Thank God the Gypsy Robe is now the legacy Robe- Page 3

[Fosse76]

Posted: 7/15/18 at 3:17am

John Adams said: "VintageSnarker said: "That's in no way equivalent. Condoms and ethnic slurs? "

Nope... cultural definitions of words and other cultural definitions of words.

"

A racist term is a racist term. It has no other meaning. 

[John Adams]

Posted: 7/15/18 at 8:28am

Fosse76 said: "A racist term is a racist term. It has no other meaning."

...except for when it does, as is also true for other, non-racist words. There are many examples of words that do not share the same definition across cultures.

It is perfectly acceptable in England to "smoke a fag". In the US, it's a hate crime (that example's a two-for).

A US citizen would not be surprised that a man born and raised in Chicago identified himself as "American", but might question a man born and raised in Buenos Aires for responding, "Me, too!"

In the US, men and women can wear pants as acceptable business attire - don't do that in the UK, though...

If you're a guest in a British home, it would be polite for the host to "knock you up" for breakfast. You would be arrested for doing the same thing in Baltimore.

I think it's important to point out, also that (at least to my knowledge), the Romani peoples have not criticized the theater community for using the term "gypsy" in its theatrical context.

Again, I am very pleased that the Romani peoples feel honored and respected by this gesture, but I do mourn the loss of the term from theater vocabulary. Judging from some of the comments here, I think the change also promotes the incorrect notion that the term's use in the context of the theater world (and in shows like Applause) is derogatory.
 

Updated On: 7/15/18 at 08:28 AM

[John Adams]

Posted: 7/15/18 at 8:34am

Kad said: "I have a hard time believing that you would possibly tell an offended Romani person, 'oh, it’s okay, it is not really a slur when I say it.'”
 

Would it be egotistical of me to interpret your comment as an understanding that I would never willfully insult the Romani peoples? (I hope so)

Updated On: 7/15/18 at 08:34 AM

[BJR]

Posted: 7/15/18 at 9:03am

Kad said: "It’s not like any of you will ever be wearing it anyway."

This. It's a tradition that didn't even belong to any of you.

[behindthescenes2]

Posted: 7/15/18 at 10:42am

Just because it's name has been "officially" changed, doesn't mean it has been changed.  It will ALWAYS be the gypsy robe and there is not a blasted thing anyone can do about it.  The Legacy Robe will always be mentioned in the future with a (subset title, Gypsy Robe) long after all you have self-congratulated yourselves on this small, picayune, obnoxious, and sanctimonious exercise.  If you really want a challenge, try getting the "N-word" out of the lexicon of the African-American culture, and society, and those who have taken on that culture (the latter being people who haven't the remotest sense of what it means to be African-American in the United States, or a person of African decent in any country outside of the African continent where they are a minority) and then you can congratulate yourselves wholeheartedly.  I say this because no matter how much Maya Angelou, Oprah,  John Lewis, and others wish it's daily usage to be extricated from  music, literature, colloquial and urban language and dialogue , or prohibit the "artistic license" use of it in anyway, not to mention the abilty to use it under the guise of the 1st amendment, I sincerely doubt it will come to pass, as it will be the case for same-sex loving individuals who continue to face on an hourly basis the terms and use of such endearing nicknames such as "faggot, homo, sissy, nancy, queer, and the stupid term gay among countless others that are even more gross in usage."

Sometimes we take things and ourselves way too seriously when it comes to our self-awarenes and self-importance.  Truly what is tragic now is that all of those  glorious performers in the past who proudly wore the "Gypsy Robe," will be prohibited or intimitated by these new righteous zealots to ever bring that past honor to the forefront of their own legacy in show business by that name, because they weren't given a "Legacy Robe," they were given a "Gypsy Robe"  and this exercise has forever diminished their accomplishment.  

