Miss Saigon - Theatre Royal / Prince Edward / UK Tour

[ncbears]

...

[ncbears]

Aug 4, 2016 21:38:31 GMT mrbarnaby said:

Poor Broadway.

First we send them a rubbish touring version of Les Mis..

Then Cats

Now this. They'll think they've woken up in the 1980s again.


Quite frankly after shows like Hamilton etc, these revivals just look very sad indeed.

and now the ENO version of Sunset Boulevard with Glenn Close.  

[Dave25]

Aug 5, 2016 2:01:15 GMT couldileaveyou said:

Aug 5, 2016 1:38:17 GMT Dave25 said:

I think Miss Saigon, with glorious music that never feels like a musical parody and has a strong story and sublime singing voices and melodies looks extremely refreshing after Hamilton.

I wouldn't compare a racist show like Miss Saigon to Hamilton.

Hamilton is a racist show, they deliberately cast on color.

There is nothing racist about Miss Saigon. Except that Asian people are portrayed as strong, powerful, determined characters with a heart of gold, and that white Americans are portrayed as weaker and more clueless, but I wouln't call that racism, that just happens to be the story.

[theatre-turtle]

I'm Asian and I don't think miss Saigon is racist. In fact it's my favourite show.

[49thand8th]

I am Asian and I do think it's racist. It used to be one of my favorite shows, but I came around, realized it was full of cliches (both lyrical and otherwise) and supports a lot of stereotypes. I'd like to see a story centered around the Vietnam war that's written by an Asian American creative team. I'd like to have seen Allegiance succeed.


However, I have friends of all sorts of backgrounds who all differ on their takes with this show.  (I don't plan on seeing the revival.)

[Dave25]

Aug 6, 2016 14:10:26 GMT 49thand8th said:

I am Asian and I do think it's racist. It used to be one of my favorite shows, but I came around, realized it was full of cliches (both lyrical and otherwise) and supports a lot of stereotypes. 

So let's start with Kim, one of the strongest female heroine roles out there and basically the role that carries the show. A determined character with a heart of gold, a lioness that fights for her son, loyal, trustworthy, determined and respectful. A beautifully written role and well developed character. 

Do you have any problem with that?

I think that people (like you) who call this show racist just love to play the victim role, or for some reason can't handle reality and history. Because it seems that you can't accept any characteristic in any role that you personally have a negative association with, even though things exist and happened. We are telling a story here. If you want equality you have to accept Asian characters that are portrayed in a negative way too. What do you want? Every asian character in the show working as a respectable accountant at a bank? Because that is what you would like to see? So many aspects of race, the way people treated eachother during the war, the social system, are important and beautiful to be told and actually need to be told in this show. 

Do you think the tv show Mad Men is discriminating? Because we get an idea of how men treated women in the 50's? You should realize what was real at the time and that it's a story they are telling.

If you can't handle this you should learn to get over that first before you watch any show. With that said, I don't think there are cliche's in this show. 

Edit: Could you please tell me which part of history in this show you would like to see erased and why, and how you would like to see it resolved or portrayed?

[Deleted]

How horrendously rude are you to insinuate that someone is playing the victim role because they are offended by the portrayal of their own race? I'm guessing you aren't Asian yourself. Mind you, the fact that you think Hamilton is racist for not wanting white people for certain roles just shows how laughable your views are.

[Dave25]

Because there is nothing to be offended about. That in itself is rude.

If anything, the Asian characters are portrayed as hero's.

About Hamilton: Deliberately casting a certain race while it's not necessary story-wise, is focussing on race too much and for the wrong reasons. So that could be debatable. It's a 2 way street.

[Deleted]

You don't get to pick and choose what oppressed groups are offended by. 49thand8th isn't the first person to say this about the show and she wont be the last.

Hamilton does focus on race but for a good reason. It would be completely inappropriate for white people to play slave-owners whilst singing R&B and rap music - music that originated from people of colour. It also gives people of colour guaranteed roles in an industry where they are often overlooked for their white counterparts. There are far more casting calls specifying caucasian actors than POC.

[Dave25]

I am still waiting for the first person that can explain their accusation with proper support.

But you are right, people can be offended by anything, even their own reflection. But that does not mean the subject of matter is flawed in any way.

[Dave25]

Aug 6, 2016 21:41:20 GMT @snutte said:

It also gives people of colour guaranteed roles in an industry where they are often overlooked for their white counterparts. There are far more casting calls specifying caucasian actors than POC.

There are also far more caucasian actors than POC. 

I don't want to turn this into a Hamilton disussion, but I think it is important to be said. No minority group should be "guaranteed" roles because of their minority characteristics. The whole point of equality is that we should look past these characteristics and learn to be neutral.

You can't live by double standards. You either embrace casting on race, or you reject it. "Taking back land" by doing the exact same thing you have a problem with is by no means the solution.

