Overcoming Footloose
Carla Axtman
I have an overdeveloped sense of justice. That's probably why when I learn about people rising up to overcome injustice in their own way, I find it especially moving.
A Footloose-ian schism in the town of La Grande over the local high school's production of "Picasso at the Lapin Angle" reached it's apex recently. The play about the fictional meeting of Pablo Picasso and Albert Einstein held performances in mid-May over the objections of a good number of local parents. In a nutshell, a group of these parents decided the play was inappropriate for high schoolers because its set in a bar (promoting teenage drinking) and has sexual themes (that some found degrading to women). The superintendent eventually agreed with the parents and banned the play from LaGrande High School. For background, you can read about it here and here.
The production went forward at Eastern Oregon University through the efforts of the players and teachers, the EOU Democrats Club and the play's author, actor/director/writer Steve Martin.
Today's O has an especially nice write-up by Marty Hughley on the production, the students and the community.
I wonder now if Martin will write a play about a high school banning a play. Or maybe that theme is so old and tiresome that its not worth the sweat, even though its reality it pops up from time to time.
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
May 31, '09
Just a small correction, La Grande is two words, not one. I see a lot of people make that mistake.
12:07 p.m.
May 31, '09
My mistake, Justin. And I should know better. I'll fix it ASAP.
Thanks for the correction.
May 31, '09
I don't understand how shielding high school students from adult themes is somehow supposed to guide them towards adulthood. I didn't understand it when I was a high school student in the '70's either, in fact there were few aspects of high school that I did understand and I agreed with very few of them.
Kudos to Steve Martin and all others who persevered to bring this play forward.
May 31, '09
Meanwhile in NY, "Kevin Bacon wasn't footloose enough.
The Hollywood star tried to chase down a thug who swiped his BlackBerry at a Seventh Avenue subway station Thursday, sources told The Post. The brazen mugger managed to escape and was at large yesterday..."
http://www.nypost.com/seven/05242009/news/regionalnews/subway_thief_smokes_bacon_170781.htm
... and... well... this speaks for itself...
"...Gossip Girl hottie Chace Crawford will be kicking off his Sunday shoes in the remake of Footloose, stepping into the void left behind when Zac Efron dropped out.
Crawford, 23, will play Ren McCormack, the rebellious dancing high schooler who launched the career of a then 25-year-old Kevin Bacon, Paramount Pictures has announced...."
Ren's back... and he's p*$$ed...
4:50 p.m.
May 31, '09
RE: "a group of these parents decided the play was inappropriate for high schoolers because its set in a bar (promoting teenage drinking) and has sexual themes"
As if there is ANYTHING that could possibly stop adolescents from getting drunk or having sex. Ignorance and stupidity combine in the hinterland -- as always.
May 31, '09
Regarding the play, “Picasso at the Lapin Agile,” and all the blogs and writings ridiculing LaGrande for its decision.
First, blanket comments like Lee Coleman's; "Ignorance and stupidity combine in the hinterland -- as always."; are uninformed,unproductive, prejudice, narrow minded and destructive. The comment shows no understanding of rural values and attempts to class rural citizens as "inferior" in their knowledge and intellect.
Second; I fail to see the claims of "censorship" or loss of Amendment rights here.
A play is proposed by a teacher and a group of students become exicited to preform the play in their high school (a publicly financed education facility), a group of high school parents after reading the play question the appropriateness of the content (even the writer Steve Martin has commented in the LaGrande Observer to that effect) put forth a petition to stop the production of the play at their high school (their Constitutional right),the appointed official of the school reviews the petition and teacher/student request and rules against its production. Unsatisfied with the ruling, members of the community and the teacher appeal, the community comes together and voices its opinions on both sides (right to representation), the elected delegating body hears those opinions, deliberates and rules to discontinue the production on school grounds.
Seems like democracy in action to me, and as a bonus their children have learned about and had the opportunity to see our country's principals in action. They learned how to appropriately present differing views for consideration and accept the ruling of an elected Representative Body.
The play was not summarily hauled into the street and burned and it was not banned from ever being produced. The community members respect each others opinions and don't "hate" one another based on those differences.
Those that wanted to see the play "go on" find a new production facility, its writer graciously, and maturely I might add, comments on his play and offers to finance its production so that it can be presented at the local college.
Young people have been allowed to express their talents and perform the play for the community, and community members that wished to see it attended. EVERYONE'S RIGHT to have an opinion (whether conservative or liberal/for or against) and express it in our FREE country is preserved.
