A few weeks ago, I attended the Thursday night showing of the Opera as well as the post-show conversation with some cast members, Mary Watkins and Clare Coss. I did not comment during the post-show discussion. However, I requested to speak with Clare Coss and Mary Watkins, which they accepted. That conversation occurred last week. Members of the BSU were also in attendance to share their perspectives. This update will first detail how I felt about the opera and then my reflections following my conversation with the creators.

Emmett whistles in the play, but Carolyn Bryant has admitted he did not whistle in real life. 

Emmett and his cousin express attraction and excitement to see Carolyn Bryant, which isn't likely to have happened, as Carolyn herself admits she lied.

Emmett expresses that he wants to be a police officer. Not sure what a black boy aligning himself with the police force is meant to virtue signal. Does it make it sadder that he was killed because this version of him wanted to be a cop? Does a Black person wanting to be a police officer represent progress? I doubt that many black people in the 1950s wanted to join the police force, but even if they did, modern statistics show that the presence of Black people in the police force does not lead to reduced harm from the police. Did he even want to be a cop in real life? I questioned the point of adding this to the portrayal of his character.

There was a constant juxtaposition between Chicago and Mississippi. Chicago was represented as more progressive and safer for black people, and Mississippi was represented as dangerous and openly racist. I can understand that certain places are better than others for specific demographics. However, I think the way this was shown in the play glazes over the fact that being Black meant being treated as a second-class citizen no matter if you were in Chicago or Mississippi.

Additionally, Roanne Taylor's presence, in my opinion, prevents white people from being shown as the antagonists they have historically been. I understand that her presence is meant to explore the concept of white allyship. Still, I don't think any of the explorations added any innovative ideas or statements about the concept of white allyship. Roanne feels racism is wrong, doesn't speak up, and deals with white guilt. The most basic concept of white allyship is that white people should speak up. I don't believe an entire opera about Emmett Till's life and a fictional white character added to that story was necessary to illustrate that. However, would Emmett's story be different if she did exist and speak up? I will say that I did ponder that as I left the theater, which led me to question the value of white-allyship to the movement.

In the post-show conversation with the cast, a cast member said that "Emmett Till's soul came here with a mission." That mission, in my opinion, was to have a happy childhood and live a full life. However, it was implied that his mission was to be a sacrifice to advance racial equality. This viewpoint adds a silver lining to black death that doesn't actually exist. Unfortunately, I can name multiple black children who have died at the hands of racism in my lifetime. Black children being killed and then us being sad about it afterward has not prevented black children from continuously being killed. Even if movies, songs, poems, and operas are written about it. 

In the conversation with Clare Coss, Mary Watkins, and the BSU, I attended to listen to their positive viewpoints surrounding the Opera. I intended to listen to the other side rather than re-iterate my own opinions. 

One of the main arguments in support of the Opera was that it is meant to show history. Unfortunately, I have already named some inaccuracies in the depiction of historical events. 

Another argument was that it was informative. Sure, if a viewer was informed by the play, I can't tell them they weren't. But, on the other hand, I and many others knew of what was depicted about Emmett Till's life.

I brought up that I had a problem with Emmett Till's story and likeness being used in an entertainment piece. Then we got into a conversation about if all art is entertainment and if this opera's goal was to entertain or inform. 

I'm not an artist, and I know artists view art uniquely. However, in my opinion, an Opera entertains. It would only be informative to those who didn't know basic facts about Emmett Till. Additionally, my opinion is that the Opera overall adds nothing new or profound to the conversation surrounding black people killed at the hands of anti-black racists. However, it may be new and profound to certain viewers.

I also think the BSU's tension with me led to an outpouring of support for the play from them. If the play was "good," I am wrong. If I am wrong, what I said when I called them out was also wrong, and they don't need to critically look at themselves as an organization. Certain members of the BSU argued in support of the Opera but hadn't seen it. To be clear, I initially argued against the premise of the Opera, and since I have seen it, I can specifically detail what I do not like. Multiple members left the BSU because of their handling of the situation.

I think there is a lot of value in the conversations generated from the controversy surrounding Opera. Clare Coss and Mary Watkins are both very talented and creative. Their ability to have a conversation with a person who has openly criticized something they have worked so hard on is admirable.  

I did enjoy speaking to Clare Coss and Mary Watkins and felt that they were open-minded and accepting of my opinions. We come from different backgrounds and generations, so we see this issue very differently. However, I respect them both after our conversation, even if we disagree.