Thinking in race is a choice.

[Deleted]

Aug 6, 2016 22:05:42 GMT Dave25 said:

Aug 6, 2016 21:41:20 GMT @snutte said:

It also gives people of colour guaranteed roles in an industry where they are often overlooked for their white counterparts. There are far more casting calls specifying caucasian actors than POC.

There are also far more caucasian actors than POC. 

I don't want to turn this into a Hamilton disussion, but I think it is important to be said. No minority group should be "guaranteed" roles because of their minority characteristics. The whole point of equality is that we should look past these characteristics and learn to be neutral.

You can't live by double standards. You either embrace casting on race you prefer, or you reject it. "Taking back land" by doing the exact same thing you have a problem with is by no means the solution.

But we're not neutral. As long as there are white people guaranteed roles, there need to be guaranteed roles for POC too. Anyway, I remember now you're the person that said people need to be brainwashed in order to enjoy rap music so I wont be engaging with your stupidity anymore. 

[Dave25]

Nothing is guaranteed. For anyone.

[broadwaylover99]

Here's the thing with Hamilton - Lin said himself that the reason PoC have been cast as (mostly) Caucasians is so that the story of how the United States came to be can be told by what the United States looks like today, plus as was said above, that comes naturally out of the rap/hip-hip/R&B store. I frankly would be offended to see Caucasian actors in some of those roles, and I'm sure many others would be

[Dave25]

Aug 6, 2016 23:36:50 GMT broadwaylover99 said:

so that the story of how the United States came to be can be told by what the United States looks like today

What does the US look like today? 95% POC?


And how on earth could you be offended by caucasian actors playing caucasians? There is no music style exclusively for a certain skin color.

In your logic, would you be offended by a black Christine in Phantom? Because a swedish, operatic singing ballet dancer, daughter from a Swedish violinist, from that era is naturally not black? Or actually, because that singing style did not originate in that race?

It makes me sad that people are offended by that. And focus on race difference constantly. Making sure the race gap grows bigger and stays.

[Phantom of London]

How can a piece of very powerful objective story telling be racist?

You had children born from Vietennese women and American GI's, these people were spat on and despised they were the Bui-Doi (The Dust of Life), because of the embarrassment this would of caused America, when the musical came out - it made them face up to their responsibilities in 1989 and re-nationalise these poor people as American citizens.

It was well known that American Soldiers were sent in the villages to win the Vietenesse heart and minds, the natives flooded these poor soldiers with drugs (heroin) and prostitutes, it was the locals that actually won the minds.

A lot of the soldiers that got conscripted were black, just like John - because middle class white people sent their children to Canada to live to avoid conscription.

So when ludicrous sweeping judgements get made and I guess the poster read that on-line, because they haven't been back to elaborate on their statement, but just don't let facts get in your way, when you make such a bold statement.

[talkstageytome]

Okay this conversation is getting heated and I don't want to get into an argument. I am fan of Miss Saigon, but there are also elements of it which could definitely be called out.

- the Vietnamese language is ignored for the most part in favour of a made up language 'Dju Vui Vai'
- Negative portrayal of Vietnamese men. In popular culture even today Asian women are overtly sexualised while Asian men are portrayed as sexless. It's an offensive stereotype that we still see today, and that in itself is offensive. (I know that these attributes are a result of the setting of Miss Saigon in a nightclub, and of course it's not directly enforcing these stereotypes, but it's not denying them either.)
- 'white saviour' stereotype
- etc. I'm sure people will add more...

And obviously the casting of Jonathan Pryce as the Engineer in the original cast was controversial and just cringeworthy. People protested his casting when the show came to Broadway for the first time, and rightly so!



And as for the Hamilton casting call 'controversy', as a white actor I saw hundred of casting calls which specified 'caucasian' actors for random roles like 'shopper, cashier, nurse, patient' etc. etc. There's no reason why these minor supporting roles should always be played by white people, let alone the leads. Not to mention all of the hullabaloo that you hear when a black actor plays the Phantom or another role typically played by a white actor (when Norm Lewis was cast I think some people literally exploded while typing 'black people didn't live in 19th Century France' again and again every where (which, also, they did?). Plus, there are white actors in Hamilton anyway, they're just not always front and centre. Kind of like when you go to see a show, wonder why it's 2016 and there's still an all white cast, and then someone points out one non-white actor in the ensemble and tells you that's diversity. I see no problem with the way Hamilton is cast, and the story it is trying to tell.

