By Amanda VanNostrand.
Here in Philadelphia to amuse and/or offend you is The Book of Mormon, showing at the Academy of Music between now and June 9th. The Book of Mormon is the winner of nine Tony Awards, including Best Musical. Some viewers should be prepared to laugh between gasps of surprise at the simultaneously lude and “hilarious” jests made in the song, dance, and dialogue of this musical comedy, while others should bring tissues.
It is likely that anyone purchasing a ticket will be well aware of the content of this show, and if not it is worth doing the research before attending. The Book of Mormon is a story chock full of jabs at the Mormon religion, which, as described in our show, could be referred to as a Part III of the Bible. In this religion, the belief is that Jesus arrived in America during the 1800s. Golden tablets were left by him to the leader of the religion, and this leader, as instructed by Jesus, did not show the tablets to anyone, but instead copied them and shared them with others, converting them to the Mormon religion.
The Book of Mormon is the story of two devout Mormon men: Elder Price (Liam Tobin) and Elder Cunningham (Jacob Ben-Shmuel). (But mostly Elder Price.) Despite Elder Price’s frequent, steady childhood prayers to be placed in Orlando for his forthcoming Missionary work at age 19, he and Elder Cunningham are sent to Uganda. Here their mission is to baptize as many people as possible and the story is formed as they learn to relate with Ugandans while struggling with the realities of the work they are doing.
Upon hearing ‘The Book of Mormon’ many who have seen this musical will respond with a comment referring to the humor within, and often the reviews are positive. One must wonder, however, given the nature of much of the show, who it is that we are taking these reviews and opinions from. For example, is it likely that someone of the Mormon faith is laughing? More ironic is the possibility that the laughter is coming from those of other faiths, who, like it or not, may fail to observe certain similarities between the funny, ironic characters in the show and the behaviors of other religious followings. (Adolescent dreams about going to hell after sinning, and being taught, in so many words, to turn feelings off because faith is just simply more pure if you are happy all the time – these things may strike chords with more than just the Mormon faith. The realities of these effects on young people could be funny to some, but if they are funny, it is likely that these damaging effects have not been personally experienced.) And then take the portrayal of the Ugandan people. Ever heard a stereotype about Africa and those who live there? It can almost be guaranteed that this show will reflect it: from giving many of the (African) characters AIDS, to having the Mormans’ first interaction with them be of theft, to teaching the Mormons a common phrase likened to giving God the finger, all the way to barbaric acts towards babies, it is concerning (and completely unsurprising) that the laughter is often coming from an audience that is mostly not African. One must wonder if it might be time to put this show in the vault; enough is enough.
Other than its offensive nature, The Book of Mormon is a solid production: the acting, singing, set design, etc. are all worthy of the Academy of Music; each scene is well put together with plenty of talent to go around. (How much of that actually matters may remain questionable.) Jacob Ben-Shumel played the part of Elder Cunningham and he was, simply put, quite funny. One of his character’s quirks is that he tells lies and Ben-Shumel’s portrayal of this character is hilarious: as he likens Mormonism to Star Wars, consistently gets Nabulungi’s name wrong, and does not lose his perception of Uganda being another version of The Lion King, he brings consistent laughter from the audience. This combination of character and actor is certainly appropriate. Set design was done by Scott Pask and he sure did his job: the backdrop of Utah’s Salt Lake City is colorful and appealing, while the ‘slums’ of Uganda are portrayed just as many in Utah imagine them to be.
While this is clearly an offensive show to this reviewer, to others, it may simply be considered satire and a comedy that makes light of real ignorance that exists. The show is at times so far-fetched that perhaps there is room to excuse its insensitive nature and let it simply be a joke about the absurdities of Mormonism and the stereotypes and cluelessness held by those who go to other countries in the hopes of saving lives and souls. Is this story written to shed light on the preposterousness of our perceptions, or is it written to take a religion that is not our own and mock it, along with mocking a people group that is not our own as well? It is no surprise that this show is so popular, but it may be concerning.