Another high school play banned

[Gothampc]

Posted: 11/27/07 at 7:03pm

Ten Little Indians. Who knew Agatha Christie was a racist?

A widely performed school play has been canceled by Lakota officials after a recent meeting with a local NAACP official.

The internationally acclaimed play - Agatha Christie's "Ten Little Indians" - was to be performed by students at Lakota East High School this weekend.

But Gary Hines, president of the local NAACP branch, recently complained to Lakota officials that the play, based on Christie's 1939 mystery novel, was inappropriate for a school production.
Link

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 11/27/07 at 7:04pm

Brought to you by courtesy of the PC police

So much for free speech.

[Tkt2Ride]

Posted: 11/27/07 at 7:16pm

Well, putting on a Play that many in the Public didn't want to support tells me that maybe the Public has spoken it's peace? There is so much material out there, maybe something like this should have been better researched? Just the title alone makes me wonder why they didn't have it changed once again?

It's easy to stomp on other people's ancestor's but if you want to make a good show, give the people what they want, not what you can get away with. Especially at a Public School.

[hearthatstrue]

Posted: 11/27/07 at 7:39pm

The only logical reason for banning a high school production of this play is the fact that it centers around murder and revenge. I suppose that the core plot and the actual murders could a bit much for some. But, then again, it's Agatha Christie!

Methinks Mr. Hines needs to do his research before condemning a brilliant piece of literature as "racist" and "inappropriate." I do understand its history and can see how somebody could be offended by the older title (which was changed specifically for publication in America because it was deemed too offensive). BUT, if the title is already changed -- if the original title was never mentioned to an unsuspecting public, what harm is being done? I don't get it. Updated On: 11/27/07 at 07:39 PM

[winston89]

Posted: 11/27/07 at 8:11pm

I can understand how the old title would have been considered offensive. But, I don't understand how they can consdier this show offensive at all. Yes, technically "indian" is not the correct phrais at all. But, you have to realize that they can't get up in arms at all about it because it is a phrase that is used in every history class cross country.

I do know that there have been many places that have ditched the term " red" to go with the word "Indian." For example, my brother went to Colgate University. While he was there they were called the Red Raiders. But, during his time there they changed to the raiders as to not be offensive.

I wonder if they NAACP was upset because of the original title of the play?

[me2]

Posted: 11/27/07 at 8:21pm

I think I remember seeing a college presentation on the play where it was revealed that the Indians of the title were actuall Eastern Indians, the kind good old Columbus intended to find.

I once knew someone who had to have extensive meetings while doing ANNIE GET YOUR GUN. They didn't object to the play, they just wanted a honorable representation onstage, particularly concerning the wearing of tribal ceremony clothing during "I'm an Indian Too." It was a big, big headache for the director. I then spent much time working at an all-Native American school, and then it all seemed rather ridiculous in the face of more significant, serious problems the community was facing but weren't having meetings concerning. Not that I begrudge anyone to attempt to right hundreds of years of wrong through a school play, but in terms of priority, it didn't make a whole lot of sense.
Broadway Blog: Reflections While Reading Call Me Anna

[kyleorlando]

Posted: 11/27/07 at 8:25pm

They should do "Something's Afoot". It's basically the same story but a musical.

[hearthatstrue]

Posted: 11/27/07 at 8:43pm

Me2, I believe you're right, but that's not the entirety of the plot. The plot is based off of the old nursery rhyme "Ten Little Indians." I can understand how the nursery rhyme could offend, but the book/play itself shouldn't. Christie utilized the rhyme brilliantly, in my opinion, because she basically stripped it of its racist undertones and turned it solely into a device for a vengeful murder mystery in which race doesn't play a part. As far as I understand, the players can be any race. Yes, the main characters are sent to "Indian Island," but that name can easily be remedied. I'm sure, if it was that offensive, you could change the name of the island, or just call it "the island." I don't believe Agatha Christie had any racist intentions whatsoever.

Winston: Mr. Hines made it clear that the original title ("Ten Little N******") is the reason he wanted the play canceled. Updated On: 11/27/07 at 08:43 PM

[Tkt2Ride]

Posted: 11/27/07 at 9:43pm

I'm sure the NAACP would not let something under it's original title be presented that way. I like Agatha Christie's works. It's been a longtime since I have seen this one but most of us older folks know the rhyme as very bad form.

How this didn't come up in talks, even from the Students, would surprise me. I just don't understand why the Title cannot be changed? It isn't the whole PC thing. It's just about compassion for others who might be growing up there. We get so caught up in a box. It's fiction, not historical. I really doubt there will be a whole discussion on the topic and very few would stick around for it.

