JLP Controversy- Page 4

Posted: 4/15/21 at 11:24am

Kad said: "I think a cast pressuring a fellow cast member who didn't really do anything wrong into dropping out of a show would be a tremendously bad look for the production and bad precedent."

Is this actually happening? I am trolling through Twitter, trying to find where they imply anyone should quit, but all I can find are vague tweets that just seem to be more about "we can be better" and some tweets from Ezra Menas (a JLP cast member) who was, in some way, personally harmed by something.

I have a hell of a time getting to the bottom of what is actually happening on Twitter. Can someone help.

[gigi1234]

Posted: 4/15/21 at 12:30pm

ctorres23 said: "Kad said: "I think a cast pressuring a fellow cast member who didn't really do anything wrong into dropping out of a show would be a tremendously bad look for the production and bad precedent."

Is this actually happening? I am trolling through Twitter, trying to find where they imply anyone should quit, but all I can find are vague tweets that just seem to be more about "we can be better" and some tweets from Ezra Menas (a JLP cast member) who was, in some way, personally harmed by something.

I have a hell of a time getting to the bottom of what is actually happening on Twitter. Can someone help."

this article is making the rounds on twitter and describes the controversy: https://brooklynrail.org/2021/04/theater/One-Step-Forward-Two-Steps-Back-Broadways-Jagged-Little-Journey-Toward-Nonbinary-Inclusion

this is the statement jagged little pill put out about the situation and as you can tell from the over 200 negative comments, it has not gone over well https://www.instagram.com/p/CNntfUyDIa2/

there was also a video jagged little pill made here that was not well received: https://www.instagram.com/p/CNksz7XljVE/

seeing a lot of people online demanding lauren steps down, but not any cast members or anyone involved in the production (aside from possibly ezra, although not clear on that). people are just curious what the conversations are behind the scenes, but obviously we don't / most likely will never know

Updated On: 4/15/21 at 12:30 PM

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 4/15/21 at 12:52pm

How about they tried something in a pre-Broadway tryout, it didn't work as they hoped? Perhaps they thought it clouded the character's purpose, or it was one issue too many, or it was a distraction? Either way, it was lost in the creative decisions before it came to Broadway. The Broadway version is what they are standing by, and they shouldn't have to go back to a non-final draft to appease some people with nothing else to do except examine past social media and press like it was the Zapruder film. 

Posted: 4/15/21 at 2:05pm

gigi1234 said: "ctorres23 said: "Kad said: "I think a cast pressuring a fellow cast member who didn't really do anything wrong into dropping out of a show would be a tremendously bad look for the production and bad precedent."

Is this actually happening? I am trolling through Twitter, trying to find where they imply anyone should quit, but all I can find are vague tweets that just seem to be more about "we can be better" and some tweets from Ezra Menas (a JLP cast member) who was, in some way, personally harmed by something.

I have a hell of a time getting to the bottom of what is actually happening on Twitter. Can someone help."

this article is making the rounds on twitter and describes the controversy:https://brooklynrail.org/2021/04/theater/One-Step-Forward-Two-Steps-Back-Broadways-Jagged-Little-Journey-Toward-Nonbinary-Inclusion

this is the statement jagged little pill put out about the situation and as you can tell from the over 200 negative comments, it has not gone over wellhttps://www.instagram.com/p/CNntfUyDIa2/

there was also a video jagged little pill made here that was not well received:https://www.instagram.com/p/CNksz7XljVE/

seeing a lot of people online demanding lauren steps down, but not any cast members or anyone involved in the production (aside from possibly ezra, although not clear on that). people are just curious what the conversations are behind the scenes, but obviously we don't / most likely will never know"

Thanks for the context. I looked at the comments on the Instagram posts and... wow. The kids are pissed.

Updated On: 4/15/21 at 02:05 PM

[fashionguru_23]

Posted: 4/15/21 at 2:34pm

I hope we can find the humour in some of the posts because some of the comments on the Instagram posts above seem to be more upset  at the fact the show was changed between the out of town and Broadway. I feel like that is supposed to happen between Broadway and tryouts. Does this mean I can try to get Mr. Sondheim to include 'Silly People" into A Little Night Music?