[whygodwhytoday]

I just came to check this thread... Why does Miss Saigon attract the whiny political correctness police ALL THE TIME?! I've studied the Cold War in depth and whilst there is stereotyping for convenience (of theatrical/musical expression), the sentiment of the show is true. It's that age old America/White/Capitalism vs Global/Black/Socialism argument; and rooting for the latter will always make you appear more "liberal" and "open-minded". I hope in 30 years time people on forums won't be reminiscing over the casting in Hamilton and we'll be able to take things like that with a pinch of salt if it comes at the cost of enjoying original and moving pieces of art. XXX

[Dave25]

Aug 7, 2016 10:01:08 GMT talkstageytome said:

I know that these attributes are a result of the setting of Miss Saigon in a nightclub, and of course it's not directly enforcing these stereotypes, but it's not denying them either.)
- 'white saviour' stereotype
- etc. I'm sure people will add more...

Of course it's the setting of the story. Why should people deny anything when a story like this is told?

And what the heck about "white saviour"? The only hero in this story is Kim, and every character is a victim of circumstance. There are no saviours in this story. The character of Kim earns much more respect than the character of Chris.

If points like that make a show racist in your opinion then we have such a different view on truthfulness about a show like this and what it really is, that we should stop the discussion right here.

[talkstageytome]

Firstly, I don't think I was clear enough when I said it the first time, so I'll repeat myself- I do agree that pieces of art which are based on historical events should present those events as they happened, not dumb them down or change facts just because they present something uncomfortable or unacceptable by today's standards. But that doesn't mean we can't comment on how uncomfortable the truths presented are. Yes, the women are sexualised, prostitution is glamorized, the west is romanticised. Yes, these may have been the truths of the time, but that doesn't mean we should accept them without realising how uncomfortable these truths are.

And I'm not making my points up. You can very easily google the points I made and listen to/read the thoughts of Vietnamese and other East Asian people talk about their thought and opinions on the way race and culture is presented in Miss Saigon. It's not my place to speak for another group of people, and make decisions about what another person should be offended about. I'm just collecting information for various different sources and commenting on it. Also, clearly not all asian people think that Miss Saigon is racist. But in keeping with the recent Hamilton 'controversies', not all white people think that Hamilton is racist for not casting 'enough' white people. But that doesn't mean that these discussions shouldn't be had.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_savior_narrative_in_film#Trope_in_film_genres < The 'white saviour' trope is a contraversial one seen in modern media all the time. It doesn't always mean that a character is literally a 'saviour'. Here's a wikipedia page about the white saviour trope in movies. I figured since it's just a list it wouldn't matter that wikipedia isn't exactly the best source.

Yes, Kim is undoubtedly the hero of the story. The white saviour element comes in the form of the idea that Tam can only have a good life if he goes to America. Of course things weren't exactly fantastic for Tam and Kim, but subtextually, what about all of the other boys and girls? What about those who didn't have one American parent? Also, the idea that Kim and Chris fall in love in spite of everything, and years after Chris leaves and moves on, Kim is still besotted with him is interesting. Yes, he was her best hope, but her obsession, and that ghostly 'I still taste your kisses' bit after Chris and Ellen fight in the hotel room, really enforce this idea of Kim a) being pushes aside and forgotten, and b) being totally reliant on Chris. Now actually, this I do see both sides of, because obviously when you see the show you understand Kim's endless struggle to survive, the fact that Chris became more of a symbol for a better life, and the fact that ultimately Kim does what she does in the final scene because she wants the best for Tam, not because she realises that her love for Chris cannot be. I totally get that, and anyone would feel inspired by those actions. However, the negative imagery which surrounds Kim is still there. Also, many people don't like the idea that in act 2 Kim is portrayed as a commodity to be pushed aside in favour of a white woman. However, I'm not sure I personally get that from the scene because obviously Chris has been apart from Kim from several years so of course he's moved on, and also, there is no stipulation that Ellen must be played by any particular race of woman. So although this has been a point raised against Miss Saigon, I think equally this can be explained by context.

Like I said, I'm a fan of Miss Saigon. I saw the recent West End production a few times and loved it, and I love that Kim is such a strong, driven female character, so I don't think these controversies mar the musical as a whole. But I'm not about to let the concerns/opinions of those who do feel that these elements are offensive fall on deaf ears.

Also, being offended about the way white people are presented (or rather, not presented) in Hamilton, and then turning a blind eye those offended by the presentation of Vietnamese people is a bit of a dichotomy.

(and then of course there are my other bullet points which you forgot to quote, e.g. the way asian male characters are presented, the way in which the Vietnamese language is tossed out in favour of a totally made up language ( here's a nice little bit of writing about Orientalism. The bit about the 'Oriental Fantasy' is particularly apt to this conversation > reappropriate.co/2014/04/what-is-orientalism-and-how-is-it-also-racism) and here's a quote from that page, because I think it perfectly sums up Miss Saigon... (again, it's not exactly a .edu website or anything, but if you want you can look further into the points made. I just posted it because it's a bit easier to read, especially as we're having a discussion, not searching for texts to reference in our dissertations!)

