The Volokh Conspiracy - Yale Rescinds Ban on Realistic-Looking Stage Weapons:

The Yale Daily News reports:

Stage weapons will again be allowed in University theatrical productions, in a reversal of last week's ban, Yale spokeswoman Helaine Klasky said Tuesday morning.

Administrators decided Monday afternoon to require that audiences instead be informed of the use of stage weapons before the start of every performance, she said. In the wake of the Virginia Tech massacre, which left 33 students dead last Monday, Dean of Student Affairs Betty Trachtenberg had told students that they would be required to substitute obviously fake props for realistic stage weapons in theatrical productions.

I'm glad to hear that the ban has been rescinded. And of course I'm delighted to hear that those Yale theater patrons who would be deeply disturbed by seeing things that look like real swords (but that are sure to be fake swords) will now be warned ahead of time.

By the way, Dean Trachtenberg's view, criticizing the ban's critics:

I think people should start thinking about other people rather than trying to feel sorry for themselves and thinking that the administration is trying to thwart their creativity. They're not using their own intelligence. We have to think of the people who might be affected by seeing real-life weapons.

OK, as someone who tries to use his own intelligence, I'll bite: What exactly should we think of people who might be affected by seeing a real-looking (not real-life, but real-looking) sword in a play?

Thanks to reader Adam Sofen for the pointer.

Related Posts (on one page):

Yale, realistic-looking stage weapons, and the prospects of zero tolerance policies:
Yale Rescinds Ban on Realistic-Looking Stage Weapons:
Zero Tolerance Comes to Campus:
Yale Bans Realistic-Looking Onstage Swords:

(link)

Shelby (mail):

I dunno, but I hear Virginia Tech has a lot of counselors available. Maybe some could be spared to help the traumatized victims of Yale's theater department.

4.24.2007 6:50pm

Felix Sulla (mail):

Christopher Hitchens had a good article in Slate today about the general reraction/overreaction to the Virginia Tech shootings, aptly titled "Suck It Up."

http://www.slate.com/id/2164914/

4.24.2007 6:55pm

EH:

If people are going to be affected by seeing a real-life facsimile of a weapon in the Yale theater department, they are living in - or visiting - the wrong country. Plus, doesn't Yale imply some modicum of intelligence?

4.24.2007 6:57pm

pete (mail) (www):

The actors could still have fun with this and make the warning as dramatic as possible. Maybe they can make a big sign with sirens and flashing lights: that says "Warning! Realistic looking weapons may be used in this performance. Attend at your own risk. Yale University will not be responisble for any psychic trauma that results from seeing a realistic looking fake weapon."

Or else they could have the students perform a greek chorus of the warning to the audience before the play starts.

4.24.2007 7:00pm

John (mail):

I've been trying over the last couple of days to think what on earth could be in this Dean's mind, as I am hard pressed to think she is the complete dolt that her statements make her seem.

The only thing I could think of was this. Suppose some play called for some one to shoot a pistol. Then a Yale audience member might not be able to distinguish this from the onset of mass murder. Similarly, a stage swordsman might in fact be a disguised mass murderer about to leap into the audience to start beheading Yale students.

So, to prevent these disquieting perceptions, we must use our "own intelligence" and "think of the people who might be affected by seeing real-life weapons" and ban them lest audience members get the wrong idea.

4.24.2007 7:01pm

But we really should worry about people thinking theatre is real life. Warning son, cats don't really sing in English, young love isn't worth suicide by poison.

4.24.2007 7:07pm

Guest Poster:

This is the same Betty Trachtenberg that belives that 18 year olds are responsible enough to drink, but she doesn't think that they can tell the difference between a prop sword, and a real one!

4.24.2007 7:08pm

e: Certainly, though many college theatrical productions make suicide by poison understandable.

4.24.2007 7:11pm

A.C.:

Lots of theaters mention that there will be gunshots, strobe lights, or fog effects in a show because some people do have extreme reactions to these things. I knew a person with epilepsy who couldn't stand strobe lights, for example. I've never heard of anyone wigging out from the mere sight of a weapon on stage, so adding a warning about this seems fairly silly. But this does sound like an attempt at a climb-down, and perhaps the offending bureaucrat will climb down the rest of the way in a little while.

4.24.2007 7:24pm

Daniel950:

"What exactly should we think of people who might be affected by seeing a real-looking (not real-life, but real-looking) sword in a play?"

I think that those are exactly the kind of wimps that make it easier for murderers to ender "gun-free" zones.

4.24.2007 7:26pm

BobH (mail):

EH asks: "doesn't Yale imply some modicum of intelligence?" I asked my son, a junior at Harvard, about this. He said he'd get back to me.

WHOI Jacket:

Heh, BobH

I asked my cousin a similar question. (Harvard, Pre-Med '05)

Exact same answer.

4.24.2007 7:34pm

Ron Hardin (mail) (www):

The lady may be having difficulty with the concept of fiction.

As Stanley Cavell said, to a child alarmed by some action on the stage in a play he was too young to go to, you say, ``It's not real. It's make-believe,'' but this is an emergency measure.