It is the connection with the song that really is the issue. Not so much the content of the Play. At least in College, students are Mature enough to differentiate better. I am sorry but the over all attitude in High School can still be very rebellious. It takes very little to incite hatred in others. Especially when times are getting tighter for so many families.

This just doesn't seem like the sort of Play for this age group to be performing. Especially in a school named after the Lakota Indian Tribe. I can easily see this as offensive and fodder for a fight. I think many will feel grateful this person stepped up to say something before it did cause some trouble at their school. Too many kids getting killed in High Schools.

I wouldn't linger too much on the PC as much as I would common sense. If this was a Play based on the study of racism, that would be very different indeed. It doesn't so it will do nothing to advance acceptance of anything but a bad title.

[winston89]

Posted: 11/27/07 at 9:59pm

Yes, Tkt2ride,

But they got up in arms because of the original title of the play. It was originally called "Ten Little N-----" but the name was changed when the show made its American debut. This was in 1940. When the Christine novel which she then turned into a show was published in serial form in the saturday evening post. The title was "And Then There Were None." It was then turned into a play which played on Broadway at the Broadhurst six years later. This time under the name Ten Little Indians. A name which was then used in London.

It is true that the original name was used in England. It was never ever used in America at any point. I do not se3 why something like that should ffect if a school should do the sow or not.

Keep in mind that in England today if they are talking about Native Americans they call them Red Indains they call people from India Indians.

[DrTheatre]

Posted: 11/27/07 at 10:21pm

I heard that because the play is now banned, stagehands that were planning to work that production are now going on strike!

WOW, get a different play!

Updated On: 11/27/07 at 10:21 PM

[EdmundOG]

Posted: 11/27/07 at 10:36pm

It's also worth noting that the original word doesn't carry nearly the same connotation in England. It was changed without fuss or complaint when published in America, and then changed again to a better title anyway. And as far as I can tell, that's the title the play was first published under, anyway. And Tkt2ride, do you have any idea what the show's about? It's not racially insensitive at all, really.

[nitsua]

Posted: 11/27/07 at 10:44pm

I have the AND THEN THERE WERE NONE movie, and I've seen the play a few times. It has nothing to do with race. At all.

No one's out killing Indians.

This is stupid.

[sidneybruhl]

Posted: 11/28/07 at 12:37am

Sorry, I do consider myself PC, but this is just plain stupid!

[winston89]

Posted: 11/28/07 at 8:49am

You also have to realize that in England some words mean different things then they do in the states. As someone said before the original title of the show did not mean the same thing it does here.

It is like it American English and UK English are the same language but with different dilacts.

[Mattbrain]

Posted: 11/28/07 at 10:41am

I'm as liberal as you can get but this is bullcrap. It's obvious that the guy is just pissed about the title alone.

This is the sort of thing that happens at my old high school. They're extremely PC down there. It's so bad that all of us kids in the chorus got freaked when the chorus teacher wanted "There Is Nothing Like A Dame" as one of the songs in the next concert.

Updated On: 11/28/07 at 10:41 AM

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 11/28/07 at 12:30pm

Here's a very interesting article that gives a lot of insight into the title's and play's racist (and anti-semitic) origins:


"The strange and offensive history of Ten Little Indians

By Sudie Hofmann

A bright yellow flyer hung on the wall of a local high school promoting a school-sponsored play. A bottle of poison and a rope appeared near the title of the play, Ten Little Indians. The subtitle read And Then There Were None.

I found it surprising that this controversial play was being performed in St. Cloud, Minn., a community where indigenous issues—such as the use of American Indian mascots and team nicknames—have been at the forefront of social justice activism for more than a decade.

When I found the flyer, I shared it with the Coalition Against Cultural Genocide (CACG), a local network of community activists with whom I have been active on the mascot issue for many years. We quickly conducted research on the history of the play and decided to present it to the school administration.

An Internet search provided us with a cover of the original 1939 Christie book, titled Ten Little n*s. The cover featured a "black" doll or golliwog (originally spelled golliwogg), hanging from a noose. Golliwogs, according to Ferris State University's Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia website are "grotesque creatures, with very dark, often jet black skin, large white-rimmed eyes, red or white clown lips, and wild frizzy hair." They made their appearance in the children's book series by Florence Kate Upton, which was published in England beginning in 1895. In the books, golliwogs, looking much like caricatures of black faced minstrels, haunted a toy store where they terrorized two Dutch dolls, Peg and Sarah Jane.