"Western men are reimagined as universally Godly, good, moral, virile, and powerful — but ultimately innately human. By contrast, those traits that best serve as a counter-point to the Occidental West are emphasized in the West’s imagined construct of the East: strange religions and martial arts, bright colours and barbaric practices, unusual foods and incomprehensible languages, mysticism and magic, ninjas and kung fu. Asia becomes innately unusual, alien, and beastly. In Orientalism, Asia is not defined by what Asia is; rather, Asia becomes an “Otherized” fiction of everything the West is not, and one that primarily serves to reinforce the West’s own moral conception of itself."

[Deleted]

£22 to see this at the cinema!?!?!!!!!! Dame Cam had better be selling the programmes

[Dave25]

Talkstageytome, thanks for your post!

Yes, they are truths of the time, so I think it is not something where the word "accept" should come in at all.
I think it's beautiful to see stories of all times of all truths.

Edit: The comparison you make with Hamilton is a bit off, because that is purely about only hiring a certain race, completely aside from the story because they think this is a good way to "take back land" in the casting business, or have some idea that certain music styles are only allowed to be performed by certain colors. A bit like "If somebody robs me, I just rob someone else and then everything is good". That has nothing to do with a discussion about a story of a show.

The way you treat people in real life or business can be racist. A true story can never be racist. It can be about racism, but that is no reason not to tell it.

[talkstageytome]

Aug 8, 2016 10:32:59 GMT @theatremonkey said:

Aug 8, 2016 1:52:54 GMT talkstageytome said:

The white saviour element comes in the form of the idea that Tam can only have a good life if he goes to America

Tam's life as a Bui Doi would have been far harsher than life in the USA. The opportunity to "live free" in this case I feel is justified.

Yes I agree. That was one element which I have seen mentioned many times by critics of the story, but don't necessarily agree with personally. 


Well if nothing else this discussion has given me an opportunity to finally put Edward Said's criticism into context. Finally, my degree has been useful for something!  

[talkstageytome]

I think I didn't necessarily word that very well. I do actually agree with you that Tam would've had a better life in America. What I was trying to say is that having done a lot of reading around the subject, one of the things which people often criticise about Miss Saigon is that it glorifies America and that the Vietnamese characters are given false hope about the lives they will lead in America. However, obviously theatremonkey you touched upon the fact that we can look back on that period of time and see that young Vietnamese children with American fathers were treated poorly in Vietnam, and would indeed have had a better life in America (although the article below goes into detail about how some were also treated poorly, became victims of drug abuse, suffered as a result of job scarcity etc. in America too. But that's another story. Plus Chris and Ellen seemed to have a stable life in America so we can assume Tam at least would've been taken care of).

> www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/children-of-the-vietnam-war-131207347/?no-ist

So while Miss Saigon does glorify America to an extent, the way in which Kim fights for Tam to be taken to America is not an example of this glorification, but a dramatisation of the real problems faced by young mothers of children with American fathers at the time.

So in this case it could be said that the accusations against Miss Saigon are unfounded. But then again, who am I to tell people what they can and can't find offensive?


The book 'Actors and Activists: Politics, Performance, and Exchange Among Social Worlds' by David A Schlossman is really interesting and goes into a lot of detail about Miss Saigon and the controversies which surround it. It talks a lot about the production of the musical, and examples or Orientalism, e.g. the way in which the production team built an image of Vietnam based on what looked and sounded best (aka 'most Otherly') not what was most accurate. (Apparently the blessings and other bits of Vietnamese were based on translations given by Vietnamese waitresses in London, and when the translations differed they just picked whichever one sounded best). Another particularly interesting bit concerns the way in which the Bui Doi are converted from a national responsibility into a personal domestic problem.

> books.google.co.uk/books?id=WhTm0uQvmnUC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

(Page 144 onward - if you've got 15 mins or so it's definitely worth checking out! Not only is is interesting, it's also just a generally enjoyable read.)

[bellboard27]

A few thoughts on this. I think there is a danger of retrospectively analysing the hell out of this from a 2016 perspective – including the motivations of Vietnamese who wanted to leave after the fall of Saigon. Let’s focus on the show. What key characters want to leave? Kim and the Engineer.

What might be Kim’s motives: worry about the future of a half-American child? She has killed a high ranking Vietnamese army officer and fears for her life? She is married and feels a duty to be with her husband? She is in love? All of these?

What are the Engineer’s motives: he has lost everything, so anything is better than Vietnam? America is the land of vice and greed, so what better place for him? Hardly portraying America in a great light!

My sister-in-law is from Hanoi and she fully understands why South Vietnamese might have wanted out after reunification. It was a time of great uncertainty, so it was natural to want to avoid this.

In any case, in analysing Miss Saigon it is important to remember the basic plot is Madame Butterfly – so the opening up of Meiji period Japan needs to be taken into account.