Controversial Egg?

Class Act is in the middle of rehearsing "A Day in the Death of Joe Egg" by Peter Nichols. This play was listed as being one of the recommended texts for WA high schools. So far, they are staying away in droves. Is this 1967 play too controversial for our modern audiences?? We have already had a school ring up and say they were disgusted by our flyer - which quoted a review from The Observer which was on the BACK of the actual text along with a review written in 1993 (we put both on the flyer thinking they were "safe" as they were published with the text!) The offending review was by Ronald Bryden in 1967 - " This remarkable play is about a nightmare all women must have dreamed at some time, and most men: living with a child born so hopelessly crippled as to be, as the father says in it brutally, "a human parsnip". For all that, it has to be described as a comedy, one of the funniest and most touching I've ever seen." I must admit that during rehearsals, I am cringing at some of the 1967 references - but because the play is not pc enough for today's standards - should we not perform it?? Should we be changing some of the offensive references? What do you think? Angelique Malcolm

I'm not all that familiar with the play although I do remember the stir it caused originally. Speaking as a writer however please do not make changes to the script. The play deals with an incredibly sensitive subject and shows how it was approached forty years ago and hopefully will make people realise how far we have come. To modify a writers work to "bowdlerise" it is a sin against the intent of the writer. Shouldn't a play like this shock? Aren't we allowed to shock any more? Do the play Class Act and glory in having offended the small minded people who can't see past the nose on their face. Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing. www.tonymoore.id.au

I think I might have to come see this one, if only to see whether or not it's accurate. freddie the rocking jedi badger

I tend to agree with "Logos" in that censoring is tantamount to sin within the theatre. I too am not familiar with the work. However, your concern raises a financial point. And, perhaps to address it, it might be helpful to try and rebrand your production without the things you will determine are causing this problem. That, on the other hand, may become a slippery slope which will cause more problems. Much better to leave it as it is and find an inventive way to get more in the door. Ultimately, you will have to do what's best for the "bottom-line". Good luck. I hope you find what works. Let us know what happens. Peace out, Daniel.

People these days get overly pedantic about things being "pc". If anything it's offensive that they don't want to see a play that actually represents a minority group in society today and gives them a voice. "I have two giraffes... the State requires me to learn the Harmonica..."

a tricky one for sure, however, i would guess that the feedback that you have had from teachers especially, does not identify 'small mindedness' but rather a cautious approach, which i would imagine teachers these days have to exercise. i am not a teacher myself but i do know those who are and it is often the case that their own opinions or tastes have to be compromised in order to appease the preferences of not necessarilly the students but more over the parents. i would imagine the material in this play would offed the morals of (in particular) schools of a religious persuasion whose beliefs contradict those expressed in the play. it is very easy to dismiss the reaction as samll mindedness when you dont have to consider anyone elses sensebilities but your own, however, they are just responding to the information you have given them, as am i...i just think people jump on the anti pc wagon a little too quickly without considering the context. i think the majority who took that opinion had claimed not to have read the play...therefore they hardly offer intelligent offerings, more just sound bites in response to you considering editing, and they as 'playwrights see that as artisitic butchering (rightly so), although i have to admit i have never read or seen their workings being performed. im afraid that you have decided to produce a play without the necessary research, in that your target audience has turned its back on you. harsh lesson but proof im sure, that it so important to canvas what audience need especially when it is directed at schools and those in education. any way good luck. Is that all there is, if so can we all stop dancing (or something equally as pointless and wacky!)

I didn't say I hadn't read the play. In fact I have but some years ago so am currently not that familiar with it. I still consider that to reject a play like this simply because it deals with subject matter that has the potential to offend is small mindedness. It reeks of the city fathers of Tunbridge wells refusing Steady Eddie the right to perform in their theatre because his humour dealt with disabled people. And that really happened. Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing. www.tonymoore.id.au