[joevitus]

Posted: 4/15/21 at 2:47pm

Hard to complain about that, though (although, obviously, one can). Now that shows in tryouts are more successful, or pre-Broadway run productions might produce a cast recording--not to mention YouTube videos--people are going to get more attached to a work in development and opine about changes. Had such a situation existed in the early 70's, I bet a number of Sondheim fans would prefer Company continue to end with "Happily Ever After" than "Being Alive" or the omission of "Marry Me a Little" (which is, of course, usually included now, in a slightly different context). 

[Kad]

Posted: 4/15/21 at 3:20pm

The fact that this needs to be broken down into multiple links and dozens of social media posts to even start to parse out what exactly is the reason for outrage is precisely the reason why I think this will fizzle out.

 

[broadwayindie]

Posted: 4/15/21 at 3:33pm

I just think that it's interesting that the show ran all of 2019 with little issue, the story was posted at that time, no issue. The story resurfaces and it becomes a big thing. Nothing in the article was new or novel. If you were following the script (or watched the inescapable slime tutorial) you would know about the character's gender identity and its apparent fluidity. You would also know that Patten gets standing ovations for her performance and that Menas, while fine, simply does not match her power. I may have given it more thought if Menas was better, or Patten was a tv/movie star. None of these are accurate and the show frankly needs Patten's performance to continue to run after the pandemic.

[DiscoCrows]

Posted: 4/15/21 at 3:56pm

Agree with most of what is being said here, I find it hard to attribute what is happening to nonbinary erasure (not that it can't or hasn't been an issue in other productions, if that) simply due to the fact that this is all under the context umbrella of a musical being rewritten and developed prior to a Broadway run- for better or worse, that's HOW this is supposed to work. I do imagine that part of the conversation was definitely whether or not Lauren should be playing a non-binary person, a conversation that rightfully should've happened, and I'd be surprised if that didn't at least partially inform the interpretation of the character on Broadway. It's even written verbatim in Lewis' article, where they say that "While the musical never directly said Jo is nonbinary, it was clear enough that many of the Boston critics mentioned it in their reviews (in which the character was variously referred to as “gender fluid,” “gender-exploring,” and “exploring gender identity”)." My question is, isn't "exploring gender identity and gender fluid" different from deliberately non-binary? That isn't at all rhetorical— but it reads to me like two very different things and if someone who identifies as/with any of those labels and wants to clarify that'd be really appreciated.

I think it seems as though even if the character, either officially or unofficially, was nonbinary in Boston, the swap to a "cis" character, even if disingenuous only by way of Patten (and others) deleting tweets and retroactively backtracking, is only ever completely symptomatic of both her and the rest of the creative team genuinely not having certainty over who the character should be, ala, the process and cycle of a developing musical property. I don't entirely blame people for being angry and frustrated with the show for handling it the way they have, I can see how it comes off as gross, but it feels very circumstantial and I'm inclined to give Cody, Paulus, and Patten the benefit of the doubt in having been relatively well-intended even if having stumbled along the way. They should take accountability for backtracking and being tight-lipped about it, though I don't think that means recasting Patten, as she was always priority #1 in this situation and the journey of Jo and gender identity has always been second to that. I don't believe that JLP, or any show fundamentally "owes" a non-binary character to the world if it's not within the best interest of the show/holistic property itself— even if the show is better or worse for that.

One of the top comments on the JLP Instagram response was that they should donate to some gender identity-based charities and organizations and even beyond the scope of "good PR" I do think that'd be a good sentiment.

Updated On: 4/15/21 at 03:56 PM

[MollyJeanneMusic]

Posted: 4/16/21 at 9:11am

OK.  So as the Broadway Stan Twitter (TM) representative on this board (that was a joke, by the way, but the rest of this isn't), I feel like I gotta explain a few things that y'all have pointed out - from my point of view this time.

1. So yes, the role was created for Patten.  If you know from the start you're going to be bringing a cis woman into this role, here's a suggestion: maybe don't write the character as nonbinary?

