To say that students auditioning for the show are not given an equal chance is an unfair statement. Without the experience of directing shows, one would not have the same sense of what is required to create the best possible cast. An important note is that one builds a cast to be balanced so the group can most effectively work together. This is key, as a cast spends a great deal of time together in what can often be a stressful environment, so one must consider the social aspect of the group in order for the group to be at its strongest. As for the choice in show, it was well suited for the group of actors that we have at our school. Such a cynical view should not be taken on what is so clearly an enjoyable and memorable experience. While I did not have a lead role, I thoroughly enjoyed everyday day of rehearsal and every show we performed. I can only hope that those who want to take part in these shows would be happy with any role they were given rather than only wanting a lead.

Junior- That is absolutely not the case. There were so many ways to do the show more modestly if the actresses felt uncomfortable, but they individually approved each and every costume and dance move that they used. If an actress felt uncomfortable, they would say so, which only happened a few times because we know what is appropriate for the Whitman stage. There were 46 people in the cast and 4 were strippers. There were so many other roles that they could have played if they were uncomfortable being a stripper, but they weren’t. Also there were only 2 songs in the whole show that had anything to do with stripping at all.

Guys, this is absolutely ridiculous. This point of the article was just to show two points of a debate about whether Whitman Drama should do a show about the objectification of women.
The show went on. It was watered down. But the show was over like a month ago, why are people even still debating this?

And drama kids, we get it: you love Gerkin. That doesn’t mean that whole freaking cast of Gypsy needs to tell their sob story, it’s just redundant.

tl;dr? Drama kids quit being such drama queens

As someone who was involved in the show where actors “undressed onstage and remained in undergarments”, I can vouch that this was something that was run by the cast members before agreed upon and not something that “objectified” them in the least. While some audience members may find it abrasive or offensive, the argument cannot be made that women actors are objectified or feel uncomfortable onstage.

The Whitman Drama program has not only been my home for four years, but it is extremely special to everyone involved and the bad press and rep the program is receiving is not indicative of its reputation or class. Whitman puts on incredible shows with talented students acting and producing who love what they are doing and that’s what the important thing should be here.

Though I do respect each person’s opinion on this thread, I think many of you are mistaken in what Whitman Drama means and represents for those involved. Whitman Drama was where I found my home. I did not participate in any shows my freshman year, primarily because I did not have the self-esteem to do so. I thought I was useless. My sophomore year, I auditioned and got into the musical, Damn Yankees. I slowly became acquainted to everyone in the cast and built friendships that I maintain to this day. Though somewhat cliche (but not any less true!), Whitman Drama was like a family to me, and I felt more comfortable at rehearsal with all of my friends in the program than I was at home. Christopher also treated us like professionals, something we have to get used to in college. We don’t get babied or watched, and we are forced to come up with solutions on our own and act like adults. Christopher values treating us as adults, as equals. I probably learned more things from Christopher than I did from some of my teachers at Whitman.
Some of the comments on here are quite acerbic, and I would like to say that if you aren’t involved in the program, you really lack the perspective that you need to understand Whitman Drama. I would like to say that I did not receive a lead role until my senior year, and even so, I am not disgruntled with the program. I wholeheartedly disagree with k.walsh’s comment regarding loaded resumes for college applications. Though there have been a few students (with exceptional talent) that have garnered more lead roles than others over their four years at Whitman Drama, most students involved tend to share similar experiences in terms of stage time. In regards to the risqué nature of some of Christopher’s shows, I have to say that it is completely acceptable. I have encountered very few students that think the show’s are too inappropriate. Most of the criticism comes from parents. This being said, our generation is different from those preceding it. We are more open and accepting, and in general, our society embraces risqué things more often than they were in previous generations. Shows like American Idiot and RENT are quite popular, especially because they bring important issues to the surface. I saw Whitman’s production of Gypsy, and I must say, I was very surprised how much controversy there was over it. The show IS NOT ABOUT A STRIPPER. That is not the main message, and if you think it is, I suggest you go back and watch it again. Yes, there are scenes that feature the burlesque, but I don’t understand why it is was considered so inappropriate? The girls were all exposing less skin than they would in a bikini, which is considered socially acceptable. We are a high school, and students are most definitely not sheltered from sex and sexuality, and shouldn’t be, for that matter. For example, advertisements and images for stores such as Abercrombie and Fitch clearly objectify the human body and show much more skin than necessary, and students see things like this every day on TV, yet I don’t see parents removing televisions from the house in order to shield their children’s precious eyes. This is the 21st century, and I guarantee that almost every student at Whitman has seen a girl in a bikini or guy with his shirt off, such as at the pool. It is very hard to find a show that doesn’t deal with gender stereotypes or objectification of women. Some argue to choose more appropriate shows, such as Oklahoma. But this show deals with gender stereotypes in the same way that Gypsy and Damn Yankees deal with objectification of women. There is something unappealing and inappropriate in every show, it just depends on how much attention the audience gives it. What Christopher expresses in his shows is a message that delves deeper than just riding the gray line between what is acceptable and what isn’t. He brings to light issues that are very important. He makes the audience think. Personally, I believe Christopher is a creative genius, and I am sure everyone in Whitman Drama will agree with that.

