Much Ado About Race, Class, Gender, and Cuba [Culturelicious]

It was one thing for me to watch the play as black and American. But it is another thing to hear about these issues from those intimately familiar with the subject, like Ortiz. He also brought up that the Eurocentric (and UScentric) view of the world also forgets a few things:

“The other thing I wanted to put on the table is the relationship of Shakespeare to Cuba. It’s one thing to discuss a North American play that is coming to Cuba. But Shakespeare is a writer that resonates all over Latin America, primarily through the Tempest. Anna in the Tropics – the Tempest is all over that play. So Cuba in a way has had a relationship with Shakespeare that’s important.”

Ortiz and Serra also pointed out how despite the colorblind casting, somehow race (and racist stereotyping, as Orta pointed out above) still snuck into parts of the interpretation. Ortiz notes:

“There isn’t a racialization of characters, but there is a colorization of sorts – some characters get a latino accent – and it’s Braccio and Margaret who were clearly directed to act more Latino than the other characters.”

In line with this was a broader conversation about the pan-Latinoization targeted at US audiences:

Serra, who went to see Puss in Boots, said:

You try not to be the critical scholar. I went to see Puss in Boots with my daughter and you have this music, and it’s salsa, meringue, flamenco, bolero…and Gypsy Kings. I was loving it, but my academic [side] was saying “this is such a pastiche!”

Ortiz expanded on those ideas, saying:

Puss in Boots has Hayek & Banderas – in a fantasy world, you can do anything you want, so why Latinize this world with a mishmash? The same thing with this production – it goes back to a pan-Latin depiction and it may speak to how this country deals with anxiety about its own Latinization.

Even Ugly Betty – the narrative is that Betty is from Mexico, but the actors aren’t; issues dealt with are immigration. They are supposed to be in the Bronx, but Betty’s sister is totally full on Nuyroican, and no one ever explains how this Nuyroican girl got into this family! And if you are blind to it, you just see a family of Latinos, and if you are conscious of these differences it is glaring.

Other interesting notes from Ortiz:

Those complications [in creating worlds that are based in reality] can take you in the direction that may ultimately become problematic – but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t do it.

“Another thing about Cuban women – having been raised by a lot of them – society has always been deeply particiarchial, but Cuban women are not shrinking violets. There is a strength and intensity that circulates with femininity in the culture. There are far more Bernices that Heroes in Cuban culture.”

Page 3 of 3 | Previous page

  • Steve Murgaski

    Your analysis does make me curious about the play.  Thanks.

    Re: your audience not knowing about Mad Men, I’ve never watched the show either.  Is it worth watching?

    Sitting in front of the television feels like going to church.  It force-feeds you the American dream, as dreamt by network executives and advertising agencies.  You become a commodity — the audience corporations are paying to brainwash.  I do really need a good reason to sell myself like that.

  • Eva_Noel

    Thanks for this!  I saw this version of the show about a week and a half ago, and the Cuban setting put me on edge.  Before I saw it, I wasn’t sure if they were trying to make some sort of statement with that setting, and even after I saw it, I was still confused.  It’s not my area of history, and I appreciate all this reading for better context.  I was sorry I couldn’t make it to the discussions.

    I wondered throughout the play if Don Pedro was a man of color as a nod to the setting, or if it was just because everyone remembers Denzel Washington in the movie, and if that has okayed this role to be played by men of color.   I was also a little put off that the two men of color were either sexless (Don Pedro*) or hypersexualized (Borachio).

    *I think there’s room for more nuance than simply “sexless,” but he is a major, powerful character who is not married off at the end.  His main purpose is to bring other people together, not to have a romance of his own, despite his sincerely played (in this version, anyway) interest in Beatrice.

  • Pingback: Recent Shakespeare Production Promotes Latino Stereotypes | NewsTaco