2. The excuse that the social media site made, years after they should've addressed the controversy, that the character was never written as trans/nonbinary but was made "clearer" for the Broadway production?  Besides the fact that multiple eyewitnesses and bootlegs from the ART production prove that that's not the case, even if it was, and you see nonbinary fans of the show seeing themselves in a character, why would you say "no, that's a bad thing, let's change it"?

3. This is not a recent issue - it's just the first time that a major Broadway writer has written about the controversy.  There's a wonderful thread by @robbedsettos on Twitter (which Christian Lewis actually gave a shout-out to in their article) that details the entire history of the "nonbinary parts" of the character of Jo.  The issue isn't just about the representation itself - it's about the fact that fans of the show, especially trans/nonbinary fans who used to see themselves in Jo, have been very clearly lied to and gaslighted about what Cody, Paulus, and Patten wanted to do with the character.

4. People have been theorizing about multiple people from the show leaving, which may have something to do with their ability to now call out the situation.  Ezra Menas took a reference to JLP out of their Twitter bio, which led a few to believe that hir time in the show is over.  (Ezra uses they/zie/hir pronouns, by the way.)  Celia Rose Gooding booked a Star Trek show that films in Canada, so they might not be returning either.  I don't know about the other people in the cast, as I learned that they had reacted to the situation from this thread, but there may already be a cast change-up anyway.

There are a few people who are getting very close to the point on these boards, and I think it's important that when trans/nonbinary people tell you the show is messed up in some way, you at least try to see what they're saying before judging them for trying to find something wrong with a show.  (The reason people are mad about the fact Some Like It Hot is coming to Broadway is because placing male characters in dresses just for the humor of them "pretending" to be women falls right into the same logic that state legislatures across the country are using to prohibit trans women from playing women's sports - that they're just men in dresses, which is unequivocally not true.)  And if the nonbinary actor from the show decides to speak up and tells you, from their personal experience, that what happened was wrong, I think it's okay to believe them.  From what I can tell, you guys (for the most part) don't like the show anyway, so there's no prior history you have with it from which you need to separate yourself, like with critiques about The Book of Mormon or Miss Saigon.  This article and this backlash have been a long time coming, and instead of judging what it is or why it's coming out now, just please try to listen.

Sorry, I know this is a lot.  Between this, the Scott Rudin thread, and the Karen Olivo thread, I'm just feeling a little fed up with some of the people on the board right now.

Updated On: 4/16/21 at 09:11 AM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/16/21 at 9:48am

“ 1. So yes, the role was created for Patten. If you know from the start you're going to be bringing a cis woman into this role, here's a suggestion: maybe don't write the character as nonbinary?”

Ok so by your logic, actors can no longer act and must only play roles identical to themselves?

Posted: 4/16/21 at 10:02am

Jordan Catalano said: "Ok so by your logic, actors can no longer act and must only play roles identical to themselves?"

This is why I was offended when they cast Idina Menzel as Elphaba and not someone green.

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 4/16/21 at 10:34am

Jordan Catalano said: "“ 1. So yes, the role was created for Patten. If you know from the start you're going to be bringing a cis woman into this role, here's a suggestion: maybe don't write the character as nonbinary?”

Ok so by your logic, actors can no longer act and must only play roles identical to themselves?"

Yikes, no. Do you expect women to play male characters? Or vice versa? For the same reason, I’d expect a non-binary character to be played by a non-binary performer.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/16/21 at 10:37am

Well there’s an all female version of 1776 that’s headed to Broadway. Do you not agree with that happening?

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 4/16/21 at 11:17am

Jordan Catalano said: "Well there’s an all female version of 1776 that’s headed to Broadway. Do you not agree with that happening?"

You are so dense

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/16/21 at 11:34am

Really? That coming from you?

Posted: 4/16/21 at 11:36am

Call_me_jorge said: "You are so dense"

Resorting to insults because you lost the argument.

 

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 4/16/21 at 11:54am

Jordan Catalano said: "Really? That coming from you? "

Really, at least I can tell the difference between an all female cast for 1776 and Jo in jagged little pill.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/16/21 at 12:02pm

JFC. You really just want to fight when literally nobody picked a fight with you.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 4/16/21 at 12:03pm

Who gets to make the rules about what needs to be authentic and what is acting?  Sexual orientation must match, but not religion?  Race but not age?   Gender Identification but not athletic ability?

