Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
--> Ein [[HaveAGayOldTime Weib]], das Nacht und Tod nicht scheut, (A woman who neither fears night nor death,)
--> Ist würdig, und wird eingeweiht. (Is worthy and will be initiated.)
--> Ist würdig, und wird eingeweiht. (Is worthy and will be initiated.)
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 27,28 (click to see context) from:
** "[[https://www.naturalhistorymag.com/picks-from-the-past/12476/shakespeare-in-the-bush Shakespeare in the Bush]]" deals with the account of anthropologist Laura Bohannan, who decided to try to explain the plot of ''Theatre/{{Hamlet}}'' to a West African Tiv tribe, to try to prove that some ideas are just universal. To her surprise, and despite a fair amount of attempts at CulturalTranslation, they ended up taking away a ''very'' different interpretation of the story from any common scholarly one. Despite this, they still enjoyed the story, and even managed to successfully predict several plot points, including the ending.
*** The Tiv find the idea of ghosts to be completely absurd, as such a concept doesn't really exist in their folklore. Because of this, they are very confused at the appearance of Hamlet's father, and at first conclude him to be an omen (in which case he shouldn't be able to talk) or a ''[[VoodooZombie zombi]]'' (in which case he shouldn't be immaterial, and he's almost certainly under the control of someone else). However, they do recognize that it therefore makes sense that Hamlet should be suspicious of the ghost's words, because the ''zombi'' would be sent by a witch, and could therefore just be lying.
*** The Tiv find the idea of ghosts to be completely absurd, as such a concept doesn't really exist in their folklore. Because of this, they are very confused at the appearance of Hamlet's father, and at first conclude him to be an omen (in which case he shouldn't be able to talk) or a ''[[VoodooZombie zombi]]'' (in which case he shouldn't be immaterial, and he's almost certainly under the control of someone else). However, they do recognize that it therefore makes sense that Hamlet should be suspicious of the ghost's words, because the ''zombi'' would be sent by a witch, and could therefore just be lying.
to:
** "[[https://www.naturalhistorymag.com/picks-from-the-past/12476/shakespeare-in-the-bush Shakespeare in the Bush]]" deals with the account of anthropologist Laura Bohannan, who decided to try to explain the plot of ''Theatre/{{Hamlet}}'' to a West African Tiv tribe, to try to prove that some ideas are just universal. To her surprise, and despite a fair amount of attempts at CulturalTranslation, they ended up taking away a ''very'' different interpretation of the story from any common scholarly one. Despite this, they still enjoyed found the story, story engaging and enjoyable, and even managed to successfully predict several plot points, including the ending.
*** The Tiv find the idea of ghosts to be completely absurd, as such a concept doesn't really exist in their folklore. Because of this, they are very confused at the appearance of Hamlet's father, and at first conclude him to be an omen (in which case he shouldn't be able to talk) or a ''[[VoodooZombie zombi]]'' (in which case he shouldn't be immaterial, and he's almost certainly under the control of someone else). However, they do recognize that it therefore makes sense that Hamlet should be suspicious of the ghost's words, because the ''zombi'' would be sent by awitch, witch and thus could therefore just be lying.lying, since the witch in question would probably have done it to manipulate Hamlet.
*** The Tiv find the idea of ghosts to be completely absurd, as such a concept doesn't really exist in their folklore. Because of this, they are very confused at the appearance of Hamlet's father, and at first conclude him to be an omen (in which case he shouldn't be able to talk) or a ''[[VoodooZombie zombi]]'' (in which case he shouldn't be immaterial, and he's almost certainly under the control of someone else). However, they do recognize that it therefore makes sense that Hamlet should be suspicious of the ghost's words, because the ''zombi'' would be sent by a
Changed line(s) 31 (click to see context) from:
*** The recurring element that characters can be driven mad by nothing more than strong emotion or traumatic reactions doesn't play at all to the Tiv, who believe that madness is a supernatural thing caused by an existing entity. Because of this, they end up concluding that Claudius is the one bewitching people and driving them mad, and therefore declare that Claudius's death is actually a KarmicDeath--he drove Hamlet mad, and this has made Hamlet willing to kill him. They also conclude that Laertes must have killed Ophelia by driving her mad, probably to sell off her body to a witch--an idea that's actually made stronger when he jumps into her grave. Additionally, this means that Claudius wanted both Hamlet ''and'' Laertes dead (since this Laertes is now magically-potent enough to kill his own sister), hence why he poisons the wine for the winner.
