I can clearly understand why Frank Wedekind’s Spring Awakening had an aura of controversy surrounding it since its birth in 1891 . The themes present are somewhat taboo even in contemporary society and we are significantly more open and accepting. I felt that the scene involving adolescent rape was unnecessarily grotesque, I cannot seem to fathom any artistic advantages of including this. I understand that Wedekind was trying to comment on his society’s repression of sexual topics, and I agree that it should be done, but I do not appreciate the way he chose to express his opinions.
I would side with the people who chose not to have Spring Awakening produced in their theater. My rationale is that, after painfully reading the play and its suggestive qualities, I would not want to voluntarily subject myself to its performance especially 100 years ago where issues like homosexuality were strongly hated by the public. If the main characters are thirteen or fourteen year olds, then thirteen and fourteen year olds should be able to watch this plays performance, and I would never allow my thirteen year old sister within a mile of Spring Awakening. I think the biggest objection I have is the age of the characters, they are too young.
In a performance of Spring Awakening, the scene of Hanschen and Ernst kissing
I am not trying to say that Sexual subjects should not be allowed in society, because they are part of human nature and as a progressive society the topic should be discussed. However, discussion of our sexual nature contrasted with adolescent rape and masturbation are not even on the same planet. All people should be educated about Sex and the fact that sexual desires are natural and human to enhance the knowledge of safe sex. Furthermore, some of Wedekind’s expressions are correct and stand to better society like showing that Wendals mother hid what sex is,what pregnancy is and even the fact that Wendal was pregnant from her. Focusing on elements like misinformation of sex would, in my opinion, create a more beneficial play.
I totally agree with you about how uncomfortable and painful reading Spring Awakening is. Wedekind must have received an incredible amount of protest throughout his life. At a time where censorship was extremely high, Wedekind left the public with no choice but to forbid the play. However, I feel that Wedekind was a revolutionary and a progressive writer of his time. Without writers like him the world would truly not be the way it is. Sometimes society needs some radicalism so that the world could move forward, for better or for worse.
I think this play is meant to explore what makes each and every one of us uncomfortable. For example, Wedekind’s inclusion of adolescent rape was meant to be controversial and devastating. Wendla’s innocence and Melchior’s ignorance is highlighted in this scene. The awakening both teens go through is tragic and the consequences are even more so. Because of this particular scene, the true harm misinformation and ignorance can lead to is fully developed. Although you may not agree with the way he chose to express his opinions, sometimes the harshest way can lead to the most change and understanding of complex issues.
I agree with you that sometimes harsh means can sometimes lead to change of an issue. But I think that everyone can agree that adolescent rape is an egregiously nefarious act. Because this is widely agreed upon, I don’t understand what Wedekind is trying to influence. We already agree
Ahmed your perspective on the play was intriguing. Indeed, we cannot confuse sex education with passive acceptance to adolescent rape. That part of the play was quite gratuitous. Wedekind wanted us to change our social norms and accept sexuality as a daily part of our lives instead of repressing it to the point of madness. And indeed, society has now changed for the greater good.