All of these comments are either bullying the actresses, Karen Clarkson, Chris Gerken, or the Black and White, as Actor/Techie said. Parents– Choose if you want equal opportunities for everyone or talent based auditions, because it cannot be both ways. If everyone is given an equal opportunity, everyone would only get one chance to be in one show, and if it is talent based then Sammy Zeisel is always your leading man. Whitman Drama has a great balance as is.

Despite your views,Senior who never wants to be an actor, the Whitman audition process is not an automatic reward for anyone who auditions. I have been close to the Audition process, and as anyone who has auditioned knows, actors are not required to try out for ensemble roles. many actors try out for all the roles, and there is a clear option to only audition for specific roles. Usually newer actors have not yet developed their skills enough to get a non ensemble role, but this is not a law, just a norm. Actors like Erin Craig have been able to get bigger parts due to their skill.
the belief that attempting an Audition shows full dedication is ridiculous. it is merely a display of intrest and skill. The Audition Process is used to select the actors who will best act in the show’s limited roles. the process is voluntary, and at no time is an Actor required to play a part that they didn’t want. The process has equal oppertunity, not because everyone gets a part, but because anyone can Audition, and display their skills. It is completely unreasonable to blame the audition process, or Mr. Gerken on being unfair.

I am a parent of two kids who participate in Whitman Drama. I am frankly quite surprised at the remarks criticizing the Whitman drama program and Mr. Gerkin, so I’ll make a few quick points.

First, the suggestion that the same students are chosen repeatedly for lead roles is bizarre. “Equal Opportunity” is how this was described. Sorry to be blunt, but that is like complaining that the football team doesn’t give everyone a chance to be quarterback. Participation in many activities at Whitman is determined through a competitive process to identify the students with the most talent for that activity. If a student feels he or she deserves a larger part in a production or activity, the best advice may be for that student to work harder and improve his/her skills so that he/she is the best.

Second, I am quite pleased that the Whitman drama program does not serve up pablum and treacle. I shudder to think how dull and inconsequential the program would be if it were required to cater to the most delicate of sensibilities. I saw nothing in Gypsy that a reasonable parent in 2011 could find objectionable, and anyone who feels the need to cover their eyes at the site of a female in leotards and tights must have a terrible time walking down the street without bumping into things.

In addition, every Whitman student who attended Gypsy should have left with a greater understanding of vaudeville, burlesque, and the historical figure Gypsy Rose Lee. If one goal of the high school experience is to expand the knowledge of the students and broaden their horizons, we as a community should favor “Gypsy” over, say, “The Little Mermaid.”

I stand behind my comments, and of course you may use my name.

Cynthia Coe Aragon

Senior Actor Dude, your reasoning is off. Your talking like Mr. Gerken is running his own personal adult theatre troupe. We students at Whitman are very busy and we only have 4 years here, some have less time. By definition, a student’s audition for a public high school performance should be proof enough of the student’s talent, and the fact that a student puts the effort into preparing for an audition should be proof enough of the student’s dedication, anything else is not reasonable for a kid in high school. If a student wants a certain part in the school play he or she should only have to try for that one part, not first try for an ensemble part, and then if he or she plays his or her cards right, hope for a future lead role. This isn’t Walt Whitman High School for the Performing Arts, at this school we also have AP’s. You’re also arguing against yourself when you say that equal opportunity is guaranteed because everyone gets a chance one way or the other, really what does that mean? Does that mean if a student wants to act he or she should be happy if they get to move some props around or “poor the coffee,” you sure that’s equal opportunity to act in a school play? Also, you say most students get only one shot at a leading role, dude that supports cronyism not equal opportunity. Either everyone only gets one shot or no one gets only one shot. Equal is equal. Also, how is it that you know that “attitude” is why sometimes students are not selected for a second production, what kind of insider information do you have? Seriously, you sound like a crony yourself with these kinds of comments. And, what do you mean people get catty and jealous if they don’t get a role so then they make cronyism (k.walsh) accusations? That makes no sense, catty and jealous means the students gossip about each other, and does not mean someone accuses Mr. Gerken of cronyism and suggest that a teacher to do his job. Seriously dude, the more you argued your case the more you convinced me of the opposite.

