Miss Saigon Previews Thread — Page 12

WhizzerMarvin said: "I'll admit that Miss Saigon isn't exactly the subtlest of musicals, but I guess I don't see the musical glorifying the objectification/fetishizing of Asian women. In fact, it seems the opposite to me.

The women are introduced by singing about how much they want to be Miss Saigon and how they can't wait to show the soldiers a good time, which can make you cringe, but all this is instantly undercut with The Movie In My Mind, which lets us know that this is all an act and they are doing this out of necessity to stay alive and possible find a way out of the dire situation they have found themselves in. The women are being pimped out, but they do not enjoy the work- anything but. It seems an accurate picture of another horror of wartime to me. I don't think the musical is trying to have us find the women sexy, but rather feel sympathy/empathy for their horrible predicament.

I'm genuinely not trying to be insensitive; I guess I don't see the problem with the musical shining a light on how women are so often turned into objects to be sold/bartered with in wartime (I know it happens out of wartime too, but it seemed especially dire during the fall of Saigon) and the tragedies that can ensue when this happens.

Lizzie, What are your thoughts about Madama Butterfly?



"

I 100% agree. People who do see this as objectifying are wrong, because it is not what is happening. It's the opposite, like you say.

Clearly there are people who don't understand this, but there is no discussion with people who have their perceptions cut off from reality.

The fact that unfortunate things from the past are told in a story does not have anything to do with the show or movie being objectifying.

WhizzerMarvin said: "Lizzie, What are your thoughts about Madama Butterfly? "



I don't have an educated enough opinion on Madama Butterfly to give you anything substantial. I will say I don't like how it ushered in/supports a Western stereotype of Asian women that refuses to die.

Dave, please do more listening and less posturing. Please especially listen to theatregoer3 here.

I'm done with this thread. But I said more about Miss Saigon months ago in another. If someone wants to try to find it (I just did to no avail), feel free to link. Bye!

Mister Matt said:

But here is where he really goes off the rails, loading his theory with blanket generalizations and assumptions:

"Secondly, Kim’s suicide assumes that of course life will be better for Tam in America with his white G.I. father and his white wife than in Vietnam with his Vietnamese mother. In this reasoning, it goes without saying that life in America is superior not just economically to that in Vietnam, but in all the ways that really matter, whatever they may be. As evidenced by Thuy, the Vietnamese will be prejudiced against Tam’s bi-racial heritage while as a bi-racial Asian American, Tam will find himself accepted and cherished by all he comes into contact with in America; there Tam will never ever experience any racism like the kind he is already subject to in Vietnam (after all, Thuy, the symbol of the typical Vietnamese male, wants to kill him). Many white Americans actually believe this assumption. Of course, Asian Americans who have experienced the racism of white America have a very different take on the matter. Similarly, many Korean, Chinese and Vietnamese transracial adoptees would also question the scales which see life as an adoptee in America as far superior to what life might have been like if they had grown up in Korea, China or Vietnam."

I have issues with this paragraph too, least of which is the alternative fact that Kim and Tam would be creating a life for themselves in Vietnam when, in fact, they have been living in Thailand for most of act two.

The show itself is not declaring that life will be better for Tam in America with two white parents, but rather that Kim thinks it will be better. Nowhere does it say that Kim is correct. To the contrary, the engineer has just finished a song about how the American Dream is an empty promise, a fraud and a scam. It's all hollow and shallow. (That's why he knows he will excel there.) The show is telling us that Kim is putting her faith in a false ideal, not an ironclad, perfect one.

Immigrants have been told for years that America is the land of opportunity; here the streets are paved with gold. (As an aside, I know someone who grew up in poverty in Guatemala and had been told- through movies and the like- the streets in America were actually paved with gold. When he moved to the States later in his youth he told me he was genuinely disappointed to find out the streets were just regular pavement and felt like he had been betrayed by the movies that promised him an instant happy ending here.)

