To think Black Out nights in theatre ARE important

[PenguinLord]

I know there was a theatre that did it last year and a thread about it- but there is a West End venue this year which will host two or three black out nights (where "all-black-identifying audiences" are invited) of the Slave Play. I had mixed feelings, but after having read a few articles on it, I actually agree with the concept- for the record I am very much white.

Spokesperson for the PM criticised black out nights saying "“The prime minister is a big supporter of the arts and he believes that the arts should be inclusive".

But let's face it, theatre experience is far from inclusive or accessible. Having 2 out of a few dozen nights will not really make a difference, nor excludes people who are not black to attend literally 80 if not more other performances. I was in theatre this week, and had a good look around. 98% of the audience were white. There were a few Asian people and 1 (one) black person- in the audience of around 300.

I suppose Id be far less likely to attend an event where I would stick out like a very sore thumb, is it really such a big deal to have two performances where people who dont usually feel theatre is an inclusive space can feel welcome, surrounded by people that belong to the same community?

I haven’t read any posts supporting black out night that say all black people should feel the same. From what I recall (and it’s a very long thread) the argument for seems to be that it is important to make space for black people who feel connected to slavery to experience the play in audience of people who also feel the practice still has a grip on their families, communities and lives.

While all black people are not descended from slaves, the vast majority (if not all) of black people in this country will have some experience (to varying degrees) of the institutionally entrenched racism that is the legacy of slavery.

Black people being stopped for driving a flash car is one example. It is evidence that it is still slightly unbelievable to some people that black people are equally capable of being entrepreneurs, professionals or otherwise highly successful and able to afford an expensive car. For that to be unbelievable, the subtext must be that black people are expected to do menial or low-ranking jobs. That’s not a million miles from the white mindset during slavery which was about maintaining a two tier system run by white people.

I think it should self-define in a way that doesn’t, for example, see it threatening with deportation people, in many cases, British citizens, who have lived there legally for decades because of (a) its own poor record-keeping and (b) decision that this group of people didn’t matter.

Also, ask yourself why people keep voting Tory, despite not being on board with their policies?

That's not true. Most black Britons came here from the Carribbean. Their ancestors were taken there as slaves. Only a minority of black people in Britain came directly from Africa. Slavery is very much a reason why the afro Carribbean people are here - they were a ready made population that spoke English etc and were suitable to come over to work when we needed them.

Also although we never had laws of racial segregation like in the US, and the problems we have are not as severe as in some US states, there has been a de facto colour bar in many areas and still plenty of institutionalised racism in the police, justice system and many other areas.

I replied to one that was saying that. I agree with most of what you say. I don't think enforced racial segregation is going to help with any of these issues though. If people want to get together to talk about slavery that is absolutely fine but they shouldn't bar any particular race unless it's a private event.

You've shifted over to politics, but your original point was about history and legacy and how a nation defines itself in light of these, and with good reason: politics are never fixed, always changing, but history can never be changed.

That's why nations, not just Britain but all nations, take their identity from their past.

So with that in mind, how do you think britain should self-define?

But there is a direct correlation between a nation’s self-definition and its current politics.

Re the British identity, so far we only have propositions what it shouldn’t be, nothing positive.

How about a nation that ended slavery?

Personally, I can see a lot of look-at-me virtue signalling in the English obsession of being ashamed of their own country.

Almost as if it was another one of the luxury beliefs designed to signal belonging to a higher social class. I haven’t found many working class people ‘ashamed to be British or English’, but, as Orwell rightly observed, it’s pervasive among the so-called intellectuals/academics and other aspirational classes. In an extraordinary act of intellectual acrobatics, the same people will go out of their way to support everyone else’s claim to national identity.

I’ve lived in many countries and this island is the least racist of them all. It’s also the only country I’ve ever been to where waving the national flag is frowned upon. You should see Norway on the Independence Day.

And no, it’s not dangerous to be proud of your country and its achievements.

Pile on in 3…2…1…

Of course but "current politics" doesn't match the point you originally made, which was about "Pandering to a lingering sense of British exceptionalism, encouraging self-definition by the soi-distant glories of the past, a disinclination to examine certain aspects of that history and its ongoing impacts".

So to be clear: are you saying that your version of British identity would involve erasing Britain's past and focusing on its political shortcomings?

