Culture Gender-neutral Joan of Arc at Globe - Audiences for I, Joan will hear Joan use the pronouns “they” and “them”

1660307619092.png

Joan of Arc will be portrayed as a gender-neutral character in a new play at the home of Shakespeare in London, in a radical departure from the usual depiction of the historic figure.

Audiences for I, Joan, which will open on August 25 at the Globe and run for two months, will hear Joan use the pronouns “they” and “them”.

The play is described by the theatre as “alive, queer and full of hope”. It will chart Joan’s rise during the Hundred Years’ War between the French and English. Isobel Thom will take on the title role in her first big theatrical role.

Michelle Terry, the Globe’s artistic director, said that it was not the first production to represent Joan of Arc as non-binary and referred to the Oxford English Dictionary, saying it used the word “they” to refer to a singular person as early as 1375.

She said: “Theatres do not deal with a historical reality. Theatres produce plays, and in plays, anything can be possible.”

Joan of Arc, who is thought to have been 19 when she was killed in 1431, has inspired musical, artistic and dramatic works since she was burnt at the stake. She was convicted as a heretic when she was captured by the English. She was made a saint by the Roman Catholic Church in 1920.

Terry added that England’s most famous playwright would have approved of the depiction: “Shakespeare did not write historically accurate plays. He took figures of the past to ask questions about the world around him.

“Our writers of today are doing no different whether that’s looking at Ann Boleyn, Nell Gwynn, Aemilia Bassano, Edward II or Joan of Arc. The Globe is a place of imagination. A place where, for a brief amount of time, we can at least consider the possibility of worlds elsewhere.

“We have had entire storms take place on stage, the sinking of ships, twins who look nothing alike being believable, and even a Queen of the fairies falling in love with a donkey.”

After joining the Globe in 2018, Terry presided over two shows that were cast as “gender blind”, which meant men and women could play roles normally depicted by members of the opposite sex.

Terry herself played Hamlet in 2018, and Catrin Aaron stepped into the role of Horatio. Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night features Viola, a character who walks the line between male and female genders.

Charlie Josephine, the non-binary writer of the play, said: “Joan was this working-class, young person, who was transgressing gender at a time when it was really dangerous and that just felt instantly relatable to me.”

However, one academic has said that the play risked “rewriting history”. Frank Furedi, an emeritus professor at the University of Kent, said the play was “projecting of a fantasy backwards”.

He added: “Someone like Joan of Arc would not have any idea what non-binary was. It is a recharacterisation of something that did not even exist at the time.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/gender-neutral-joan-of-arc-at-globe-qn5thkz5n (Archive)
 
Theater, as a medium, is dead. It has been for a long time. It's been completely infested by self-worshipping midwits and anti-west subversives for at least a decade. Don't get me wrong, theater people have been insufferable Dunning Kruger monstrosities since the 60s, but at this point they only exist to destroy all that is good in the world. Hamilton was the final nail for most people. The industry is now propped up exclusively by upper class liberal white women and their cuck husbands who pretend to like this garbage because otherwise they might get yelled at.

No recent Broadway play has any actual cultural impact at all outside of the tiny cult it's designed for. Those of you who haven't actually seen Hamilton: can you name a single song from it? Because I can't. Can you name anything about Hamilton, except for the fact that it's all race-swapped? Yeah, me either.
 
That's a lot of words just to say you hate women.

This really pisses me off. I am a genuine admirer of Joan of Arc. I have Mark Twain's biography of her, I have seen both the old black and white "Trial of Joan of Arc" and The Messenger starring Mila Jovovich. (1). Joan of Arc, contrary to what Ted Theodore Logan thought, was not "Noah's Wife". She was a real and admirable person who did something extraordinary. And yes, I count inspiring armies as extraordinary. Some people don't grasp that we know a lot more about some periods of history than others. They mentally have Joan of Arc alongside Jesus in their mind as distant past. Well it's the past for certain but there's a great deal of difference between a religious figure from an age where there wasn't nearly as much writing and wasn't a mainstream political figure at the time and consequently have next to nothing in contemporary written records about... and Joan who lived in the 1400's and we have numerous first hand accounts written at the time.

There's an obscure saying attributed to Joan of Arc which is: "Move, and the sky will move". It's more traditionally translated as 'Help yourself and God will help you,' but I find the former far more evocative and it's one of those little quotes I hold dear.

This is an insult to her. We all sit around these days and let this crap roll over us on the idea that this Woke movement is too well-supported to be stopped, it's proponents too dedicated/duplicitous/numerous to make a dent in. That we can't turn back this tide. You know what I say?

Move, and the sky will move.





1. Nobody will persuade me out of liking that film. Vincent Cassell, John Malkovich, Ms. Jovovich in a character role as opposed to comedy or straight action movie. She really gives it her all in this movie. And Dustin Hoffman as Jesus/Satan/God/Schizophrenic Delusion/Who The Fuck Knows?
 
So we are literally at the point now where the actual whole entire point of a story is ignored and subverted just to shove a hopeful future an hero in! Lovely!


This is all the proof you need to convince someone that troons are:

a) Dangers to human history
b) Honest to god misogynists
c) Cancerous growths

d) all of the above
There's nothing more progressive than assuming any woman who's not a vapid girly-girl stereotype is actually a man born in the wrong body.

These!
 
The only comfort I get out of this is these blasphemers will be called to answer for this in the end. This makes me genuinely angry. Lately I've come to see the necessity of women in the Church, from the Virgin Mary all the way on down. For a woman who became a hero, a real hero during a time when teenage girls were regarded about as well as an ant on the ground and was martyred to be treated this way is disgusting.

The Left says they want heroes for girls to look up to, then just straight up do their level best to destroy one of the best examples... @JosephStalin if that chopper's real how do you feel about a Templar LARPer joining in?
 
the funny thing is that her story is pretty close to a real life version of what they all say they want in a female character; a woman who breaks gender roles and goes on to lead an army and win battles. this is exactly what all the woke female lead movies try to do, yet here they take a real life version of that and do everything they can to erase her being a woman. it'
s further proof that at the end of the day these people dont care about real women, they care about made up pronouns.
Yeah, but she was one of those dirty Christfags, so they hate her.
 
“alive, queer and full of hope”
Nobody involved in this is hopeful and their souls are dead. They're definitely faggots though.
 
Wait.... I thought the way pronouns work is that other people use them to refer to the person in question.

It is. But I'm guessing someone calls Joan "she" and she goes off on a tangent about how she's "they/them and stop misgendering me you transphobe". Which is exactly how a woman from the 15th century would act. It's 100% historically accurate. :biggrin:
 
Atrás
Top Abajo