to:
*** The recurring element that characters can be driven mad by nothing more than strong emotion or traumatic reactions doesn't play at all to the Tiv, who believe that madness is a supernatural thing caused by an existing entity. Because of this, they end up concluding that Claudius is the one bewitching people and driving them mad, mad (probably in-character for him), and therefore declare that Claudius's death is actually a KarmicDeath--he drove ''doubly'' [[KarmicDeath karmic]]; he killed Hamlet's father and gets killed in turn by his son, ''and'' by driving Hamlet mad, and this has insane he made Hamlet willing to kill him. They also conclude that Laertes must have killed Ophelia by driving her mad, probably to sell off her body to a witch--an idea that's actually made stronger when he jumps into her grave. Additionally, this means that Claudius wanted both Hamlet ''and'' Laertes dead (since this Laertes is now magically-potent enough to kill his own sister), sister and thus a threat), hence why he poisons the wine for the winner.winner; Laertes would poison Hamlet and win, then get poisoned himself, killing two birds with one stone.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 30 (click to see context) from:
*** The "forbidden love" aspect of Hamlet and Ophelia's romance doesn't quite translate to a culture where (due to polygamy being normalized) it would be entirely normal for a chief's son to marry a less important woman. Even after it's explained, the idea that it might leave Ophelia DefiledForever confuses the Tiv, who argue that it could simply be made up for with gifts--consequently, they land heavily on the interpretation that Polonius is just kind of an idiot.
to:
*** The "forbidden love" aspect of Hamlet and Ophelia's romance doesn't quite translate to a culture where (due to polygamy being normalized) it would be entirely normal for a chief's son to marry a less important woman. Even after it's explained, the idea that it might leave Ophelia DefiledForever confuses the Tiv, who argue that it could simply be made up for with gifts--consequently, they land heavily on the interpretation that Polonius is just kind of an idiot.idiot... which he is, even disregarding his relationship with his daughter.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 27 (click to see context) from:
** "[[https://www.naturalhistorymag.com/picks-from-the-past/12476/shakespeare-in-the-bush Shakespeare in the Bush]]" deals with the account of anthropologist Laura Bohannan, who decided to try to explain the plot of ''Theatre/{{Hamlet}}'' to a West African Tiv tribe, to try to prove that some ideas are just universal. To her surprise, and despite a fair amount of attempts at CulturalTranslation, they ended up taking away a ''very'' different interpretation of the story from any common scholarly one. Despite this, they still enjoy the story, and even manage to successfully predict several plot points, including the ending.
to:
** "[[https://www.naturalhistorymag.com/picks-from-the-past/12476/shakespeare-in-the-bush Shakespeare in the Bush]]" deals with the account of anthropologist Laura Bohannan, who decided to try to explain the plot of ''Theatre/{{Hamlet}}'' to a West African Tiv tribe, to try to prove that some ideas are just universal. To her surprise, and despite a fair amount of attempts at CulturalTranslation, they ended up taking away a ''very'' different interpretation of the story from any common scholarly one. Despite this, they still enjoy enjoyed the story, and even manage managed to successfully predict several plot points, including the ending.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 27 (click to see context) from:
** "[[https://www.naturalhistorymag.com/picks-from-the-past/12476/shakespeare-in-the-bush Shakespeare in the Bush]]" deals with the account of anthropologist Laura Bohannan, who decided to try to explain the plot of ''Theatre/{{Hamlet}}'' to a West African Tiv tribe, to try to prove that some ideas are just universal. To her surprise, and despite a fair amount of attempts at CulturalTranslation, they ended up taking away a ''very'' different interpretation of the story from any common scholarly one.
to:
** "[[https://www.naturalhistorymag.com/picks-from-the-past/12476/shakespeare-in-the-bush Shakespeare in the Bush]]" deals with the account of anthropologist Laura Bohannan, who decided to try to explain the plot of ''Theatre/{{Hamlet}}'' to a West African Tiv tribe, to try to prove that some ideas are just universal. To her surprise, and despite a fair amount of attempts at CulturalTranslation, they ended up taking away a ''very'' different interpretation of the story from any common scholarly one. Despite this, they still enjoy the story, and even manage to successfully predict several plot points, including the ending.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
This topic is described in more detail above. Cut for redundancy.
Deleted line(s) 52 (click to see context) :
* In her article "Shakespeare in the Bush", Laura Bohannan describes recounting the story of ''{{Theatre/Hamlet}}'' to a pre-literate tribe in Africa. Their society had no concept of ghosts and it was proper custom to marry your dead brother's wife. The story is still a tragedy, but has become a tale of powerful witches who send false visions and murder their own sisters.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 27 (click to see context) from:
** "[[https://www.naturalhistorymag.com/picks-from-the-past/12476/shakespeare-in-the-bush Shakespeare in the Bush]]" deals with the account of anthropologist Laura Bohannan, who decided to try to explain the plot of ''Theatre/{{Hamlet}}'' to a West African Tiv tribe, to try to prove that some ideas are just universal. To her surprise, and despite a fair amount of attempts at CulturalTranslation, they ended up taking away a ''very'' different interpretation of the story.