Hmmm, again to reiterate, if your audience are those of students below the age of 18 then you have to take into consideration the details/themes/issues of the play. It just seems so naive (i also believe it isn't even on the set text list provided by the curriculum council)i would therefore assume that the choice would have to be questioned, am i right in thinking that class act is specifically a theatre in education company (the title is a clue!)if so then the education liaison could/should have been consulted. logos, i honestly don't understand your references to tunbridge wells and steady eddie, but i could understand the embarrassment it could cause to teachers if parents see the material as inappropriate - maybe the topic of a thalidomite baby and its reference to as a 'parsnip' is a little too much in bad taste. i feel that you havent really read the original posting, instead you have got your knickers in a knot over censorship, its not small mindedness, if anything in this context its 'large' mindedness as it is taking into consideration the principals and levels of tolerance that other people hold, as oppose to those of the individual self. im sure those who refused steady eddie weren't year 12 students! black humor is great when appropriate and often very clever and provides a very accurate picture of society and values in a provocative satirical way...however, the point i am trying to make is that your own tastes have to be set aside in compliance with the sensibility of the people who entrust teachers with their children. i might be wrong and i hope i am, but your argument just reaks of ignorance. i think the notion was rejecting in it on the fact that school children were invited and encouraged on the back of a review that 'could' be deemed inappropriate and therefore stands to embarrass or offend. too put it another way, if you promoted literature to an institution such as a school promoting mark ravenhills controversial 'shopping and f***ing' or an art exhibition exhibiting the work of institutionalised murderers and rapists it would be deemed inappropriate, as you dont have the right to push on people of an impressionable age such works. If, however, as an adult who sees the worth in the art and the maturity to deal with the material on an intellectual plain then, that is another matter. Is that all there is amigo? because if it is put on some shoes and lets go dancing (or again something more wacky)!

But the whole point of this started with the reaction to the flyer! please remember norma it is a 'damn good play' in your opinion and it isnt a question of personal taste, rather, that the offending literature that contained a review that was inappropriate (only)considering the target audience! 1967 was the date the review was written and therefore it could be argued that is has very little relevance today, it might have been wiser to have sourced a more recent and therefore relevant review to include. i find it interesting that the lady who posted the original posting is cringing at the content during the rehearsals...i really think you need to prepare a little more thoroughly in the early stages of production class act.

I'd just like to point out that A Day In The Death of Joe Egg IS on the suggested texts list for high schools - that's why we chose it. Angelique

i find it interesting that the lady who posted the original posting is cringing at the content during the rehearsals...i really think you need to prepare a little more thoroughly in the early stages of production class act. There's a big difference though between reading a script to yourself and reading it aloud in character with blocking, though.

Perhaps you should include the above information on the flyer in place of the reference that the school complained about. And, also perhaps just get someone to stand up on stage before the performance and explain the situation, adding that it shouldn't get in the way of the play. Hope this helps. Cheers, Daniel.

If they get up on stage before the show and 'explain the situation', then it's already getting in the way of the play, isn't it? Damn it, Class Act, put the bloody thing on and to hell with the PC legion. I'll be there in the front row on opening night, as will many others. freddie the rocking jedi badger

Thanks Rocking Jedi Badger - we look forward to seeing you there! Now rehearsals have progressed, I see it is such a funny AND sad play which is VERY well written - the actors are pretty bloody good, too - I think it will be a great night's entertainment (in spite of a couple of cringey racist and un-pc 1960's remarks.) Thanks to everyone for all the comments above. Angelique

Well it shouldn't, is what I'm saying. I mean, it could be something like, 'careful folks, the tea is hot'. I'm still going to enjoy the tea, I'm glad of the warning not to burn my lips. Freddie Badgery, an admirable supporter of local theatre. Rocking out, Daniel.

You're suggesting that they announce before each show that the play may scald the audiences' mouths? Now that WOULD be worth seeing. freddie the rocking jedi badger

In a manner of speaking, I guess I am. And yes, I too would like to see that, but in the end I was just offering a POV, a POV which may lead to something fresh for the person doing the reading. Perhaps, it wasn't the best example to use. I think you know what I meant, though: The audiences sensibilities being stoked by the pc-incorrectness of some of the references. Rocking out, Daniel.

Yeah, I know what you meant ;) Was just teasing you. I guess my point of view is that sometimes theatre needs to be shocking; that audiences sometimes need to confront their discomforts. I believe a play such as this, in the same vein as To Kill A Mocking Bird, is a play that should not apologise in advance for what it is, nor the attitudes expressed by the characters. Admittedly, I have not seen or read the play, but the subject matter is very close to my heart (for reasons I won't necessarily go into on this forum). Needless to say, I do have a vested interest in seeing how this play is performed and whether or not it rings true, no matter which era it's set in, nor how confronting the issues. Let them come, let them be shocked, let them walk away reflecting, say I. freddie the rocking jedi badger

Say indeed, I agree entirely. The author's words are sacrosanct, inviolable. Let any who disagree with this, answer to us and we shall make merry work of them. What say you, freddie, the rocking jedi badger? Rocking out, Daniel.