So for those who don’t know, The Cursed Child is a continuation of the Harry Potter series but as a playwright instead of a novel or film. It takes off from where we leave the final scene in Deathly Hallows. 19 years later, all grown up with kids of their own now. The Cursed Chid story is actually about their children during their time at Hogwarts while our main trio + 1 are all older and working in their own professional fields.
The playwright was of course intended to be turned into an actual play to watch live in theatres and I had the pleasure of seeing the 2 part play in its year of opening in Australia back in 2016. I booked a flight to Melbourne, stayed at a hostel and made a whole weekend trip for the sole purpose of seeing this play.
It was amazing. Most plays or musicals that are performed in a theatre are travelling performances but for this one in particular, you travel to see it. And the reasoning behind that is to do with how huge of a production it is. By that I mean the staging, effects and magic that takes place would be virtually impossible to do in a new city every so often. They go ALL out and completely turn that theatre into a magical world. Down to the patterns on the wall in the stalls leading to your seats. But lets face it, its Harry Potter. People will travel and make an effort if its Harry Potter.
I chose to watch the 2 parts in the same day. Part 1 around midday and Part 2 after dinner [the other option is to watch them on 2 consecutive days]. Usually for whatever your favourite thing/story may be, the saddest part about it is that you usually crave more of that world when its over. So seeing a full high end production, 2.5hour performance and being left with wanting more, KNOWING that you have a whole other 2.5hour’s to consume later in the day is beyond satisfying. The magic [won’t spoil it for those who haven’t had the pleasure] makes it even more phenomenal.
After a few years, the effects of covid and I guess the controversy about the author of our beloved story, the play has sort of fizzled out. In Australia at least. The play as I am aware is still playing in the busier parts of the world but in Melbourne in particular, I guess it just wasn’t selling as much. They announced their final dates of show the and I wanted to see it one last time in Aus before I could no longer do so. Another thing I noticed when looking into booking my tickets was that they condensed the two part play and made it into one show only. I thought this was an interesting choice. As I said, more is better when you love the world its based in but I was curious. Curious about which parts they chose to keep and if the best bits were still intact…
I have researched and it looks like they’ve made this “reimagined” version in the New York theatre, so Melbourne must have followed suit. Props to London for keeping theirs as the original. I will definitely be going to see the two parts in some future trip to the U.K if hopefully, it’s still playing. So to reinstate, instead of a 2 part 5 hour play following the story as it was originally written, they made a 1 part 3.5 hour play with missing parts… But I soon discovered it was not JUST with missing bits, but even a changed storyline.
Small spoiler alert if you haven’t read the writing or seen the play but Malfoy’s son Scorpius has a thing for Hermione and Ron’s daughter, Rose; and Harry’s son Albus has a little crush on someone named Delphi. In the reimagined version, they decided to make Scorpius and Albus fancy each other instead…
Look it was subtle but nonetheless, I see you. I see what you’re doing… Initially, I thought maybe I had remembered incorrectly but I think that’s probably something I would have remembered the first time. I was confused. Then I just got downright mad. To change someones story, to just completely re-write someones work is so disrespectful to their creativity and efforts. No it isn’t just a small detail, it helps drive the story from start to finish.
Now why would they do that? Well after my initial reaction I couldn’t help but think deeper into the meaning behind it. I thought on the surface maybe this was just a typical Melbourne thing to do, to create some sort of angle to make sure everyone know’s the political stance they would want to be projected out. Even though there’s no need to do that. I’d say most of the western world now is accepting enough and bible bashing people with beliefs usually turns more people off than on it. There’s no need to peacock your beliefs to make yourself seem more accepting or progressive. Just walk the walk and be a good example.
Then I couldn’t help but think about the controversy over JKR and how everyone has demonised her for being “anti-trans”. I looked into it just now and I don’t think that’s what she was saying AT ALL. She was being pro-woman which i’m sure most people would have no problem with right? It’s amazing how you can twist someones intention to suit your beliefs. If you read what she wrote, thinking the idea behind what she wrote was anti-trans, is actually anti-trans. Her women remarks actually fortify the meaning of transitioning – to sum it up she is basically stating that a trans-women aren’t women, they are trans-women. A women is a women and without that title, there would be nothing to transition into. Its like saying someone who’s naturally brunette and dyes their hair blonde is a blonde. Sure, they are now blonde but naturally, they are still brunette. Its all very confusing and I’m not sure if I’m the right person to speak about it but maybe 2 and 2 does make 5 if you really want it to…
Then let’s not even get started on the fact that the thing that everyone was referring to was written text, on the internet, which in itself is confusing and never accurate. It can be warped and translated in so many different ways. If you think this is untrue then tell me, how do you read this: LOL. Because I read it as its spelled but not what it stands for. I read that as ‘lol’. I know a good percentage of people that read it letter by letter – L.O.L. ‘el, oh, el’. And I know another percentage of people that see those three letters and literally read ‘laughing out loud’. And there’s probably even more than that. Now that is a very small text, a common phrase and until now you probably never thought about that as an example of text miscommunication. So, if it is in written text, you can only understand someones intentions of what they have sent out to an extend.
So I imagine that Melbourne being a very “progressive city” and the entertainment industry in general always trying mix political agenda’s with the arts, is why they decided to change it. Show to the world “you should still support this play because we believe in the same as you and not the creator of this story”.
I think it’s just a huge slap in the face to JKR whom we should only have to thank for giving us this play to begin with. Maybe thats a little melodramatic. But I do think they’ve done it to pledge their stance against her. Its subtle, but I see you. I could be wrong but I’m wagering that I ain’t!
She gave us a gay Dumbledore for goodness sake. And not to push an ideology but that’s just how she perceived his character to be. She has some of the most diverse cast of story characters. She is not prejudice at all and it is sad for people to try and discredit her after all the things she has done, not just creatively but philanthropically.
All in all, it’s shitty that they’ve changed and condensed the story. The original play was a masterpiece and after re-reading the screen play again, I am nostalgic for the stories we’ve grown with and loved. And if you haven’t read the screen play and are a fan of the books/films, do give a read! Its great. There’s no filler so you can read it super fast. It brings us back to the world we love, we get a visit from old characters we thought we’d never hear from again and its a bit of closure getting to see where our trio end up.
Peace.
Please.