Threaded Order Chronological Order
| re: Martin McDonagh Says Theatres Have Refused His Plays, Calls It “A Dangerous Place For Writers” | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 02:07 am EDT 04/09/23 | |
| In reply to: re: Martin McDonagh Says Theatres Have Refused His Plays, Calls It “A Dangerous Place For Writers” - Singapore/Fling 01:28 am EDT 04/09/23 | |
|
|
|
| Just want to say there's a massive difference between revising something so that it no longer reads as racist or interpretable as racism in current day... vs making it "more inclusive." I don't know if you mean to imply anything with that, but I think it's insanely presumptuous and transgressive against an author's rights to change something to be more inclusive because of a current day obsession with inclusivity wherever it can be found or forced. Of course any real debate would be about specific examples. I'm just speaking to the general idea of re-evaluating and re-writing passages from older books because they "could be more inclusive" I agree the loss of "queer" to mean strange or outside societal norms is a shame. And I agree there's space for nuanced conversation about what drives revisions, on a case by case basis. But I continue to raise an eye to your emphasis on the need for inclusivity as a reason for rewriting older works. And again, I mean outside of scrubbing racist things and things. Maybe I'm missing something or being too sensitive to the language or vagueness of that kind of statement. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: Martin McDonagh Says Theatres Have Refused His Plays, Calls It “A Dangerous Place For Writers” | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 08:32 pm EDT 04/09/23 | |
| In reply to: re: Martin McDonagh Says Theatres Have Refused His Plays, Calls It “A Dangerous Place For Writers” - Chazwaza 02:07 am EDT 04/09/23 | |
|
|
|
| Inclusive is a broad umbrella for things that address racism, sexism, ableism and the like - the subjective bit is where we draw the line on what is sexist/misogynistic versus what is an unflattering portrait of a specific female character, or whether you think that affirming traditional patriarchal gender roles is itself sexist (which in many cases I would say it is) and thus these revisions address that. If you’re okay with scrubbing racist things, then you’re on board with at least one aspect of inclusivity, since the text is now inclusive of BIPOC readers by not being racist. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: Martin McDonagh Says Theatres Have Refused His Plays, Calls It “A Dangerous Place For Writers” | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 03:39 pm EDT 04/10/23 | |
| In reply to: re: Martin McDonagh Says Theatres Have Refused His Plays, Calls It “A Dangerous Place For Writers” - Singapore/Fling 08:32 pm EDT 04/09/23 | |
|
|
|
| But here again, a problematic choice of words if you ask me... "unflattering portrait"... who says any character, including characters who are female, non-white, and/or disabled, need their portrait drawn of them in a script to be "flattering" ? Let alone that it must exist to not affirm or reject "traditional patriarchal gender roles" etc? If it does indeed do those things, perhaps it doesn't need to be produced anymore because it no longer presents a recognizably worthwhile or nuanced view of society. Also, you are broadening and redefining the word "inclusive"... I get that it is used this way, but it also implies, as you used it, at least in my reading of it, that the goal and mandate of all things presented to any audience should be to include, or not exclude, as many peoples and types of people and experiences as possible. Yes I am ok with scrubbing racist things, if those in control of the work have approved any changes -- and if they haven't, then it only needs to be seen/produced/read by people who don't care or can keep it in its historical context. I am on board for many aspects of inclusivity but I think it's more tricky that you're painting it to be. What constitutes something being racist and worthy or erasure? Is a character who is racist needing to be erased from a play because we don't want racist people to exist? I doubt very much that the author who included them in the work did either. If the text promotes and upholds the racism of the character, that's another issue... and if it is a book, or the premise of a play, where the intent is actually racist, that's also another issue. Again, this is really only possible on a case by case basis. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Martin McDonagh Says Theatres Have Refused His Plays, Calls It “A Dangerous Place For Writers” | |
| Posted by: ryhog 01:49 pm EDT 04/09/23 | |
| In reply to: re: Martin McDonagh Says Theatres Have Refused His Plays, Calls It “A Dangerous Place For Writers” - Chazwaza 02:07 am EDT 04/09/23 | |
|
|
|
| I don't have time right now to address the broader inclusivity discussion, but I just wanted to note that, at a minimum, some non-inclusive scripts could indeed be "interpretable as racism." That said, I agree with the wisdom of case by case. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Martin McDonagh Says Theatres Have Refused His Plays, Calls It “A Dangerous Place For Writers” | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 03:29 pm EDT 04/10/23 | |
| In reply to: re: Martin McDonagh Says Theatres Have Refused His Plays, Calls It “A Dangerous Place For Writers” - ryhog 01:49 pm EDT 04/09/23 | |
|
|
|
| I mean, yes, of course... but also if you take it further, literally any and every text, written by a white person, ever, and especially before 5 years ago, that either doesn't include non-white characters or, worse, does include them, could be "interpretable as racism"... so yes, let's stick to the case by case. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.047653 seconds.