Posted on 05/22/2005 9:04:39 AM PDT by 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.
Right. Indeed the "N" word appears on just about every page of the entire novel, which I only got around tor eading about a year ago and I'm 62. It's quite an eye-opener on racial attitudes in the pre-Civil War South and sometihng everybody should read, if only to see how far we've come since then.
There are also some really great character consrasts between Huck, who's essentially a very practical blue collar hick, and his buddy, Tom Sawyer, who has a lot more book larnin, but no where as near as much practical knowledge as Huck. Sufffice it to saw, without revealing too much of the funniest part of the novel, that applying Tom's larnin manages just about to get Huck, Tom, and Jim killed.
You cannot change the characters in a play based on skin color and ethnicity and expect it to make any sense. Twain's story is extremely specific to black slave and white boy who befriends black slave (or other way around). I agree that it is absurd to portray it oppositely.
An aside: this is a much smaller issue, but PC was even alive 35+ years ago when I was a kid in the last 60's. We had a production of Cinderella and straws were drawn for parts. A huge ugly girl got the part of Cinderella and I, very petite and pretty, got the role of the prince. I think even my mother complained about it. The girl was about a foot taller than I was and I had long hair and she had short hair. It would have been logical to simply switch roles, but NO! So I had to show up with my hair in a bun and pretend to be this prince to his gargantuan of an ugly ducking girl....
ABSURDITY!
It'll cost you, you cheapskate.
< That's the impression I'm getting, but I'm still frankly amazed. It's just the character's name. No animus is expressed through it; it's just the character's name. >
But that's just it...we ALL know the character's name. It didn't need repeating. It isn't new to anyone.
Animus is implied anytime that word is used by whites for ANY reason. We should all be used to that now. I hate it as much as the next guy, but it's a fact.
:)
Thank you. I guess he needs to put that extra word in there for us to figure out who he is talking about. Not that we needed the help or anything :)
I am sorry. I do say the other word every now and again, but no where near what I used too....I guess I replaced one with the other...
< So I'm part of the neo-Nazi Twain plot now for mentioning the character's name? Christ, people... >
Ok. I give up. Having been outed as a member of the Stormfront Twain Trolling Brigade, I'll go back under my bridge and read my books now. Sorry.
What happened to common sense?
No need to apologize. I understand how things can get heated up here at the great FR.....helps energize the old brain!
BTW, I am READY for football to begin!
About 70 years. The problem here is that the R&H play based on the novel is a "derivative work" that inovlved a lot of original creative work by the R&H playwrights. Actually, that's the only part that's currently subject to the R&H copyright. However, it's impossible to put on the play without using the copyrighted parts, because they're woven into it just llike fat marblling a roast is woven into the roast. Thus, although the original work is in the public domain and anybody can write and produce a play bassed on it, that same anybody can't legally produce the R&H paly without the R&H permission.
I didn't say that! LOL I never said YOU were in SF. I'm just stating why the moderators may have pulled your post so not to attract trolls. It HAS happened before. Don't take it so personally.
< An aside: this is a much smaller issue, but PC was even alive 35+ years ago when I was a kid in the last 60's. We had a production of Cinderella and straws were drawn for parts. A huge ugly girl got the part of Cinderella and I, very petite and pretty, got the role of the prince. I think even my mother complained about it. The girl was about a foot taller than I was and I had long hair and she had short hair. It would have been logical to simply switch roles, but NO! So I had to show up with my hair in a bun and pretend to be this prince to his gargantuan of an ugly ducking girl....
ABSURDITY! >
May I say this for all of us ugly young girls in life...hurrah...we won one.
I'm sorry, that was just so tempting.
Are you kidding me?
That was MORE offensive than the other bomb you dropped at the beginning of this thread.....
Tom Saywer is the archetype for the unseen manager, an artist in the field of sociology in the workforce; a delegating fool.
:) me too
it looks as if the Buckeyes will be making some noise this year :)
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.