[Kad]

Posted: 7/15/18 at 11:18am

behindthescenes2 said: "Just because it's name has been "officially" changed, doesn't mean it has been changed. It will ALWAYS be the gypsy robe and there is not a blasted thing anyone can do about it. The Legacy Robe will always be mentioned in the future with a (subset title, Gypsy Robe)long after all you have self-congratulated yourselves on thissmall, picayune,obnoxious, and sanctimonious exercise. If you really want a challenge, try getting the "N-word" out of the lexicon of the African-American culture, and society, and those who have taken on that culture (the latter being peoplewho haven't the remotest sense of what it means to be African-American in the United States,or a person of African decent in any country outside of the African continent where they are a minority)and then you can congratulate yourselves wholeheartedly. I say this because no matter how much Maya Angelou, Oprah, John Lewis, and others wish it's daily usageto be extricated from music, literature, colloquial and urban language and dialogue , or prohibit the "artistic license" use of it in anyway, not to mention the abilty to use it under the guise of the 1st amendment, I sincerely doubt it will come to pass, as it will be the case for same-sex loving individuals who continue to face on an hourly basisthe terms anduse of such endearing nicknamessuch as"faggot, homo, sissy, nancy, queer, and the stupid term gay among countless others that are even more gross in usage."

Sometimes we take things and ourselves way too seriously when it comes to our self-awarenes and self-importance. Truly what is tragic now is that all of those glorious performers in the past who proudly wore the "Gypsy Robe," will be prohibited or intimitated by these new righteous zealots to ever bring that past honor to the forefront of their own legacy in show business by that name, because they weren't given a "Legacy Robe," they were given a "Gypsy Robe" and this exercise has forever diminished their accomplishment. "

Get a grip.  It’s a ceremonial opportunity given to an extremely small portion of not just the general population, but even the relatively small population of AEA members. In the scope of traditions, this one is incredibly minor- a subset of a subset of a subset of the population even knows about it.  No one will be driven out of town on a rail for saying they received the gypsy robe back in the day.  Future generations will refer to it as it is officially called.  

It is an offensive term. People may not have realized that, and that’s okay. But they know now. So they have two choices: make amends, or be an asshole. Looks like we know where you stand.

 

 

[dramamama611]

Posted: 7/15/18 at 11:31am

What a load of rubbish.   NOTHING is diminished by changing the name.  

 

Additionally, the arts can only take care of things within their realm -- the using of the N-word by people of color is not one of those things.  If they were giving out a coon-award or other ridiculous thing they would take it upon themselves to change the name of that too. 

 

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 7/15/18 at 8:55pm

Ravenclaw said: "I understand the side saying that the word as it is used in the theatre is entirely divorced from its original context. Another example of an acceptable word with problematic origins is the word "hysterical," whose root references female anatomy. Etymologically, the word "hysterical" references an implied instability or craziness perceived to be inherent in women. However, most people who use the word "hysterical" have no idea of its etymological origin, and thus, you'd be hard pressed to find someone who takes great offense at the use of the word "hysterical" today, despite its problematic origin."

Maybe when hysterical is used as a synonym for hilarious. But when it's used to refer to a woman's behavior? It is very much still a loaded word that people use with malicious intent and that others rightfully find offensive.

[OlBlueEyes]

Posted: 7/16/18 at 3:47am

The Roma people qualify as one of the most hideously oppressed by our beloved Western Civilization, particularly in the last century, and if they find the term Gypsy to be a slur against them, it cost Actors’ Equity nothing to change the name of the robe. 

If Gypsy is really considered to be a slur of equal weight as n***** then this is a tiny first step. If matters have not changed since this article was published three months ago, the theater community has yet to come together on this.

