Hacker News Reader

Comment by spqr0a1 | Hacker News Reader

This is largely a story about excessive copyright duration. The casting requirement for this 70 year old play is based on legal threats by the estate of the author who died over 30 years ago.

View on HN

This is a story about the insanity of forced "diversity". Or whatever newspeak you'd prefer.

Please read the article first, not only the title. The above comment is completely correct. Whether their approach is acceptable though, that's another story of course.

Literally no diversity was forced. Not even sure where you got that idea, except if you only read the title.

If they had auditioned women, the play could've gone on. If, of course, nobody objected to none of those women being cast.

Or if they read the policies of the venue and adhered to them, the play could go on. Saying "you can't do X at this venue" is not the same as saying "you must do X".

...but the university is doing exactly that - forcing diversity for diversity sake. The play was written to be all male and they refused them the venue as a result of no women being called to audition for a role that isn't for women.

There's thousands of years of history of women playing men in plays, and men playing women.

That's nice, but irrelevant. Forcing an artist to represent art in a way it isn't intended, is absurd. What is the argument for it?

Is there any venue in the world which has no rules in place for the users of the venue?

Can you provide other examples like this? If not, then you have your answer.

They should've had in the casting call, a role for a woman in a sandwich-board sign, on it printed directions to the theater's fire exits. She stands at stage left for the entire performance, and has no lines, requiring no additions or subtractions to Beckett's work.

How do you propose the producers adhere to both the restrictions of the rightsholders, and of the venue?

Hold an audition allowing all people to try out, and if a woman does get cast because she is best for the role, read the prepared statement before the play indicating the rights holders don't like it.

…and get sued by the Beckett estate; because that’s an out only if you’re in one jurisdiction in France. I suppose if the University was willing to accept liability, that’d be different.

In Netherlands it was already decided by a judge:

> Famously, in 1988, Beckett brought legal action against a Dutch theatre company, which wanted to stage a production of Waiting for Godot, with women acting all the roles. His lawyer argued that the integrity of the text was violated because actresses were substituted for the male actors asked for in the text. The judge in the Haarlem court ruled that the integrity of the play had not been violated, because the performance showed fidelity to the dialogue and the stage directions of the play

https://eprints.qut.edu.au/86803/#:~:text=Famously%2C%20in%2....

Nice, but insofar as Dutch law lacks stare decisis, it's not stopping the Estate from suing someone else and at least getting to trial...

It would have been a non-problem if copyright died with the author.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com