Search

ARCHIVES
CONTACT US
WORLD NEWS

Editorial: Controversial play needs open communication

In the past week, a controversy has brewed over the production of a play written by a UA Theater Arts graduate student. During last week's auditions for "Timepiece," actors were told that their parts might include onstage nudity. It turned out that they also might include sex scenes with a blow-up doll. While the production should be protected as art, the lack of full disclosure is inexcusable.

Despite its perhaps questionable comment, this production, like all art, is protected by the first amendment. There is no litmus test for what is art and what is not, and any attempt to create one cannot end well. Certainly, simulated sex with a blow-up doll can be presented as a completely prurient spectacle; but that does not mean that it cannot be meaningful. "Hustler" presents nudity in a vulgar manner; but it doesn't preclude Rembrandt from being art. As distasteful as some of us might find this sort of expression, we have no choice but to tolerate it.

Without a doubt, the content is questionable, and the actors auditioning for roles in the production of "Timepiece" should have been fully informed of it. While the sort of actions the play calls for are art, there is no guarantee that all actors are willing to participate in it. It requires a great deal of courage to go on stage and perform. It requires even more confidence to go on stage in a dramatic production nude. The mindset necessary to perform simulated sexual acts on stage is a different beast entirely, and many actors probably don't have the stomach for it.

There is some argument as to how much about the content of the play was disclosed to the actors. The producers say that that the actors were told everything they needed to know. The actors say that they were aware that nudity would be a part of the production, but were unaware of the nature of this nudity.

Producing a play such as this is a step forward for the theatre department. Often, it seems that to turn a profit on a show, they must put on works that are likely to draw non-student audiences; audiences that are a great deal more conservative than most students. The department shouldn't be limited to productions that are acceptable to the people sitting at the good seats during basketball games. This is a university, and if the envelope can be pushed anywhere, it is here.

However, the entire department must be in agreement as to the merit of the production. The student body is willing to support edgy art, but only so long as the department is behind it first. That means that the staff, faculty and actors must present a united front, saying that this is meaningful, that this is significant. This means that all of those involved with the genesis of the production must be completely forthright with each other. To some extent, the trust of the actors in the production has been betrayed, and must be restored before the play can move on successfully.