Everyone’s a Little Bit Racist- and Broadway a Little Bit More

BY: Cheyenne Figaro

The Broadway stage is often heralded as a center of creativity, a celebration of culture; however, it is just the opposite. For decades, the very stages that had brought to life Upper West Side in West Side Story and Vietnam in Miss Saigon have also perpetuated racist stereotypes, sometimes as apparent as blackface or yellowface, and other times through the much more subliminal use of lyrics, choreography, and dialogue. The importance of racial distinctions is only built upon when other identities such as gender and class are also interpolated into musicals. For proof of this, look no further than Kim in Miss Saigon and Miss Anna in The King and I. While both women face obstacles because of misogyny, Kim’s race and class cost her much of her autonomy and opportunity while Anna’s whiteness and “civility” gives her the upper hand throughout the production despite often contesting with a monarch.

It would be remiss to venture into the racism and sexism of Miss Saigon, without first touching on the fact that those were fundamental principles of the production. The show is based on Madame Butterfly, a one-act play which follows the same storyline of a fallen Asian woman desperate to meet her white savior, and going to extreme lengths for him to take their child back to America. The show was widely popular, and turned into an opera that was just as successful, before receiving the modern updates that made it Miss Saigon. However, the production wasn’t a celebration of Asian culture as it should have been, instead choosing to go the more American route, making a mockery of an “exotic culture”, and presenting it in a way that made Americans feel like they had to save the China Doll from the woes of her broken down country. These ideals remain ingrained in the modern version, where Kim is presented as an innocent, lost girl needing a strong, patriotic, white army man to come sweep her up. Kim’s entire identity is formed around inferiority but also around her need to be controlled and guided. She is a seventeen year old virgin, and instead of paying for her and setting her free, Chris actually proceeds to have sex with her. Yet, this sordid act is made out to be one of romance, and one of the only times in which Kim is able to voice her opinions, she decides that she wants Chris to buy her, despite the fact that she doesn’t know him from a hole in the wall. This scene heavily conveys the idea that the white patriot is inherently positive for the lost Asian girl, who wants to go with him and be obedient and give him what he wants. Hence, despite prostituting herself, Kim is happy with the outcome of her tryst with Chris and quickly falls in love with him. They sing of staying together even if this is the “Last Night of the World”, because they see themselves as soulmates. Of course, this dream comes crashing down not even fifteen minutes later with Chris leaving Kim behind, but it was good while it lasted, right?

Further into the story, the race and power dynamics between Kim and Chris become more relevant and apparent in the story. Chris leaves Vietnam and one year later gets a new wife. Correction: he gets a new, white wife. In the biggest slap in the face to Kim, he decides that the only way to forget her is to get someone who is the opposite of her. The fact that white, blonde, and affluent just happens to check those boxes is a coincidence, right? No. Although Kim and Chris were married in a non-traditional way, they were still in fact married. His new marriage is a statement of what a real wife should look like: white, clean, and American. She can’t be a lowly prostitute and she isn’t just a fetish for white men as women of other cultures often are. Hence, Chris being bound to Kim through nightmares is supposed to evoke pity from the audience, as we are made to feel bad for this man who is now being “burdened” by his past. Of course, the audience feels bad for Kim’s minor inconveniences too– left with no job, no house, a three year old, and an obsessed army general searching for her– but still Chris. Kim’s being a burden is reiterated when Chris finds out he has a son and instead of beaming with joy is filled with sadness. His son is another burden, and as soon as Ellen realizes Kim is in love, they make a joint decision to leave Chris’s family, Kim and Tam, in Bangkok because that would be the most comfortable to their lifestyle. Thus, Kim has to beg on her knees, sing on her knees, and literally pull out all the stops until her suicide just to get a white man to listen to her, to consider her opinion. Kim, an Asian woman, only experienced freedom throughout her story when she was living in poverty with Tam, and even then she was singing “I Still Believe” and thinking of her white knight in shining armor, because the musical is an endless cycle of American praise. Her autonomy is limited in every way, and yet all of Kim’s decisions revolve around Chris- from having sex instead of running away, remaining in poverty instead of going with Thuy (even if he is her cousin), and lastly taking her own life so that Chris can acknowledge and help their son. Kim’s story is one of fallen glory, of giving your everything to your love (even if they try actively to forget about you for three years and only come back for their son). Yet, Kim is portrayed as a victim of her circumstances, but not as a victim to the racism and misogyny that placed her in those circumstances to begin with. 

