Clean version of David Mamet play?

A friend of mine was so excited to get cast in a David Mamet play at a local community theatre, but he has since become frustrated that the director is cutting out all of the "bad" language for fears of offending the audience.

I happen to agree with my friend that it is wrong to do that, especially with David Mamet, whose plays are in fact known for their raw language.

Is this even legal, or does a director have the freedom to clean up language at his discretion? I can understand, even if I don't agree, with the idea of a theatre not wanting to offend their audience, but if the language in Mamet is too much, then I believe a different play should have been picked?

Should I alert the rights holders, or am I just over-reacting. At the least, shouldn't the theatre at least make public the fact that they are doing a clean version of a David Mamet play, so as to not mislead audiences into thinking this is what he actually wrote? Is there any real threat that the production could be fined or closed?

Looking for any advice anyone can share about similar situations.

PS - for the record, I am not talking about a word here or there. I'm talking about practically every bit of foul language. I mean, he's substituting in tamer words when he just has to have vulgarity... like "crap" and "fudge" and "dang".

I think it's likely you're a sock puppet. If not, no, it's not legal, no, you're not over-reacting, and yes, you should alert the rights holders.

But I think it's more likely that you're a sock puppet. Why do Mamet and change the language? It's absurd. If you're worried about offending the audience you don't do Mamet.

The only similar situation I can think of was Kathy Lee Gifford who didn't want to use the Lord's name in vain so she used an obscenity instead - but that was sanctioned by Sondheim.

I was chosen to direct a one act play for my high school's Senior One Act Play Festival. The first play I wanted to direct had some bad language and my teacher asked Sam French if we could cut it. They said no.

Which leads me to my point: It's up to the rights holder (usually the playwright, or the publisher if the playwright has passed) to decide what happens.

There's a chance that the director has permission. Your friend should ask the director.

---

"I am not a sock puppet. What a strange thing to say."

Not really. You joined today to ask this question, which you clearly already know the answer to. After all, you also said:

"I mean, we're talking David Mamet here. Cutting the profanity seems wrong."

It doesn't seem wrong, it is wrong. How ridiculous to take on a Mamet play if you're going to substitute words like "dang" and "fudge". I think you can understand why the idea of sockpuppetry might rear its head under the circumstances.

Besides, as much as I believe you're a sock puppet, I gave you the benefit of the doubt and answered every one of your questions. What more do you want?

I am so sick and tired of people joining this community and harassed for being a "sock puppet" just for starting a conversation or asking a question. Welcome, Jacksprat. I hope you don't let some people deter you from posting and joining in on conversations here.

Oh, and I agree that you should tell the licensing company and let them resolve it.

"Which this, by the way:

"Why do Mamet and change the language? It's absurd. If you're worried about offending the audience you don't do Mamet."

Is not acceptable evidence that it's a fake post."

Oh, please. I never said it was a fake post, and I haven't been nasty to jacksprat, and even answered all his/her questions. In fact, I've never, ever called anyone a sock puppet before.

" There have been dozens of threads like this and people have been helped without the accusations. "

It wasn't an accusation, just an observation, and I'm not remotely interested in impressing anyone with my "brilliant deduction skills". I did not harass OP, in fact was downright polite by the standards on this board. IMO, you're both over-reacting.

Jacksprat, a sock puppet is someone joins a board to get people riled up, and it happens here frequently. Most of them are crude and transparent. It usually involves a silly question, and sue me, the idea of deliberately picking a Mamet play then butchering the language falls in that category for me.

"I'm just weighing the pros and cons of meddling or not, and it would be nice to be able to let the theatre know that they should change their stance with a nudge, rather than risk the danger of losing the rights completely.

The cast has expressed their disappointment to the director in this decision to placate the community by cleaning the script, but it is something he isn't willing to negotiate as he is the director after all, and the Board of Directors stands by him as well.

Reporting this incident could backlash on the cast... Its a really tough decision to make."

If the cast has expressed their opinion, and the Board of Directors is standing behind the director, you have three choices: speak to the board regarding the illegality of their actions, which will likely serve no purpose and could get ugly, do nothing and let them put on a sub-par play (which play is it, btw?), or drop a dime to the rights holders before the cast gets too invested in the show. Shows have shut down during a run under circumstances like this, and that would be far more traumatic to the cast, I would think.

A tough decision, yes, but alerting the rights owners is the right thing to do. Let us know your decision.

eta: "The main reason I was looking for advice was because my friend wants to do the show. He would prefer to do it as written, but if reporting the theatre causes them to pull the rights altogether, then my friend won't have the pleasure of even doing a censored version of the script."

It's extremely unlikely that the director has permission to "clean up" a Mamet play. If you report it, they will very likely pull the rights, but better no play than a bowlderized one.

Updated On: 5/18/10 at 10:53 AM

Somebody really changed the eff word to Fudge? I mean, really? So not only is he doing Mamet without Mamet's language, but he's going for unintentional laughter?

I tend to believe the OP is a sock puppet.

