A Question For Those Who Saw The Original Production of LA CAGE- Page 2

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/8/10 at 10:15pm

I want to thank everyone who's taken the time to share these stories so far! They really are so touching and I can't tell you how much I appreciate you taking the time to post them. <3

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 4/8/10 at 10:28pm

Such a great thread, thanks Pal Joey and the rest for sharing

[haddaddy3]

Posted: 4/9/10 at 12:28am

I never thought a thread could make me cry!!! Such heartfelt accounts from everyone. Thank you for sharing your memories with those of us young people who owe so much to you. We may not ever be able to comprehend the struggles you endured, but threads like this help to give us an immense appreciation you and for our history. I, for one, will try not to take so much for granted after reading this. Again, thank you, thank you, thank you.

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 4/9/10 at 6:52am

When La Cage opened in the 1980's it reflected acceptance about being gay, today though La Cage Aux Folles should just be thought of in the context of just a great musical.

[Kad]

Posted: 4/9/10 at 9:05am

"When La Cage opened in the 1980's it reflected acceptance about being gay, today though La Cage Aux Folles should just be thought of in the context of just a great musical."

Why? In a time where, in America, gays and lesbians are denied marriage equality, La Cage aux Folles should be just as important as it was.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/9/10 at 9:40am

Actually, Phantom, when La Cage opened in the 1980s, the idea of lesbians and gay men having marriage rights was so remote that it was almost a punch line.

A long-term gay relationship like the one Georges and Albin have was so under-reported in the media that it was part of the comical set-up of the original material. Long-term relationships like that existed in real life, especially among lesbians, but there was very little public awareness that those couples existed. In some cases--maybe most--the men and women in those couples had to be closeted to their families and co-workers.

In 2010, the idea of marriage is so real you can look around and see legally married lesbian and gay couples--including couples in California whose legal marriages have been invalidated by the mob rule of bigoted voters inflamed by homophobes in the Mormon and Catholic churches. If those bigots had their way, there would be a constitutional amendment forever banning any state from legalizing our unions.

Perhaps La Cage Aux Folles is even more timely than ever before.

And more gay then ever. ;-}

Updated On: 4/9/10 at 09:40 AM

[Scripps2]

Posted: 4/9/10 at 3:09pm

So how do people feel about A Chorus Line and its portrayal of gay people, when compared to La Cage?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/9/10 at 3:31pm

Some posters, like FindingNamo, are very critical of the portrayal of gay men in A Chorus Line as victims. Very.

A lot happened in American society between 1975 and 1983 to advance those attitudes. Plus--Chorus Line was talking about the experiences of the dancers when they were adolescents and teenagers--all before Stonewall in 1969 and the gay-liberation movement that followed in the 70s.

[raker]

Posted: 4/9/10 at 5:30pm

I remember La Cage as having a straight sensibility as much as a gay one. The characters and the setting were gay, but the story was fairly universal. It was nice that it was completely accessible to our parents and grandparents who weren't used to gay-themed anything, except us their gay-themed sons, and they were still working on being comfortable with that. It was definitely a score for our team.

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 4/9/10 at 8:55pm

Firstly, I would like to pay tribute to what a great thread this is and how touched I have felt reading peoples experiences on here.

Secondly, In the UK we do now have civil partnerships for gay and lesbian couples, which is great, not just because they are recognised as a legally committed couple, but has brought polarity for pensions and wills.

Thirdly, Me saying that "La Cage Aux Folles should be thought of in the context of a great musical" is me saying that sexuality is not a issue anymore and people should see this show purely because it is a great musical, which just happens to centre around a gay couple, which in today's society is simple irrelevant.

However I did not realise civil partnerships are illegal (if that is the right term) in the US is this true? or is just a few states?
Updated On: 4/9/10 at 08:55 PM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/9/10 at 10:38pm

You are ill-informed.

Updated On: 4/10/10 at 10:38 PM

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 4/9/10 at 11:02pm

They are illegal (whether it be called marriage or something else) in most states.

[TIGGOSAURUS]

Posted: 4/10/10 at 7:13am

This is a great thread, really moving to read.

Thank you to those who have posted their accounts of the impact of the original production, especially PalJoey for putting it in context so vividly.

There's no doubt there has been a lot of positive change between then and now, but recent events on both sides of the Atlantic (and in other parts of the world) show there is still a long way to go to change some attitudes. I hope this particular production (whatever its critical merits/de-merits) will continue to affirm a message of acceptance and challenge deep-seated prejudices.

Just out of interest, how would it play in the US media / mainstream if one of the Obama's made a visit to see this show?

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 4/10/10 at 10:14pm

PalJoey, you are the vital voice of the institutional memory of BWW, if we can consider BWW an institution. My thread-reading life would be so much poorer without your contributions.

What I really love about your first post in this thread is how you illustrate that a show that doesn't change can be changed by the times it lives through. That's such an important lesson.

Also, do not get me wrong, I lovvvve A Chorus Line, it had for me the same impact you have previously described when I first saw it when I was 14 or 15 or however young I was. My problem with the revival was that they didn't find a way to let the show be the show (set in 1975) but living and breathing now.

I am not sure exactly how they would have done it, but I came away from the Every Little Step documentary realizing the gay men on the creative team were absolutely wedded to the gay men as victim crap and that that informed the entire production. They were more interested in bawling through Jason Tam's audition and being so nostalgic for the original production that they simply couldn't come up with something that could live on, the way the Chicago revival has.

The La Cage revival is interesting to me because who knows how the object will seem in the bizarre atmosphere of 2010.

Updated On: 4/10/10 at 10:14 PM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/10/10 at 11:27pm

I maintain La Cage is even MORE relevant in what you call "the bizarre atmosphere of 2010" than it was in 1983.

So here, for those of you who foolishly believe that being gay is "no longer and issue," are remarks MADE JUST THIS WEEK by former governor Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, who speaks for a great number of fellow Americans:

On marriage equality:

"Even civil unions are not necessary. I think there’s been a real level of being disingenuous on the part of the gay and lesbian community with their goal of civil unions...You don’t go ahead and accommodate every behavioral pattern that is against the ideal. That would be like saying, well, there are a lot of people who like to use drugs, so let’s go ahead and accommodate those who want who use drugs. There are some people who believe in incest, so we should accommodate them. There are people who believe in polygamy, so we should accommodate them.'"

On gay adoption and foster care:

"I think this is not about trying to create statements for people who want to change the basic fundamental definitions of family. And always we should act in the best interest of the children, not in the seeming interest of the adults...Children are not puppies. This is not a time to see if we can experiment and find out, how does this work?"

Updated On: 4/10/10 at 11:27 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 4/10/10 at 11:29pm

Are you sure the best of times is now?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/10/10 at 11:33pm

Absolutely. If Ronald Reagan couldn't spoil my good times in the 1980s, what makes you think Mike Huckabee can now?

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 1:14am

I didn't have any good times between July 1981 and October 1987.

So I guess the best of times is now.

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 10:23am

Yes, but Mike Huckabee reflects republican god fearing rhetoric, or am I ill-informed?

[Amalia Balash]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 1:03pm

Thank you all so much for this beautiful thread! One of the things I love most about this board is threads like this that provide context and texture to so many shows I've loved.

I saw La Cage in San Francisco in 1984. I remember being so scared for my friends all the time because of AIDS. But I felt so uplifted by the feeling of family that night, not just onstage but in the audience. This thread brings both of those feelings back.