Clean version of David Mamet play?

[jacksprat]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 12:46am

A friend of mine was so excited to get cast in a David Mamet play at a local community theatre, but he has since become frustrated that the director is cutting out all of the "bad" language for fears of offending the audience.

I happen to agree with my friend that it is wrong to do that, especially with David Mamet, whose plays are in fact known for their raw language.

Is this even legal, or does a director have the freedom to clean up language at his discretion? I can understand, even if I don't agree, with the idea of a theatre not wanting to offend their audience, but if the language in Mamet is too much, then I believe a different play should have been picked?

Should I alert the rights holders, or am I just over-reacting. At the least, shouldn't the theatre at least make public the fact that they are doing a clean version of a David Mamet play, so as to not mislead audiences into thinking this is what he actually wrote? Is there any real threat that the production could be fined or closed?

Looking for any advice anyone can share about similar situations.

PS - for the record, I am not talking about a word here or there. I'm talking about practically every bit of foul language. I mean, he's substituting in tamer words when he just has to have vulgarity... like "crap" and "fudge" and "dang".

[winston89]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 1:02am

I think technically it's against the law to alter any part of a play. However, there are schools etc all over the place that might shorten or cut out a monologue to make the play a little shorter. I do know that when I was in high school it was common for my director to cut out a line or two of a lengthy monologue etc to make it a little shorter. But, he never altered anything for content. This is someone that is a strong believer that theatre is supposed to push the comfort zone.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 1:13am

I think it's likely you're a sock puppet. If not, no, it's not legal, no, you're not over-reacting, and yes, you should alert the rights holders.

But I think it's more likely that you're a sock puppet. Why do Mamet and change the language? It's absurd. If you're worried about offending the audience you don't do Mamet.

The only similar situation I can think of was Kathy Lee Gifford who didn't want to use the Lord's name in vain so she used an obscenity instead - but that was sanctioned by Sondheim.

[jacksprat]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 1:34am

I am not a sock puppet. What a strange thing to say.

To be perfectly clear, I don't agree with the decision being made by this theatre. I think that plays should be done as written, but I know that there is some leeway that groups get away with. I just think this is a step too far.

I mean, we're talking David Mamet here. Cutting the profanity seems wrong.

[Biff AKA Levi]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 2:57am

I was chosen to direct a one act play for my high school's Senior One Act Play Festival. The first play I wanted to direct had some bad language and my teacher asked Sam French if we could cut it. They said no.

Which leads me to my point: It's up to the rights holder (usually the playwright, or the publisher if the playwright has passed) to decide what happens.

There's a chance that the director has permission. Your friend should ask the director.

[Mildred Plotka]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 3:07am

Drop an anonymous tip to the licensing company and sit back and let the issue resolve itself.

I'm not a Mamet fan but a I am fan of a playwright's rights and this is a clear violation. Report them.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 3:35am

"I am not a sock puppet. What a strange thing to say."

Not really. You joined today to ask this question, which you clearly already know the answer to. After all, you also said:

"I mean, we're talking David Mamet here. Cutting the profanity seems wrong."

It doesn't seem wrong, it is wrong. How ridiculous to take on a Mamet play if you're going to substitute words like "dang" and "fudge". I think you can understand why the idea of sockpuppetry might rear its head under the circumstances.

Besides, as much as I believe you're a sock puppet, I gave you the benefit of the doubt and answered every one of your questions. What more do you want?

[jacksprat]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 9:56am

I've just never heard the term "sock puppet" before, so I'm not even sure what it means.

It is true I joined today, but I have lurked for far longer than that.

I was pretty sure that it was illegal, but I have also seen instances in which community theatres have made changes and cuts to plays, so I figured there just might be some sort of leeway allowed.

The main reason I was looking for advice was because my friend wants to do the show. He would prefer to do it as written, but if reporting the theatre causes them to pull the rights altogether, then my friend won't have the pleasure of even doing a censored version of the script.

I'm just weighing the pros and cons of meddling or not, and it would be nice to be able to let the theatre know that they should change their stance with a nudge, rather than risk the danger of losing the rights completely.

The cast has expressed their disappointment to the director in this decision to placate the community by cleaning the script, but it is something he isn't willing to negotiate as he is the director after all, and the Board of Directors stands by him as well.

Reporting this incident could backlash on the cast... Its a really tough decision to make. Updated On: 5/18/10 at 09:56 AM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 10:03am

I am so sick and tired of people joining this community and harassed for being a "sock puppet" just for starting a conversation or asking a question. Welcome, Jacksprat. I hope you don't let some people deter you from posting and joining in on conversations here.

