That’s a Pretext for Your Context..

It has been an interesting few weeks.  Since my last post, I obviously finished by run as Gertrude, the ugly stepsister to Cinderella, went on to play Big Louie Salino in Mafia Murder Mystery for Salty Dinner Theater to much success, and personal joy. It was a great run with very appreciative audiences.  I have always loved playing this character.  Big Louie was the first character I played in a murder mystery dinner theater.  And I loved it!  So when the opportunity came about to do it again, I jumped at the chance.  The additional perk that I got to do the show with my heterosexual life partner, with whom I had just finished playing the other ugly stepsister with, was icing on the cake!

About this same time, I developed a hernia which I have been informed could be operated on, but at my current weight is more hassle that it is worth.   Someone of my girth will almost always re-injure the hernia, and if they were to put in a mesh to correct it, the mesh could become infected and that would lead to a much bigger problem.  I was told that I should get gastric bypass surgery and drop 100 lbs. and then look into getting the surgery.  As you should know from reading this blog, I have an personal aversion to the idea of bariatric surgery.

So, to that end, I have started Weight Watchers and had my first (minor) weight loss.  It seems doable for the first time in a long time, but still not simple nor fun yet.  I know as things progress, it will get better and be more and more fun as I see the progress, but right now, it’s kinda tedious.  low-cal breads, fat-free cheese and dairy, specific types of food to start out with, but now I’m counting my points and eating “normal” food.  It has only been two weeks, but at least I’ve seen some tiny progress.  Not yet something to crow about, but hopefully soon it will be.

There has also been an unusual confluence of events, at least to me, and I feel compelled to comment on them.  Two very disparate events that don’t seem at all connected, but came into an odd connection to each other in my mind.

The first is the case of Kate Kelly, who was excommunicated for, depending on your point of view, apostasy or opinion.  I have to admit that I felt conflicted at first.  I felt that while she was not exactly supporting the leadership of the Church, excommunication was pretty extreme.  Then I read the letter from her bishop, that she released to the media (which I won’t go into here!) and my opinion changed quite a bit.  Some of the explanations that were given for why she was excommunicated made a lot of sense to me.  It wasn’t just for thinking that women should be ordained, but for actively working, through the “Six Discussions” that Ordain Women released as ways to actively try to change other’s beliefs, that was the primary reason for the decision.  Now, you can say what you want, and I am sure that many will, about how hypocritical that may seem from a church that actively sends missionaries out to give discussions to people to change their minds about religion, but it’s something that I, as a member of this church, take to heart.  I believe that the prophet of the church is called of God, and that he receives revelation on an on-going basis. I believe that he is the only one authorized to receive revelation for the church as a whole.  And, being a man (take that for what it’s worth) I fail to see how women are discriminated against by not being ordained to the priesthood.  Just as I don’t see how women wearing dresses somehow discriminates against them, either.  I can tell you, I never felt discriminated against in the time I wore a dress!  And I probably should have been.

The other story that I came across was about a theater company in Texas, Theater Under The Stars (TUTS) who recently ran afoul for copyright violations in their production of “Hands on a Hardbody.”  This was a recent Broadway musical involving that ever so American spectacle held at car dealerships across the country.  Contestants have to place a hand on a car or truck and leave it there until only one person is left, who then wins the car/truck.  The musical was not a long-running success, but the real issue in this was that the director, Bruce Lumpkin, decided that the show needed some help.  He rearranged song orders, gave some lines to alternate characters, even replaced some interstitial music in the show with new music.  All of this without seeking permission from the rights holders or authors of the show.  His reasoning for all this was that the show had not been successful on Broadway, and had, according to him, been reworked between the different times he had seen it.  So therefore, there must be nothing wrong with a little reworking.  But then he made the biggest boneheaded decision of them all, and invited the authors to opening night.  As you can guess, they were not as appreciative of his helpfulness, and informed their agents and Samuel French, the licensing company.  Needless to say, the rights were pulled when Samuel French sent a cease and desist order and the final three shows were cancelled.  Apparently this is not the first time this director has tried this, and in an article posted online, he attempted to get authorization to make changes to an upcoming production of “The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas” which ended up with the licensing agent from French hanging up on a phone call with Lumpkin over a song they wanted inserted in the show.

You may be asking yourself, “how are these two disparate stories connected?  Tony, you must have lost your mind!”  Well, it was interesting to me that in the comments on these two stories one phrase seemed to keep coming up over and over again: “ If you don’t like it, get out!” or “If you don’t like it, do some other show.”  There are arguments I have long heard, particularly in Utah regarding the Mormon church and the culture here in Utah.  “If you don’t like the church (Mormons, liquor laws, etc.), just get out.”  It has always seemed a bit petty of an argument.  Accept what you’re given, or don’t take it.  As a parent I’ve said similar to my kids when they complain about what we’re having for dinner, but when your talking about life and culture, take it or leave it is usually not a real option.  People generally don’t have the freedom to just pick up and move.  Job, home, family, etc. can all play a part in ability to change your location.  And generally, those people who are being told to like it or get out object to the sentiment.  I know I would.  But that same argument suddenly take a whole new meaning when referring to something like copyright.  I agree with the sentiment in regards to copyright: If you don’t like the material, and you can’t get written permission to change it, then find something else to do.  Don’t rewrite it just because you probably won’t get caught.  It’s not right. and I’m not trying to draw any analogies here between the two stories, I just found it a bit ironic and interesting that the same argument would be accepted by groups in one arena as unacceptable, and in another as not only acceptable, but the only correct response.  Tell me what you think!

Quote of the day:

“History offers us vicarious experience. It allows the youngest student to possess the ground equally with his elders; without a knowledge of history to give him a context for present events, he is at the mercy of every social misdiagnosis handed to him.” – Hilary Mantel

“I think I’ve been called edgy – but in all honesty, there is a safety in what I do because I’m always the idiot. Unless you’re just listening to buzz words and not taking into account the context of the situation, you see I’m always the ignoramus.” – Sarah Silverman

Posted by Tony Porter on June 25, 2014

https://anthporter.wordpress.com/2014/06/25/thats-a-pretext-for-your-context/