet Hatikvah vs. Petah Tikvah. With a P. And Irving Berlin wrote "God Bless America" all those years ago, not "God Bless You, Nited States." ;-) Next topic, please - as I do agree this thread is going nowhere - with a B. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That's not what it means | |
| Posted by: BruceinIthaca 07:35 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
| In reply to: re: That's not what it means - Singapore/Fling 06:27 pm EDT 07/14/18 | |
|
|
|
| With due respect to the people doing a fine job of articulating what "white privilege" means in this context and in general, it feels like the thread is starting to veer off-course and may have outlived its usefulness. Gustave and the OP seem determined NOT to understand the history of race in the United States. It does not take an advanced degree in Critical Race Studies to understand that non-white people, since the time of the Pilgrims, have been dispossessed or treated as possessions in this country, and that theatre is one of the many venues in which they have had lack of access. If posters truly need deep explanation as to why blackface (or yellowface or redface or transface, as I have heard it called) continue the lack of fairness, I'm not sure any amount of eloquent and straightforward explanation will help. It certainly doesn't seem to be helping in our nation at large. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.073778 seconds.