Oh, and I agree that you should tell the licensing company and let them resolve it.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 10:03am

I don't see why it's so outlandish to believe someone joined the boards to ask people they believed would know better. He knew it was probably illegal and wanted to know the best course of action. There have been dozens of threads like this and people have been helped without the accusations. Even if you suspected the poster was a sockpuppet, he's not posting dozens of obscene threads or picking fights with posters, so it serves no purpose to call him out, other than to make yourself look good for your supposedly brilliant deduction skills.

Which this, by the way:

"Why do Mamet and change the language? It's absurd. If you're worried about offending the audience you don't do Mamet."

Is not acceptable evidence that it's a fake post. There are hundreds of instances of high school and community theatres of censoring "inappropriate" shows and every time there's a thread about it, someone asks this same question. People are idiots, that's why. Especially delusional community theatre directors who have to do the popular show, even if it means butchering the script, or having all the black characters be played by white actors in color-coded shirts. Even if this instance is made-up, it still happens all the time.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 10:53am

"Which this, by the way:

"Why do Mamet and change the language? It's absurd. If you're worried about offending the audience you don't do Mamet."

Is not acceptable evidence that it's a fake post."

Oh, please. I never said it was a fake post, and I haven't been nasty to jacksprat, and even answered all his/her questions. In fact, I've never, ever called anyone a sock puppet before.

" There have been dozens of threads like this and people have been helped without the accusations. "

It wasn't an accusation, just an observation, and I'm not remotely interested in impressing anyone with my "brilliant deduction skills". I did not harass OP, in fact was downright polite by the standards on this board. IMO, you're both over-reacting.

Jacksprat, a sock puppet is someone joins a board to get people riled up, and it happens here frequently. Most of them are crude and transparent. It usually involves a silly question, and sue me, the idea of deliberately picking a Mamet play then butchering the language falls in that category for me.

"I'm just weighing the pros and cons of meddling or not, and it would be nice to be able to let the theatre know that they should change their stance with a nudge, rather than risk the danger of losing the rights completely.

The cast has expressed their disappointment to the director in this decision to placate the community by cleaning the script, but it is something he isn't willing to negotiate as he is the director after all, and the Board of Directors stands by him as well.

Reporting this incident could backlash on the cast... Its a really tough decision to make."

If the cast has expressed their opinion, and the Board of Directors is standing behind the director, you have three choices: speak to the board regarding the illegality of their actions, which will likely serve no purpose and could get ugly, do nothing and let them put on a sub-par play (which play is it, btw?), or drop a dime to the rights holders before the cast gets too invested in the show. Shows have shut down during a run under circumstances like this, and that would be far more traumatic to the cast, I would think.

A tough decision, yes, but alerting the rights owners is the right thing to do. Let us know your decision.

eta: "The main reason I was looking for advice was because my friend wants to do the show. He would prefer to do it as written, but if reporting the theatre causes them to pull the rights altogether, then my friend won't have the pleasure of even doing a censored version of the script."

It's extremely unlikely that the director has permission to "clean up" a Mamet play. If you report it, they will very likely pull the rights, but better no play than a bowlderized one. Updated On: 5/18/10 at 10:53 AM

[angelplays]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 11:18am

Also, if the director and the Board are allowed to get away with this, there's no telling what may be next for their revisions.

It should be stopped immediately. The only way they will learn there are consequences is if they are reported and have to deal with the licensing agency (at the least) this time.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 11:25am

Somebody really changed the eff word to Fudge? I mean, really? So not only is he doing Mamet without Mamet's language, but he's going for unintentional laughter?

[wexy]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 2:43pm

clean Mamet is an oxymoron.

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 2:44pm

I tend to believe the OP is a sock puppet.

Notice - no mention of where they are from or the name of the theatre company or even which play.

Also it is "a friend who is in it. If the friend is concerned the friend knows who licenses the play and can simply call them.

Finally, no theatre group would elect to do a Mamet play an then "clean up" the language. (GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS Jr?)

Sock puppets like to post useless "info"("I heard a rumour that when Kristen goes on vacation from PROMISES Idina will replace her.") They never mention a source and the supposed rumour is so outrageous that no one would ever take them seriously. They sometimes try to add credibility claiming that "a friend knows someone in the cast..." but they never even name the cast member.

They just like to see how many responses they can generate.

LOL - and I just supplied another "fix" for this one.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 2:49pm

Personally, I can't wait to see Idina in PROMISES!

[jacksprat]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 3:38pm

It would be a pointless to even attempt to defend the authenticity of my post, and ironically, it sounds as though a call placed in to the rights holder would only lead to a gentle reminder to the theatre to do the show as written, which would mean that there would never be any proof that the theatre was contemplating doing this in the first place.

The only way to show that what I am saying is true would be to wait until after opening weekend to report them. Really, until they try and sell tickets to a paying audience, they haven't done anything wrong yet. This would lead to the theatre group potentially having the rights taken away in mid-run, (or maybe they will just be told to revert back to the play as written and they'll be let off with a warning... i don't know.)