to:
** "[[https://www.naturalhistorymag.com/picks-from-the-past/12476/shakespeare-in-the-bush Shakespeare in the Bush]]" deals with the account of anthropologist Laura Bohannan, who decided to try to explain the plot of ''Theatre/{{Hamlet}}'' to a West African Tiv tribe, to try to prove that some ideas are just universal. To her surprise, and despite a fair amount of attempts at CulturalTranslation, they ended up taking away a ''very'' different interpretation of the story.story from any common scholarly one.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** "[[https://www.naturalhistorymag.com/picks-from-the-past/12476/shakespeare-in-the-bush Shakespeare in the Bush]]" deals with the account of anthropologist Laura Bohannan, who decided to try to explain the plot of ''Theatre/{{Hamlet}}'' to a West African Tiv tribe, to try to prove that some ideas are just universal. To her surprise, and despite a fair amount of attempts at CulturalTranslation, they ended up taking away a ''very'' different interpretation of the story.
*** The Tiv find the idea of ghosts to be completely absurd, as such a concept doesn't really exist in their folklore. Because of this, they are very confused at the appearance of Hamlet's father, and at first conclude him to be an omen (in which case he shouldn't be able to talk) or a ''[[VoodooZombie zombi]]'' (in which case he shouldn't be immaterial, and he's almost certainly under the control of someone else). However, they do recognize that it therefore makes sense that Hamlet should be suspicious of the ghost's words, because the ''zombi'' would be sent by a witch, and could therefore just be lying.
*** In the original play, Claudius marrying Queen Gertrude is treated as a bit suspect and leaves Hamlet resentful. To the Tiv, a younger brother marrying his dead brother's widow is, in fact, practically standard policy, and considered quite kind. They are also confused at the idea that Claudius, a ruler of some power, has only one wife, since a good chief should have many wives and children to handle his homestead.
*** The "forbidden love" aspect of Hamlet and Ophelia's romance doesn't quite translate to a culture where (due to polygamy being normalized) it would be entirely normal for a chief's son to marry a less important woman. Even after it's explained, the idea that it might leave Ophelia DefiledForever confuses the Tiv, who argue that it could simply be made up for with gifts--consequently, they land heavily on the interpretation that Polonius is just kind of an idiot.
*** The recurring element that characters can be driven mad by nothing more than strong emotion or traumatic reactions doesn't play at all to the Tiv, who believe that madness is a supernatural thing caused by an existing entity. Because of this, they end up concluding that Claudius is the one bewitching people and driving them mad, and therefore declare that Claudius's death is actually a KarmicDeath--he drove Hamlet mad, and this has made Hamlet willing to kill him. They also conclude that Laertes must have killed Ophelia by driving her mad, probably to sell off her body to a witch--an idea that's actually made stronger when he jumps into her grave. Additionally, this means that Claudius wanted both Hamlet ''and'' Laertes dead (since this Laertes is now magically-potent enough to kill his own sister), hence why he poisons the wine for the winner.
*** The Tiv find the idea of ghosts to be completely absurd, as such a concept doesn't really exist in their folklore. Because of this, they are very confused at the appearance of Hamlet's father, and at first conclude him to be an omen (in which case he shouldn't be able to talk) or a ''[[VoodooZombie zombi]]'' (in which case he shouldn't be immaterial, and he's almost certainly under the control of someone else). However, they do recognize that it therefore makes sense that Hamlet should be suspicious of the ghost's words, because the ''zombi'' would be sent by a witch, and could therefore just be lying.
*** In the original play, Claudius marrying Queen Gertrude is treated as a bit suspect and leaves Hamlet resentful. To the Tiv, a younger brother marrying his dead brother's widow is, in fact, practically standard policy, and considered quite kind. They are also confused at the idea that Claudius, a ruler of some power, has only one wife, since a good chief should have many wives and children to handle his homestead.
*** The "forbidden love" aspect of Hamlet and Ophelia's romance doesn't quite translate to a culture where (due to polygamy being normalized) it would be entirely normal for a chief's son to marry a less important woman. Even after it's explained, the idea that it might leave Ophelia DefiledForever confuses the Tiv, who argue that it could simply be made up for with gifts--consequently, they land heavily on the interpretation that Polonius is just kind of an idiot.