Why should Kim not believe the same thing? All she has known in Vietnam and Bangkok is war, pain, strife, forced prostitution, etc. Why wouldn't she believe that Tam could have a perfect life in America, or even just a better, easier one? The show never leads us to believe that Tam's "better life" will be fulfilled, only that Kim truly believes she's doing the best thing for her son based on her previous life experience.







"

Whizzer - That is EXACTLY how I see it as well. Kim has spent years living in desperation, clinging to a dream as a beacon of hope to keep them going. Once that dream is shattered with truth, she's run out of fuel and sees no other path to a better life for her child based on their own experiences since his birth. And as you said, the musical makes no assumption that she's making the right choice (the other circumstance is the strain of Chris and Ellen's relationship in the scenes leading up to the finale and the potential conflict of facing Kim again). The only assumption it makes (or rather asks us to make) is to understand her choice, which I personally do based on the events of the musical leading up to that final scene. I understood the choice in the same way I understood Fantine's choice to give up Cosette and then beg Valjean to raise her. I observed a mother sacrificing herself not for the guarantee, but for the opportunity for a greater chance at a better life for her child.

mar6411 said: "Dave 28282 is Dave19. Keep that in mind and recall his long posting history.



"

A history against racism yes. What has that to do with me and others going against a false objectification claim here? Do you have anything on-topic to say?

Updated On: 3/10/17 at 06:23 PM

Thank you Dave19. My PSA was completely on topic.

I think the context is important. I don't believe that the original creative team (or that of Madame Butterfly) intentionally set out to depict a hurtful portrayal of Asians. Perhaps they really wanted to showcase the horrors of war, and how Asian women in particular suffered through these times. But you have to look at who is telling the story. Was an all-white creative/producing team the best choice to capture this complicated dynamic? Are the Asian characters being treated with empathy rather than pity?

I also think it's important to examine how few Asian female roles exist in theater - and how nearly all these portrayals include victimization. As an Asian woman, I'm tired of seeing these stories being told over and over again. The only time we see ourselves represented on the stage, it's to suffer abuse and be abandoned.

When you consistently depict a group of people as "tragic victims," you are making them an object of the story, rather than the subject. That's what objectification means.

I personally believe that Miss Saigon has one of the better/more nuanced iterations of this stereotype. But it still falls for the same narrative tropes. If there were more diverse Asian roles/works onstage, perhaps it wouldn't be subject to this level of scrutiny - but when we're being told this same story of Asian victimization ad nauseam, it behooves us to ask why (predominantly white) storytellers feel compelled to go back to this well over and over again.

belrowley said: "I also think it's important to examine how few Asian female roles exist in theater - and how nearly all these portrayals include victimization. As an Asian woman, I'm tired of seeing these stories being told over and over again. The only time we see ourselves represented on the stage, it's to suffer abuse and be abandoned.

When you consistently depict a group of people as "tragic victims," you are making them an object of the story, rather than the subject."



Well said!

Updated On: 3/11/17 at 08:09 PM

Babe, I can't speak for others, but I certainly never meant to tell Asian Americans, or anyone else for that matter, that their perceptions were "wrong." All I was doing was trying to better explain what my perception of the story is. It's supposed to be a discussion, which has remained pretty civil and informative IMO.

I read one of the links that Lizzie posted about the two stereotypes that Asian women often fall into: the dragon lady and the lotus blossom. I totally see these two types pop up even today in film and TV. It's shocking how much Asian female characters are still trying to break out of these two molds. That said, I don't see Kim as either a dragon lady or a lotus blossom. In my eyes she is a very strong and complex woman. Maybe I'm completely off base and someone can explain how Kim is just another stereotype and not as complex as I imagine her to be, but after years of familiarity with the show I don't see it.

I suppose this might all be similar to complaints I hear about how gay men can only be characters if they're A) the sassy best friend sidekick who has no personal life of his own and is completely neutered sexually or B) a tragic figure dying of AIDS. For a long time you rarely saw anything different in mainstream film, TV or theater. People at large are comfortable with the other when it is packaged in a stereotype that is easy to digest. As for Miss Saigon, I think part of the power of the show comes from Kim breaking the mold; it first appears that she is being set up to follow in the lotus blossom track, but she is revealed to be so much more.