The problem now is that anyone who reports the current state of rehearsals would have to be someone on the inside, and that is where I would be concerned for my friend. The cast has made it known that they disapprove of the changes, so for a complaint to come in now... well, the theatre is going to assume it was a cast member trying to sabotage the production.

I agree that it is ludicrous to do a Mamet play with cleaned-up language, but it is truly naive to believe that this couldn't happen because "no" theatre group would do this. You just don't understand how certain theatre groups operate, especially when they have an audience that they believe would not handle foul language well.

So... I am leaning towards waiting until after opening, then alerting the rights holders, so that it can lead to public embarrassment for the theatre, my friend in the play can escape suspicion, since by that point it will have been seen by hundreds of people in the public.

The only real question left for me to figure out is whether the theatre would have to pay a fine, or would just be allowed to continue with the second week as written, or if there would be longer lasting repercussions, such as not being able to get rights to any play from that publishing house again.

When the director and Board have been told that they shouldn't do this, but they don't take the warnings seriously, I kind of want to see them flounder a bit... that may be juvenile, but it is how I feel.

Plus, the bonus to waiting is it gives me the chance to show that I am not a "sockpuppet"... :)

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 3:40pm

I don't believe any of that.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 3:52pm

"I agree that it is ludicrous to do a Mamet play with cleaned-up language, but it is truly naive to believe that this couldn't happen because "no" theatre group would do this. You just don't understand how certain theatre groups operate, especially when they have an audience that they believe would not handle foul language well."

Then why choose Mamet? Mamet without the language is not Mamet.

"So... I am leaning towards waiting until after opening, then alerting the rights holders, so that it can lead to public embarrassment for the theatre, my friend in the play can escape suspicion, since by that point it will have been seen by hundreds of people in the public.

The only real question left for me to figure out is whether the theatre would have to pay a fine, or would just be allowed to continue with the second week as written, or if there would be longer lasting repercussions, such as not being able to get rights to any play from that publishing house again."

Report it or don't report it, but I think it is a huge mistake to report it mid-run. If you do that, damages are much more severe. The cast will have wasted its time and the show will be shut down instantly, and yes, fines and other repercussions are very likely. If, otoh, you report them now, they have a chance to see the error of their ways. I wouldn't worry so much about your friend, who in any case probably wouldn't want to do a b@stardized version anyway. There's a bigger picture here. Report them now. The director is breaking the law and doing everyone a disservice.

"ironically, it sounds as though a call placed in to the rights holder would only lead to a gentle reminder to the theatre to do the show as written, which would mean that there would never be any proof that the theatre was contemplating doing this in the first place."

That's not ironic. That would just force them to do the right thing. Where's the irony in that - and why would you care about proof? Since the entire cast has voiced their displeasure, your friend is no more suspect than anyone else. Besides, who cares if the director knows who turned him in? Someone needs to grow a pair of balls and do the play as written.
Updated On: 5/18/10 at 03:52 PM

[angelplays]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 4:57pm

I suspect it could in fact result not only in a warning, but I would think that someone could be dispatched from the licensing company to see if what the company says is being done (assuming they say "Oh, ok. Sorry. We'll use the language as written.") is in fact being done. And if it's NOT in fact being done, I would expect there would be severe repercussions up to and including the inability of that company to get anything licensed by that agency again - or until there is a significant change to the board.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 5:12pm

Exactly. If you report them mid-run, you're screwing everyone, and they will have trouble in the future. If you report them now, they're on notice to do the right thing - and yes, they will send someone out to check.

There is no bonus in waiting, unless it's for your own satisfaction. As you said:

"I kind of want to see them flounder a bit... that may be juvenile, but it is how I feel. "

Almost every single person on this thread has suggested you report it. If you're truly concerned about your friend, do it now or don't do it all, and hope nobody else does. I can promise if I were in the audience of a Mamet play with people saying "dang" and "fudge", my first phone call the next day would be to report that travesty.

[Jon]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 5:52pm

"Sock puppet" refers to someone who is already a member of a discussion board, but joins again under a new screen name so he can post something (usually controversial) without being identified.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 6:04pm

Seeing a cleaned up Mamet is like watching The Sopranos on A & E edited.

[DMsquared2]

Posted: 5/18/10 at 8:32pm

"clean Mamet is an oxymoron."

That's hysterical. The title of this thread practically made me laugh.

I agree with those who have said you should pick something else. Good luck and welcome to BWW.

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 5/19/10 at 12:52am

Call the licensing agency and report it. I once did a very embarrassing production of The Sound of music several years ago where the director rewrote the entire libretto, and to this day I regret not calling him out on it. Please, save everyone from a similar situation and do the right thing.