Senior Actor- I was sitting in the third row center at that performance and your description of Lola’s outfit is not even close to accurate. I don’t want to go into the details of her outfit here but that evening my wife and I were stunned. After the show and after a few phone calls I was made aware that I was not the only man uncomfortable watching what my son likes to refer to as ” eye candy for men.” It would be inappropriate for me to discuss it more than to say that the play and the song have been around for a long time and it has always been known as a seductive song– “Whatever Lola Wants, Lola Gets”–there’s no revelation here. As for the vampire play’s nightgowns, braless comes to mind. Limiting myself to what is appropriate here, I will only say that when it’s done right with the proper lighting, the length of the gown is irrelevant.

My parents had a discussion about this letter the other day and the overall consensus was that sexy vampires in negligees, Lola’s sex dance in a skimpy baby doll’s outfit, undressing on stage and remaining in under garments, etc. etc. etc. made for too much Whitman High girl eye candy for men. My dad recalled averting his eyes once because he was embarrassed to be forgetting that the girl on stage was just that a girl. Want to know what I said? But dad, what’s wrong with eye candy!? The night did not go well after I said that.

and it seemed like some poeple were more focused more on the contreversey than the play bc that was the worst whitman play ive seen so far

Wow, interesting stuff! Anyway, it all makes sense to me. If you are a girl, you will most probably be treated like an object in a Whitman play, even if it’s a good play. …Glad i’m a guy.

Ms. Clarkson, as you are a freelance journalist you know that the use of anonymity and the use of a pseudo-name have the same results. So, why all the fuss? Could it be that it is your intention to introduce such fallacious concerns as an attempt to change the subject? The anonymous letter to the Black and White addresses Mr. Gerken’s proclivity towards choosing plays that either dress females in scanty clothes or portray them, one way or the other, as sexual. Many of us have been observing this phenomena for years, and there are, indeed, many of us. Of course, Mr. Gerken’s arguments are valid but then walking the gray line is his specialty. On another vein, I should like to mention one matter that well, has come to the attention of the actors at Pyle, and that is that Mr. Gerken tends to cast the same students from year to year in key roles, such that those students have a loaded college application. I don’t purport to know why such cronyism exist in the drama department at Whitman, but as the institution has a fiercely competitive environment it comes as no surprise. To be sure, Mr. Gerken is not a teacher nor was he ever employed as such, so what is his duty to this educational institution? One would hope that it is to encourage, support, and give equal opportunity to every student who wants a part, but sadly, such has not been the case. Perhaps what is missing in the drama department is an individual who warms the air below the wings of any student who dreams of flying–however flawed that student might be, that is to say, a teacher.

While I completely agree that the Black & White should be held to the journalistic standards of any other newspaper in the United States, I believe the community needs to remember that the Black & White is a class made up of high school students who are in the introductory phases of learning about journalism. As a former staff member, I know how hard each writer, editor, lay out person and photographer works to make sure that what they’re presenting to the community is of the highest caliber they can create. Even though we like to think that we’re professionals when we’re on the paper, it’s impossible to expect that 16- and 17-year-olds, who also have a plethora of homework and other stresses associated with high school, can produce the same quality of work that the Associated Press puts out. Saying that the editor-in-chief is trying to press some agenda by publishing these two letters is uncalled for. That being said, I see nothing wrong with how these letters were presented or formatted. Better to spark a discussion within the community than have people stew, internalizing their thoughts. For more information about the Black & White’s policy’s see: http://www.theblackandwhite.net/about/.