 

 

Updated On: 4/16/21 at 12:03 PM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/16/21 at 12:06pm

dramamama611 said: "Who gets to make the rules about what needs to be authentic and what is acting?"

Twitter.

 

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 4/16/21 at 12:29pm

MollyJeanneMusic said: "

1. So yes, the role was created for Patten. If you know from the start you're going to be bringing a cis woman into this role, here's a suggestion: maybe don't write the character as nonbinary?"


To me, this is THE issue. Not to talk about the elephant in the room, but the creators of this show were NEVER looking specifically for a nonbinary person, but they don't want to say it. The idea that they were is some made up Twitter narrative. Jo was conceived as a gender non-conforming queer character who sang Hand in My Pocket and You Oughta Know--that's it. They needed to find someone who could sing two of Alanis' most famous songs (and frankly her MOST iconic song) and make us forget about the original. And that person had to be charismatic enough that by the time they got to You Oughta Know, we were rooting for the character. And Jo was never a main character so that actor had to be able to do that in relatively brief stage time. To be honest, when I heard about this show I thought they'd never find someone who could pull off "You Oughta Know." And they found someone who can do that an more...so they're supposed to turn away the actor that found who can do that....why exactly? Again, Patten met the show's needs. If you make an Alanis Morissette musical and that song is a bust, your musical has failed. 

I AM curious as to why they hung onto a narrative that suggested a nonbinary character (who actually WASN'T referred to with they/them pronouns, btw--another Twitter myth) when they KNEW they had a cis actor. And if I'm Patten and I have one Broadway credit as an understudy to my name, and am originating a role for the first time, I don't know how empowered I feel to do anything. Is she supposed to give up the opportunity of a life time because Cody and friends were misguided? Did try to address things privately and was ignored? Why is the onus on her?

And another elephant in the room--imagine if any other understudy behaved the way Menas is in regards to the person they were understudying. They've been pushing the anti-Patten narrative subtly this whole time by trying to make it seem like they don't have the role because of transphobia, but the reality is Menas auditioned for the role just like Patten did, and they're just not very good. Even if Patten left the show on her own accord, I would HOPE there is a more capable nonbinary actor out there. Menas can barely sing the role on key and their acting was community theater level. This role was never going to belong to Menas. 

 

 

Updated On: 4/16/21 at 12:29 PM

[InTheBathroom1]

Posted: 4/16/21 at 12:38pm

But also, when they started writing this musical. Non-binary was not as widely discussed or understood so I think the mistake is understandable. And they went back to make the character clearer so a cue person wasn’t playing a trans person.

[HenryTDobson]

Posted: 4/16/21 at 12:46pm

Jordan Catalano said: "dramamama611 said: "Who gets to make the rules about what needs to be authentic and what is acting?"

Twitter.

"

This. I never understood the argument that straight guys shouldn't play gay parts. By that standard, shouldn't gay men not be allowed to play straight parts? And for this scenario, are trans people only permitted to play trans characters? It feels like it's not safe to play any character anymore without the possibility of being cancelled. I just can't keep up. 

[PipingHotPiccolo]

Posted: 4/16/21 at 1:03pm

dramamama611 said: "Who gets to make the rules about what needs to be authentic and what is acting? Sexual orientation must match, but not religion? Race but not age? Gender Identification but not athletic ability?"

Its the kind of thing that requires common sense but that doesn't come into play anymore. Is a Black Jewish person more suited to play Hodel than a white Catholic? Was Nathan Lane's Nathan Detroit inauthentic because he isn't straight? I thought last year's WSS was wonderful but thought the color-blind casting was downright confusing and undermined the production. 

The issue should be *opportunity*- if Broadway productions have no room for people of color, the whole damn thing is broken, and work needs to be done there. (Has there ever been a lead Black Elphaba? How the F not?)  But the push to make sure only X type actors play X type roles in all circumstance is lost on me.