Threaded Order Chronological Order
| re: Ragtime... for our time | |
| Posted by: portenopete 11:40 am EDT 08/27/20 | |
| In reply to: Ragtime... for our time - rossde 06:27 pm EDT 08/26/20 | |
|
|
|
| "Lynn Ahrens commented that when Ragtime came out in 1998, it seemed to celebrate how far we have come in race relations. She said that now, she feels that it shows how far we still have to go." Ain't Time a kick in the pants? One of the things I always disliked about RAGTIME was its rather smug and comforting message for the white folk (who made up well over 3/4's of its audience in every production I ever saw or was in). The emotional reaction so many white folk had at the curtain call made me think it had touched a very deep and fragile spot for them and their cheering at the end proved that they had passed the test as good people. I don't think that's a reason for not doing it and playing too much against that might result in a very warped production, given that the material is crafted that way. One thing I remember thinking back in 1998 when I first saw it in Toronto was Brian Stokes Mitchell's casting as Coalhouse. By casting a very light-skinned actor with telegenic good looks, it made Coalhouse's "otherness" in relation to The White Family so much less urgent. Not that a person of Mitchell's complexion wouldn't have stood out in turn-of-the-century New Rochelle, but in late 20th century New York, he couldn't have been a more charming, attractive presence for a white audience. That transgression of coming into the house uninvited is a huge thing and with Mitchell it felt perfunctory. (Quentin Earl Darrington in the revival felt like much more of a threat and while his singing isn't quite as calming as Stokes, I thought he told the story more effectively.) It's an ambitious musical and a lot of it works really well. Having three protagonists is a tall order so it's not surprising that some story lines got sacrificed. Ultimately it succeeds in having a different lens for different audience members. Inevitably the whites will see it through Mother's eyes, the blacks through Coalhouse's and the immigrants through Tateh's. (Presumably the magicians will see it through Houdini's eyes.) |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: Ragtime... for our time | |
| Posted by: huskyital (huskyital@yahoo.com) 02:26 pm EDT 08/27/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Ragtime... for our time - portenopete 11:40 am EDT 08/27/20 | |
|
|
|
| The term "white folk" or "black folk" I find very demeaning. | |
| reply to this message |
| re: Ragtime... for our time | |
| Posted by: portenopete 03:07 pm EDT 08/27/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Ragtime... for our time - huskyital 02:26 pm EDT 08/27/20 | |
|
|
|
| I loathe it too, but it seems to be the mot juste for the moment. (Its' strained conviviality is preferable to the aural assault of "BIPOC".) Just like avoiding buying green bananas, getting too comfortable with any of these expressions is unwise, as someone will deem them offensive soon enough. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Ragtime... for our time | |
| Posted by: BruceinIthaca 02:43 pm EDT 08/27/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Ragtime... for our time - huskyital 02:26 pm EDT 08/27/20 | |
|
|
|
| Do you find it demeaning in the title of the classic book by W.E.B. DuBois, "The Souls of Black Folk"? If so, you might want to read the book. It's about ... the souls of ...black folk. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.018820 seconds.