Shakespeare’s Romeo & Juliet is being performed in an "alternative" way in one east London school.
Van Helsing at Moonbattery alerted us to this silly story from the other side of the pond. To coincide with Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered (LGBT) History Month, kids between the ages of 14 and 16 performed the play as . . . wait for it . . . "Romeo & Julian."
Why was this Shakespeare work—often the first exposure children have to his genius—reimagined in this particular way? Leytonstone School drama teacher Jo Letson explains that reworking the most famous play by the most famous son of Straford-upon-Avon was necessary to combat "homophobia and homophobic bullying."
Yes. A cast featuring men in tights chasing after other men in tights and speaking flowery language tells us just . . . well, what, exactly? Does it make a typical child snicker? Certainly. Does it then follow that this is a teaching moment against the horrors of "homophobia"? Apparently, to Liberals Gone Wild with political correctness.
It’s not, after all, as if modern society hasn’t produced slews of gay-friendly plays for teaching moments—"Rent," for one. Why must Shakespeare be destroyed on the altar of political correctness?
Because the left is in the business of destroying traditional Western culture—upon which it intends to build its own, more "enlightened" world. Thus it is not enough merely to teach tolerance. There must be intolerance for all that does not serve the agenda of the destruction of the West. Such "incorrect" thought must be quashed at every front, and that means rewriting history and having Shakespeare slapped to death by interior decorators.
To Jolly Old England’s credit, not everyone in a position of power is as batty as Ms. Letson. Some members of Parliament are not pleased:
Calling for a debate on political correctness during questions on upcoming Commons business, Tory MP Philip Davies said: "This is mind-blowing.
"Anyone with an ounce of sense would want their children to be learning Romeo & Juliet rather than ‘Romeo and Julian’," Davies said.
The MP for Shipley in Yorkshire added: "Romeo and Juliet is one of the greatest works ever written. It is a play that every child should study.
"It is very worrying that this literary masterpiece is being used for such a politically-correct purpose," he said.
Quite right … indeed. Cheerio, chaps. Stand firm against the army of arrogant twits that surrounds you, such as Commons leader Harriet Harman, who offered a rebuke to those who would object to this grotesque travesty of a great drama:
"I seem to remember that in Shakespearean times, boys would play girls and girls would play boys and the whole point was trying [to] work out which was which," Harman said. [Ed: If that’s what you think the "whole point" of Romeo & Juliet is, my dear, get thee to a nunnery!]
"There is going to be a debate next Thursday about new equality legislation so we can ensure everybody in this country is treated with fairness, respect and not subject to prejudice and discrimination—and indeed cheap shots—from you."
Oh, dear. Legislation—to be debated next week(!) in Britain—outlawing anything that doesn’t adhere to Harman’s idea of "fairness" and "respect." Objecting on the basis of tradition and (gasp!) freedom of thought? We’ll have none of that! That’s the stuff of "cheap shots," and no one should have the freedom to commit such crimes against humanity.
And Ms. Harman is as wrong on her history of drama as she is about everything else: women were not allowed on the stage at all during Shakespeare’s time. Crikey, the woman hasn’t even seen Shakespeare in Love, for Pete’s sake. The reality was not exactly the gender-bending free-for-all she puckishly imagines the Elizabethan stage to have been. (What the Elizabethan stage did have, however, was a level of intellectual freedom unimaginable in the Blighty of today.)
It’s not the right season just yet, but this is a "very midsummer madness." As the Bard himself might say, "something’s rotten in Denmark England" these days.