But the industry’s major charity, Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS, is sticking with its annual “Gypsy of the Year” fund-raiser, which collects millions of dollars for health care. And the word remains widely used by performers themselves.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/20/theater/actors-equity-association-gypsy-robe.html

Change would have to come to an overly-revived Broadway musical and more than a few popular songs. How about the many literary references? I believe that it is in Jane Austen's novel Emma that Gypsies threaten her young friend. (In the case of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, which have many instances of the word n******, a censored edition was published that used the work "slave" instead. Although this may sound offensive, the alternative has been in many cases not to include the books in the high school curriculum at all. No one is accusing Mark Twain or, in the case of Show Boat, Oscar Hammerstein II, of being racists, but intent to be historically accurate here does not matter.)

Hardest of all would be to train the population to avoid using the word "gypsy" to express the common meaning of a free spirit or a wanderer. Educating the public to not use the word would be a lengthy process.

Ultimately I do not see success here principally because the Roma people have no political power. But I still applaud the Union for doing its part.

[JBroadway]

Posted: 7/17/18 at 11:38am

Others have said this already, but I'd like to re-iterate it - because (as far as I can tell) none of the anti-name-change people on this thread have responded directly to this particular point, and I would like to hear your responses: 

EVEN IF the word has been re-appropriated to be more positive, EVEN IF the "social Justice warriors" are just being too sensitive and self-righteous, EVEN IF the robe has lost some of its former glory through this name change, EVEN IF the name-change has negative consequences, EVEN IF the Roma people are wrong for being offended...

EVEN IF all of those things are true (I don't personally believe that they are, but that is irrelevant to my current point)...

Why does all of that outweigh the alleviated pain of the Roma people? Isn't it more important to be respectful of our fellow human beings? The hurt you are experiencing as a result of this change is not equal to the hurt that the Roma people experience when the word is used - so isn't it a worthy sacrifice? 

 

[dramamama611]

Posted: 7/17/18 at 11:41am

Yes, this.

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 7/17/18 at 2:12pm

Exactly. Thank you, JBroadway.

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Posted: 7/17/18 at 2:12pm

I agree with so many posts here saying this change is a good thing. I'm just going to point out a more self-serving but not negative point-of-view. Equity did the right thing for them and the community by being proactive with this change because no matter how you slice it, no matter how many paragraphs you write on BWW that like 50 people at most read, every time they advertise this ceremony, which is supposed to be celebratory and give nothing but positive attention to the dancer receiving the robe, what people outside the community will see is the word "Gypsy". The word is derogatory in every other context. That will do nothing but invite more and more negative attention and ire as time moves on and distract from the purpose of publicizing the ceremony in the first place.

And for all the people saying it will always by the "Gypsy" robe...it will for a few years until people get used to the new name or die off. I get the need to honor tradition, but there are such things as negative traditions and as we evolve and become more aware we need to adapt to the times. There are many theatre traditions/terms that are no longer done/used because time has moved on. This is about self-preservation and making sure theatre survives.

Updated On: 7/17/18 at 02:12 PM

[John Adams]

Posted: 7/17/18 at 4:17pm

JBroadway said: "The hurt you are experiencing as a result of this change is not equal to the hurt that the Roma people experience when the word is used - so isn't it a worthy sacrifice?"

That's a really good question, and I don't think there is a definitive answer to it, as yet.

First: no one in this thread is "anti-name-change". The name has been changed. Period. In reference to myself, I believe it is a misguided choice.

The NYT article from April of this year offers many interesting perspectives from both sides of the question. Based on information and perspectives expressed by Roma people, it doesn't seem as if the use of the word, "gypsy", in its theatrical context, and as used by people in the theater world, is/has been hurtful to the Roma.

Keep in mind that this is a change that was initiated by Actors' Equity, unprompted by the Roma. Also consider that Equity's removal of  of the descriptor is not universal; although the gypsy robe will now be called the "legacy" robe, Equity is keeping the name for the "Gypsy of the Year" fund-raisers. 

If you choose, I hope you'll take a look at the Roma Peoples Project site, and the video posted there, regarding how some Roma wish to move forward. I was particularly effected by the words of the first gentleman who appears in the video (Bozhidar Draganov) and a Roma musician (Mihaela Dragan) who appears later in the video.

