Non-gender specific - Yay or Nay?
Chatty was meandering her way home from the post office, having just posted four Christmas packages AFTER HOURS, using the special postage machine/box/miracle. Chatty *hearts* this marvelous machine.
She was humming along to the 24/7 Christmas radio station, and was stopped at the light by her local community college. Having time to look around, she noticed the cool flashing traveling sign at the front entrance - one that notes upcoming events, when classes for the new semester begin, etc. It's very eye-catching.
So, Chatty was watching it flash, and saw: Congratulations to our Theater Department students and their production of 'Twelve Angry Jurors'!
Hmmmmm. Chatty is pretty sure that the name of that play is "Twelve Angry Men", and she is also pretty sure that the playwright wouldn't be too happy to see his title changed. She is also pretty sure that much of the drama results from there being twelve (all Caucasion) men on a jury deciding the fate of a Puerto Rican teenager. In fact, had there had been women on the jury, Chatty is pretty sure the whole play would have been a one-act, rather than a three-act - but that is neither here nor there, and just her opinion, anyway.
But Chatty's point - if indeed she has one - is this: What gives a school - or any other body producing a well-known play - the right to change the title of that play, and with it no doubt also the content and force of that play?
Did they want to make it less gender-specific, and therefore somehow more palatable to audiences? If so, get a clue - it's about TWELVE ANGRY MEN - palatable was never a priority to the playwright - in fact, just the opposite. Did they want to cast some females students as jurors? Again - NOT AN OPTION. Or shouldn't be, anyway. Did they think they could just take a well-known, brilliant play and....um...PLAY with it? Again, NOT AN OPTION, at least in Chatty's opinion.
Chatty wonders what's coming next...how about "The Merry Spousal Units of Windsor"? Or, "Two Gentlepersons from Verona"? Maybe "I, Claudia". How about "Romeo and Julian"?
We could enlarge on the theme, and add songs: "Here Comes Mrs. Santa Claus"..."The Person from Ipanema"... "Thank Heavens for Little Boys".
Now, any one of the above might make for some very interesting productions or songs - but they would NOT be the play - or song - as it was intended to be performed by their various authors.
And, don't even get Chatty started on possible book title changes - although of course we DO have both "Little Women" and "Little Men" - which pretty much makes Chatty's point - because they are TWO DIFFERENT BOOKS!
Chatty has nothing against things like "It's a Wonderful Life" being re-cast with a female playing the lead. If the story is not harmed by being non-gender-specific, why not? Besides, Chatty loves Marlo Thomas.
But "Twelve Angry Jurors"?
Puhleeeze...
This is Chatty, over and out.
OK - gotta come clean here. Chatty DOES know that there is an adaptation of the play, credited to Sherman Sergel - but that doesn't make it RIGHT!
She was humming along to the 24/7 Christmas radio station, and was stopped at the light by her local community college. Having time to look around, she noticed the cool flashing traveling sign at the front entrance - one that notes upcoming events, when classes for the new semester begin, etc. It's very eye-catching.
So, Chatty was watching it flash, and saw: Congratulations to our Theater Department students and their production of 'Twelve Angry Jurors'!
Hmmmmm. Chatty is pretty sure that the name of that play is "Twelve Angry Men", and she is also pretty sure that the playwright wouldn't be too happy to see his title changed. She is also pretty sure that much of the drama results from there being twelve (all Caucasion) men on a jury deciding the fate of a Puerto Rican teenager. In fact, had there had been women on the jury, Chatty is pretty sure the whole play would have been a one-act, rather than a three-act - but that is neither here nor there, and just her opinion, anyway.
But Chatty's point - if indeed she has one - is this: What gives a school - or any other body producing a well-known play - the right to change the title of that play, and with it no doubt also the content and force of that play?
Did they want to make it less gender-specific, and therefore somehow more palatable to audiences? If so, get a clue - it's about TWELVE ANGRY MEN - palatable was never a priority to the playwright - in fact, just the opposite. Did they want to cast some females students as jurors? Again - NOT AN OPTION. Or shouldn't be, anyway. Did they think they could just take a well-known, brilliant play and....um...PLAY with it? Again, NOT AN OPTION, at least in Chatty's opinion.
Chatty wonders what's coming next...how about "The Merry Spousal Units of Windsor"? Or, "Two Gentlepersons from Verona"? Maybe "I, Claudia". How about "Romeo and Julian"?
We could enlarge on the theme, and add songs: "Here Comes Mrs. Santa Claus"..."The Person from Ipanema"... "Thank Heavens for Little Boys".
Now, any one of the above might make for some very interesting productions or songs - but they would NOT be the play - or song - as it was intended to be performed by their various authors.
And, don't even get Chatty started on possible book title changes - although of course we DO have both "Little Women" and "Little Men" - which pretty much makes Chatty's point - because they are TWO DIFFERENT BOOKS!
Chatty has nothing against things like "It's a Wonderful Life" being re-cast with a female playing the lead. If the story is not harmed by being non-gender-specific, why not? Besides, Chatty loves Marlo Thomas.
But "Twelve Angry Jurors"?
Puhleeeze...
This is Chatty, over and out.
OK - gotta come clean here. Chatty DOES know that there is an adaptation of the play, credited to Sherman Sergel - but that doesn't make it RIGHT!
AMEN!
Reply to this
Love it went you go on a rant! Love, Judy
Reply to this