Arts Canned in Canada
posted by on December 22 at 10:05 AM
Toronto’s major theater has scrapped plans to make My Name Is Rachel Corrie the centerpiece of its 2007 season.
Bragg’s version: When he read the script (based on Corrie’s journals) he had an emotional reaction and was “absolutely reduced to tears” as he told the Star’s Richard Ouzounian five weeks ago. But later when he went to see it on stage at the Minetta Lane Theatre in New York’s Greenwich Village (where it recently closed) it fell flat. The theatre was half-empty, and there was no standing ovation at the end. “The truth is it just didn’t seem as powerful on stage as it did on the page — and the audience wasn’t buying it.”
The alternate version being told among CanStage insiders: Members of Bragg’s board were alarmed by negative response from influential supporters of the theatre, especially in Toronto’s Jewish community, who were canvassed for their opinion. Many were dismayed and openly critical when confronted with the prospect of the city’s flagship not-for-profit theatre producing a play that could be construed as anti-Semitic propaganda, especially during a frightening period when Israel’s existence is threatened by Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas.
Calling the play “anti-Semitic propaganda” is a bit much, but Corrie, scheduled to open at the Rep in March, is certainly stirring up the hornets but the controversy isn’t helping to sell tickets—The New York production closed ahead of schedule.
Anyone who says the Rep doesn’t know how to take a risk is now officially wrong.
I would disagree on the point of the Rep not know how to take a risk. The reason being the risk escalated after the chose the show.
It doesn't seem particularly risky for the Rep to do a show that has generated a lot of national media about a person who has local ties based on events that are currently relevant. That actually seems fairly safe to me. I wonder if they are currently reconsidering their decision.
(how Sloggy is that? Bashing the supposed, and unknown, intentions of an organization despite the fact that what they are actually doing is fairly noble.)
Maybe they read Cynthia Ozick's devastating teardown of the stupid propagandist in The New Republic.
I think the New York production closed because it just wasn't any good. It's a really engrossing play to read--but just to read--
The real question is whether the Rep's "risk" is artistic or financial.
"Topical plays", that is, those based on hot-topics-of-the-day generally have a very short life-span, and it's just as likely "Rachel Corrie"'s lifespan has already elapsed in artistic terms.
Yes, GDC does make some good points regarding the play's potential relevence for local audiences, but unlike recent examples of topical plays such as, "The Larimore Project", for instance, "Rachel Corrie" has garnered whatever notoriety it has due mainly to the controversy surrounding it's initial cancellation, which frankly had very little to do with the question of the play's artistic quality.
This might naturally lead one to conclude the Rep booked the show for its potential box office draw, than for its artistic quality, since presumably no one really was in a position to accurately gauge that quality at the time they made their decision.
Of course, now that the show is proving to be somewhat less than a critical hit, they're stuck: cancelling, for any reason, even financial at this point would give the impression of censorship - and who needs that kind of negative publicity? On the other hand, producing the show to less than moderately full houses is a losing proposition as well.
Maybe the best thing to do would be to let Book-It take a crack at the show: at least they might be able to translate some of the power of the "reading version" into a staged production. But, at the Rep? Well, I suppose if you want to see a girl run over on stage by a real bulldozer...
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).