Liat and Cable.

I haven't seen the revival yet, but I'll give it a shot.

1. She sees how much Liat loves Cable, and knows he will treat her well. She does not think that Liat will love the planter, nor will he take good care of her.

2. It should be clear by their acting that the relationship is more than physical. Cable is unwilling to marry Liat because of the racial differences and his girl back home.

I think if R&H gave Liat more to do, it would have been perfect. However, what they do have is sufficient, and a good actor should make everything clear to the audience.

Updated On: 3/19/08 at 05:34 PM

Here is what I posted when Jaystarr posted a similar question. Hope it helps:

I don't know anything about wartime Polynesian or Tonkinese society, but I've always assumed that parents arranged marriages and choose partners based on financial considerations as much as anything else. That is why a wealthy planter would be an advantageous and reasonable choice, whether or not there was any actual "love" involved.

As aliciag correctly points out, Bloody Mary is a capitalist. With her new found financial freedom Bloody Mary can afford to marry off her daughter to a man who would make her daughter happy. She sees something in Cable and just "knows" that he and her daughter would be a good match. And judging from their reaction to each other, she was right.

The fact that Bloody Mary would consider a man outside of her race dramatically contrasts the racist mentality that Cable is wrestling with.

So I don't see it as Bloody Mary putting the white race on some superior level. I see it as part of the over-all power of love theme that runs throughout South Pacific.

As for the race issue being out dated. I can't agree. I haven't seen this production yet, but I know the show pretty well. The way Hammerstein handles the race issue is so smart and so brilliant. He doesn't make his character clear cut, easy to hate bigots...but likeable individuals struggling with what they have been taught vs what their hearts tell them is right. That dilemma is as much a part of the human condition today as it was then.

---

I think the love can be seen as an intoxication in a sense. Here he is, totally separated from American society on an island with an exotic, beautiful young woman. He's swept up in the mystique of it all and falls into that ideal love that's too ideal to be true.

And, I agree with BigFatBlonde. The issue is never dated, and Hammerstein deals with it beautifully.

---

It is also worth remembering that this story is set during a war, when people tended to get very close very quickly.

I didn't work up much enthusiasm for the Liat/Cable storyline in this production either. It did seem clear to me that Bloody Mary is pimping out her daughter to Cable out of a desire to see her get a chance at a better life by ensnaring an American, or at least for her to have some kind of happy time with a man before being sold to a planter.

But Mr. Morrison, as fine looking as he is, just never brought Cable to life for me. I hope he and Bartlett Sher get some time together to work on this.

I don't think the matters of race are dealt with in a particuarly deep way. It must have been a shock in the 1940s to see this handled at all, a biracial sexual relationship was strong stuff for a musical to be dealing with back then. But in 2008, I did find myself wishing for something that went a little further, told me a little more about these people as people.

---

Could it also have to do with the fact that America was (is) looked on as the place where all dreams can come true? By marrying Liat off to an American, she would ensure her going to the States and in her mind, a better life.

---

"On a darker level, Mary serves to show the audience that racism is universal."

I wholeheartedly disagree with this statement, and I can provide stacks of anthropological papers to back it up. Racism is not universal in any real sense. Distrust of outsiders is not equatable to racism in certain societies. Especially when an army of outsiders marches into your society and bombards your culture with a culture of it's own.

Also, it's very difficult to ascribe racism to a non-dominant culture. Racism usually only works in one direction, from the oppressors to the oppressed. "Reverse Racism" doesn't exist, because racism is about power, and so those without power cannot oppress those above them.

Racism is systemic, but bigotry can be individualistic.

Updated On: 3/20/08 at 12:22 PM

Sorry, but I consider this show a dreary, dated relic, and the Liat/Cable storyline one of the most insipid in musical theatre--the song "Happy Talk", which could induce tooth decay, wouldn't be out of place on "Sesame Street."

---

So refreshing to have a conversation like this without "yelling". Cheers to mature discourse!

One last question then, on this topic - Is there a term for reactionary resentment one feels for a race that has subjugated or repressed their race in the past? For example, if an African American man/woman born in the USA in say the 1980's resents or even hates whites as a result of past injustice - under your definition, this would not be racism, as the USA populous is still prodominantly white (unfortunately).

As for South Pacific, I think that while the themes may seem archaic and the relationship between Cable and Liat may seem thinnly-drawn, one has to look at it through an historical lense. It's an art piece from a past generation. You cannot hold it up to the light of modern drama.

Updated On: 3/20/08 at 12:54 PM

jrb: I would call that being angry at being oppressed, and can you blame anyone for that? Being distrustful of people who look like the people who oppress you (because of what you look like) is self-preservation, not racism.

But yes, hurray for mutual intelligent discourse.

Updated On: 3/20/08 at 12:57 PM

I think BFB nails it in her analysis.

If you read the relevant story in TALES OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC, the relationship of Cable and Liat is based on Cable's sexual frustration and his loneliness and isolation. He is captivated by her youth and beauty but since they can't converse (she speaks French and Tonkinese, he English) it is hardly based upon a meeting of the minds. The relationship is romanticized by a rapturous love song which makes it more palatable to musical theater audiences, and since *SPOILER* it ends with Cable's death, the racism issue is only fully joined for Nellie and Emile.

A discussion of race is irrelevant today, a relic of the past? You should have told Barack that and saved him some time. Or maybe look beyond 10 blocks in midtown Manhattan. Nellie's story arc, coming to grips with a past relationship resulting in two mixed race children, is very relevant today.

Isherwood's piece in the Times really resonated with me. The story really holds up as a story about America coming to terms with its place in the world. At the end of WW2, we were a superpower, policing the world, and a moral arbiter. The current Administration would like to believe this is still the case -- the only difference is that the rest of the world doesn't buy it anymore.

The piece is extremely relevant in political and social terms. And that's much more important than whether it's "shocking."

Updated On: 3/23/08 at 08:13 PM