*** The recurring element that characters can be driven mad by nothing more than strong emotion or traumatic reactions doesn't play at all to the Tiv, who believe that madness is a supernatural thing caused by an existing entity. Because of this, they end up concluding that Claudius is the one bewitching people and driving them mad, and therefore declare that Claudius's death is actually a KarmicDeath--he drove Hamlet mad, and this has made Hamlet willing to kill him. They also conclude that Laertes must have killed Ophelia by driving her mad, probably to sell off her body to a witch--an idea that's actually made stronger when he jumps into her grave. Additionally, this means that Claudius wanted both Hamlet ''and'' Laertes dead (since this Laertes is now magically-potent enough to kill his own sister), hence why he poisons the wine for the winner.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 49 (click to see context) from:
* Edouard Bordet's 1920s play ''Theatre/LaPrisonnière'' (The Captive) tells the story of Irene, a wealthy twentysomething in love with a somewhat older woman. Pressured by her father (who seems to be onto her) and frightened of her feelings, she marries a male childhood friend who's long been infatuated with her. Act Two depicts their loveless marriage; Irene has reconnected with her old lover and her husband is also cheating with an old girlfriend of his. The play ends with Irene and her paramour going off together and her probably-soon-to-be-ex-husband wanting to marry his mistress. Sounds like a perfectly happy ending -- but at the time, it was considered a tragedy because Irene was "lost" to homosexuality. Even at the time, there was a dissonance because the play had a huge [[LGBTFanbase following amongst lesbians]].
to:
* Edouard Bordet's 1920s play ''Theatre/LaPrisonnière'' ''Theatre/LaPrisonniere'' (The Captive) tells the story of Irene, a wealthy twentysomething in love with a somewhat older woman. Pressured by her father (who seems to be onto her) and frightened of her feelings, she marries a male childhood friend who's long been infatuated with her. Act Two depicts their loveless marriage; Irene has reconnected with her old lover and her husband is also cheating with an old girlfriend of his. The play ends with Irene and her paramour going off together and her probably-soon-to-be-ex-husband wanting to marry his mistress. Sounds like a perfectly happy ending -- but at the time, it was considered a tragedy because Irene was "lost" to homosexuality. Even at the time, there was a dissonance because the play had a huge [[LGBTFanbase following amongst lesbians]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 63 (click to see context) from:
* In the Spanish, mid-16th century play ''Theatre/TheAlacdeofZalamea'', a wealthy peasant's daughter is raped by an army officer. Her brother, who has managed to wound the rapist, then tries to kill her to redeem the family honor; her father tries to convince the rapist to marry her, and eventually packs her off to a convent. This was a perfectly realist representation of her predicament in Spain at the time; both the father and the son are depicted as entirely honorable ( the rapist is executed, and by the garrotte instead of beheading although he is a noble - i.e. a dishonorable death ).
to:
* In the Spanish, mid-16th century play ''Theatre/TheAlacdeofZalamea'', ''Theatre/TheAlcadeofZalamea'', a wealthy peasant's daughter is raped by an army officer. Her brother, who has managed to wound the rapist, then tries to kill her to redeem the family honor; her father tries to convince the rapist to marry her, and eventually packs her off to a convent. This was a perfectly realist representation of her predicament in Spain at the time; both the father and the son are depicted as entirely honorable ( the rapist is executed, and by the garrotte instead of beheading although he is a noble - i.e. a dishonorable death ).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 49 (click to see context) from:
* Edouard Bordet's 1920s play ''Theatre/LaPrisionerre'' (The Captive) tells the story of Irene, a wealthy twentysomething in love with a somewhat older woman. Pressured by her father (who seems to be onto her) and frightened of her feelings, she marries a male childhood friend who's long been infatuated with her. Act Two depicts their loveless marriage; Irene has reconnected with her old lover and her husband is also cheating with an old girlfriend of his. The play ends with Irene and her paramour going off together and her probably-soon-to-be-ex-husband wanting to marry his mistress. Sounds like a perfectly happy ending -- but at the time, it was considered a tragedy because Irene was "lost" to homosexuality. Even at the time, there was a dissonance because the play had a huge [[LGBTFanbase following amongst lesbians]].
to:
* Edouard Bordet's 1920s play ''Theatre/LaPrisionerre'' ''Theatre/LaPrisonnière'' (The Captive) tells the story of Irene, a wealthy twentysomething in love with a somewhat older woman. Pressured by her father (who seems to be onto her) and frightened of her feelings, she marries a male childhood friend who's long been infatuated with her. Act Two depicts their loveless marriage; Irene has reconnected with her old lover and her husband is also cheating with an old girlfriend of his. The play ends with Irene and her paramour going off together and her probably-soon-to-be-ex-husband wanting to marry his mistress. Sounds like a perfectly happy ending -- but at the time, it was considered a tragedy because Irene was "lost" to homosexuality. Even at the time, there was a dissonance because the play had a huge [[LGBTFanbase following amongst lesbians]].
