Theatre | The Guardian: It is a play renowned for its extreme physical violence, with scenes featuring execution, rape and mutilation. Shakespeare’s Titus Andronicus even culminates with its eponymous character, the Roman general Titus, feeding Tamora, the queen of the Goths, her own sons “baked in a pie” before slaughtering her.
7 comments:
This is an interesting debate. I do see both sides but I don’t see the harm in a ‘trigger warning’ this can come in any form– doesn’t need to shout in anyones face, but a sign or a quote is fine to me. But I do see Gregory Dorans point, art is something supposed to be provoking, something unexpected even– if you don’t want to be vulnerable and open in a space maybe you shouldn’t experience it. But at the same time, why should more sensitive people not be able to experience art in a safe space. I think to some extent some trigger warnings are unnecessary and maybe too explanatory. But many are important for the audience, they are half of the experience sometimes. Art is meant to be seen by people, especially theater– an audience is accounted for in theater, entertainment– meant to entertain other people.
The debate about trigger warnings is still ongoing today in theatres and universities around the world. And while to some degree I agree with Ralph Fiennes who said that trigger warnings take the element of surprise out of theatre. I still think there are some shows that warrant trigger warnings. Occasionally I do think there are too many warnings for a theatre show that give away essential details about the play that don’t seem as harmful to others as some trigger warnings. However, with the growing conversation about the public’s mental health and the act of taking care of it, it’s a question of how much is too much of a limit for trigger warnings now. Trigger warnings for Shakespeare seem less like a big deal say trigger warnings for a show like Gloria. I think there is a conversation that needs to be had at every institution and theatre company about what trigger warnings are trying to do. They should be trying to add the audience to inform them of matters that might cause them mental or emotional harm, they shouldn’t take away from the key action or conflict of the show. This debate will continue for a long time until we figure out what the true meaning of trigger warnings is.
I think when people or celebrities weigh in on this recent debate in the industry a lot of them can miss the point. While I may see the argument of “you shouldn't need trigger warnings, theater is supposed to be shocking” I think a lot of these people forget that certain technology actually can be a health risk, it can cause seizures and plenty of other medical issues that are dangerous for audiences. I think I am still open to being convinced either one way or another about “Trigger warnings but I think it is ridiculous that some of the influential people in theater are forgetting an entire population of their audience that may need warnings about features of the show for health purposes. I think sometimes these people forget that it is a privilege to perform in front of an audience and that the audience pays for a ticket, and maybe sometimes it is fair to acquiesce to what the audience needs even if it changes the art a little bit.
I feel like the article put a huge photo of homeboy Gregory before it even begins just to give the audience the frame of mind the man myth and legend who said “if you are anxious, stay away” is just another white man. Personally I have no strong opinions if shows I go to have content warnings. Like if they’re there and help people make decisions about attendance or ease anxiety, great and I guess if they’re left out in the name of “art” like whatever. I think the argument against them that it takes the “shock” out of the theater is dumb because it’s not that deep. I don’t think the mention of blood and knives is going to make the audience yawn when someone’s eyes are ripped out of their sockets. Also like–movies and other forms of entertainment like video games have had warnings like this from the start so why do people get so twisted when a show has a post you don’t even have to look for more than a second if you don’t want to see the different advisories. Maybe the solution is to have a sign that offers you a place to look at the content advisories to the side if you are someone who likes to know.
This is probably my fourth article I have read about this topic and I think this is the one I most strongly disagree with. There is a difference between wanting to protect a story and any surprises that might come with it and flat out disregarding how something might impact other people. I do not think that the example given at the end of the article is a good example of a trigger warning. I don't think you have to tell everyone exactly what is going to happen, just the topic of the triggering event. Then it is up to the individual to decide if they want to go or not and with a basic trigger warning they can better judge that. I think that is when the arguments don't come if you are worried. I think you have to provide some amount of information or you are just setting yourself up to hurt people.
This article I think is such a strange way to look at warnings. I have always thought that trigger warnings are helpful for the audience so they can mentally prepare. However there have been multiple shows that I have watched without looking at the trigger warnings for and have honestly been sitting in my seat shocked. I can see why some people do not want t “ruin the experience of theatergoers” but it is also the fact that we do have to keep the safety of people in mind when we are doing shows and it is important that people are aware of trigger warnings so they know if they should purchase the tickets and they are able to watch the show without any trouble for themselves. I think that there are many strong opinions out there but it is 2024 and people need to be more open minded about so many things that trigger warnings should not be this much of a debate.
The trigger warnings conversation and debate has been something that has become much more present in my life and career as we have talked about it extensively in interstage management class. Tina has shared her thoughts on content warnings and in some cases, I tend to agree, and many of them go along with themes stated in this article. it can be a slippery slope adding content warnings to shows that are clearly about sensitive content or violence. understanding where to draw the line at is complicated and sometimes can be a spoiler warning for the particular production. I think putting the content warnings on the back of a poster is probably the most helpful solution I can think of, because it allows the people that want to see them to be exposed and the people that don't want to be spoiled knowing that they are okay with any form of content, to still see the show without these warnings.
Post a Comment