Fiction is not yet ready for the child. It ought to be, for adults, though.

4.24.2007 7:35pm

Cathy (mail) (www):

The only person I can think of who might be affected by seeing real-life weapons in the theater is Lincoln.

Kovarsky (mail):

i'd like to use someone else's intelligence please.

4.24.2007 7:36pm

cathy,

that's hilarious.

4.24.2007 7:37pm

J-L:

Another creative way to ensure that "audiences...be informed of the use of stage weapons before every performance":

Combine it with a warning about turning off cell phones.

"Those whose cell phones ring during the performance will be threatened with our realistic but theatrical stage weapons!"

4.24.2007 7:40pm

Humble Law Student (mail):

Only people that smart can be that stupid.

4.24.2007 7:51pm

Tom Holsinger (mail):

Yale was very wise. Their Drama Department has ways of keeping silly outsiders from intruding on the Department's turf. As in,

Dress one actor up as Cho, armed with some Super-Soakers, and another as the Wicked Witch from the Wizard of Oz, with a sign on her chest stating "Dean Trachtenberg", and a day-glo orange nerf baseball labelled "magic wand".

Then film their duel outside Trachtenberg's office. Have an announcer loudly proclaim the terms of the duel - the Wicked Witch has to hit Cho with the magic wand before he can squirt some water on her. If he succeeds, she must scream, "I'm melting, I'm melting" and go into dying convulsions. If she succeeds in hitting him first, he has to surrender his Super-Soakers and go into exile.

With judges dressed as the Easter Bunny and a bunch of Tooth Fairies (rugby players in tutu's, with wings, tiaras, and pipe wrenches), all carrying signs saying "Dean Trachtenberg Is Unfair! She Believes In Magic But Not In Us!"

(reposted from the thread above - I hadn't noticed this one)

4.24.2007 7:56pm

Charlie (Colorado) (mail):

"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

4.24.2007 8:36pm

Bill N:

I told my wife, who has sung in dozens of large and small opera productions for nearly 20 years, the story of Yale's policy of banning realistic-looking weapons, and she was appalled on more than just aesthetic grounds. She noted that realistic weapons are the safest--people only get hurt when fake weapons (such as the collapsable sword that failed to collapse a few years ago and nearly killed a singer) are used in realistic ways. Opera companies use very real-looking weapons, but then artfully fake stabbings, etc., for safety reasons.

4.24.2007 8:57pm

Jim Rhoads (mail):

I have long observed that this site often draws out commenters that delight in taking positions opposite of the erudite posters. Many times those positions are quite liberal.

Sadly for Ms. Trachtenberg, no one comes to her rescue here.

That persuades me that this was one decision she made that was unwise.

Kudos to the Yale Administration for correcting the problem.

4.24.2007 9:26pm

Charlie (Colorado): Mmmm. No. A fear of weapons under appropriate circumstances is not only understandable, but actually quite intelligent, and in some situations even essential. (I make no comment on anyone's sexual maturity, mind.) The issue here is whether actors onstage from the Yale drama department should strike terror into the hearts of the mases.

4.24.2007 9:27pm

guess'd:

"This is the same Betty Trachtenberg that belives that 18 year olds are responsible enough to drink, but she doesn't think that they can tell the difference between a prop sword, and a real one!"

Stuff'em with Soma (&/or rum) and keep'em happy and thoughtless.

4.24.2007 9:38pm

Hank Reardon:

BobH:
EH asks: "doesn't Yale imply some modicum of intelligence?" I asked my son, a junior at Harvard, about this. He said he'd get back to me.
-----------------------
WHOI Jacket:
Heh, BobH

I asked my cousin a similar question. (Harvard, Pre-Med '05)

Exact same answer.

Typical, slow-thinking Harvard students.

4.24.2007 10:34pm

neurodoc:

Dean Trachtenberg previously announced her intention to retire at the end of this school year.

4.24.2007 10:43pm

The River Temoc (mail):

The only thing I could think of was this. Suppose some play called for some one to shoot a pistol. Then a Yale audience member might not be able to distinguish this from the onset of mass murder.

When Chechen terrorists seized a theater full of people seeing the musical Nord-Ost in Moscow in 2002, there were reports that many in the audience had precisely this reaction — they thought the seizure was part of the play.

4.24.2007 11:05pm

John Burgess (mail) (www):

Hank Reardon: I'm with you. I asked my son, a Senior at Penn, and he was quick to come up with an opinion. Alas, it being Penn, the answer is not printable on this blog.

4.24.2007 11:43pm

rarango (mail):

Humble Law Student notes: "Only people that smart can be that stupid. Whould HLS permit me to change smart to "educated and in academe?"

The scary thing, Dean T probably believes herself.

4.25.2007 10:23am

markm (mail):

e: Certainly, though many college theatrical productions make suicide by poison understandable.

Ah, someone's finally come up with a valid reason to search theater-goers for weapons. But to really prevent an audience mass-suicide, you not only need to take away their weapons and poisons, but also belts and shoelaces. Maybe that's not even enough. Could someone choke himself to death on a sock? Best if the audience is nude...

4.26.2007 10:59am