Bozhidar Draganov (who btw, identifies himself as Gypsy, as well as Roma) says, "Please, do not fight what exists. Start building what you want to replace it." I believe that the theater community has assisted in moving toward that ideal with its adoption of the word "gypsy", in its theatrical context. 

Mihaela Dragan says, "...this is one of the things that I try to do with my work; to educate non-Roma people about us through Arts, so they can use their privileges and become our allies in our fight for equality." It is not exactly what she expresses, but I believe that by using the word "gypsy" - as it's defined within the Arts community with its very positive connotation, it promotes our direct connection to the history of Roma artists (in dance, particularly). By doing so, we are matching the spirit of her wish for us to be allies.

When the theater community shows by example, that the word "gypsy" is always used lovingly, respectfully, and with honor, we help to erase the stigma of the word.

In the NYT article, Chita Rivera says, "It’s an honor to be called a gypsy — it’s a title to be proud of. If anything it brings attention to the word and the group. I have always considered myself a gypsy and still do.”

For the record, Kad, I don't think that makes her "an asshole". 

[OlBlueEyes]

Posted: 7/17/18 at 11:11pm

I did not know that the Roma people had not requested this change. If the preponderance of that group is indifferent, then I would start to wonder if Actor's Equity was not just pandering to the media for its approval.

But the Roma Peoples Project at Columbia seem very happy about the change, if this group is representative of the Romas:

Today, Actors Equity posted to Twitter a message they received from the Roma Peoples Project at Columbia University.

"Given the actual Roma history and its entanglement with the 'gypsy' misnomer, we at the Roma Peoples Project believe that the change of name from 'Gypsy Robe' to 'Legacy Robe' initiated by the Actors' Equity Association is remarkable," the statement says. "It is a step towards accurate representation of Roma people in mainstream society. We are moved by their honorable choice."

Read the full statement on the Actors Equity Twitter account.

 

[RippedMan]

Posted: 7/18/18 at 2:19am

Forgive my ignorance, but as an actor, I'm not sure many of us would equate "Gypsy" = a negative for the Roma people. I just think of a gypsy has a vagabond, which, to me, greatly explains an actor's life. You're constantly going from show to show, theater to theater, city to city, etc. I don't quite see any negative connotation, but again, maybe that's my ignorance, so if it's better to be called a Legacy Robe, which is a fine name, then so be it.  

[Sondheimite]

Posted: 7/18/18 at 2:31am

I meant this no snark, these are real questions I'm interested in:  

Why are you people so attached to the term, is my question?

Why so afraid of change?

The word hurts people.  I'm sure that people have argued the many meanings of many racial slurs.  Why not just... not say the word?  Why do you NEED it to be called the Gypsy Robe?  Why is that important to any of you, as none of you are ever going to be in a position to even receive it?  

Updated On: 7/18/18 at 02:31 AM

[newintown]

Posted: 7/18/18 at 7:33am

OlBlueEyes wrote: "But the Roma Peoples Project at Columbia seem very happy about the change, if this group is representative of the Romas."

The Roma or Romani people have no autonomous state, government, or central leadership, so there is no single person or group who can legitimately speak for them as an entity.

[JBroadway]

Posted: 7/18/18 at 9:37am

newintown said: "OlBlueEyes wrote: "But the Roma Peoples Project at Columbia seem very happy about the change, if this group is representative of the Romas."

The Roma or Romani people have no autonomous state, government, or central leadership, so there is no single person or group who can legitimately speak for them as an entity."

 

That works both ways though. Just as the RPP don't speak for all Romani, neither do the members of the community who self-identify "Gypsy." It's their right to try to reclaim the word, but it's not our place to force along that change, and to tell those that do view it as a slur that they are wrong to do so, simply because some Romani have reclaimed the word. 