I decided to dig deeper into the history of Christie's book and play. The history is complicated and often cloaked in legend and misinformation. The origin of Christie's title is based on a song and chorus written in 1849 by a Philadelphia songwriter, Septimus Winner. His original rhyme,"Old John Brown," contained the refrain "one little, two little, three, little Indians." In 1866, Winner expanded the song and retitled it "Ten Little Indians." This version is replete with references to American Indians "out upon a spree," "dead drunk," in canoes, living in "wigwams" with "daddy Injun" and "mommy squaw." In 1869, Frank Green and Marc Mason created a minstrel tune, based on the song, for tenor G. W. "Pony" Moore to perform in St. James Hall in Picadilly. Its popularity with young children eventually established it as a nursery rhyme.

The rhyme metamorphosed in England, the United States, and Germany into Ten Little n*s, Ten Little Indians, The End of Ten Little Negroes, and And Then There Were None. The lines of the rhyme vary from decade to decade, and country to country. The 1943 theatrical version of Christie's book, Ten Little n*s, was based on a popular version of the rhyme in England at the time. The play, like the book, is set on n* Island, a name given to it because it resembled, "a man's head—a man with Negroid lips," according to Charles Osbourne in The Life and Crimes of Agatha Christie. The play employs the use of the children's nursery rhyme in which individuals die by different means. A few stanzas include:

Ten little n* boys going out to dine;

One choked his little self and then there were nine.

Seven little n* boys gathering up sticks; One chopped himself in half and then there were six.

Two little n* boys playing with a gun; One shot the other and then there was one.

One little n* boy left all alone;

He went and hanged himself and then there were none.

When the book version of Ten Little n*s was published in the United States in 1940 by Dodd, Mead, its title was changed to And Then There Were None, presumably in an effort to avoid offending African Americans. However, the title changed again to Ten Little Indians when Pocket Books published it in 1964. The play has subsequently been produced in some U.S. communities as Ten Little Injuns and more recently, playbills have indicated that the Indians referred to in the play are East Indians, as was the case in the local high school production mentioned earlier. Although the Christie title has changed over the last 66 years, its focus has always been about eliminating a specific group of people of color.

The subtitle or alternative title, And Then There Were None, presents another aspect of embedded racism, which is that of genocide. Rarely is the connection made from this ideological message of the title of the play to centuries of racism, colonization, and genocide. "And then there were none" has often been the intended goal of many colonial governments as well as that of U.S. government policies.

As I continued my research, I found that the play has problems reaching beyond the title. Some versions of Act III include the line "n* in a woodpile," which is a phrase used to cast suspicion on a particular character in the play. It was included in versions of the play published as recently as 2003.

In spring 2003 I began corresponding with the staff at Samuel French Inc. the publishing house holding exclusive U.S. rights for the play. I suggested some changes that could be made in the play, all of which involved the removal of references to people of color. As I suspected, only the Christie Estate, managed by Chorion PLC in London, could approve the changes.

I began to contemplate how I could approach the school and initiate a dialogue about the issues this play presents for a school currently experiencing racial tensions. The shifting demographics of the school, which included Somali and Ethiopian students, brought out the worst in some parents and students. Confederate flags appeared on belt buckles and swastikas were created with black markers on upper arms, all carefully out of the sight of teachers. Physical altercations on and near the school campus precipitated the need for several open parent meetings that produced few results.

I thought this could be a place to begin the discussion and link it to the issues of xenophobia, racism, and stereotypes in the play. The school did not return my phone calls and declined my offers of providing videos from Southern Poverty Law Center's Teaching Tolerance project and making teacher education students available for small-group discussions.

When the Coalition Against Cultural Genocide reviewed my research, members of the group presented copies to the administration of the area high school and they forwarded them to the members of the student-directed play. Students, in turn, contacted a local newspaper with claims that their free-speech rights were being infringed upon by local activists. The wire services picked up the story and the Wall Street Journal saw fit to poke fun at our concerns in its "Tony and Tacky" column that week. The column did not include even a fragment of our research or critique.

Eventually, the cast and crew of the show made several slight modifications: They reduced the type size of the title in the playbill and included a disclaimer from the director, pointing out that no attempt was being made to intentionally offend anyone with the production. But they also chose to print every line of the nursery rhyme in the playbill.

