According to the New York Times today:

“Oh, Mary!,” a campy comedy about Mary Todd Lincoln, premiered on Broadway this week. Its star, Cole Escola has become an overnight sensation — 17 years after taking up acting.

(07-13-2024 03:30 PM)David Lockmiller Wrote:  According to the New York Times today:

“Oh, Mary!,” a campy comedy about Mary Todd Lincoln, premiered on Broadway this week. Its star, Cole Escola has become an overnight sensation — 17 years after taking up acting.

Oh, Dear

Here is an over view of the plot:

"The show is a comedic spoof of the lives of Abraham Lincoln and Mary Todd Lincoln. The show is set in the days leading up to Lincoln's assassination, which occurred while he and Mary were watching Our American Cousin at Ford's Theatre. The show portrays Mary as someone who longs to live a life away from politics and be a vaudeville performer, while Lincoln uses her as a beard to hide his sexuality, and is often away from home dealing with the issues of the Civil War, leaving her alone in the White House."

Obviously, the show offers no historical content. In several interviews, the author has stated that he did no historical research. He bascially had a "what if" thought about how perhaps Mary's life was not destroyed by her husband's murder. The author plays the title character and states that the character is more about him than anyone else. The saddest part of this production is that the artwork used outside of the theatre projects a "serious" theme. Theatre goers who purchase tickets are often lead to belief they are going to a serious play about the Lincolns. Those audience members are disappointed and often leave before the final curtain.
However, those who know this is a farce often enjoy the show.
The play has been nominated and won several awards.

I googled the main actor, Cole Escola, and this is what the IMDb website has to say "Cole Escola is non-binary and uses they/them pronouns"
Why do they/them think that is important to share with the world?

Just in case I missed the memo and it's important to someone out there, Gene C is a male person and uses he/him pronouns
(and my icon is not a picture of me, but of Fido, a male dog and also uses he/him pronouns.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/McSP9wPzVLA

(08-13-2024 10:30 AM)Gene C Wrote:  Just in case I missed the memo and it's important to someone out there, Gene C is a male person and uses he/him pronouns
(and my icon is not a picture of me, but of Fido, a male dog and also uses he/him pronouns.

That's important to know, Gene. . . . I think.

Given that the play follows a reimagined Mary Todd Lincoln, depicting her as a petulant wannabe cabaret star with a predilection for booze and, in its absence, paint thinner, the warm reception wasn’t necessarily a given. It even drew praise from Lincoln director Steven Spielberg, Sally Field (who played Mary in the movie) and screenwriter Tony Kushner, who all attended one night.

Quote:Why do they/them think that is important to share with the world?

Because not everyone shows them the basic human respect that we all are entitled to.

Best
Rob

Rob, I will politely disagree with you and take the blame for steering the conversation away from Lincoln.

(08-13-2024 10:46 AM)David Lockmiller Wrote:  It [the play] even drew praise from Lincoln director Steven Spielberg, Sally Field (who played Mary in the movie) and screenwriter Tony Kushner, who all attended one night.

Why did the movie "Lincoln" have to stray from the truth? is the question that I would ask of these three people.

A quote from a review by Variety Magazine

"Perhaps most subtly, Escola deftly folds in gender commentary and nonbinary experience, highlighting the ways we use both fashion and performance to explore and embody our genders — and how for some people, these can be vital forms of expression. In this, Escola’s performance of Mary offers a fascinating, legitimately queer and trans riposte to the man-in-a-dress stock character — a trope usually riddled with transphobia, including in its recent Broadway iterations, but here transformed into something much more gender-affirming.

Here is the review of the "Oh Mary" play.
https://variety.com/2024/legit/reviews/o...236067236/

No one who sees this play is going to see it as a history lesson or mistakenly believe that this was who Abraham Lincoln was. Art, by its very nature, is often intended to shock the sensibilities of those who view it, allowing the recipient to freely enjoy what the artist provides or move on to something else. I actually put up a post about this before this https://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussi...-4976.html

My opinion of it hasn't changed, but it has nothing to do with the subject matter. It has everything to do with the fact that it doesn't appeal to me.

Best
Rob

ETA: What I initially linked to was another story, not the one under discussion here, but the subject matter is pretty much the same. Again, for most people, art is meant to shock and cause people to think. If all you want from art is Grant Wood or Norman Rockwell, that's fine, but the fact remains that others disagree and want something else. This is no weakness, and opposite tastes are no strength.

