Variety: A lawsuit brought against the producers of “Hamilton” and the owners of the theater in which it’s playing has turned attention to issues of accessibility for disabled Broadway theatergoers — an often-overlooked subject where real accommodation and good intentions can meet murky questions of demand and execution.
6 comments:
I understand why theaters and productions aren’t consistently providing some of these reasonable accommodations, budgets are tight, as is time close to opening, when some of that work would have to get done. (I’m not saying it is ok, just agreeing with the author that this is a priorities issue.) I respect that the class action lawsuit is suing for change, not damages. On the one hand, I feel like there should be more specific laws applying to both theaters and productions when it comes to disabilities. The word “reasonable” keeps the accommodations for a wide range of disabilities open, but when you’re working on a show, mandatory, like the fire marshal will shut it down if this doesn’t happen, seems like it would be more effective. But I at the same time, I would be concerned about whether rules would carry over into a much small regional or even community theater. I’m not saying that they shouldn’t have disability accommodations, I am concerned about the financial impact on those small companies, whether providing an audio description service is even feasible for them.
What started as an article that invoked a sense of “who do I want to win” attitude turned into a respectful, thoughtful lawsuit about promoting greater accessibility for disabled people. I greatly applaud the fact that the visually-impaired plaintiff is not pressing charges, but rather trying to hold Broadway accountable for not being as accessible as it ought to be. I think a lot of people could take a page from this plaintiff’s book – not all lawsuits need to be about getting money or being repaid for someone else’s wrongdoing. Sometimes, one can use the American legal system to impact real change in this world. Additionally, the choice of “Hamilton” was a smart one. It is the biggest name on Broadway as of currently, and helps the lawsuit gain even more attention to some of the problems that disabled people still face even in some of the most liberal places.
This is something that I never would have thought off and I like that the the lawsuit, and by proxy the article, brings attention to this problem. The reason that I, and most likely others, don’t often think about the issue of disability accommodations in the theater is that I personally and the people that I tend to go to the theater with don’t need. However, this is vitally important for someone whose theatrical experience relies on this technology. I have seen open captioned performances and devices to enhance the audio, during the show but I don’t know if I have encountered visual aids. However, I have seen museums with technology to explain the pieces for the visually impaired. I can understand why producers tend not to spend the money on this technology, but if it is as easy as the article makes it sound, I hope that other shows start to include this technology when they have their show. Hamilton is most likely a good show to sue because they have already gotten so much good publicity that the small amount of bad press that this lawsuit is bringing up is not likely to affect their ticket sales. I hope that Broadway and other theater start to adapt this technology because it is important that theater be accessible to everyone.
This article is very upsetting. For a show that spreads the message of inclusion and not to discriminate. I understand that it costs a lot of money to be able to have these devices bought into the theater. And for a show that is clearly going to flop they do not have the time nor funds to do this. However, Hamilton does have the money and time to do this. Its upsetting to see that some people can’t enjoy this show because Hamilton and the theater have yet not bought the correct devices. Broadway needs to become more accessible to all people. In the Deaf west spring awakening one of the actress was handicapped and could not walk around the theater. There are videos of her cast mates bring her to different floors because she could not walk and there was no other way to see the theater. Broadway needs to invest in getting the theater accessible for everyone.
I think the fact that the decision to not accommodate disabilities can sometimes come down to an issue of prioritizing is really sad. Making sure that as many people as possible can get a great experience from your show should be something that shows put near the top of their list, as without an audience there's no one to attend what you've created. The question that I have about this article is how would audio description work for a show like Hamilton in which someone is almost constantly speaking, singing, or wrapping? I've never listened to a track for the visually-impaired before so I'm curious about what they do in a situation like this. Even if the description overlaps the songs it's still a good thing to have as an option. I agree that this lawsuit is unlikely to affect their ticket sales as Hamilton is already such an international success, but at least now more people will be aware that this is an issue.
I can't help but feel that the lawsuit was targeted at Hamilton simply because of its success and the possibility for a huge profit if victorious, especially since MOST Broadway shows hardly offer accessibility options. Obviously I'm not undermining the importance of having accessibility in a theater because that's a HUGE thing, especially under the law (hence the reason for these lawsuits). I don't understand how professional theater companies and producers that are on the Broadway level are managing to screw this up especially since it's required under law and under USITT standards. Some people here are giving the companies the benefit on the doubt but I feel like time restrictions, budgets, etc. isn't enough to have these options completely unavailable for people with disabilities. Along with these illogical thought processes that go on behind the scenes, it's a little ironic that, with the rise of shows that decrease stigma on people with disabilities, the same theaters that put on these shows limit their accessibility options.
Post a Comment