Added DiffLines:
* In the Spanish, mid-16th century play ''Theatre/TheAlacdeofZalamea'', a wealthy peasant's daughter is raped by an army officer. Her brother, who has managed to wound the rapist, then tries to kill her to redeem the family honor; her father tries to convince the rapist to marry her, and eventually packs her off to a convent. This was a perfectly realist representation of her predicament in Spain at the time; both the father and the son are depicted as entirely honorable ( the rapist is executed, and by the garrotte instead of beheading although he is a noble - i.e. a dishonorable death ).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 59 (click to see context) from:
* Theatre/HowToSucceedInBusinessWithoutReallyTrying: Invoked and {{Lampshaded}} in the 2010 Broadway production. When some of the misogyny was booed, Alan Cumming snapped to the audience, "Hey, it was TheSixties!" That ThrowItIn line became used in every performance of the run since.
to:
* Theatre/HowToSucceedInBusinessWithoutReallyTrying: ''Theatre/HowToSucceedInBusinessWithoutReallyTrying'': Invoked and {{Lampshaded}} in the 2010 Broadway production. When some of the misogyny was booed, Alan Cumming snapped to the audience, "Hey, it was TheSixties!" That ThrowItIn line became used in every performance of the run since.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* Theatre/HowToSucceedInBusinessWithoutReallyTrying: Invoked and {{Lampshaded}} in the 2010 Broadway production. When some of the misogyny was booed, Alan Cumming snapped to the audience, "Hey, it was TheSixties!" That ThrowItIn line became used in every performance of the run since.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 28,29 (click to see context) from:
* ''Theatre/TheMagicFlute'': To the extent that the opera has AnAesop about how you shouldn't trust or even listen to women, and how women need a man to guide them lest they become too uppity. (On the other hand, it doesn't hurt that all the parts about the brave and noble men overcoming every challenge are complete snooze fests, while the villainous [[GodSaveUsFromTheQueen Queen of the Night]] gets [[SugarWiki/MomentOfAwesome the two]] [[EvilIsCool best arias]] in the whole opera, including one of the most famous in the entire genre.) With a side of "[[UnfortunateImplications black men are too ugly to get any]], so they'll resort to [[ScaryBlackMan raping white women]], to whom they are [[WhereDaWhiteWomenAt irresistibly attracted]]".\\
On the other hand again, [[spoiler:Pamina is initiated with Tamino]]. Considering that both Mozart and Emanuel Schikaneder (who wrote the libretto) were both Freemasons and that the opera is full of Masonic themes, and that to this day most Masonic lodges do not initiate women...
On the other hand again, [[spoiler:Pamina is initiated with Tamino]]. Considering that both Mozart and Emanuel Schikaneder (who wrote the libretto) were both Freemasons and that the opera is full of Masonic themes, and that to this day most Masonic lodges do not initiate women...
to:
* ''Theatre/TheMagicFlute'': To the extent that the opera has AnAesop about how you shouldn't trust or even listen to women, and how women need a man to guide them lest they become too uppity. (On the other hand, it doesn't hurt that all the parts about the brave and noble men overcoming every challenge are complete snooze fests, while the villainous [[GodSaveUsFromTheQueen Queen of the Night]] gets [[SugarWiki/MomentOfAwesome the two]] [[EvilIsCool best arias]] in the whole opera, including one of the most famous in the entire genre.) With a side of "[[UnfortunateImplications black men are too ugly to get any]], so they'll resort to [[ScaryBlackMan raping white women]], to whom they are [[WhereDaWhiteWomenAt irresistibly attracted]]".\\
attracted]]".
** On the other hand again, [[spoiler:Pamina is initiated with Tamino]]. Considering that both Mozart and Emanuel Schikaneder (who wrote the libretto) were both Freemasons and that the opera is full of Masonic themes, and that to this day most Masonic lodges do not initiate women...
** On the other hand again, [[spoiler:Pamina is initiated with Tamino]]. Considering that both Mozart and Emanuel Schikaneder (who wrote the libretto) were both Freemasons and that the opera is full of Masonic themes, and that to this day most Masonic lodges do not initiate women...
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Modern audiences generally see ''Theatre/TwelfthNight's'' Malvolio as a victim who didn't deserve the degrading treatment he was subjected to, all because he's a smarmy jerk who asked the comic subplot to keep the noise down in the middle of the night. Malvolio, however, is a Puritan--as in, literally a follower of an extreme Protestant sect that abhors pretty much all forms of merrymaking, including theatre.[[note]]Although "Puritan" was not a precise term back then; several Protestant group with astoundingly strict beliefs arose during Elizabethan times and "puritan" was a catch-all insult for them.[[/note]] So to Shakespeare and his audience, Malvolio wasn't just an uptight prude, he was an enemy to their livelihood / favorite entertainment, which meant they didn't mind so much seeing him so notoriously abused.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 52 (click to see context) from:
** One of the songs features racist language, including the term "heathen Chinese". The lyrics are lifted from the [[Literature/OldPossumsBookOfPracticalCats original book]] and were off-color even in the early '80s. As a result, the lyrics are often either censored or the song is outright cut (as its exclusion doesn't effect the plot).
to:
** One Two of the songs features songs, feature racist language, including the term "heathen Chinese". The lyrics are lifted from the [[Literature/OldPossumsBookOfPracticalCats original book]] and were off-color even in the early '80s. '80s. As a result, the lyrics are often either censored or one of the song is songs are outright cut (as its exclusion doesn't effect cut .
