HowlRound: In online forums, on college campuses, stages, and screens, there’s been a lot of discussion recently about the concept of “political correctness,” especially as it relates to freedom of expression in the arts and entertainment. The issue of “who gets to say what,” as well as who has (or doesn’t have) the responsibility to be inclusive, has made its way to the forefront of conversations about performance art, both mainstream and on-the-fringe.
6 comments:
This article raises some tricky questions that I couldn’t help but ask myself. Not the blunt types of questions like “am I actually racist, despite my liberal and progressive values?”, I view questions like that as less than helpful, potentially backfiring and leading down a road to divisiveness and binary thinking. A more helpful question, I think, would be “how does the fact that I can only truly understand my own perspective influence the work I create, and does it exclude, in a damaging way, other perspectives on the issue at hand that are equally valid?”. It’s a harder question to ask yourself certainly, not only because it’s more specific but also because it cannot be answered with a yes or no, and I think that that type of question is inherently more valuable to a discussion regarding the perspectives of different people, because it allows for more than two perspectives. We all have a system of weighted biases and assumptions that we work with on a day to day basis, there is just too much in the world to keep track of for the human mind. The trick is to force yourself to recognize those biases and assumptions, and to keep yourself honest on whether they are helpful to you (as they should be) or if they are hurtful towards others (which they probably shouldn’t be).
I really enjoy articles like this, as they make people analyze situations they are currently in, as opposed to only looking ack at systemic inequalities of the past and judging how incorrect or unfair they were. However, this article gets a little aggressive and uninformed (something I admittedly wouldn’t have noticed if I wasn’t on the production team this past summer):
“Recently, a planned workshop production of a Prince of Egypt musical, based on the Dreamworks film, came under heavy fire when it was revealed that cast of the show, which takes place in biblical Africa, was overwhelmingly white. Rather than engaging in a discussion with those who were unhappy with the casting in an attempt to improve the production and do better in the future, the creative team cancelled the event.”
Yes, Bay Street and Dreamworks decided to cancel the performance after the internet backlash that occurred after the announcement of the cast and it only being about 1/3 POC; but this isn’t quite an accurate description of events. Bay Street responded to and held online discussions about the situation of casting this production, making it clear that this workshop was in no way a reflection or prediction of what the final cast is going to be like. Only after not getting any positive responses did Dreamworks decide to cancel.
I think this miscommunication by the author is a great example of how, regardless of how educated and informed you are on social issues, you can still make incorrect assumptions and disregard efforts if they weren’t ultimately successful. And effort is really what counts in terms of social change. If you’re making an effort to do better and resolve injustice, you are fighting.
I’m always interested in plays and articles dealing with political correctness, mainly because I have mixed feelings about the political correctness in general. On one side I can understand how artists should be able to produce what they want because it’s their art. However, as our society is moving towards more cultural inclusion I think our art should reflect that, as art imitates life. I liked the author’s response to her show not being racially diverse. She writes: “I thought to myself, ‘Oh. Yeah, this is problematic. If I saw this in someone else’s play, I would take issue with it. Thank God I was brought to task.’”. I’m glad that she was able to recognize her own flaws in her work. This maturity in her own work serves as a template for how all if not most artists should respond to having their work called out on political correctness.
Political correctness in art is a really interesting topic, because where does one draw the line between art that pushes boundaries and art that is problematic? It seems really obvious to me personally but is a “daring” performance just politically incorrect art that I happen to agree with? Because I believe my own views to be empirically right, I would be repulsed to see art which portrays subjects like anti-gay therapy. However progressive one might be as an artist, I agree with the author that anyone who was born into privilege has subconscious biases that may cause them to create problematic pieces. This is why I think it so important when you are producing a show that deals with a difficult topic to have people on your creative team that have had direct contact with that topic. There are some nuances of experience that simply cannot be learned through research. But I think if we remain open minded as artists and not dismiss works too early because they might not agree with our own world views nor become overly defensive when someone wants to education us and supplement our art with their thoughts and experiences.
I am a little confused by this article because I am not quite sure how her discussion of “political correctness” links to her casting and re-writing story. The definition of politically correct is “the avoidance, often considered as taken to extremes, of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against” (Google dictionary). If this is the case, how is her realization during casting that she was working under a stereotypical view of the world and had to change her text to better reflect what she wanted for her show and for the characters in the show relate to being politically correct. I agree that her action was important, and it really brings to light the discussion of being willing to recognize your personal bias. However, where does the discussion of political correctness come into play? Is it the language of the discourse we have when discussing issues like race, gender, and religion? Is it from producers making conscious decisions to act responsibly to diversify and respect the text? Is it from playwrights making conscious decisions about controversial details in their texts to aid in diversity and better reflect the cultures reflected? Or is it all of the above?
I did some reading in the comments section of this article (one particular debate is very funny for those interested), and I think some of this confusion is reflected in the responses. Their reactions are positive and affirming yet non-specific in a way that makes me think we don’t actually know what she is trying to be politically correct about? Or is she saying to do away with the concept of political correctness?
I understand this author's perspective. I understand that she is writing about a personal experience to enlighten and educate others. I understand that she is trying to aid the cause for diversity and eliminate closed mindedness in casting, while white cisgenders are behind the casting table. Although I understand these things, the article does not convey them effectively. This article feels more so like a white, cisgendered person saying "it's okay to be butthurt when you get called out on your political incorrectness as a result of systemic racism, as long as you change it and write something about it." Although this article attempt to raise awareness of being wary of race implications in casting, it does not seem that way. The article seems like something the author wrote to absolve her white, cisgendered sins.
Post a Comment