Wednesday, April 25, 2007

It's fine that Yale reversed its silly ban on stage weapons (in particular, props that weren't obviously fake), but to do so because of free speech concerns? What free speech right is being curtailed by a ban on fake weapons? How is whatever message is being conveyed by, for instance, a production of Hamlet, diminished because the actor can't use a prop that looks too much like a knife?

And what is with their decision to "require that audiences instead be informed of the use of stage weapons before the start of every performance"? Why would they think the audience needs to be warned of this? Are they afraid that audience members will freak out if they see something that appears to be a real weapon?

Yale should have simply said that the ban was ridiculous and that there was and is no reason to think that anybody could be driven to violence because actors in a school play were using realistic looking props.