For nearly as long as I’ve worked in the theater, I’ve experienced variations on this conversation:
Actress #1: “Ohhh, I adore 1776! I would love to do that show some day!”
Actress #2: “Me too! But there are barely any parts for women!”
Actress #3: “Man, if only someone would do an all-female production…”
We then either move into casting our hypothetical show from the available actresses in the room… or are stopped dead by some Donny Downer who asks bluntly:
Don: “Who would come to see THAT?”
(Thanks, Don. Way to bring down the room.)
For reasons that are probably pretty self-evident, (Ooo. See what I did there?) I much prefer being part of the former conversation… but, in fairness, let’s consider this question.
Going to the theater is an interesting ritual, Don. See, no matter how hyper-realistic the performance, a small part of our brains still knows this is a performance- not real life- so we’re primed to accept a bunch of things “outside the norm!” Things like:
– Eternally twelve year old boys can fly!
– Green-skinned social outcasts can command armies of flying monkeys!
– Giant, anthropomorphic felines get together at regular intervals to perform musical versions of T.S. Elliot poems and– (Okay, yeah. That one’s a stretch, Donny. I admit it.)
But, heck. We play along, right? Because, in this wacky Theater-Reality(tm) pretty much anything goes. Certainly a lady in a frock coat and boots is fairly tame in comparison to–
Don: “Hey, don’t get me wrong, honey. I’m all for a woman wearing a mask on her head and pretending she’s a lion, but putting on a pair of pants and saying she’s Ben Franklin?! That’s just not believable!”
Guess you’re not a big fan of ‘Hamilton’ either, eh Don? Well, I am… and here’s why.
Actually, wait. Lemme brag on myself for a sec. I was a great history student. Fantastic. A’s for days! When it came to history, my know-how was ‘UUUGE! I could rattle off dates and locations of American Revolution battles like letters of the alphabet… but the older I get, the less I’m sure that’s an entirely good thing.
Excessive familiarity might beget good test scores, but it also breeds a dangerous “C” word. Complacency. When you’re talking about events that took place close to 250 years ago, modern Americans- not unfairly- have a hard time relating. We lose sight of the most important lessons of history in rote regurgitation.
‘Hamilton’ rips the dusty figures of Jefferson and Washington off the high school pop quiz paper and reanimates them into modern, vibrant human beings. Further, in the guise of a Black, Hispanic and Latino cast, Lin-Manuel Miranda found a fantastic new relevance. It’s sobering how closely the struggle of minorities for rights and recognition in today’s America mirrors the experiences of Colonial Americans fighting for their independence from the British crown.
Truly, a “historically accurate” version of Hamilton would pale (no pun intended) in comparison.
So, in that same spirit, why should a great piece like ‘1776’– itself lauded as groundbreaking when it premiered in 1969- remain frozen in the amber of a “traditional” approach?
Don: “Are you saying I should start calling you ladies
“The Founding Mothers” now, or…?”
Nope. It’s “Mr. Jefferson”, thank you. Were we to adjust to “Mrs. Adams” or “Ms. Washington” we would not only violate copyright, (no worries, Sherman Edwards’ estate- we gotchu) we would be lessening the impact. Having women take on the voices and personas of these much-heralded men quietly makes it’s own ‘Hamilton’-esque statement about the place of women, not only in government, but as figures of authority. A strong leader is a strong leader, irrespective of gender.
So, Don, “An all-female 1776? Who would come see THAT?”
I say…
EVERYONE should.
Men. Women. The young. The old. The mainstream. The marginalized. Your son. Your daughter.
And you too, Donny. (I’ll save you a seat house right so you can be nice and close to Virginia.)
Heck, who knows how many members of tomorrow’s congress might just be sitting out there in our audience next month?
Your Obedient,
T. Jeff / Kay