** Battle of theplot).Pekes and the Pollicles refers to the Pekinese with the term "heathen Chinese". "Canton Chinese" and "Eastern Chinese" both fit the meter.
** Growltiger's last stand refers to the Siamese navy as "Chinks". This is often just replaced with "Cats".
** Battle of the
** Growltiger's last stand refers to the Siamese navy as "Chinks". This is often just replaced with "Cats".
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Changed line(s) 49 (click to see context) from:
* The ending of ''Theatre/{{Grease}}'', in which heroine Sandy reinvents herself as a leather-clad BikerBabe to win Danny back, was [[FairForItsDay considered progressive for its time]] -- it was one of the first positive portrayals of a woman who didn't ''want'' to be an innocent in a mainstream play/movie. Nowadays, it's usually seen as [[BeAWhoreToGetYourMan a perfectly decent woman changing herself for the worse to impress a guy who's probably not worth it]]. As a result, the 2016 TV version changed her character so that her previous self was a facade she put on to please her strict parents while the reinvented version is her finally expressing her true self.
to:
* The ending of ''Theatre/{{Grease}}'', in which heroine Sandy reinvents herself as a leather-clad BikerBabe biker to win Danny back, was [[FairForItsDay considered progressive for its time]] -- it was one of the first positive portrayals of a woman who didn't ''want'' to be an innocent in a mainstream play/movie. Nowadays, it's usually seen as [[BeAWhoreToGetYourMan a perfectly decent woman changing herself for the worse to impress a guy who's probably not worth it]]. As a result, the 2016 TV version changed her character so that her previous self was a facade she put on to please her strict parents while the reinvented version is her finally expressing her true self.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** A musical adaptation of Mrs Doubtfire was also affected by the growing backlash to DisguisedInDrag narratives. Despite making more attempts to modify the narrative (including cutting more overtly transphobic material from the film and casting a non-binary actor in a supporting role) it closed just six months after its official opening. Negative reviews and COVID-related disruptions did not help..
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
The people in "Shakespeare in the Bush" are Tiv, from West Africa. "Bushmen" refers to San peoples of Southern Africa.
Changed line(s) 23 (click to see context) from:
** Shakespeare's ''Theatre/TheTamingOfTheShrew'' is divisive on whether it is dissonance--some people perceive the ending monologue and summation of the play, in which the female character declares all women must be subservient to men in a literal sense, while others assume it is meant to be satire or sarcasm. This debate comes up almost as often as whether or not Romeo and Juliet are meant to be romantic and tragic, or just tragic.
to:
** Shakespeare's ''Theatre/TheTamingOfTheShrew'' is divisive on whether it is dissonance--some dissonance -- some people perceive the ending monologue and summation of the play, in which the female character declares all women must be subservient to men in a literal sense, while others assume it is meant to be satire or sarcasm. This debate comes up almost as often as whether or not Romeo and Juliet are meant to be romantic and tragic, or just tragic.
Changed line(s) 28 (click to see context) from:
On the other hand again, [[spoiler: Pamina is initiated with Tamino]]. Considering that both Mozart and Emanuel Schikaneder (who wrote the libretto) were both Freemasons and that the opera is full of Masonic themes, and that to this day most Masonic lodges do not initiate women...
to:
On the other hand again, [[spoiler: Pamina [[spoiler:Pamina is initiated with Tamino]]. Considering that both Mozart and Emanuel Schikaneder (who wrote the libretto) were both Freemasons and that the opera is full of Masonic themes, and that to this day most Masonic lodges do not initiate women...
Changed line(s) 42 (click to see context) from:
* The musical ''Theatre/{{Carousel}}'' features a defense of domestic violence. Julie, thinking longingly of her abusive [[spoiler: dead]] husband, remarks wistfully that "it's possible for someone to hit you ... hit you very hard ... and not hurt at all." The audience isn't supposed to cringe at how cowed she is, but to sigh over this romantic moment. The 2015 Stratford version lampshaded this in a discussion on CBC radio [[http://www.cbc.ca/player/play/2668955192 here]].
to:
* The musical ''Theatre/{{Carousel}}'' features a defense of domestic violence. Julie, thinking longingly of her abusive [[spoiler: dead]] [[spoiler:dead]] husband, remarks wistfully that "it's possible for someone to hit you ... hit you very hard ... and not hurt at all." The audience isn't supposed to cringe at how cowed she is, but to sigh over this romantic moment. The 2015 Stratford version lampshaded this in a discussion on CBC radio [[http://www.cbc.ca/player/play/2668955192 here]].
