"Examples of racism on BWW, including one where a poster decided to dedicate an ENTIRE thread regarding a black audience:
How many more would you like? I can keep going."
If you really checked those threads, you'd realize you're not primarily arguing with people who posted those examples of racism but sensible folks who are looking at a one-sided account and pushing back against your tumblr version of social critique that shuts downs legitimate discussion.
"To dismiss it as "everyone can be racist" is to dismiss the bigger picture, which is that racial tensions and the overall culture are stacked hugely against black people, who are made to constantly feel like outsiders."
To clarify, I personally, was just responding to the claim that no non-whites could ever be racist.
Kad said: "I just do not see how THIS incident- a pissy little spat at an off-Broadway theatre- is anything representative of the larger issues of race in theatre or in the country. To bring it to that point, a lot of assumptions and leaps have to be made; but the writer has framed it in such a way that questioning her account gets shut down (this thread is an example).
Even in the biased account of the blog post, I just don't see it as being anything more than a conflict between one woman who is passive-aggressive and one woman who is aggressive. "
Here's the key section:
"And this wasn’t an isolated incident. Here’s a quick list:
That time at a prestigious theatre festival when black women were responding exactly how I want them to respond to my play—loudly and expressively and “ummm hmm”-ing—and an older white patron approached them at intermission and said: “Can you enjoy the play a little quieter, please? ”
That time my play was being performed at a Tony award-winning regional theatre and older white patrons saw me coming to my reserved seat (that they were sitting in), and refused to get up from that seat until an usher assured them that I was the playwright.
That time my parents were coming to see my first Equity production at a beloved regional theatre, and again, older white patrons refused to believe that the seats they had taken were actually reserved for people that looked like my parents.
Why are all of these things important?
Because theatre has a white privilege and elitism problem. There is an environment that is fostering this kind of behavior. Our collective institutions—artistic staff, marketing departments, etc.—are placating the older white audiences, and are afraid to challenge them, or even educate them. We take their donor money and put them on boards, and we brush their microaggressions off as our old grandma or grandpa who might be a little racist and elitist but are otherwise harmless.
To that I ask: harmless to whom? I am telling you it is not harmless. It is harmful. It further marginalizes audiences of color and tells them they are not fully welcome in the theatre, except by permission of the white audience. It tells the upper-middle-class white audience that theatre is their home first and the rest of us are just guests."
The point is, whether you think Morriseau is overreacting or not, her experiences have lead her to be wary of situations exactly like this, and it ties in to the shooting of a twelve-year old because these experiences are being had with the exact kind of people who would defend the shooting of Tamir Rice, and vote in a way that promotes the shooting of Tamir Rice, because they are racist. That's the bigger picture. Morriseau is living in a country and dealing with a people who say that her kind, her race, her color shouldn't speak up about the glaring inequalities, and are more than happy to inform her of their opinion and baldly act in a way that expresses it.
Charley Kringas Inc is making two enormous assumptions:
1) Everything Morisseau says/writes is the pure, unvarnished truth, and
2) You know enough to form a strong judgement after hearing only one report, only one side of the story (and that report brief enough to read in a few minutes).
Charley, I agree that the prejudice re: allocated seating is racism. And maybe the prejudice re: gum chewing. But being disruptive (the core issue of this piece) has nothing to do with race. This award winning playwright could be Asian, black or white and still have received criticism for her behaviour. The idea that people want to enjoy a show without it being interrupted by others does not have much to do with race.
"You can't overrate Bernadette Peters. She is such a genius. There's a moment in "Too Many Mornings" and Bernadette doing 'I wore green the last time' - It's a voice that is just already given up - it is so sorrowful. Tragic. You can see from that moment the show is going to be headed into such dark territory and it hinges on this tiny throwaway moment of the voice." - Ben Brantley (2022)
"Bernadette's whole, stunning performance [as Rose in Gypsy] galvanized the actors capable of letting loose with her. Bernadette's Rose did take its rightful place, but too late, and unseen by too many who should have seen it" Arthur Laurents (2009)
"Sondheim's own favorite star performances? [Bernadette] Peters in ''Sunday in the Park,'' Lansbury in ''Sweeney Todd'' and ''obviously, Ethel was thrilling in 'Gypsy.'' Nytimes, 2000
I'm not talking about her story, I'm talking about her reaction as coming from a long series of similar encounters that are couched in racial aggression.
Her anecdotes- all about older white patrons- are experiences that I, a middle-class white boy, have had with that exact same group. I have dealt with that group of theatre patron very closely in two of my past jobs. They claim seats that aren't theirs- ushers often are needed to dislodge them, sometimes only after much cajoling. They shush and fuss and gripe. She offers no evidence of any act or word that is unambigiuously racist in those accounts, other than the fact they happened and they happened to her, a black woman.
Do I think that many nonprofits program specifically to appease these crotchety and moneyed patrons? Do I think this results in staid, risk-averse, and overwhelming white seasons? Yes. I do.
But she doesn't write about that. She writes about how these old people have been crotchety to her.
And I think using that as a starting-off (and sticking) point undercuts her grander point.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
What I'm saying is, if you go through your entire life being told that, because of how you look, you are necessarily "second" or "lesser" or even "less worthy of being alive", you are probably going to bristle quicker at events like this. I've worked with these people too and as much as they are crotchety in an overall way, they're crotchety in a racist way, too. Believe her or not, the reason this article exists is tied directly to the racism in our culture and it's hardly shocking to suggest that maybe she's not totally incorrect to feel prickly towards the Janes who condescend to her.
I don't think anyone is talking about when there's slapping; what matters in this case is why there's slapping.
We all get slapped. A lot. To assume that you're always being slapped because of your race or gender or sexual preference or religion is foolish. There are more reasons than those for people to slap others. Morisseau wanted to slap Jane because she felt Jane wasn't treating her with the respect she deserved, right? Or was it because Jane was old? Or white?
"Tell that to the black parents who have to counsel their kids on how to act around police officers so as not to get shot."
Seeing how that's a complete non sequitur, I doubt that will happen. Akin to saying "I'm rubber, you're glue." (I'm sure that you probably really felt strongly that your reply was cogent/relevant, but it just wasn't, sadly.)
newintown said: "Seeing how that's a complete non sequitur, I doubt that will happen. Akin to saying "I'm rubber, you're glue." (I'm sure that you probably really felt strongly that your reply was cogent/relevant, but it just wasn't, sadly.)"
It's not a non sequitur, they both stem from the same systemic issues.
Charley Kringas, I normally stay out of these discussions. But that was a pretty sh***y statement you made about the men and women who risk their lives everyday. Yes, I said risk their lives.
broadway belter's definition of racism is pretty xenophobic in its Eurocentric bias.
If "racism = prejudice + power", then weren't the Japanese racist in WW2 in their treatment of the Chinese? And the Hutu were racist towards the Tutsi? And the Iraqis are racist towards the Kurds? None of those majority groups with power were "white". Also, what is "white"? European? Western European? If an Albanian woman had shushed Morisseau during the show, would it be racist or prejudice? What if Jane were of Spanish or Turkish descent?
I've been discriminated against as a young woman constantly by both audience members and theatre staff. I know there is racism as well, though I personally don't experience it. I think the examples presented in this article don't make the best of argument and it only further widens the gap between otherwise well-meaning people who don't recognize the systemic racism in our culture, and people who view every slight as a racist offense instead of a reaction to an individual's behavior.
Like a firework unexploded
Wanting life but never
knowing how