Within a month of the controversy at the high school, a local university began promoting its spring student production of Ten Little Indians. Once again CAAG shared its research with the director of the play. Something very different happened this time. Initially, the director made no commitments to CACG beyond agreeing to study the information provided to her. She shared the information with the cast and crew and subsequently invited members of CACG to one of their meetings. Although there was dissent within the group, they decided, with the permission of Samuel French Inc. to delete the "woodpile" line, replace "Ten Little Indians" with "Ten Little Devon Boys" (referencing the fictitious Indian island off the coast of Devon that is the scene of Christie's play), and use nondescript styrofoam figurines on the mantelpiece in place of the American Indian figurines that are tipped over after each murder in the play. (Christie's play includes all the various forms of murder/suicide used in the nursery rhyme and the famous dramatic effect of statuettes tipping over was restaged in this manner.)

And Then There Were Some Changes
In August 2004 I received a copy of the 2004 edition of And Then There Were None from Samuel French Inc. A letter accompanying the play detailed the changes, which likely came about due to activism and public pressure. The play is now officially licensed as And Then There Were None and the Act III reference to a "n* in the woodpile" has been changed to "guilty party." The fictitious Indian Island has been changed to Soldier Island. The opening paragraph of the play states that, "a cluster of statuettes—ten little soldier boys—sits on the mantelpiece of a weird country house on an island off the coast of Devon. A nursery rhyme embossed above them tells how each little boy met his death, until there was none." I immediately contacted Samuel French, Inc. upon receiving the letter and inquired about the reasons for the changes. Their only response was that the "Christie Estate chooses to make these changes at this time." Nonethe-less, after nearly seven decades, the play no longer uses images of people of color as a "creative" staging approach.

A review of the 2004 book version of Ten Little Indians, now published by St. Martin's Griffin as And Then There Were None, reveals that editorial revision is still needed. Page 57 includes the statement "natives don't mind dying." Anti-Semitism is also expressed on pages 5, 6, and 124, when a Mr. Morris is referred to as "little Jew" and "Jewboy" with "thick Semitic lips."

Schools might attempt to produce the play under the former title, blow off the dust from the "Indian" statuettes stored in a school closet, and use the original nursery rhyme. It would not be difficult to anticipate this happening, given the considerable resistance to changing American Indian school mascots and nicknames in local communities. But this would violate agreements with Samuel French Inc."


For the rest of the article click here

[BigFatBlonde]

Posted: 11/28/07 at 3:02pm

Utterly fascinating.

If being PC means being thoughtful and brave enough to point out hidden and not-so-hidden racist tendencies, then tell me where I can send my check to the PC Policeman's ball.

[robbiej]

Posted: 11/28/07 at 3:05pm

I read that article when it was posted on ALLTHATCHAT.

Really interesting analysis of how using the nursery rhyme that references people of a certain race (instead of, say, the soldiers as is now the case) carries connotations of genocide.

Too bad '10 Little Broadwayworlders' doesn't really scan.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/28/07 at 3:18pm

Well, now that Margo has weighed in people will stop dismissing this, at least.

Have there been a lot of threads about banned high school plays lately? I'm wondering what makes this one another one. I think it's great that Roxy and Goth don't want any speech restrictions on what the students perform, though.


Updated On: 11/28/07 at 03:18 PM

[broadwayrules]

Posted: 11/28/07 at 3:33pm

I understand where they are coming from, but it's sad they canceled it. It really is such a great play...

[robbiej]

Posted: 11/28/07 at 3:36pm

I can't WAIT for the high school productions of STUFF HAPPENS and ANGELS!

[BigFatBlonde]

Posted: 11/28/07 at 3:43pm

How 'bout a high school stage adapation of Caligula?

*FREE SPEECH* *FREE SPEECH* *FREE SPEECH*

[Enjolras77]

Posted: 11/28/07 at 4:46pm

According to the article that Margo posted, in 2004, Samuel French updated the play with permission from the Christie estate and this version has the title "And Then There Were None".

If this is the case, what version is the high school doing? If they are doing the licensed version shouldn't the title be "And Then There Were None" and NOT "Ten Little Indians"? The bigger claim may be whether or not the school has obtained the performance rights or not.

Also, if they ARE doing the 2004 version that eliminates all of the racial undertones, I don't think that there should be any controversy, and the show should go on. If this is the case, I side with the school board member in the article who says that Mr. Hines is playing the race card as part of his vendetta against the school district.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 11/29/07 at 6:19pm

A title change, a group hug, a focus group on people's feelings and the show is back on.

Come on people now, smile on your brother, everybody get together, try to love one another right now.
Link