Izzard as female reimagining of Dr Jekyll, anyone ?

I thought he was funny back in the day. His ‘death by tray’ sketch sticks in my mind as making me laugh, and he had a phenomenal memory with his meandering sets that linked various themes as he went.

I admire his fundraising too, and whereas I think he now seems very attention-seeking, I suppose that goes with the territory for famous people.

As Iam says, though, this role pushes women out of the way, as so often happens when transwomen push into what used to be our roles (in both senses of the word). If there is a point being made by reimagining Jeckyl and Hyde as female it might be interesting, but I can’t think what is being achieved by casting a man in the role, particularly one who is now more famous for his ‘gender fluidity’ than his acting.

It seems to be making a point, and rubbing the noses of feminists in it. In the history of theatre it’s only relatively recently that women were able to act at all. Going back to men playing us on stage is like a metaphor for the whole TWAW movement. Slowly but surely we are being erased.

He was funny and then just started talking in stereotypes so the whole thing became really boring. And the Question Time appearance still haunts me.

What was that Galaxy?

He was on with Farage who was being his usual obnoxious self, which would obviously make anyone a bit cross, but he completely lost control, I was on 'his side' so to speak but it was an example of how not to win hearts and minds. It was a week before the referendum.

Sorry just to make it clear I was on Eddie Izzards side rather than with Farage

Well I've just watched this. He makes mincemeat of Farage www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECDrYfNvj_o

If women can't say they are women, but we have to say that transwomen are women on pain of being 'cancelled' (or worse), we really have fallen down the rabbit hole.

Frankly it's terrifying.

Mind I feel the same about James o Briens approach to the Remain/Leave debate and lots of people seem to like him.

trisher

Eddie Izzard is a hilarious comedian and a great actor. There have been quite a few productions where a male character has been played by a female- Maxine Peak, Fiona Shaw etc. I can't think of any male actor who has played a female lead, so perhaps it is time. Although as she identifies as gender fluid I'm not sure it can be completely described as such. Still I'm sure she will see the funny side of it all

To refer to my previous point - a reimagined male role played by a woman, as in Maxine Peake and Fiona Shaw is not the same thing. They are women playing the female role. To reimagine a traditional role from male to female and then cast a male to play the part is completely different.

I don't think he minds if you refer to him as he or she. So let's change to she.

Hahahahaha

No, let's not because he is a male person and hasn't even asked you to use she.

Well, I last saw Eddie in a series on Netflix where he played a raddled old junkie, could have been a female dressed as a man, I suppose, but everyone was treating them as a man!

FarNorth

^I don't think he minds if you refer to him as he or she. So let's change to she.^

Hahahahaha

No, let's not because he is a male person and hasn't even asked you to use she.

But my choice FarNorthas I said he doesn't mind. If I choose to use she because he's playing a female part that's up to me.
You can do as you like

Honestly all this it's a woman's part, it's a man's part is ridiculous. The theatre has always allowed people to cross gender boundaries and play other roles. Sarah Bernhardt did it In fact there have probably been more female Hamlets than there have been male Lady Mabeths once men stopped playing the women in all theatrical productions.
www.theguardian.com/stage/gallery/2014/sep/26/female-hamlets-sarah-bernhardt-maxine-peake-in-pictures

Pammie1 why is it "different" Just another step in gender bending.

Did anyone object when the cygnets in Swan Lake became men?

trisher I did google it and realised that the difference is that, previously, parts were being played by someone of the opposite sex to the one originally intended.

So Maxine Peake and Fiona Shaw, as far as I can see, are females who were playing male roles with everyone accepting that fact.

This is not what Izzard is doing.
He is a male, playing a male role, while claiming to be female.

An equal comparison would be Izzard playing, say, Miss Marple as a male.

If I choose to use she because he's playing a female part

Do you mean the part of Dr Jekyll or the part of girl-mode Eddie?

The theatre has always allowed people to cross gender boundaries and play other roles. Sarah Bernhardt did it In fact there have probably been more female Hamlets than there have been male Lady Mabeths once men stopped playing the women in all theatrical productions.

It's clear that you do understand the meaning of such words as female, male, woman and man.
I expect you even understand she and he.

(Cygnets are cygnets. It's irrelevant whether they are female or male. A mixture of female and male cygnets in a ballet line up, however, could look a little untidy - depending on the individuals.)