Because you'll be hard pressed to find any nation where that's how national identity is constructed.

No nation should believe it's inherently better than others against the historical evidence. This a problem Britain suffers with all the time. Boris Johnson, Brexit hubris, world beating COVID tracing system that was actually worse than anyone else's.

I would love Britain to self define as a land of equality, justice, open mindedness. Instead we are clinging to "Britain ended slavery" while having the most inhumane attitudes towards immigrants and refugees in western Europe.

Of course we should be proud of our achievements. Let's just make sure those achievements are 1. Factual and 2. Ongoing

I don’t think an achievement has to be ‘ongoing’ to be proud of it. In fact, it’s kind of impossible. Unless you want Britain to engage in a global war on slavery? No doubt this would be decried as cultural colonialism.

You claim that Britain has the worst attitudes towards refugees and immigrants in Western Europe is baseless.

For example, Denmark forcibly evicts people from abroad from their homes and moved them to other parts of the country to avoid ghettoisation, refugees also have to give all valuables to the state. France has banned all religious dress.

But even if it was true, such an attitude would still 100x better than in most non-Western countries.

I’m an immigrant but I guess lived experience matters only if it supports a certain narrative…

Inhumane? How? They get their basic needs met. We have a shortage of social housing anyway and people already living in shipping container flats.

There are thousands of versions of history. More sources and records are being found all the time. People choose which one to present. Ever heard the expression "history is written by the victors"?

Windrush scandal? Holding asylum seekers in detention centres? Sending them to Rwanda? There are loads of other examples.

Rwanda while they are processed, not to stay permanently. Rwanda won’t have them staying centres, shipping containers because they don’t lack housing. Why is that so bad?
I am aware of the genocide but places change.

Oh yes, I bet Rwanda is a paradise these days! That's why so many people try to escape it.😬

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/27/revealed-uk-granted-asylum-to-rwandan-refugees-while-arguing-country-was-safe#:~:text=Revealed%3A%20UK%20granted%20asylum%20to%20Rwandan%20refugees%20while%20arguing%20country%20was%20safe,-This%20article%20is&text=Four%20Rwandans%20were%20granted%20refugee,place%20to%20send%20asylum%20seekers.

It's obviously good to understand the past but why do we have to take our identity from our past. Why do we even have to have an identity or 'cultural heritage'. If you want one then fine but for lots of people living now it's irrelevant. I'm busy cracking on with my life apart from my parents and grandparents anything that went on before me if too long ago to have any meaning to me. I get the legalities of belonging to a country or two as thats got legal ramifications but I don't understand the value of trying to make people identify with things that they don't identify with.

so what exactly is stopping black people from going to the theatre? dont agree with this at all, just book a seat to any of the hundreds of shows on each year , it doesnt have to be black only

4 people from Rwanda. Doesn’t scream of war torn

@OhMyNerves That’s an interesting point and relates well to this particular play.

Why would Black Britons in 2024 identify with a play about slavery set in mid-nineteenth century Virginia? It’s unlikely that it has much relevance to their own cultural heritage unless they’re American.

As you say, surely this is an example
I don't understand the value of trying to make people identify with things that they don't identify with.

You will maybe understand the value of shared national identity it when it’s gone and replaced by others’ values, especially if they happen to impose on the sense of personal freedom.

Also, implying people should feel or think a certain way because they happen to have a certain level of pigmentation seems an example of imposed beliefs, doesn’t it?

“Those whose ancestors were sold into slavery may feel their suffering as depicted in this play on a more personal level.”

I think this was clear that SOME black people MAY need/want space to watch the play amongst people with a shared history and lived experience of the lasting effects of racism.

Nobody is enforcing segregation and nobody is barred from attending any viewings. The producers are asking audiences to give black people a moment.

I wouldn’t want to see separated performances for something like Matilda, but this play is going to hit differently for black audiences. The rest of us just need to respect that and give space for a private emotional outlet.

Great post @StormingNorman

No one has actually been able to articulate why they disagree with this beyond throwing lazy segregation comparisons in. What are white people losing by being ok with this?

It’s not about how it affects people personally. Luckily some can see further than the end of their own nose.

It’s about how the society is run and our shared values.

I disagree with segregation based on skin colour based on principle irrespective of whether it affects me personally.