Best
Rob

Recently, Leslie Stahl said this: "This is 60 Minutes and we can’t put out things that we can’t verify.” -Leslie Stahl responding to the President [Trump's] conspiracy theories.

Does anyone remember her infamous segment regarding the "Lincoln" movie?

As I recall, it started: "Those of us, who are not Lincoln scholars, would never know . . . ."

David,

I know I'm going to regret this, but what in the world are you talking about?

Best
Rob

(08-15-2024 12:48 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  David,

I know I'm going to regret this, but what in the world are you talking about?

Best
Rob

I was talking about the historical inaccuracies in the "Lincoln" movie, such as the scene (which I never saw) where Lincoln slaps his son. What does that say to an unknowing public about the character of President Abraham Lincoln?

Why not tell the truth?

The screenwriter Tony Kushner said later (not on "60 Minutes) about the fictional scene that he thought it would make the movie better (or words to that effect).

As I recall, Leslie Stahl began the 60 Minutes segment with the statement that the "Lincoln" movie informs the American public, "who are not Lincoln scholars," the historical truth about President Lincoln.

I believe that we had this discussion a long time ago.

Doris Kearns Goodwin wrote [as an alternative]:

After Willie's death, Mary had been determined not to allow her oldest son, Robert, to risk his life in the army. But after his graduation form Harvard, she could no longer detain him. In January 1865, Lincoln wrote to General Grant: "Please read and answer this letter as though I was not President, but only a friend. My son, now in his twenty second year, having graduated at Harvard, wishes to see something of the war before it ends. I do not wish to put him in the ranks, nor yet to give him a commission, to which those who have already served long, are better entitled, and better qualified to hold. Could he, without embarrassment to you, or detriment to the service, go into your Military family with some nominal rank, I, and not the public, furnishing his necessary means? If no, say so without the least hesitation, because I am as anxious, and as deeply interested, that you shall not be encumbered.

Grant replied two days later. "I will be most happy to have him in my Military family, he wrote. He suggested the rank of captain would be most appropriate. So Robert's wish to join the army was granted. Stationed as Grant's headquarters, Robert "soon became exceedingly popular," Horace Porter recalled. "He was always ready to perform his share of hard work, and never expected to be treated differently from any other officer on account of his being the son of the Chief Executive of the nation."

(Team of Rivals, pages 683-4.)

But maybe we are lucky that the screenwriter Tony Kushner did not write that Mary Lincoln drank a lot of alcohol, or paint thinner, when alcohol was not available.

Quote:I was talking about the historical inaccuracies in the "Lincoln" movie, such as the scene (which I never saw) where Lincoln slaps his son. What does that say to an unknowing public about the character of President Abraham Lincoln?

Why not tell the truth?

First, this was not a documentary. It was one filmmaker's idea of Lincoln's life. Second, whether or not Lincoln slapped Robert (and can you prove he didn't?) says absolutely nothing about his character. A parent slapping a child today is not acceptable, but in the 1860s, it was.

Quote:As I recall, Leslie Stahl began the 60 Minutes segment with the statement that the "Lincoln" movie informs the American public, "who are not Lincoln scholars," the historical truth about President Lincoln.

There is nothing—not a book, not a movie, not anything else—that can give the "historical truth" about anyone or anything. As long as people are different, they will approach a subject with different interpretations, kind of like you and I do when it comes to your obsession with the Perfect and Sainted Lincoln.

Best
Rob

(08-15-2024 08:39 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  

Quote:I was talking about the historical inaccuracies in the "Lincoln" movie, such as the scene (which I never saw) where Lincoln slaps his son. What does that say to an unknowing public about the character of President Abraham Lincoln?

Why not tell the truth?

First, this was not a documentary. It was one filmmaker's idea of Lincoln's life. Second, whether or not Lincoln slapped Robert (and can you prove he didn't?) says absolutely nothing about his character. A parent slapping a child today is not acceptable, but in the 1860s, it was.

Quote:As I recall, Leslie Stahl began the 60 Minutes segment with the statement that the "Lincoln" movie informs the American public, "who are not Lincoln scholars," the historical truth about President Lincoln.

There is nothing—not a book, not a movie, not anything else—that can give the "historical truth" about anyone or anything. As long as people are different, they will approach a subject with different interpretations, kind of like you and I do when it comes to your obsession with the Perfect and Sainted Lincoln.

Best
Rob

So, when you wrote for newspapers, you were not trying to tell the truth.

You were always trying to be interesting, but not correctly informative?

And, you actually think that President Lincoln was anything less than perfect?