Shows and Kids

I remember as a kid watching the Our Gang comedies, also known as the Little Rascals, over and over again. They had very funny episodes, especially the earlier ones. The later ones weren’t very funny at all to me. Why was this so? The early Little Rascals, going from Jackie Cooper though Alfalfa and most of Spanky’s tenure with the series, depicted life as kids would normally experience it: going out with friends fishing, playing hooky from school (and suffering the consequences), having a crush on the pretty young teacher, and building a long, ramshackle cart to race against a rich kid’s store-bought “car” (to impress a girl) were examples of what these early shows were about. Not only could children relate to them, but so could adults, at least those who could remember being kids at one time. From time to time, the gang would put on a show, which they dubbed “Our Gang Follies”. The first “Follies” reflected the idea of kids just coming together to put on a simple show, without any pretenses. Each of the following “Our Gang’s” follies-type shows became slicker and more professional-looking than the previous. The last of this type that I saw, titled “Ye Olde Minstrels” was almost unrecognizable to me as an Our Gang comedy.

I have a theory as to why this happened. The first Our Gang comedies were silent 1920s productions. When the talkies began, the country had gone into the Great Depression. The original idea was to let the children in the series be natural. Adult characters were often inserted into the stories to serve as comical foils to the gang’s antics. But once the political push to show that the U.S. had recovered from this troubled economic period took hold in the late 1930s, then it was considered more important to put on slicker productions instead of highlighting the kids as before just being themselves, living often under near-poverty conditions. Also, there apparently was pressure exerted to portray adults as more respectable in the later flicks, while the children displayed the expected deference to them. So it was a social agenda, I believe, that made the series less about the humor and joy involved with being a kid and made it more of kids acting like model citizens, which is actually unrealistic, and to be truthful, pretty boring to watch as well. So, what, if anything, does this have to do with today?

I could be totally off base with this, but in my opinion, putting children on stage in big productions is a phenomenon in schools and churches that’s getting a little out of hand. I recognize that participating in a performance here and there has always been a legitimate part of a child’s education and social training. It’s important to learn how to handle oneself in a poised manner in front of an audience. But it just seems to me that sometimes these shows are given more significance than they really merit. The pressure, be it real or imaginary, felt by teachers, parents, and volunteers to put on professional-caliber shows starring the children who are in their care, is apparently very strong. Instead, at least the way I see it, there should be more of a balance between excellence and participation. The idea that putting on a flawless production with near-professional acting and singing is supposed to promote the agenda of the organization putting it on doesn’t cut it with me. The performance, along with the preparation that goes into it, should be about the children, not the other way around. And anyway, life’s got to be more than just putting on one show after another. But that’s sometimes what it seems like, though. I do appreciate the efforts of all involved in putting on these shows nonetheless.