Anna’s story juxtaposes Kim’s in so many ways you would think that Broadway is trying to say that white women are inherently better in the face of conflict. Oh wait, that’s precisely what they’re saying. When first introduced to Anna, the words WHITE-WHITE-WHITE flash before the eyes, because she could not stick out more as an embodiment of whiteness. “Whistle a Happy Tune” is all about keeping a poker face when one is afraid, a skill that Anna’s son needs because apparently he is afraid of anyone who dresses differently than him- in this case differently meaning in rags or you know- like they’re poor. Throughout the number, Anna’s class is amplified as she walks with her nose turned high above the common people, as they grovel and run around for the coins that she throws on the floor like they’re pigeons. Her costume, a blue, flowy skirt, white gloves, and a tilted hat, emphasizes her wealth in comparison to the people of Siam dressed in brown and red rags. This wardrobe decision is once again emphasized when Anna speaks to the prime minister. She is nicely dressed whereas he is “half-naked”, already tilting the conversation in her favor as she seems to be more put together (read: ideally Western) than him. If anyone else were to talk back to the Prime Minister they’d surely be punished, but Anna, a white woman, is accepted by the audience as being right in this situation. She’s allowed and expected to talk back, breaking the Siamese way of doing things, because she must invade the space with her whiteness in order to correct their barbaric way of doing things. Thus, the show automatically sets up the dynamic of a fine and proper white woman having to deal with “savage” and poor Asians.

Her relationship with the King is the most apparent example of how Anna’s whiteness makes her superior in positions where women like Kim would be at the bottom of the totem pole. When the King calls her a servant in front of the Royal Children and Wives, Anna responds no, she is not a servant, and she doesn’t have to be in Siam teaching. She is doing him the favor, and reminds him of that loudly, scolding him in front of a large audience and making a fool of him. Anna’s insistence that she is not a servant despite the fact that she is being paid for is a clear contrast from Kim’s role as a prostitute in Miss Saigon. Anna holds strong to the fact that her time and obedience can’t be bought, the opposite of Kim whose virginity is purchased and is sold by the Engineer for an entire day to Chris. Anna also has the autonomy to leave whenever she would like, something that she fully intends to do until the King’s wife has to beg her to stay because the King needed her help. The musical establishes Anna as the person in power in all of her scenes, giving her the same type of white savior storyline as Chris but adding in her femininity as a way of saying that white womanhood trumps even the highest status of foreigners, despite white women being the lowest of white Americans. This idea is reinforced time and time again throughout the musical, most notably when Anna is allowed to have her head at equal height with the King whilst everyone else must bow into tiny “toads” on the floor when he walks in a room. Anna’s equal height, and thus equal importance, to the King is a stark contrast to Kim who spends the majority of Miss Saigon on her knees and staring at the ground. This physical distinction conveys everything that needs to be known about their status and role in their worlds, but also the way that these characters, a white woman and an Asian woman are viewed by American society. Thus, it isn’t peculiar that the entire last scene of The King and I is centered around Siam becoming more westernized instead of the children losing their father, and the wives losing their husband. The King is dying, yet the headlights focus on the Prince reversing every “savage” rule the kingdom has, and the children bowing to Anna in a Western fashion. The lights and dialogue in this scene are meant to move the audience to praise Anna for essentially colonizing Siam without them even knowing. Because while Kim struggled the entire show to get someone to listen to her, Anna was given that privilege the moment she stepped off the dock as a white woman. She is the American that Siam has been waiting for. She teaches them out of their ignorance, she guides them out of their “barbaric” views on love, and she overall uplifts Siam into a more progressive (Western) position.

Both The King and I and Miss Saigon bring color to the Broadway stage as it had never seen before. Full ensembles of Asians and Asian-Americans were revolutionary, and the productions opened up roles for these underrepresented groups in vast amounts. Yet, all representation isn’t positive representation, and both productions painted the picture of Asians- usually poor and uncivilized- needing to be saved by their whiter, more Western counterparts. Though completely unrelated, juxtaposing the roles of Anna and Kim reveals the twisted stereotypes that are perpetuated by the shows, as Anna is given the upper hand throughout her entire show, whilst Kim continues to experience loss and disaster at any moment that she isn’t with Chris. Hence, both roles serve to establish white supremacy in the eyes of misogyny, for Anna’s being a woman never derailed her as much as Kim’s being Asian did throughout their stories.

