Search

ARCHIVES
CONTACT US
WORLD NEWS

Letters to the editor

Criticisms of production foolish

To the editor,

This is in response to Rebecca Missel's front page article on 'Timepiece,' a play by Brian Russo, Theatre Arts MFA. I am sickened to see that the bias nature of this article was allowed to be printed on the front page. The article would suggest that a majority of theatre arts students object to the nudity. This is not the case.

I feel that the best feature the theatre arts department has is acceptance. From race and religion to sexual orientation, the people within the department are open to virtually anything. This is why I am shocked that this issue has made it to the front page. If the people who auditioned felt it inappropriate or jeopardized their morals and limits as both actors and people it was completely in their right to graciously decline the role. However, to bring the media into it or even report to the media is irresponsible.

I can, however, empathize with Koryie Harvey's concern with 'jeopardizing' her 'standing in the department' by speaking out against the production. The Theatre Arts Department is one of the most politically run in the University. So, I can't help but wonder why she did speak out.

Even after reading and re-reading the article, I am still unsure of what her problem is with the production, other that personal issues which have little place on the front page.

I am also disappointed with Angie Kamel saying she is thrilled with the press this has gotten because "it has created conversation between the students and has helped us to discover who we are." Come on. First of all it shows the Department in a foolish light.

Secondly, "discover who we are?" What the hell is that all about? Now you are just trying to sound deep.

Look, ultimately, no one is forced to work on the show who does not want to. No one is forced to see the show who does not want to. All this comes down to is an issue of censorship ...Which is a whole other letter to the editor, all together.

Saul Friedman

Acting/Directing BFA senior

Civil freedoms must not be limited

To the editor,

It heartens me to watch the editorial staff of the Daily Wildcat evolve their political acumen to such a high point of professionalism.

I allude to the latest informative commentary by one Lora J Mackel. I have taken great pleasure in her progressive interpretation of the many freedoms we, as a people, are enslaved with.

Her example of the latest nightmare in Michigan is fitting. In this example, a gun shot a six year old girl while being in the hands of a boy the same age. It is easy to imagine, had the state been there to indoctrinate this child, this never would have transpired. By not placing the parents of this child in a position of servitude to the state, they became lax in their responsibility as parents. It is foolish to think parents know how to prevent social ills from being passed on to future generations when they suffer from the very same problems. However, a powerful state staffed by properly educated persons conscious of society's ills can guide the blind masses to a better future for their children.

Clearly, by not limiting our freedoms to the lowest common denominator, we expose society to further ill.

Winston Smith

World history revision senior

Playwright speaks out

To the editor,

The auditions for my play, "Timepiece," strictly followed Actor's Equity Rules, which prohibit requiring nudity at an audition. At the auditions, all actors filled out a form which asked whether or not they would appear nude in this play. If they answered "no," they were considered for other roles, and if they answered "yes," they were considered for roles which require nudity. Both myself and the play's director, Ray Cardi, fully understand the vulnerability of the naked actor, and are making every effort to ensure that only actors who are comfortable with and consenting to on-stage nudity appear in this play.

As far as the student comments on the audition process in your March 8, 2000 article, "Theater students label playwright's work vulgar," I have only to words to say to them: grow up. To expand on the two words - according to the Krantz brothers, students were misled at the audition. How so? They were asked to say whether or not they would appear nude. How much more direct could we have been, or are we responsible to be? At auditions I have attended (where nudity is involved) this question is standard procedure, and nothing further need be discussed. Later, if an actor is cast, and he/she wishes not to participate in the play after reading it because he/she would not appear "beautiful or abstract," (as was actress Koryie Harvey's desire) we wish them a fond farewell.

As far as Mr. Krantz's pronouncement that "the play should not be performed at a university with students," I am dumbfounded. Apparently, the producer of the show, and the faculty, and the student organization THETA (all of whom approved the script) need instruction from Mr. Krantz, an obvious self-proclaimed arbiter of taste and standards.

Frankly, I am rather sick to my stomach of the pettiness and simple ignorance generated by this controversy; apparently, some students are utterly unaware of the vulgarity and tastelessness that playwrights have been using, going back to Aristophanes, and have continued to use up to the present day. This vulgarity and tastelessness has been used to reflect on aspects of the human condition which are vulgar and tasteless. And since one of the purposes of art is to reflect our world, I ask, what is the problem?

Brian C. Russo

Playwright, "Timepiece"