Racial Switch Halts 'Huck Finn' Production

Yahoo ^ | 5/22/2005 | Associated Press

[FreeManWhoCan]

GLENELG, Md. - A black Huck Finn and a white Jim might be OK for a high school production of Mark Twain's classic tale — but those performances had to be edited out of a C-Span talent show after the copyright holder objected to the cross-casting. ADVERTISEMENT

Jay Frisby, a black student who played Huck, and Nick Lehan, a white student who played Jim, taped their performance of the song "Muddy Water" for "Close Up," a weekly show that highlights high school excellence.

When the program aired Friday, the two Glenelg Country School seniors were introduced, but viewers were told that "Close Up" could not show their performance because of "copyright restrictions."

Lehan and Frisby had played the roles of Jim and Huck in the school's production of "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" without complaint. But when the show's executive producer asked for the right to air the students' performance, permission was denied.

Bert Fink, a spokesman for R&H Theatricals — the Rodgers & Hammerstein organization, which holds the license to the play — said his organization is not against cross-casting in general.

"But when you're dealing with a theatrical work and race or ethnicity is a key factor, many authors or playwrights feel strongly that ethnicity has to be reflected in the actors who portray the characters," he said.

"In the books, Jim is a runaway slave. He is clearly in the novel an African-American man. And Huck is a free white man — that is central to the story. To ignore that component or to comment on it by switching is not faithful to the story."

Frisby's father, Washington attorney Russell Frisby, said he was appalled by the decision.

"The only rationale for it is that someone in New York believes Huck Finn can't be played by an African-American. I thought we were past the days of 'whites only' clauses," the elder Frisby said.

[MikefromOhio]

it's hilarious...

he screams about yells about how he is being labelled a racist and why he isn't, then he doesn't understand about the "in vain" part of his statement about Christ...

amazing....

[zeugma]

Simple answer: you don't.

Unfortunately disney and others have purchased enough legislooters to expand the reach of copyright so far beyond its original intent as to make modern copyright unrecognisable as compared to that instituted under the fine fellows who founded this republic.

There is no central registry of copyright. The only way to determine if a work is public domain is to contact the publisher (if that is even possible). There is quite a bit of information about copyright at Project Gutenberg. The general rule of thumb is that works published before 1920 or so are public domain.

As a side note, you might recall that disney produced a cartoon of "Jungle Book" in the late 60s. At the time it was completed, (but not when it was started BTW), the copyright on Kipling's work had expired. If copyright had been as severely bastardized at the turn of the last century as it is today, they would not have been able to rip off Kipling's works for free as they did then until next year!

Personally, I have no respect whatsoever for anything under copyright beyond 30 years.

[bannie]

Thank you for the great information. I've found the information about copyrights confusing: NOW I've seen why!

[kennedy]

I have no problem with a white actor playing Jim and a black actor playing Huck.

Of course, since the character Jim is black and the character Huck is white, the white actor would need to wear black face makeup and the black actor would need to wear white face makeup. That would cause the heads of many of the PC crowd to literally explode, which I also have no problem with.

[solitas]

Frisby's father, Washington attorney Russell Frisby, said he was appalled by the decision. … "The only rationale for it is that someone in New York believes Huck Finn can't be played by an African-American. I thought we were past the days of 'whites only' clauses," the elder Frisby said.

Tough [stuff] there, Fris… While R&H maintains the copyright they may do as they please - white, black, yellow, brown, red, green, whatever. Put your traumatized kid in counseling and: Just. Go. Away.

[NoCmpromiz]

That would cause the heads of many of the PC crowd to literally explode, which I also have no problem with.

So when are we doing this play? Can't wait to invite the entire roster from DU (there'd be a whole lot of exploding going on! ;-)

[zeugma]

Like everything that comes out of congress these days, copyright is designed to be confusing and non-sensical. Back when copright law was a bit more sane, if you wanted to have a particular work ube put under copyright, you had to send a copy to the library of congress, who would assign a number to it, and ratified the copyright for the work. After 14 years, you had the option of renewing copyright if you so desired for a small fee. If you didn't renew it, it became public domain. I think the best bit of sanity we could hope for from those already bought and paid for by the major media conglomerates would be to re-institute this registration requirement. This way, the perpetual copyright we have now would remain intact for the greedy bastards, but maintaining copyright would require positive action of the copyright holder. Many unprofitable works would enter the public domain, and it would also provide a mechanism towards identifying the copyright holder for those desiring to make use of the work. Right now, for many things, it is almost impossible to identify who owns what. If you could look up the owner of record,it would actually benefit both commerce and the public, some works that would otherwise fade into obscurity might be given a new lease on life.

I'd probably also want a provision that any work that is out of print for more than 10 years would automatically enter the public domain. The point being, if a work is not being used, the public should benefit from it.

I know that some on this forum will call me a socialist for saying that works should enter the public domain as quickly as possible, but they miss the point of copyright entirely IMO. The natural state of all works is to be in the public domain. We, the people, allow the government to enforce a temporary monopoly to benefit the creator

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution

I fail to see how assigning royalties to the great grandchild of a dead author promotes "the progress of science and useful arts". This is especially true of the several occasions where congress has increased the length of copyright for existing works. Unfortunately, at this point, the supreme court is of the opinion that eternity minus one day would satisfy the clear "limited times" language in the Constitution.

[yarddog]

Actually having a Negro portray Othello is nearly as incaccurate as having one portray Huck Finn.

I say nearly because some use of the word in ancient times would have included Negroes and Shakespeare does call him Black.

The fact is tho that the Moors of Spain were mixture of Arab and Berbers. As likely to have Blue eyes as most Europeans. They were not Black as we use the term.

[MeekOneGOP]

Bye, Eeper.

"He's dead, Jim!"

[festus]

No problem here. Have at it.

[Cvengr]

Little did I know, Frank Gorshin passed away 4 days before I posted this,...so long Riddler and Bele.

[Hatteras]

"You cannot change the characters in a play based on skin color and ethnicity and expect it to make any sense."

Imagine, if you will, a total recasting of the roles for the miniseries, "Roots". Who could object to that?... /sarcasm

[Charles Martel]

Of course, since the character Jim is black and the character Huck is white, the white actor would need to wear black face makeup and the black actor would need to wear white face makeup. That would cause the heads of many of the PC crowd to literally explode, which I also have no problem with.

The stage makeup is *nothing* compared to the reaction of the PC crowd, when a white kid recites Jim's lines as written:

****

"...it was Miss Watson's Jim! I bet I was glad to see him. I says: 'Hello, Jim!' and skipped out.

He bounced up and stared at me wild. Then he drops down on his knees, and puts his hands together and says:

'Doan' hurt me -- don't! I hain't ever done no harm to a ghos'. I alwuz liked dead people, en done all I could for 'em. You go en git in de river agin, whah you b'longs, en doan' do nuffn to Ole Jim, 'at 'uz awluz yo' fren'."

****

Yep, that would be about as welcome as a new DVD release of Song of the South. ;-)

[stands2reason]

Is it that hard for you not to use the "N" word?

[stands2reason]

"Innocently" = BS

[stands2reason]

Act like you know what "G" rated language is.

[thompsonsjkc]

"The only rationale for it is that someone in New York believes Huck Finn can't be played by an African-American. I thought we were past the days of 'whites only' clauses," the elder Frisby said.

So we can cast a white guy to play Malcolm X? Rosa Parks can be played by Teresa "Ketchup" Kerry?

You can't change the characters and remain true to the novel.