Changed line(s) 45,49 (click to see context) from:
* The AsianSpeekeeEngrish stereotypes used at the climax of (some versions of) ''Theatre/AnythingGoes'' [[spoiler: to stop Hope and Evelyn's wedding and to hook up Hope and Billy and Evelyn and Reno]] have REALLY not aged well--to the point where they're often cut out altogether.
* In her article "Shakespeare in the Bush", Laura Bohannan describes recounting the story of ''{{Theatre/Hamlet}}'' to a pre-literate tribe of Bushmen in Africa. Their society had no concept of ghosts and it was proper custom to marry your dead brother's wife. The story is still a tragedy, but has become a tale of powerful witches who send false visions and murder their own sisters.
* ''Theatre/TheChildrensHour'' is about two female teachers accused of [[MistakenForGay being together]] by a bratty EnfantTerrible student, and how it ruins their lives. It comes off as very much a PeriodPiece nowadays as few would bat an eye to them being a couple. Karen cheating on her fiancee still wouldn't be socially acceptable but it wouldn't create the huge drama it did in the play, especially to the degree of getting into a court case about it. It's even worse in the '30s film adaptation - a scuffle between two women dating the same man wouldn't cause such reactions at all anymore. As a result of this dissonance, the play is always played as a 1930s-1960s (depending on the production) period piece in revivals.
* Edouard Bordet's 1920s play ''Theatre/LaPrisionerre'' (The Captive) tells the story of Irene, a wealthy twentysomething in love with a somewhat older woman. Pressured by her father (who seems to be onto her) and frightened of her feelings, she marries a male childhood friend who's long been infatuated with her. Act Two depicts their loveless marriage; Irene has reconnected with her old lover and her husband is also cheating with an old girlfriend of his. The play ends with Irene and her paramour going off together and her probably-soon-to-be-ex-husband wanting to marry his mistress. Sounds like a perfectly happy ending - but at the time, it was considered a tragedy because Irene was "lost" to homosexuality. Even at the time, there was a dissonance because the play had a huge [[LGBTFanbase following amongst lesbians]].
* The ending of ''Theatre/{{Grease}}'', in which heroine Sandy reinvents herself as a leather-clad BikerBabe to win Danny back, was [[FairForItsDay considered progressive for its time]] - it was one of the first positive portrayals of a woman who didn't ''want'' to be an innocent in a mainstream play/movie. Nowadays, it's usually seen as [[BeAWhoreToGetYourMan a perfectly decent woman changing herself for the worse to impress a guy who's probably not worth it]]. As a result, the 2016 TV version changed her character so that her previous self was a facade she put on to please her strict parents while the reinvented version is her finally expressing her true self.
* In her article "Shakespeare in the Bush", Laura Bohannan describes recounting the story of ''{{Theatre/Hamlet}}'' to a pre-literate tribe of Bushmen in Africa. Their society had no concept of ghosts and it was proper custom to marry your dead brother's wife. The story is still a tragedy, but has become a tale of powerful witches who send false visions and murder their own sisters.
* ''Theatre/TheChildrensHour'' is about two female teachers accused of [[MistakenForGay being together]] by a bratty EnfantTerrible student, and how it ruins their lives. It comes off as very much a PeriodPiece nowadays as few would bat an eye to them being a couple. Karen cheating on her fiancee still wouldn't be socially acceptable but it wouldn't create the huge drama it did in the play, especially to the degree of getting into a court case about it. It's even worse in the '30s film adaptation - a scuffle between two women dating the same man wouldn't cause such reactions at all anymore. As a result of this dissonance, the play is always played as a 1930s-1960s (depending on the production) period piece in revivals.
* Edouard Bordet's 1920s play ''Theatre/LaPrisionerre'' (The Captive) tells the story of Irene, a wealthy twentysomething in love with a somewhat older woman. Pressured by her father (who seems to be onto her) and frightened of her feelings, she marries a male childhood friend who's long been infatuated with her. Act Two depicts their loveless marriage; Irene has reconnected with her old lover and her husband is also cheating with an old girlfriend of his. The play ends with Irene and her paramour going off together and her probably-soon-to-be-ex-husband wanting to marry his mistress. Sounds like a perfectly happy ending - but at the time, it was considered a tragedy because Irene was "lost" to homosexuality. Even at the time, there was a dissonance because the play had a huge [[LGBTFanbase following amongst lesbians]].
