Monday evening at the Metropolitan Opera House was supposed to be a night celebrating Russian opera, with a performance of Tchaikovsky’s “Eugene Onegin.” While it was just that, the gala did face a sizable speed bump: angry protestors. In fact, the first voice that was heard by the audience was from a rioter, criticizing the newly established Russian antigay law. This law bans “propaganda on nontraditional sexual relationships.” It’s been common knowledge lately that Russia is very anti-gay, and with the Winter Olympics coming up, this has been a topic of discussion for many people.
Four people were required to leave the show and they complied – having already succeeded in making their point. However, these were only 4 out of the many protestors who were outside the opera house; according to the article, there were tons of picketing and chanting, along with a 50-foot rainbow banner declaring the message “Support Russian gays.” The idea for the protest stemmed from Andrew Rudin, a gay composer. Rudin created an online petition insisting that the Met dedicate the performance to Russian gay rights. The petition, signed by over 9000 people, stated that Tchaikovsky – who is ironically, gay – was going to be performed by artists who supported an antigay Russian government. While it seemed only right – at least to me – for the Met to fulfill the wishes of so many people, they could not. General manager of the Met, Peter Gelb, stated that, although he didn’t disagree, he felt it would be inappropriate if the opera house made a dedication based on a political cause. He continued by explaining that while “Russia may officially be in denial about Tchaikovsky’s sexuality, we’re not. The Met is proud to present Russia’s great gay composer. That is a message in itself.”
I found this article very interesting and relevant – especially considering the fact that Ed’s recent article was related to homophobia in the hip hop community. In his blog post, which could be found here, he asked readers why they personally feel homophobia is so prevalent in the hip hop world. I think it’s very thought provoking to see that the mere hint of something perhaps being antigay is being protested in the art community – a society where you would never expect there to be an issue with homosexuality. Although this Metropolitan Opera protest is indisputably minor compared to the problems in the hip hop community, I still think it’s crazy to see this. It’s also unsettling to see that the problems in Russia could influence people here.
Although somewhat irrelevant to this article, I remember finding out about the antigay feelings in Russia and I strongly felt that our country should’ve decided to boycott the Olympics. However, after realizing how hard our athletes trained, I thought it just wouldn’t be fair to them. So, I’m asking you all because I’m curious: how do you feel about the Olympics being in an area of antigay government? What does it say about our world, that we’re allowing this to happen? Does this tiny protest at the Metropolitan Opera House symbolize something larger?
Source: Cooper, Michael. “Gay Rights Protest Greets Opening Night at the Met” New York Times. 23 September 2013. Web. 25 September 2013.
Wow this is a very interesting article. I agree with you on most, if not all of your points. I think that the theater was right in letting the performance go on was CLEARLY the right thing to do, but I don’t agree with the statement made by the general manager of the Met, Peter Gelb, “Although he didn’t disagree, he felt it would be inappropriate if the opera house made a dedication based on a political cause.” I think that the MET would be a perfect venue for a political cause and should be used to send yet another message to Russia, that blind hatred and intolerance is NOT acceptable in todays society. I think that the arts have always been the means for pushing the envelope and questioning society and fail to see why this cannot be a means for a political cause. The protestors did their job by getting this publicity, now more will question Russia’s means and maybe, just maybe, Russia will change.
It would have been great if the MET were to send a direct message to Russia defending gay rights, but that is not what they are meant to do, and the message that they did send was perfectly appropriate for the situation. The MET’s goal is to put on a dazzling performance in order to entertain their audience, not to start a political feud. If the MET were to send one political message, then many more will follow causing a spiral into unnecessary conflicts. We need to leave the politics to the politicians. If the MET starts affiliating itself to certain political view points than they would lose audiences who share the opposite view points and that just hurts the whole establishment. I really do hope that Russia can change it’s laws by the Winter Olympics, but, just as Nicolette said, if we begin to boycott the olympics because of such laws, then the time and effort our athletes put into training will we wasted away.
After reading this article and your review, I love that you pointed out that there is an anti-gay issue in the art community. This is SO interesting because art is the one area where being expressive and open is the standard. However in this scenario, homosexuality is not even accepted in the art community no matter what country the disapproval is coming from. I think that the MET is the ideal place to promote acceptance and if art and politics can be combined in other instances thoughout history, why not now as well? The protestors did their job of supporting the Russian gay composer and I’m glad that they got their point across. I do not agree that the United States should withdraw from the Winter Olympics because he issue is not large enough to prevent Americans from competing in a sporting event with Russians along with the rest of the the world’s participants. I really enjoyed this article and think it is time for nations including our own, to advance in their beliefs on homosexuality along with the other trying issues in today’s world.
The acts of the protesters at the Metropolitan Opera House was very admirable, but I am not sure if there goal was achievable. While Tchaikovsky may have been gay, I do not know if artists performing his work while supporting antigay Russian government is wrong. If they are Russian citizens maybe they are being forced to agree with this ideal because of society. Also it would be inappropriate for the MET to make open declarations against the beliefs of a country regarding one of its citizens. What the protesters were able to contribute to the fight with antigay Russia was valuable, they brought even more attention to the issue.