Actually as I understand it the role of Dr Jekyll has been rewritten as a female character and Eddie Izzard who has worn female attire for years has been asked to play the role. So actually it isn't as simple as a man playing a woman but it is another aspect to gender bending. Great to see!

As for the cygnets the whole point of that ballet was men playing the traditional roles of women so if that is really what you object to I can't see how that can be acceptable but this isn't.
If you think Eddie Izzard is a man he is playing the role of a woman in this production just like, the men in Matthew Bourne's Swan Lake took roles traditionally womens'. The only possible objection you can have is that Eddie believes he is gender fluid. Which as far as I can see is just plain prejudice.

No, an entirely different objection is to the comparison between dance and drama, which are different entirely.

* So actually it isn't as simple as a man playing a woman but it is another aspect to gender bending. Great to see!*

So you see yet more erosion of the role of natal women as great ?

trisher

Actually as I understand it the role of Dr Jekyll has been rewritten as a female character and Eddie Izzard who has worn female attire for years has been asked to play the role. So actually it isn't as simple as a man playing a woman but it is another aspect to gender bending. Great to see!

As for the cygnets the whole point of that ballet was men playing the traditional roles of women so if that is really what you object to I can't see how that can be acceptable but this isn't.
If you think Eddie Izzard is a man he is playing the role of a woman in this production just like, the men in Matthew Bourne's Swan Lake took roles traditionally womens'. The only possible objection you can have is that Eddie believes he is gender fluid. Which as far as I can see is just plain prejudice.

Nope. The objection for me, is what is the point of reimagining the role from male to female in the first place, if you’re going to assign a man to play the woman. Sorry but I don’t subscribe to the TWAW point of view - natal women didn’t fight to establish their rights as women to see them eroded by men dressed as women. Apologies if that offends anyone, but it’s my point of view. Adele has received a load of abuse for asserting that she enjoys being a female performer, regardless of the fact that the Brit awards have decided not to distinguish between male/female in their awards. So we support trans women in celebrating being ‘women’, but natal women can’t celebrate their natural femininity for fear of causing offence. It’s bullshit, and this issue is doing nothing to help - it’s almost delighting in causing division.

Pammie1

* So actually it isn't as simple as a man playing a woman but it is another aspect to gender bending. Great to see!*

So you see yet more erosion of the role of natal women as great ?

How can it be erosion of the role of natal women Pammie1? If you rewrite a male character as a woman have you eroded the rights of natal men?
If a man dances a woman's part in a ballet have you eroded the rights of a natal woman?
If a woman plays a man's part in a drama have you eroded the rights of a natal man?
If a man plays the part of a woman in a drama have you eroded the rights of a natal woman?
It's called gender bending! Long may it continue and develop

Long may it continue and develop

Why do you see it ('gender bending') as a good thing, trisha.

I can understand people seeing some circumstances, or some incidents as being positive, but why have you taken the stance that blurring all boundaries between the sexes is always good? (If I have misunderstood and you feel that there are times when there should be differences based on sex, I would be interested to know what they are.)

It's called gender bending! Long may it continue and develop

Wow yes! There are far, far more roles for males, and especially older males than the female equivalents. Let's 'gender bend' them all 100% then we'll not have many out of work female actors but a heap more males. Then listen for the squeals of discontent haha

Yup. The whole TWAW thing is not about the tiny minority of transpeople, many of whom are in despair at the way their cause has been hijacked by misogynists, but about the patriarchy pushing the rights of women back centuries.

FarNorth

trisher I did google it and realised that the difference is that, previously, parts were being played by someone of the opposite sex to the one originally intended.

So Maxine Peake and Fiona Shaw, as far as I can see, are females who were playing male roles with everyone accepting that fact.

This is not what Izzard is doing.
He is a male, playing a male role, while claiming to be female.

An equal comparison would be Izzard playing, say, Miss Marple as a male.

Just quoting myself here because you seem to have completely missed the point trisher.

Yes, those male cygnets were in roles normally danced by females.
Great. I loved it.

Izzard is a male who is going to act in a role normally given to a male.
Claims that the role has been 'reimagined as female' are ridiculous.

Perhaps you also think Dick Emery or Ronnie Barker could have been suitable to play Ms Jekyll, if they were still around?