Miss Saigon: a Discussion of Ethics in Contemporary Musical Theatre by Chaewon Lee
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Miss Saigon: A Discussion of Ethics in Contemporary Musical Theatre By Chaewon Lee 1st place--Argument with Research Tony-nominee Eva Noblezada performing as ‘Kim’ in the 2017 Broadway revival of 'Miss Saigon' at the Broadway Theatre, photo by Matthew Murphy for Variety Part 1: In the modern age, the film and television industries constantly seem to face criticism regarding issues of racial representation and erasure in storytelling. The general consensus from all types of viewers exemplifies that people are clearly becoming less afraid to contest media that portrays people of color through a narrow and harmful lens. Although film and television encompass two major forms of media that the West has come to dominate, there is another elephant in the room that is often forgotten: theatre. Before the host of problems of racial inequity brought about by Hollywood, there were minstrel shows, revues, and vaudeville--all of which possessed no lack of startling views about race. Musicals have now replaced all these historical forms of theatrical entertainment, yet the prominent issues that surrounded them far in the past look as though they are here to stay. Although musical theatre is criticized far less often than television and film, there are still a number of shows with questionable representations of race and racial relations that have become deeply imbedded in the culture of western media and the history of theatre; these shows undoubtedly dance the thin line between ethical and unethical. One such show that does this is Miss Saigon, a 1989 musical written by the famous French songwriter/lyricist team, Claude-Michel Schonberg and Alain Boublil, and produced by Cameron Mackintosh, one of the most successful producers in contemporary musical theatre. The musical tells the tale of an ill-fated romance at the height of the Vietnam war between Kim, a Vietnamese bar-girl, and Chris, a US Marine, and unflinchingly shows the sacrifices Kim is willing to make as she transforms from a naive girl into a struggling young mother. Supporters of Miss Saigon argue that the show has been one of the greatest contributions to Asian American representation in musical theatre and a deeply exploratory look into complex stories outside the Western world. On the contrary, others insist that its prevalent showcase of Asian stereotypes displays how the show is presented by white people for white people and that it was fundamentally conceived out of the Westerner’s misguided notion that Vietnamese people during the war were completely helpless, jaded, and longing for American saviors. However, none of these contentious debates have done much to halt the countless reproductions of Miss Saigon since its initial conception almost thirty years ago, including the 2017 Broadway revival. With unwavering questions of racial representation in media today, is it just that on such a grandiose stage, Asian Americans see themselves reflected only in a tragic story that explores themes of poverty, death, and powerlessness? Whether that is right or wrong remains critically unanswered and ultimately raises the question: is it ethical for the production team to put on this show that presents controversial views about Asian Americans, if it means to tell a well-realized story with correctly cast actors? A picket protest by women at the premiere of the original 1991 Broadway production for 'Miss Saigon', photo by Corky Lee, New York Times Part 2: In this morally ambiguous situation, there are several people and groups that would be impacted by this decision. First and foremost, the producers responsible for the show’s run on Broadway risk the respect that their names and jobs carry. Moving forward with the show could potentially paint these individuals as either resilient or stubborn; however, a complete cancellation of one of the longest-running Broadway shows in history would undoubtedly tarnish the reputations of the creators, Schonberg and Boublil, and the show’s long-running producer, Cameron Mackintosh, all of whom became well-respected largely thanks to Miss Saigon’s immense success (Paulson). Because the show flaunts a predominantly Asian cast, Asian American actors are also imperative stakeholders. Regardless of the debate surrounding its ethicality, it is indisputable that Miss Saigon remains one of the few major musical successes that has provided some of the most renowned Asian American theatre performers their first chance at the limelight. For those who wish to follow in their footsteps, this production in particular certainly presents a “make it or break it” scenario, especially in today’s extremely tense sociopolitical climate (Paulson). Lastly, much like the actors, the audiences play an equally critical role. Asian American viewers especially bear the responsibility of either lauding or condemning the show. For better or worse, they must either observe themselves rightfully reflected on the stage or become victims of racial misrepresentation. When strictly evaluating how many