Wow, I see Democracy in action,and I still believe it really works!
9:11 p.m.
May 31, '09
The comment shows no understanding of rural values and attempts to class rural citizens as "inferior" in their knowledge and intellect.
Rural values=censorship? Naw. That's what was attempted by some of these folks in La Grande. That might be their "values". But are those "rural values"? I don't see how that's a legitimate argument.
Second; I fail to see the claims of "censorship" or loss of Amendment rights here.
Nobody on this post or subsequent comments claimed that there was a loss of an Amendment right in this situation, that I can see.
But there is definitely censorship. Moving the play to a different venue and having other community members exercise their "rural values" of stepping up to help get this play put on thwarted those efforts to censor this work.
May 31, '09
I remember a similar incident happening to me in high school, shortly after the Vietnam war. Only this was just a class doing a choral reading of an anti-war play. Some parent got wind of it, complained to the principal and shut us down. Even though the whole country agreed by that time the war was wrong!
Anyway, what it taught us is that kids are second class people without the same 1st amendment rights a person would have in any other voluntary gathering.
And please don't dis the hinterlands. This could and has happened in every city in this state and others. Ignorance and prejudice are not geographically bound.
May 31, '09
Carla; I still do not see "censorship". As I understand it, censorship has been historically defined as, and continues to be, repression and suppression of disfavored ideas.
It was determined by those elected by the community as representatives to make decisions on the public's behalf that it was inappropriate for presentation on school grounds. Again, they were not forbidden to present the play in ANY facility, just a public school. Asking that something be preformed in a different location is NOT censorship.
Example of my point; a lot of folks don't want a porn (a very controversial subject) shop located next to a school and we enact laws that prevent that...Why? Without societal "censorship" regarding the appropriateness of locating such a shop next to a school we could be unwittingly telling our young men and women that exposure to or exploring Porn is OK. Be careful about defending an expression without bounds society. You may not like what you get in the end.
The Amendment thing I added was in reaction to other articles in other venues....sorry for the quick draw on that one.
Regarding "rural values". You have said before that you are from rural roots Carla so you should be well aware of "rural values".I was born, raised and live in rural Oregon and I think I can safely say that in general those roots tend to be more conservative...and i don't think that is all that bad of a thing. I never said "rural values" equal censorship, but in this case, those conservative "rural value" opinions did ask for more of an appropriate place to preform a "controversial" subject.
10:06 p.m.
May 31, '09
I still do not see "censorship". As I understand it, censorship has been historically defined as, and continues to be, repression and suppression of disfavored ideas.
That's exactly what happened here. Ideas that some people didn't like were voted out and disallowed.
It was determined by those elected by the community as representatives to make decisions on the public's behalf that it was inappropriate for presentation on school grounds. Again, they were not forbidden to present the play in ANY facility, just a public school. Asking that something be preformed in a different location is NOT censorship.
No matter you slice it up, it's still censorship. They didn't ASK that it be performed in a different location. They kicked them out of the high school and some in the community stepped up and helped them put the play on despite the attempted censorship of some in the community. In fact, the Superintendent said that the law "tied her hands" so that she couldn't stop the play from being performed elsewhere. At least this is my knowledge based on the multiple news stories I've read on this.
Regarding "rural values". You have said before that you are from rural roots Carla so you should be well aware of "rural values".I was born, raised and live in rural Oregon and I think I can safely say that in general those roots tend to be more conservative...and i don't think that is all that bad of a thing.
I understand the conservative angle. But I don't agree that censorship is a good thing. I also don't think it ought to be a "conservative" thing, although I suspect in many ways it is.
The rural values I was brought up with include community, working together, working hard and overcoming adversity. Those were of much greater value to me than anything politically "conservative" that came my way. And those are the rural values I saw on display from those kids, teachers and community members that saw this play was performed.
May 31, '09
"The rural values I was brought up with include community, working together, working hard and overcoming adversity".
You forgot to mention a respect for differing opinions and each individuals right to express them. Those things were displayed in this case and EVERYONE'S RIGHT to have their opinions were preserved in the process.However, if I interpret your angle on this correctly, it is not OK to hold "conservative" opinions much less express them or have them enacted. If that is the case I would have to ask, "who is attempting to censor who"?
And by the by...in the tradition of the rural I love, some of those that helped the play to "go on", were "politically conservative" and objected to its performance in the high school venue.
Respectfully; MWS
12:23 a.m.
Jun 1, '09
It is censorship precisely because it was carried out by public officials under public authority. Democratic censorship, perhaps, but censorship all the same.