 

 

@John Adams, I appreciate your thoughtful response, and I see how you are arriving at your conclusions. I think your intentions in trying to continue the reclamation of the word are honorable, but misguided. If I'm understanding your post correctly, you're saying that continuing to use the word in a positive context helps the Roma people because it erases the harmful history of the word. But I think we have to let THEM lead that change. Many Roma people STILL view it as a slur, even if some of them self-identify as Gypsies. If they want to begin using it more universally, then perhaps down the line, the word will lose its negative potency. I would argue that something similar has happened with the word "queer," which, as someone else mentioned earlier, is now acceptable in most contexts as long as it's not deliberately being used to insult someone. But that change could not have happened if straight people had instigated it, because it would have taken agency away from the LGBT community, and the people who were hurt by the word would have had no say in the matter. The same is true in this case. 

It's not our place to decide how best to help the Roma people. You're interpreting their words in such a way that fits in with your theory about how best to use the word. But as you yourself said, that's not exactly what they're saying. It seems to me that you are twisting the meaning of those quotes to justify your viewpoint, but in the end, you're the one who says it's best to keep using the word positively. Just because you believe that your theory fits in with Dragan's philosophy, does not mean that Dragan would agree with your methods. 

And even if he did, the fact remains that many Roma people still find the word hurtful, regardless of context. You can't negate that fact by citing examples of people who are NOT hurt by it. 

 

As for the fact that Equity initiated the change themselves, I don't think that's really relevant. Not everybody has to be TOLD that what they are doing is wrong for them to realize it themselves. The word has a harmful history, and a harmful connotation for many Roma - that information is there in the world for anyone to access if they care to find out. Clearly AEA was made aware of that fact, and they decided to change it. Even if no Roma people knew about the robe (which I think is unlikely), Equity removed the term because they knew they were contributing to a harmful history. 

 

And some may disagree with me, but even if they made the decision for self-serving purposes, I believe that's better than not making the decision at all. 

[John Adams]

Posted: 7/18/18 at 10:56am

Hiya, JBroadway!

I'm enjoying this discussion very much! I feel like my awareness of the Roma has increased dramatically, and there's more I'd like to discuss i.e., "gypsy" vs "Gypsy" and more. (And yeah... I'm not exactly happy that you believe I'm the kind of person who would twist Roma words for my own, self-serving purposes...), but as points have been raised regarding who might be an appropriate spokesperson for the Roma, it does make me mindful that there is no Roma representative in this thread who can directly respond.

So... it does seem appropriate to let you have "the last word", as it were - even though it does sting a bit 

Updated On: 7/18/18 at 10:56 AM

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Posted: 7/18/18 at 12:00pm

This really has been an interesting discussion. I also think we can observe why many groups tend to be reactive rather than proactive. Though they get criticized that a change should have happened a long time ago and they are only making certain changes after getting negative feedback, at least that group/organization can cite to the criticism to validate the change. People tend to wish that organizations/groups would be more proactive and lament that they are not and make a change before it blows up, but when they do that, people will criticize them for making a "needless" change or for not honoring tradition. They also fail to see why a certain change is needed or why it is such a big deal since there isn't the same noise that happens when changes happen "after-the-fact". I think this is a case where Actor's Equity should be applauded for making the change without needing to face the same level of backlash for the name that we expect when these sort of changes happen because they had the foresight to see that this could be a real disaster for them AND it has the added bonus of respecting other groups of people. They don't always do things that are worthy of applause, but this time, I will applaud them.

[SweetLips22]

Posted: 7/18/18 at 4:16pm

Legacy is an Australian organisation established in 1923 by ex-service men to care for dependants of deceased Australian men and women from WW1 [and 2].

[antonijan]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 12:45am

Congrats to Justin Prescott for getting the Legacy Robe for the HOH musical.

But just wondering...who got awarded the Legacy Robe after the official name change?

Afra Hines?

[jameshouston135]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 6:11am

yeah it is really a sort of legacy and nothign more in it.