Asian American talents are seen on stage, Miss Saigon has arguably achieved more good than harm in accordance with the utilitarian and common good approaches to ethics. In his article “The Battle of ‘Miss Saigon’: Yellowface, Art, and Opportunity,” New York Times theatre reporter Michael Paulson interviews several whose careers bloomed after Miss Saigon, including those who achieved skyrocketing stardom like Jon Jon Briones. Performing in the show is “an honor and it’s a responsibility,” says Briones, the Filipino actor who went from a chorus member in the original production to embracing the role of the Engineer, a violent pimp who will do anything to reach American soil, in the 2017 revival. It is because of roles like the Engineer that are thought to portray minorities as self-loathing and spiteful that many argue we too often prioritize “being on the Western stage rather than [...] the roles being played” (Chung 81). In accordance, both the utilitarian and common good approaches potentially present the view that, for the good of Asian American representation, it might prove more beneficial for performers to seek roles that focus less deliberately on race and more on story and character. Another scathing criticism of the show is targeted towards the main character, Kim. Many detest that she seems a naively written protagonist who remains the victim of “total persecution and exploitation visited upon her and abject circumstances” until her suicide (Teeman). Asian American participation in such a musical phenomenon certainly presents an ethical quandary, and such morally dubious representation may perhaps warrant cancellation. However, according to cultural and social historian Dr. Tzu-I Chung, Miss Saigon ultimately offers “a chance to forge new cultural roles, identities, and contest new boundaries” (82). It is out of this profound and prevalent struggle of “feeling yellow” that Donatella Galella ultimately discovers “shared feelings from which to build collective strategies of resistance” (77). One such form of resistance is exemplified by the acclaimed 1988 play M. Butterfly, written by Chinese-American playwright David Henry Hwang. Hwang’s play is well known for utilizing commonly explored orientalist themes and presenting them with a twist, thus the show is “taken as a commentary [...] of Western attitudes towards the East” (Hwang and DiGaetani 141). Hwang explains how these themes are reflected in his characters: in order to fulfill one’s desire, “you can make that person ideal in your own mind whether or not the actual facts correspond to the reality” (Hwang and DiGaetani 144). In effect, this work about a French diplomat’s infatuation with a Chinese opera singer who is secretly a man forces audiences to consider “the condescension inherent when someone uses the aesthetics of another culture as ornament” (Guilford). This idea is heavily present in Western works that are criticized today for viewing the the East not for what it truly was but as an exaggerated reflection of the Western imagination, such as in Giacomo Puccini’s 1904 opera Madama Butterfly--the very opera that Miss Saigon is inspired by. In a recent interview for his play Yellowface, Hwang ultimately reflects on how Miss Saigon shaped his evaluation of racial relations in his future work, how the Asian American community may “have lost the battle” at first but eventually “won the war” out of the many admirable shows that emerged as a response to the initial controversy (“David Henry Hwang”). BD Wong as 'Song Liling' and John Lithgow as 'Rene Gallimard' in the original 1988 Broadway production of David Henry Hwang's 'M. Butterfly', photo by American Theatre When considering the justice approach, however, there is a deeper history to Miss Saigon that warrants further evaluation. It can be argued that the show should be cancelled not only because the Asian characters are not valued as equals but also because the actors themselves, particularly the Filipino performers, were ironically reflective of their tragic characters. According to Chung, Filipino fixation on idealizing the American Dream and embracing increasing globalization was incumbent upon the “negation of their national pride and self esteem,” which originated in the history of neocolonial relations between the United States and the Philippines (79). The 2017 Miss Saigon potentially obstructs the ethics of fairness because the very origin of the show’s success “exposes how people’s perceptions of themselves are filtered through the lenses of American popular culture and [...] uneven positionings of the First and Third worlds” (Chung 79). Stars like Lea Salonga and Jon Jon Briones had never left the Philippines when they auditioned in Manila, and it is quite likely they never would have if Miss Saigon’s creative team had not conducted their search for their perfect vision of these characters outside the US. The difference between these actors in the Philippines compared to England and the US is clearly reflective not only of their star-quality, but also of their roles as “foreign laborers” in the globalized market of the entertainment industry (Stanley).