Notice - no mention of where they are from or the name of the theatre company or even which play.

Also it is "a friend who is in it. If the friend is concerned the friend knows who licenses the play and can simply call them.

Finally, no theatre group would elect to do a Mamet play an then "clean up" the language. (GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS Jr?)

Sock puppets like to post useless "info"("I heard a rumour that when Kristen goes on vacation from PROMISES Idina will replace her.") They never mention a source and the supposed rumour is so outrageous that no one would ever take them seriously. They sometimes try to add credibility claiming that "a friend knows someone in the cast..." but they never even name the cast member.

They just like to see how many responses they can generate.

LOL - and I just supplied another "fix" for this one.

---

It would be a pointless to even attempt to defend the authenticity of my post, and ironically, it sounds as though a call placed in to the rights holder would only lead to a gentle reminder to the theatre to do the show as written, which would mean that there would never be any proof that the theatre was contemplating doing this in the first place.

The only way to show that what I am saying is true would be to wait until after opening weekend to report them. Really, until they try and sell tickets to a paying audience, they haven't done anything wrong yet. This would lead to the theatre group potentially having the rights taken away in mid-run, (or maybe they will just be told to revert back to the play as written and they'll be let off with a warning... i don't know.)

The problem now is that anyone who reports the current state of rehearsals would have to be someone on the inside, and that is where I would be concerned for my friend. The cast has made it known that they disapprove of the changes, so for a complaint to come in now... well, the theatre is going to assume it was a cast member trying to sabotage the production.

I agree that it is ludicrous to do a Mamet play with cleaned-up language, but it is truly naive to believe that this couldn't happen because "no" theatre group would do this. You just don't understand how certain theatre groups operate, especially when they have an audience that they believe would not handle foul language well.

So... I am leaning towards waiting until after opening, then alerting the rights holders, so that it can lead to public embarrassment for the theatre, my friend in the play can escape suspicion, since by that point it will have been seen by hundreds of people in the public.

The only real question left for me to figure out is whether the theatre would have to pay a fine, or would just be allowed to continue with the second week as written, or if there would be longer lasting repercussions, such as not being able to get rights to any play from that publishing house again.

When the director and Board have been told that they shouldn't do this, but they don't take the warnings seriously, I kind of want to see them flounder a bit... that may be juvenile, but it is how I feel.

Plus, the bonus to waiting is it gives me the chance to show that I am not a "sockpuppet"... :)

"I agree that it is ludicrous to do a Mamet play with cleaned-up language, but it is truly naive to believe that this couldn't happen because "no" theatre group would do this. You just don't understand how certain theatre groups operate, especially when they have an audience that they believe would not handle foul language well."

Then why choose Mamet? Mamet without the language is not Mamet.

"So... I am leaning towards waiting until after opening, then alerting the rights holders, so that it can lead to public embarrassment for the theatre, my friend in the play can escape suspicion, since by that point it will have been seen by hundreds of people in the public.

The only real question left for me to figure out is whether the theatre would have to pay a fine, or would just be allowed to continue with the second week as written, or if there would be longer lasting repercussions, such as not being able to get rights to any play from that publishing house again."

Report it or don't report it, but I think it is a huge mistake to report it mid-run. If you do that, damages are much more severe. The cast will have wasted its time and the show will be shut down instantly, and yes, fines and other repercussions are very likely. If, otoh, you report them now, they have a chance to see the error of their ways. I wouldn't worry so much about your friend, who in any case probably wouldn't want to do a b@stardized version anyway. There's a bigger picture here. Report them now. The director is breaking the law and doing everyone a disservice.

"ironically, it sounds as though a call placed in to the rights holder would only lead to a gentle reminder to the theatre to do the show as written, which would mean that there would never be any proof that the theatre was contemplating doing this in the first place."

That's not ironic. That would just force them to do the right thing. Where's the irony in that - and why would you care about proof? Since the entire cast has voiced their displeasure, your friend is no more suspect than anyone else. Besides, who cares if the director knows who turned him in? Someone needs to grow a pair of balls and do the play as written.

Updated On: 5/18/10 at 03:52 PM

Exactly. If you report them mid-run, you're screwing everyone, and they will have trouble in the future. If you report them now, they're on notice to do the right thing - and yes, they will send someone out to check.

There is no bonus in waiting, unless it's for your own satisfaction. As you said:

"I kind of want to see them flounder a bit... that may be juvenile, but it is how I feel. "

Almost every single person on this thread has suggested you report it. If you're truly concerned about your friend, do it now or don't do it all, and hope nobody else does. I can promise if I were in the audience of a Mamet play with people saying "dang" and "fudge", my first phone call the next day would be to report that travesty.

Seeing a cleaned up Mamet is like watching The Sopranos on A & E edited.

---

Call the licensing agency and report it. I once did a very embarrassing production of The Sound of music several years ago where the director rewrote the entire libretto, and to this day I regret not calling him out on it. Please, save everyone from a similar situation and do the right thing.