With the Olympics I do not believe the U.S. should boycott the Olympics. I feel the U.S. has no right in interfering in the antigay issue at this point. While this issue is still in disputed with the government and people it should not be a major concern of the U.S. If this issue grew into physical disputes where many people were killed or harmed I would understand U.S. support. This one incident at the opera house could be a small start to a larger conflict.
I understand the Metropolitan Opera’s standpoint on the issue. I agree that it is not in the Metropolitan Opera’s place to take a stand on social issues in foreign nations. The Metropolitan Opera performs operas from all over the world and it is a part of the international opera community. I think that playing Tchaikovsky’s work is enough in supporting gays in Russia. I find the protestors cause just, but I do not find it appropriate to attack the performers. They are only doing their job and to simply categorize them as anti-gay just because they are from Russia is wrong. How do they know what the performers think about gay rights? Another thing to keep in mind is that not every nation has the same values as we do. We happen to be more liberal and accepting of homosexuality here in America. Russia and many other nations are not as progressive about gay rights and it may take years for them to change. In terms of the Winter Olympics, it would be incredibly bold by the United States to boycott on an issue that has mixed views across the nation. Like you said, it is also unfair to the athletes who have worked so hard to compete in the upcoming Winter Olympics. I hope that one day people around the world will become more accepting of gay rights.
Unfortunately many countries and communities still do not accept gay people or same-sex relationships, which is disappointing. While the Olympics are being held in Russia, I agree with you that it isn’t fair for athletes to not compete because of the antigay area. The Olympics are, to put it simply, for athletes to compete in sports they excel in and that’s it. Sexuality, relationship status, or personal lives should not be involved at all in the competitions, and most viewers do not care. Although it is difficult to accept the fact that we are sending representatives of our country to such a hostile environment, I believe we should continue to cheer them on despite the negative criticisms they are bound to face.
If a country decides to not send its athletes because of Russia’s stance on gay people then I think that is plain ignorance. We need to walk in with an open mind and understand that people still hold tradition close to heart and we also need to understand that acceptance of gay marriage started in recent years and will take much longer before society accepts it as a whole.
This article brought up many good points about the current issue of homosexuality and art. One thing in particular that I agreed with was the Metropolitan Opera House’s handling of the situation. While I agree with the protesters for trying to have an effect on the Russia’s stance on gays, I don’t think it was fair of them to put the Met in this kind of difficult situation. I completely understand why the Met would not want to get tangled in political issues. I also admired their comment that while “Russia may officially be in denial about Tchaikovsky’s sexuality, we’re not. The Met is proud to present Russia’s great gay composer. That is a message in itself.”
in regards to boycotting the 2014 Olympics, I agree with you that wile it may have some effect on Russia, it just wouldn’t be unfair to our athletes after all of the hard work that they put into this.
I do not think it is the MET’s responsibility to interfere with the Russian governments decisions. I think they have the right to remain indifferent to Russia’s choices. The protesters should not take it out on the MET for they had no influences on Russian beliefs. They should protest against places of Russian politics who made the decision of being anti-gay. Basically they have the right to be mad, but not mad at the MET.
In this article (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/22/opinion/russias-anti-gay-crackdown.html?_r=0) the issue with the olympics being help in Russia is clear. President Putin said police can detain people from foreign countries if they are suspected to be gay. This will be a big problem because i am sure there are many fans, athletes, coaches, and family members who are gay. Will they be jailed in Russia? I am sure the Olympic committee, the United States and many other countries will have something to say about this.
I really enjoyed your topic because I have been reading about the different riots caused by Russia’s treatment of gays and the riots it has caused. I think that if the Met decided it was going to support the gay rights movement, they should have gone all the way, not just saying Tchaikovsky was a gay composer so we will play his songs anyway. However, the interesting part of article is that question you posed on whether we should boycott the Olympics. What I found interesting was members of the Italian government, also supported Putin, but this wasn’t a source for much rioting. Why should there be a difference as to which government, if we are going to be fair, we should criticize any violators of human rights. One of the activists, Mr. Tilgher, “hailed President Vladimir V. Putin’s “courageous positions against the powerful gay lobby”…”. Why isn’t this causing outrage? I think there shouldn’t be any bias when it comes to calling countries out on their actions and who they support.
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/italys-far-right-salutes-putin-for-anti-gay-law-and-support-for-assad/
I’m not 100% sure I understand correctly what the protesters wanted. I don’t understand how the Met dedicating the performance to gay rights in Russia would affect or pressure Putin. I think the connection may have been linear, “Russian Opera -> Gay Rights in Russia -> Dedicate Opera to Gay Rights in Russia”. I agree with General Manager Peter Gelb that the Opera house didn’t and shouldn’t get DIRECTLY involved with political issues. That being said, the Met has in the past and even in this case shown their standings on political and social issues through their actions. In this case, they present a gay Russian composer. In the past they hired Marian Anderson, the Opera’s first black singer in 1954. This was at a time when blacks and African Americans were still fighting for Civil Rights and the Met made such a bold move to hire a black singer. Therefore, I think the protest might have been a little unfounded. The Met is clear on where it stands on the issue of gay rights and honestly nothing they could’ve done or said would affect Putin somehow and would make the whole show all too political.
Link to Marian Anderson: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/07/this-day-in-history-marian-anderson_n_4057095.html?utm_hp_ref=arts&ir=Arts