Unpacking in P'town
New Conservatory Theatre Center March 2024
Desiree Rogers ("Minty"), Awele ("Lydia) photo by Lois Tema
White folx easy disbelief that African American women can be "eloquently articulate" about anything at all is notorious. And our ability to come to that articulation about multi-ethnic identities did not just begin. We've been thinking and talking about it ever since the first intermarriage.
Matt Weimer & ShawnJ West rehearsing for their
My grandmother, Lydia and her dance
We had a fabulous run at New Conservatory Theatre Center and I have only great things to say about the cast, crew, support staff and audiences. I learned so much from everyone about developing a comedy for the stage. I again experienced how hard actors will work to fulfill the characters they're playing. My respect for all of the team members is deep and lasting.
We had only one unfortunate event connected to the play; which I mention because other writers and performers of colour will probably face the same perpetrators. A review from one of the local queer newspapers was so ill-informed and inaccurate that I would call it racist. I don't want to name names because ultimately the reviewer is not someone who will be remembered in the annals of gay journalism. What is important is that the queer community and the artists' community hold reviewers to high standards. I studied journalism, especially critical writing with some of the best known journalists of their time but I'd say my standards are even more stringent than theirs. When I write I'm aware that the world is looking at me as a lesbian of colour and what I say reflects on not just me but on an entire community; several communities in fact. People (especially this reviewer) are sharpening their knives on the words I write; on any pronouncements I make.
When a reviewer doesn't like my work and expresses it intelligently I'm interested in the opinion. I might learn something that improves my writing. When a white male reviewer lies about what was on stage I'm furious at him and at his white male editor. This one starts with this lie about these retired performers:
"...and there's virtually nothing said about how
these old friends have
spent the past three decades."
In fact it's stated in more than one bit of dialogue that one character works at a local bar, another is an antique dealer and another teaches young kids tap dancing. This is the first of several errors he commits. It may seem unimportant until you see that the remainder of his piece rests on other inaccuracies and his totally biased assumption:
"...Gomez simultaneously piles their dialogue high with identity politics
from times yet to come."
He believes that African Americans had no political consciousness until when? Has he read no history? He writes:
"How likely that a mixed-race character of the
period would eloquently
articulate a sense of feeling othered by both the
African- and
Native-American communities..."
Awele in rehearsal for 'Lydia' who ponders
her Wampanoag/African identity.
White folx easy disbelief that African American women can be "eloquently articulate" about anything at all is notorious. And our ability to come to that articulation about multi-ethnic identities did not just begin. We've been thinking and talking about it ever since the first intermarriage.
roles as 'Scotty' & 'Buster,' who face interracial hurdles.
Two other characters, interracial couple Scotty and Buster, must work through their ethnic differences before Scotty's father visits. Toward the end of the play, as they resolve their disagreement, Buster tells Scotty not to refer to their bedroom as the 'master bedroom.' So the reviewer writes:
How credible is it for a Black character in 1959
to object to the term
"master bedroom"?
Why is the reviewer so ignorant that he can't imagine that Black people have been sensitive about the word 'master' ever since masters controlled our lives?
The reviewer's lack of imagination/education weighs down every line of his review. How is it possible that he believes African Americans only started reflecting on the racism of language recently? It's an embarrassment for queer journalists and editors to see his piece in print. How likely is it that a queer writer would publish such ill-informed and insulting opinions in the 21st century? Very likely apparently; I just didn't expect it in the Bay Area. The reviewer is so focused on spewing his misinformation he never actually assesses anything about the actors, the story, the dancing, singing, the sensitive lighting, the glorious set, charming costumes, delightful direction, etc.
partner in the 1930s.
The play is based on my maternal grandmother, Lydia, and her group of gay friends who spent summers in Provincetown so I can attest to the reality base of the ideas and issues. But I shouldn't have to. At this point I and other playwrights should be able to rely on the education and non-bias of others in our communities.
The play has finished its successful run but the reviewer and editor will go on to taint theatre audiences with their racist and sexist opinions about other writers of colour. So be wary of spurious opinion writers wherever they come from. And complain when they splash their ignorance on your work and that of others. As Audre said: "Your silence will not protect you."
And did he ever mention it's a comedy? Not to worry, there's a gnome and a Wampanoag ghost named Miss Queppish who have that reviewer in their sights.
***
No comments:
Post a Comment