Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

Horrible histories - live show disappointment

84 replies

Mner2019 · 05/05/2019 17:16

Just back from seeing Horrible Histories’ live show. Whilst the show in and of itself was good fun, I was disappointed. Just two men on stage the whole time who did all the characters (men and women). One of their lines was that history is written by the winners and the irony was huge.

Yes history is indeed written by the winners - white middle class men. Why couldn’t our expensive ticket stretch to women being involved as well...?

The only women up there were two pulled from the audience to act as witches which just seemed to emphasise the ridiculous sexism even more to me - underpaid, there to help the men with the banter!

DS was disappointed with the lack of the rat. I missed the women. 50% of the population and barely deserving of a mention. Barmy Britain indeed!

OP posts:

SnapesGreasyHair · 05/05/2019 18:50

Taking mine to see Terrible Tudors.... really hope it good😱

Stiffasaboard · 05/05/2019 18:55

We saw them few years back and was two men and two women and they seemed very inclusive and didn’t stereotype
I felt exactly the opposite to you and I’m a miserable git who moans loads about stuff like this

Shame if they have missed a trick in this show. Surely they could manage to recruit a woman in place of one of the men?

CinnabarRed · 05/05/2019 18:57

My three (aged 11, 8 and 7) loved both Terrible Tudors and Awful Egyptians.

woman19 · 05/05/2019 18:59

"To their detractors they are gruesomely violent and guilty of simple stereotyping. Their creator, Terry Deary, has been accused of being, among other things, anti-Scottish and anti-Catholic"

www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/features/terry-deary-im-not-some-koko-the-clown-coming-over-to-perform-for-you-2299712.html

Horrible Histories have entertainment value, but...........

Comefromaway · 05/05/2019 19:06

The creators of Horrible Histories the books and TV show are different to Birmingham Stage Co. The stage show will have been created under licence.

They are also touring Billionaire Boy.

Comefromaway · 05/05/2019 19:08

Shame if they have missed a trick in this show. Surely they could manage to recruit a woman in place of one of the men?

Why should they though.

Maybe they just cast the two people who they felt had the best chemistry on stage regardless of sex. Two handers require that.

LizzieSiddal · 05/05/2019 20:39

Maybe they just cast the two people who they felt had the best chemistry on stage regardless of sex.
What a pathetic excuse. And one which has been used for decades whenever women or indeed anyone other than a white, male tries to upset their dominance in almost every area of our society.
This show was about the history of Britain, not employing a woman in it is inexcusable.

Comefromaway · 05/05/2019 20:48

I’m sure the fabulous Alison Fitzjohn would disagree with you there (she’s not available at the moment though as she’s been touring with The Band).

thewinkingprawn · 05/05/2019 20:52

We’ve been to loads - usually a mix of men and women. In the nicest way - you are looking for something that is not there with this theatre company.

Original poster

Mner2019 · 05/05/2019 23:32

It’s good to hear their productions generally are not all like this and do have a better balance but it is frustrating that this wasn’t the case with the today. This is the only production of theirs that I have been to. Considering the cost for us was a lot, it was a shame that they either couldn’t or wouldn’t find a balance this afternoon. This does not entice me to go back.

OP posts:

StealthPolarBear · 05/05/2019 23:41

Terrible tudirs was better than awful Egyptians imo

Fantasisa · 05/05/2019 23:46

I agree with you, OP, and I would have been annoyed too. Although to be honest, I saw one of them which featured a woman in London with DH and the DC and I was distinctly underwhelmed. I think because the TV show is so good, just having two actors on stage felt boring in comparison and I ended up wishing we had saved the money and I love going to the theatre.

Goosefoot · 06/05/2019 03:28

Quotas aren't all they're cracked up to be.

SleepingSloth · 06/05/2019 05:40

There were only 2 people in it ! If there had been 20 and they had all been men, then you would have a point, but I really do think you must be waiting to be offended.

CrumpetyTea · 06/05/2019 05:42

I thought it was really good - the children I was with loved it. I was surprised it wasn't like the TV show but thought the two guys were excellent. From memory the vast majority of characters they did were men so it wasn't as if it was men playing women to a large degree.
History ( as taught to children) is about what the people in power did and in particular what the reigning monarch did - which means it focuses on what a certain very privileged number of men did to a huge degree - when you are looking at history from the ordinary person's perspective its different but that's not what horrible histories generally does

Original poster

Mner2019 · 06/05/2019 07:54

I really do think you were looking to be offended

You know I really wasn’t. I bought the tickets as a treat for our family. DS normally loves horrible histories. He didn’t like it because of the lack of the rat and I didn’t like it because of the poor representation of women. DH thought it was great.

OP posts:

thewinkingprawn · 06/05/2019 08:46

It’s a pretty small company - do you expect them to hire a woman who is not in the company in if the women who are in the company are doing other plays?

MaybeDoctor · 06/05/2019 09:08

If it was a large theatre organisation like the RSC then I think your complaint would be reasonable. Or if it was a production that was specifically funded by The Arts Council to raise awareness of female participation in historical events etc. But their website says 'it relies for 100% of its income from the box office' (direct quote). Therefore, they are probably running on not so much a shoestring, but a bit of broken shoelace. They probably don't have a female actor available and the costs of recruiting, rehearsing and inducting someone are too high.

I am currently putting on some events as part of my job role and the first response I got was a complaint that the events did not include a particular group - not a group that has a protected characteristic, just a convenience factor like 'people who are only free on Saturdays'. On many levels I agree with them and in an ideal world I would also hold events on Saturdays. But my budget is tiny, my time capacity is limited and my speakers are mostly giving their time free of charge - so I can only achieve what is reasonably possible within the constraints of those factors.

Fantasisa · 06/05/2019 09:11

The OP has said, perfectly validly, that this performance did not work for her. We all know that history focuses on men’s lives - the clue is in the name.

It would be nice if a stage show of a hugely popular TV series, which uses amazing actors and actresses, also used women in each performance too. It isn’t that hard. And if it is a small company, get bigger - the tickets cost enough.

LizzieSiddal · 06/05/2019 09:12

It’s a pretty small company - do you expect them to hire a woman who is not in the company in if the women who are in the company are doing other plays?

Yes, I expect them to hire enough women to represent, you know, actual women.

Original poster

Mner2019 · 06/05/2019 09:40

If they had put make up on to look black, everyone would be quite rightly outraged at the racism. But it’s ok because it’s only women?

They obviously just completely ignored any multicultural side of our history.

This is a big brand associated with the bbc, a company who through all their faults, has a woman on every panel show. But some of us are ok with ignoring women when they’re on the stage?

OP posts:

Comefromaway · 06/05/2019 09:50

I think you are confusing the “big brand” books and TV shows with a little shoestring children’s theatre company who pay a fee to licence and adapt the books into stage shows.

Original poster

Mner2019 · 06/05/2019 10:00

It is called ‘horrible histories’ with the branding and the logo evident to see. If I’m confusing the two, then it’s not surprising. We went to see it because it was a ‘horrible histories’ performance. If the two thing are completely separate, this is not being made clear at all.

OP posts:

CinnabarRed · 06/05/2019 10:06

If they had put make up on to look black, everyone would be quite rightly outraged at the racism. But it’s ok because it’s only women?

The female actor played plenty of male parts in the two performances we saw.

SleepingSloth · 06/05/2019 10:41

But it’s ok because it’s only women?

FGS. It's ok because there were only 2 people in it !

People on here have said that the company has many women. People have also said that the ones they have seen had women in. Yet you still are making out there's a problem.

Flip

1 2 3 4