But just as when gay men dealing with AIDS is handled with nuance and grace, as in The Normal Heart, as belrowley points out, there are just so many times we can hear these stories without craving to see minority characters be presented in fresh, original ways.

For me, the first problem with Miss Saigon is it brings back a worn-out trope which didn't need to be brought back. I don't understand why the authors thought the world needed an update of Madama Butterfly.

Another problem is the Vietnamese women are treat as commodities. The first thing we learn about Kim, she's a young virgin girl from the country for sale. John buys Kim as a present for Chris. In turn, Chris wants to give Kim money after a night of sex. The Engineer sells Kim in the hope Chris will help him get out of the country.

Another problem is Chris. In "Why God Why?," he sees Kim as a way to make him feel better. He doesn't see her as a person; he sees her as an object. The lyrics, which aren't bad, make me cringe. In Chris's view, God is a pimp.

This isn't a love at first sight story; it's a love at first lay story. Gee, after one night of sex, Kim and Chris pledge their love and the next thing we know, they get married.

To me, Kim is not a complex character. She does not break the mold. At the end, she is another in the long line of Asian women who sacrifice themselves for a white man.

Did anyone see VIETGONE last fall? The Vietnamese characters are complex characters who don't fit any mold. Tong and Huong are bad ass women! The Vietnamese characters make personal sacrifices! To me, VIETGONE is funny, moving and fresh. It makes Miss Saigon look stale. VIETGONE should have moved to Broadway.

I have always really enjoyed the orchestrations in Miss Saigon especially the brass and percussion. Have heard some comments about the smaller orchestra and poor sound. Have they worked bugs out? How does the orchestra sound? Vibrant and full or tinny?

I'm surprised no one has mentioned that the original inspiration for the show came from a photograph of a Vietnamese woman giving up her Vietnamese-American daughter in the hope that she would have a better life with his biological father - a former soldier - in America. I don't think this ties up any loose ends in this discussion, but could perhaps provoke further discussion.

Image:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/charsuede/59908052

From Schönburg & Boublil:

"The silence of this woman stunned by her grief was a shout of pain louder than any of the earth's laments. The child's tears were the final condemnation of all wars which shatter people who love each other.

The little Vietnamese girl was about to board a plane from Ho Chi Minh Airport for the United States of America where her father, and ex-GI she had never seen, was waiting for her. Her mother was leaving her there and would never see her again.

Behind this particular picture lay a background of years of enquiries and bureaucratic formalities, in order to find the ex-solider from the other side of the world, with whom the woman had shared a brief moment of her life.

She knew, as only a mother could that beyond this departure gate there was both a new life for her daughter and no life at all for her, and that she had willed it.

I was so appalled by the image of this deliberate ripping apart that I had to sit down and catch my breath. I suffered for the mother as though I might see my own little boy leaving me forever and I suffered for the child as though in my early youth I had been forcibly removed from my parents. Was that not the most moving, the most staggering example of 'The Ultimate Sacrifice', as undergone by Cio-Cio San in Madame Butterfly, giving her life for her child?

This photograph was for Alain and I, was the start of everything..."

Babe_Williams said: "Chris learns he has a child and Kim is alive, his first response is "it's too late, I have a new life."



Ellen's response to Kim's proposition that they take Tam: "we want kids of our own."



what drew kim to Chris or vice versa other then a night of hot sex? Chris doesn't ask Kim about her life until after they he offers her money. What do we know about Kim in the second half of the show other then she is still pining for Chris and loves her son? I like this show, I enjoy the music, but these aren't nuanced or developed characters by any stretch.



One of the the lines that bothers me is the line where Chris says "you are the only thing that I care for here." Kim is an object, by his own choice of words. Also, my statements here are based on my viewing of the show years ago and the original London cast recording. If some of this dialogue has changed, I was not aware.



Ellen also immediately assumes Kim is the maid when they first meet.

Updated On: 3/11/17 at 11:39 AM