Posted on 12/04/2014 9:32:33 AM PST by C19fan
Since Peter Pan’s first adventures to Neverland in 1904, by way of the Duke of York’s Theatre in London, his story has been retold in countless variations on stage, page, and screen. More recent versions, including tonight's Peter Pan Live! on NBC, have been rewritten in attempts to unburden the text of its disturbing racial stereotypes.
Peter himself has also been reincarnated many times over. Where his Edwardian roots cast him as an impish child, still with all his baby teeth, contemporary storytellers envision a prepubescent boy physically and emotionally tottering on the edge of teenagedom—that stepping stone to adulthood he both disdains and disavows. Peter has been Disney-fied and Universal-ized; with technological advancement he has gained access to an increasingly resplendent Neverland.
One of the few things that hasn’t changed in more than a hundred years: On stage, Peter is almost always played by a woman.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
I saw Mary Martin (Larry Hagman's mom) play Peter Pan on TV back in the early 60's. Even as a small child I wondered why they would do that. He's supposed to be a boy! It didn't make sense then and it doesn't make sense now..........................
They also use a woman because they do have a big bulge in their tights...so I’ve read.
I don’t think that they should use a woman to play Peter Pan. It’s confusing to children.
Peterless Pans...oh, never mind!
The grand old tradition of British theatre, particularly "the pantos" (children's Christmas pantomime, which had its roots in the Italian commedia del'arte) has always had cross-dressing principals. The man dressed up as a comic woman (the "Dame" who is always good, or the "Ugly Sister" who is a villain) originated with the great clown Grimaldi, whose tumbling and acrobatic skills were unmatched (plus none of the actresses of sufficient skill to handle the work wanted to play an old and ugly woman!)
- And the "Principal Boy" was always played by a woman. On the one hand it was a plum role, on stage almost all the time, and on the other a boy old enough to handle the demands of the acting would be at risk of having his voice change any moment.
So it's tradition, born mostly of practical concerns in a long-running show, nothing to do with sexuality. Sometimes I feel like C.S. Lewis in The Four Loves when confronted with this "Everybody in History is Gay" nonsense - "The implications would be, if nothing else, too comic. Hrothgar embracing Beowulf, Johnson embracing Boswell (a pretty flagrantly heterosexual couple) and all those hairy old toughs of centurions in Tacitus, clinging to one another and begging for last kisses when the legion was broken up… all pansies? If you can believe that you can believe anything."
Years ago, after the story of the penis story broke, I found this VHS LITTLE MERMAID Disney box in a ditch. Yes, it is exactly as shown.
I read that it was because of work laws that forbade boys from acting if they were below a certain age, so they used girls of age who had no begun to mature yet.
In the past 20 years or so, there have been slews of books by homo authors who read “gay subtexts” into EVERY imagineable old movie. Even things like the Universal monster movies, where the Frankenstein monster is supposed to be some kind of symbol of being a homosexual outcast! The insanity is endless. They have it encompassing everything.
And I even see it every time I venture over to the Internet Movie Database, where submitted old-movie reviews by dingbats will invariably refer to any character played by unglamourous or semi-homely character actresses like Aline MacMahon, Agnes Moorehead and such, as automatically indicative of a “lesbian subtext.” It’s just mind-bogglingly insane. I think this craziness is being circulated throughout academic/college circles, like a lot of other weird liberal-tinged historical revisionism, and young minds are buying it all up, and perpetuating it further, in their internet postings.
***I haven’t heard of the Wizard of Oz movie being queer.***
WHAT! You don’t remember the Lion singing about being a “dandy lion”?
It is almost as if Jimmy Durante did not see a man who he declared to be “A Sunflower, swish, sister, swish!” (/the Phantom President)
or Peter Lorie placing the SIX INCH LONG handle of his cane against his mouth in THE MALTESE FALCON!
Can we clap and make the fairies go away? (Or at least back in the closet?)
Gay men were drawn to tragic heroines and wanton vixens. For one thing, their roles usually included them controlling men via their sexuality.
Rather ironic since gay men lambaste straight men for being hen-pecked by their women.
That is because a boy of the right age would only have the part for a few months, maybe a year.
Finding children of that age who can carry that kind of role is not easy. Having to find two, (star and understudy) would be very very hard.
It is easier to find a small female who will not begin to grow a beard or have her voice change at an awkward time.
Because of the Cosmic Battle...
What are the racial stereotypes in Peter Pan? That is something I missed.
But they're not real Indians, any more than the Pirates are real Pirates . . . or than the St. Bernard dog is a real nanny.
It's a fantasy . . . deal with it.
Reminds me of a friend whose sister-in-law was a detective...Dickless Tracy.
Isn't Bart Simpson voiced by a female?
And they say Jesus and his students were homosexual, too. They see the world only through homosexual-colored glasses.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.