7 thoughts on “Everyone’s a Little Bit Racist- and Broadway a Little Bit More

  1. From a mere glance at the title, Cheyenne Figaro’s article had already grabbed my attention. I found it incredibly poignant that you highlight the writer’s emphasis on Chris’ struggles while downplaying the true victim of the plot, Kim. By emphasizing Chris’s tragic move back home without even stating how much larger the struggles of Kim were back in her wretched, abandoned life, writers despicably downplay women’s’ struggles, portraying them as requiring less onstage attention and recognition than men. In the same way, Anna’s snooty poise comes across as snobby and misguided, widening the cultural gaps between her and the King rather than bridging them. I completely agreed with your analysis of the King’s half-naked introduction, noting how starkly it set him apart from her proper, beautiful attire. In subtly characterizing the two cultures as different in their civilization, the writers subconsciously portray women as much more put together than the men they’re paired with.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. First of all, I love your title! It is clear from your writing that you have a strong grasp of Broadway tropes and issues. I would add that in addition to both shows only proving stereotypical roles for Asian people, they both have a history of having white people in yellowface perform the marginalized stories of Asian people depicted in the shows. This fact adds to the argument that there was no attempt on the part of the shows’ creators to accurately tell stories of Asian people.


    Liked by 1 person

  3. Your juxtaposition of Kim and Anna’s characters is extremely useful in understanding how Broadway plays off of harmful stereotypes in order to advance propagandist narratives. I like how you highlighted their relationships to men. I also wrote about Anna and Kim, but I didn’t think about how both Anna and Kim are technically “servants” but receive entirely different treatment and respect. The way in which they are allowed to navigate their respective “workspaces” are entirely different. I’m glad that you highlighted how these differences add to Western stereotypes and the problems on Broadway.

    – Zoë

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I like your idea about how broadway sells the plot of Miss Saigon as romantic ignoring how problematic it is that Kim is a young, innocent girl who’s virginity is bought and then taken by the more experienced, powerful white man. This is supposed to be excused because they “fall in love,” but as you so eloquently pointed out, that lasted fifteen minutes and then he actively spent the last three years trying to replace and forget Kim. I like how bluntly you express your view of Kim and Chris’s relationship because when you look at it in that way, you can see how problematic the plot is and how tragic her love and sacrifice is, especially when it is compared to Anna’s story. You make good points about how Anna, a woman in place that is also patriarchal and sexist, has a much different experience because of her whiteness. Her race gives her importance and power, making her an equal in standing with the King. I had never looked at Kim and Anna’s experiences in comparison, and it is interesting to see how Broadway has handled the portrayal of two different important female characters so differently because of race.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. You provide great analysis here! Your work is easy to read and understand. One of the strongest aspects of your paper is how apparent your tone is. There are several moments throughout the paper where I get a clear idea of your unique writing voice. Don’t be afraid to lean into this more moving forward, I think it is a great asset to have for the essays we write for this course. Your bold statements effectively describe Kim and Anna’s differences and how their portrayals contrast within their respective shows. All the claims you make are backed up with evidence from the shows and are explained thoroughly. The only recommendation I would offer is that your second-to-last paragraph could have been broken into two to help ease the transition between the subject matter. That way, there is a clearer distinction between your Anna analysis and the importance of stage production between the two shows.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Your title definitely grabbed my attention, and your essay did not disappoint. This is so good. You articulated Anna’s whiteness very well from her costume to her actions to her words, such as in “Whistle A Happy Tune.” Initially this song seems quaint as she’s preparing her son to encounter a whole new world. However, as you so brilliantly pointed out, she’s really just preparing him to be surrounded by a bunch of poor, ethnic, and “uncivilized” strangers. Anna is entering their world, their turf, yet she still holds so much power as she gets to voice her opinions freely and leave whenever things get hard, unlike Kim. I really like how you mentioned that Chris pays for Kim and STILL chooses to sleep with her, instead of letting her go. This choice speaks volumes about Chris’ character. It reveals that the American way may not be as righteous as it is self-serving as Chris leaves Kim in the aftermath of a war his people ran away from when they couldn’t finish it. Kim has to beg and grovel for her needs, and she is met with nothing in return every single time. You definitely helped me to understand Kim’s character better and why she ultimately decided that taking her own life was the only option to ensuring her son’s safety.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Hello! The way you speak about the characters and plots is colloquial and effective. I think I understand the “white knight” racist elements of Miss Saigon much better due to your explanation. Chris is being held back by his thoughts of Kim and we are supposed to feel bad for him. You beg the question, why? And I answer, “You’re right! I don’t know!” Why as an audience are we expected to feel bad for a character we are also expected to believe has all of the power in the situation and is the only one who can raise people out of terrible situations? In addition, you spoke of The King and I, which brought so much more value to the piece for me, again, because obviously, it’s racist, but you did a great job of labeling examples and describing these prejudiced moments. The reference to the local people being “half-naked” as opposed to Anna being smothered in clothes is so telling of the story and fits into your argument perfectly. I think you’ve done an excellent job with this paper and I look forward to enriching my own understanding through your rhetoric in the future.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s