* The ending of ''Theatre/{{Grease}}'', in which heroine Sandy reinvents herself as a leather-clad BikerBabe to win Danny back, was [[FairForItsDay considered progressive for its time]] - it was one of the first positive portrayals of a woman who didn't ''want'' to be an innocent in a mainstream play/movie. Nowadays, it's usually seen as [[BeAWhoreToGetYourMan a perfectly decent woman changing herself for the worse to impress a guy who's probably not worth it]]. As a result, the 2016 TV version changed her character so that her previous self was a facade she put on to please her strict parents while the reinvented version is her finally expressing her true self.
to:
* The AsianSpeekeeEngrish stereotypes used at the climax of (some versions of) ''Theatre/AnythingGoes'' [[spoiler: to [[spoiler:to stop Hope and Evelyn's wedding and to hook up Hope and Billy and Evelyn and Reno]] have REALLY not aged well--to well -- to the point where they're often cut out altogether.
* In her article "Shakespeare in the Bush", Laura Bohannan describes recounting the story of ''{{Theatre/Hamlet}}'' to a pre-literate tribeof Bushmen in Africa. Their society had no concept of ghosts and it was proper custom to marry your dead brother's wife. The story is still a tragedy, but has become a tale of powerful witches who send false visions and murder their own sisters.
* ''Theatre/TheChildrensHour'' is about two female teachers accused of [[MistakenForGay being together]] by a bratty EnfantTerrible student, and how it ruins their lives. It comes off as very much a PeriodPiece nowadays as few would bat an eye to them being a couple. Karen cheating on her fiancee still wouldn't be socially acceptable but it wouldn't create the huge drama it did in the play, especially to the degree of getting into a court case about it. It's even worse in the '30s film adaptation- -- a scuffle between two women dating the same man wouldn't cause such reactions at all anymore. As a result of this dissonance, the play is always played as a 1930s-1960s (depending on the production) period piece in revivals.
* Edouard Bordet's 1920s play ''Theatre/LaPrisionerre'' (The Captive) tells the story of Irene, a wealthy twentysomething in love with a somewhat older woman. Pressured by her father (who seems to be onto her) and frightened of her feelings, she marries a male childhood friend who's long been infatuated with her. Act Two depicts their loveless marriage; Irene has reconnected with her old lover and her husband is also cheating with an old girlfriend of his. The play ends with Irene and her paramour going off together and her probably-soon-to-be-ex-husband wanting to marry his mistress. Sounds like a perfectly happy ending- -- but at the time, it was considered a tragedy because Irene was "lost" to homosexuality. Even at the time, there was a dissonance because the play had a huge [[LGBTFanbase following amongst lesbians]].
* The ending of ''Theatre/{{Grease}}'', in which heroine Sandy reinvents herself as a leather-clad BikerBabe to win Danny back, was [[FairForItsDay considered progressive for its time]]- -- it was one of the first positive portrayals of a woman who didn't ''want'' to be an innocent in a mainstream play/movie. Nowadays, it's usually seen as [[BeAWhoreToGetYourMan a perfectly decent woman changing herself for the worse to impress a guy who's probably not worth it]]. As a result, the 2016 TV version changed her character so that her previous self was a facade she put on to please her strict parents while the reinvented version is her finally expressing her true self.
* In her article "Shakespeare in the Bush", Laura Bohannan describes recounting the story of ''{{Theatre/Hamlet}}'' to a pre-literate tribe
* ''Theatre/TheChildrensHour'' is about two female teachers accused of [[MistakenForGay being together]] by a bratty EnfantTerrible student, and how it ruins their lives. It comes off as very much a PeriodPiece nowadays as few would bat an eye to them being a couple. Karen cheating on her fiancee still wouldn't be socially acceptable but it wouldn't create the huge drama it did in the play, especially to the degree of getting into a court case about it. It's even worse in the '30s film adaptation
* Edouard Bordet's 1920s play ''Theatre/LaPrisionerre'' (The Captive) tells the story of Irene, a wealthy twentysomething in love with a somewhat older woman. Pressured by her father (who seems to be onto her) and frightened of her feelings, she marries a male childhood friend who's long been infatuated with her. Act Two depicts their loveless marriage; Irene has reconnected with her old lover and her husband is also cheating with an old girlfriend of his. The play ends with Irene and her paramour going off together and her probably-soon-to-be-ex-husband wanting to marry his mistress. Sounds like a perfectly happy ending
* The ending of ''Theatre/{{Grease}}'', in which heroine Sandy reinvents herself as a leather-clad BikerBabe to win Danny back, was [[FairForItsDay considered progressive for its time]]