I personally think that the Black and White has slipped in their standards for this year. The parent letter is not even news. Whitman teachers receive catty emails from jealous parents and students all the time. How is this any different?
In addition, I am aware of several issues regarding journalistic integrity with the Black and White. I was interviewed for a piece last year through email, and my words were edited and cut so that they had a completely different meaning. The piece made me sound much more intense and closed minded in my views, most probably to make the paper sound better.
The 2011-2012 school year’s paper has been relatively weak so far, and so clearly the journalists were too lazy to go out and find real stories but instead edited and cut this woman’s letter (probably in the same way that mine was) to spice up their issue and gain money and readers.
I think it is truly sad that the paper has been so weak and they are resorting to such sad measures to gain entertainment value. The choice to run an anonymous letter, as Karen said, severely decreased their professional value in my eyes.

I don’t care so much about the motives of B&W so much as the sources this concerned parent is getting their information from. It sounds like a case of selective understanding, they are fixated on the fact that “gypsy” has a small burlesque element (quite small in fact). Also had this person done even a small amount of research on the show they would have found that it is not an R- rated show, honestly a reviewer would be hard pressed to make it pg-13. This is because:
1) the show is not solely about a girl who learns to be a stripper
2) most of the show takes place in the early performance careers of June and Louise (it’s much less disturbing than toddlers and tiaras)
3)HELLO! Mr. Gerken, his associates, and the administrators are aware that it is a high-school production. They have standards for these shows, I know.

Also why is the point about the other participants (tech, orchestra, actors) even relevant? For tech it is not required to work on every show, the pit is a group that is selected through optional auditions and the bulk of the actors who auditioned were at the meeting when the show was announced LAST YEAR! Anyone who felt uncomfortable about this show had several months to either complain about it formally or find an alternative activity to do. If a performer, technician, or musician is really serious about the performing arts Washington does not fail to provide opportunities to young people in these areas. So why is this letter pertinent now? Why after so many months which included auditions for all three major components to the musical( that’s tech, actors, and pit in case you weren’t paying attention) does this letter come about? The timing is suspect and the argument is flimsy, all around pointless addition to the latest issue of B&W obviously meant to incite controversy, can we get back to some real news please? Like continuing developments on those thugs that got arrested on the 20th, that’s news.

Sarah Cutler (deliberately?) misses the point. It is unfortunate that The Black & White does not hold itself to the same standards as this nation’s most respected news sources, virtually all of whom have adopted a policy of NOT publishing anonymous letters to the editor. The Associated Press’ Standards & Practices (www.ap.org/newsvalues/index.html) regarding anonymous sources serves as a model for newspapers across the country. “Transparency is critical to our credibility with the public and our subscribers. Under AP’s rules, material from anonymous sources may be used only if: 1. The material is information and not opinion or speculation, and is vital to the news report.” How sad that ethics seem not to have a place in The Black & White’s journalistic practices.

I believe anonymous posts are ok as long as they meet a higher bar than signed letters. In fact, I like the way the B&W handled this letter with the accompanying response from Christopher Gerken. However, I question the B&W’s claim that “All comments are read before publishing them.” Sometimes my comments appear a day later but usually they appear instantly. And once I had a comment removed when it was on point – it just stated facts and asked reasonable questions that the article failed to address. This type of censorship is very inappropriate and undercuts the integrity of the newspaper.

Not only don’t I use my name, I don’t even use my real email address because the one time I did, the following day after I had posted, someone posted a scurrilous attack to my blog mentioning my comment. Obviously, the only way they could identify me was from my email address – which is not shown to the public. So it must have been a B&W person with access to the email addresses. What is the policy of the B&W – who gets to see the email addresses? And what is the policy for anonymous letters? Although I’m posting anonymously, both Karen and Debi make excellent points that need to be addressed. The B&W policies should be available online.

I find it fascinating that the Black & White requires me to use my real name to leave a comment and yet is willing to publish an “anonymous” letter. Gypsy is a superb musical based on historical fact. I have seen more flesh and inappropriateness on prime time TV . . . Glee. Personally, I am looking forward to another evening of exceptional theater presented by phenomenal students, GO WHITMAN DRAMA!

To say Gypsy is about burlesque is reductive to the point of frightening. It is a plot point that comes about by a reluctant character choice, and its consequences are clearly shown. I doubt anyone will be encouraged to objectify themselves based on this performance. The educational opportunities, both in historical and sociological ideas, are bountiful and should not be overlooked. Meanwhile, the centerpiece of this show is perhaps the most compelling character in the musical theatre canon. Has Anonymous seen the show? I hope they do, because clearly they’re missing out on something wonderful.

Moreover, there is not a better play out there, but that may just be my opinion.

And this is coming from a boy who LOVES musicals.