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?

@YaMuvva

are you talking about class or race. Where should Kwasi Kwarteng go to escape his 'oppressors'. It is very simplistic to call all people.of colour 'oppressed'

Oh, don’t be so patronising, please.

That’s why I say “class” rather than “all individuals”. Do you understand the difference?

Says you, who just declared white privilege isn't even a thing because you said so 🤦‍♀️

I said that white privilege isn’t “a thing” for the 90% of white people in the UK who are descendants of potato farmers and maids, like me.

Sorry if the other 10% are embarrassed by their slave owner ancestors or private school education or whatever, but it has nothing to do with the rest of us. (Not counting you in the 10%, of course, because you say you’re not.)

@YaMuvva

the oppressed are the working class and the oppressors the upper class who own the capital. I can read Marx.

I don’t think you understand what white privilege is.

The definition isn’t “A person who has never descended from slaves or potato farmers”.

Nor does anyone gain anything from white privilege.

White privilege is the absence of discrimination based on your skin colour.

I have white privilege because I as a white woman will not be treated as badly as a black women on the same situation - eg if we were accused of a crime. And actually if we accessed healthcare, research shows.

It’s got nothing to do with what your ancestors did.

When people say ‘marketing ploy’, it suggests that it’s a profit-driven pursuit and it must therefore be A Bad Thing. In fact, audiences are so overwhelmingly white, that it’s quite possible that Black Out nights won’t sell out, as the usual audience may feel disinclined to book on these nights.

I’m very interested in how this pans out as I’m involved in a small arts festival which has diversity and inclusion at its core, but what often happens is the DEI happens onstage, and the audience remains happily white middle-class, largely 50-70yo, delighted to be entertained by something that is different and provocative - perpetuating the gulf.

I feel some posters are being disingenuous in flipping this to a ‘what if it was whites only?’ scenario. The research is that theatre goers disproportionately represent the middle class/middle aged/white population, and the remit of arts funders is to correct that. So roll with it.

Everything relating to these places trying to get bums on seats is a marketing ploy

Theatre isn't the cinema. There's an unpredictability and immediate feedback loop created between actors and audience.

My understanding of Slave Play is that it is intentionally confrontational and purposefully makes audiences (whoever they are are) in some ways complicit in what's going on on stage in order to make them feel uncomfortable.

Given the subject of the play, I'd be interested to know how different it feels to experience that as a member of the audience (of any ethnicity) when the audience is not predominantly white. I gather this is what the director is trying to explore.

Incidentally there was a very interesting and somewhat heated discussion about this with two interviewees (both women of colour) on a radio programme a couple of weeks ago. They wildly disagreed with each other, which should be of no surprise to anyone.

It's an interesting idea. It's not paving the way to segregate audiences. I have no issue with it.

It absolutely is "a thing".

Please do some research, you're really not understanding what it is.

Or at least read the post from @YaMuvva

I'm going on the "black out" night. I shall be identifying as a gay black man.

I mean, honestly, these weird luvvies are barking mad aren't they.

Oh, yeah, and who decided that white privilege meant that then? How very convenient that the descendants of maids and potato farmers are privileged just because.

But in the context of this discussion, it’s a bit irrelevant, isn’t it? Because we’re talking about a play where the descendants of slave owners are not welcome. Fair enough, but why target the rest of us?

Oh do shut up with your utter middle class bollocks. 🙄

Oh how witty.

You can identify as yourself and you'll still get in. Nobody is excluded.

It’s common sense.

Can you give us your definition of what you believe white privilege is and how it links to your great great granny being a maid? Because I genuinely don’t see the connection - nor do I know what MY ancestors did for a living. No one looks at you and says “she was descended from potato farmers”. they do look at you and say “she’s white”.

They are not saying anyone has to check if their ancestors were slave owners before entering. But I’d see the equivalent being a female only stage show of a play about suffragettes. An oppressed group Coming together to witness how they would have been treated many years ago, the leaps that have been made since and sadly the things that are still the same.

Well, naturally, I’ll have to defer to your superior intellect and knowledge. It’s quite clear who the mastermind is in this debate.

Yes, but is ‘ploy’ the right word? The arts want to be inclusive, and to reach audiences that might not in the normal course of the year attend arts events. This encourages participation and engagement, which is a social benefit. We don’t see the same social barriers in football, on the playing field at least. There is huge merit in outreach programmes in the arts in schools, targeted at youngsters. This initiative is for adults who are Black who are under-represented in audiences.

Touched a nerve I see......

Not really, the same tediuous 'joke' has been said loads of times on this thread, and it's just as unfunny when you say it.

As I said, nobody is excluded. Its a simple request, which has clearly touched a nerve with you.

Why is that?

Because it is racist. I cannot stand racists. Now on your bike racist....

How is it racist exactly?

I would LOVE to hear your explanation.

"Oh, yeah, and who decided that white privilege meant that then?"

Umm...the person who first wrote about white privilege, and the countless academics and others who've used their definition since?

You can't just decide that what words means are suspiciously 'convenient' because you don't happen to like them.

It's also not an attack on any other opressed identities, because... intersectionality. You're getting cross about something that doesn't exist.

Has it ever occurred to you that, for example, Eastern Europeans, who are ‘perceived as white’, face discrimination and prejudice, often also from those perceived as non-white?

The clue is social class, not skin colour.

Oversimplifying things may make people feel good but doesn’t solve anything.

Do you mean Peggy McIntosh, the wealthy and completely derived from the real world aristocrat who confused class privilege with skin tone privilege, perhaps purposefully?

Most ‘research’ that supposedly supports the concept of white privilege is based on loose interpretation of various phenomena. For example, the preference for Western-sounding names. The clue is familiarity. In Nigeria, Nigerian names would be preferred. In Poland - Polish. I’m not saying it’s right but it’s not a manifestation of white privilege. Eastern Europeans also don’t get hired in the West for this reason.

As to the ‘unconscious bias’ test, even its inventors said it’s skewed and unreliable.

If you want to prove me wrong, feel free to post some links to data. I’m open to learning.