When I was at high school we did a version of Joan of Arc that was set at the end of the world. A dystopia, about a burning world and royalty and love. That play would have probably done damn well with a non-binary Joan actually, because so much of that narrative was about bodily autonomy, about being forced to be impregnated, to carry on the population. About forced femininity. A Joan who doesn't feel right in their own skin already, even before the whole dystopia thing - it would have worked.
I'm saying this cause this story has been adapted for years and will continue to be adapted long after you're gone. There's been at least seven films and presumably countless other pieces of media about her.
Hamlet, Othello, Lear, Macbeth, Malvolio, kings and queens, Alexander the Great, Cleopatra, Coriolanus. Royalty, historical icons, real or not. They've all been queered or cross-cast. All their stories have been told in beautiful, different, interesting ways - ways that have unlocked discussion, created different narratives, explored their worlds in a way that makes them feel more alive than just some sentences on a page. How does Malvolio become more sympathetic as a woman? What does queering do to the story of Macbeth? What happens if Puck is non-binary?
Adaptation brings stories back to life, and reignites passion in a subject.
Hell, I've played a crosscast Prospero on stage. Taking a role that's historically masculine and splitting it between two (then) cis-identified woman actors? That's giving characters layers you didn't expect.
I, Joan is not erasing the historical woman. It's providing a different angle on the story. Y'all sound like those guys who get mad when there's a lead woman in a video game by whining about the character using they/them pronouns and having complicated gender feelings. Oh no, one portrayal of a person is doing a different thing? Shock horror. The world's going to end. Fucking get over yourselves.
No real person ever is going to google Joan of Arc and think "omg she was non-binary" because of this play. it's not erasure, it's adaptation. it's expression, it's THEATRE, not the real world. it's not "literally 1984". - because a) most of yall who say something's like 1984 have never read it, and b) people aren't trying to tell you that Joan of Arc wasn't a cis woman. They're saying "if you think the abstract concept of Joan being non-binary is interesting, come and see this play". And I do. I find that idea very interesting.
If anything, a young person seeing this play could very easily become interested in the real Joan of Arc's story and seek it out after seeing the play.
Adaptation breeds discussion and creativity. It interests audiences in things that they mightn't have cared about. I'm not going to see a play about my hometown's history because I don't really care about it, but I'd see a play that discusses the queer icons that grew up here, cause there's something relatable to latch onto.
TERFs, radfems, whatever the fuck you call yourselves now - you're not helping. You're not making theatre better or art better or making the world safer or standing up for women, you're harming people.
Cis women get thrown out of toilets all the time because y'all get in a moral panic about tiny genetic factors - shapes of noses, length of hair, omg she has broad shoulders thus she must be a trans spy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - and trans and cis people die because you see gender as a strict line rather than a series of complicated biological factors that have always been more than just two options.
Get the fuck over yourselves. Stop whining and clothing your rhetoric in proto-fascist buzzwords.
With this much internet attention, the show's going to sell out anyway. :) In theatre, any publicity is good publicity, and I certainly hope it gets a repeat season and a digital release.
romaincrisis
gummygunk
vaporwave
discoholicmusic
snowghoul
ellievsbear
stormborns
kianamaiart
