1776 Casting- Page 3

[KathyNYC2]

Posted: 10/9/15 at 9:00am

Kad said: "I don't know, I think seeing a black Thomas Jefferson striking out the anti-slavery passage in the Declaration has the potential to be extremely poignant, for many reasons. "

 

I am 100% in favor of color blind casting in 99% of situations..and I don't disagree with your comment. ^^ But would it work both ways..could we have say a white person playing a black slave? Obviously there is none in this cast but in another show?  I am not trying to be argumentative - I am just thinking out loud.  Would that take some of the power out of the moment..or not?  Would that be powerful or confusing? Would it work on film as well as in the theater?

Just curious what others think...

 

 

[Auggie27]

Posted: 10/9/15 at 9:14am

I actually felt a bit farklempt that HAMILTON had this impact.  If we want to embrace the "game changer" talk, hell, let's start changing the damn game. Imagine if 1776 had fastidiously avoided people of color simply to avoid comparisons with the masterwork across town?  They'd be indicted on other counts.  And as for an African-American Rutledge, take a look at how slavery is discussed in That Other Show.  There's a moment in "Yorktown" when it's clear slavery isn't ending with independence that resonates beautifully.  A great black actor singing "Molasses to Rum"?  We'll all be enthralled.  I would bet money that the show not only will not suffer, but might find a powerful new point of access.   In the wishlist department, I'd love to see a person of color sing "Momma Look Sharp."  It's been done by every cute white boy in America, while the black ones must do "Freedom" in SHENANDOAH.  

 

If HAMILTON has created overdue new opportunities at City Center, it's one more reason to love the show.  To me, it's that simple.

[wonderfulwizard11]

Posted: 10/9/15 at 9:53am

Auggie, I believe a black actor did play the Courier when the show was done at the Papermill at few years ago. But it remains a good idea, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it done here. 

[Kad]

Posted: 10/9/15 at 9:58am

"Molasses to Rum" is one of the most scathing pieces of musical theatre to ever be written- a thorough indictment of our forefathers and their complicity in the slave trade, even those who championed freedom. Its power would not be diminished if it were sung by an actor of color.

[BobBenson]

Posted: 10/10/15 at 5:06am

Everyone seems to get skid marks in their panties over this. I think it's interesting for a five day concert. It seems fun and interesting. And if you think there should be an all white RAISIN IN THE SUN or THE COLOR PURPLE. Do it! Do it! Quit bellyaching and trying to be obtuse. 

Updated On: 10/10/15 at 05:06 AM

[SmoothLover]

Posted: 10/10/15 at 2:18pm

I think the show was chosen because it is a will be a big political year. I don not think it had anything to do with Hamilton.

[Kad]

Posted: 10/10/15 at 6:42pm

SmoothLover said: "I think the show was chosen because it is a will be a big political year. I don not think it had anything to do with Hamilton"

“We chose to do 1776 in part because of the success of Hamilton." - Jack Viertel, Encores! Artistic Director

 

Updated On: 10/10/15 at 06:42 PM

[Up In One]

Posted: 10/10/15 at 10:08pm

It will be interesting to see what choices are made - the basics behind colorblind casting should be that the best actor gets the role regardless of race. When casting people of color for effect it becomes more specific and in my mind more like stunt casting. How about an entire black cast?

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 10/11/15 at 3:24am

Kad said: ""Molasses to Rum" is one of the most scathing pieces of musical theatre to ever be written- a thorough indictment of our forefathers and their complicity in the slave trade, even those who championed freedom. Its power would not be diminished if it were sung by an actor of color. "

But would it not be strange to have an actor of color arguing in favor of the slave trade? There are many black actors who could do the song great justice, but would not be appropriate for the character in a fully realized production. If it were a concert production, where the emphasis is on the music and not on the book, I'd love to hear Brian Stokes Mitchell take a stab at it. In a fully stage production, it would be hard for me too buy the fact that an African American man would encourage slavery. 

I will restate, the only time I find colorblind casting to be a bad idea is when issues of race play a key role in the show's plot. I have no problem seeing a black actor take on the role of Hamlet opposite an Asian Gertrude, which I have seen and really didn't think anything of it until I heard two older ladies talking about it after the show. 

[KathyNYC2]

Posted: 10/11/15 at 7:51am

jimmycurry01 said: "Kad said: ""Molasses to Rum" is one of the most scathing pieces of musical theatre to ever be written- a thorough indictment of our forefathers and their complicity in the slave trade, even those who championed freedom. Its power would not be diminished if it were sung by an actor of color. "

 

But would it not be strange to have an actor of color arguing in favor of the slave trade?

I will restate, the only time I find colorblind casting to be a bad idea is when issues of race play a key role in the show's plot.

 

I tend to agree with you - unless it's maybe a particular situation where they might for example use a black actor as a slave owner and a white actor as the slave - to make a statement. Otherwise, I agree it might just distracting. I also agree in all other situations, I have no problem with color blind - or even gender blind casting.

 

[ChiTheaterFan]

Posted: 10/11/15 at 8:30am

In Hamilton there are a number of references to Jefferson having slaves and Daveed Diggs plays Jefferson. The color-conscious casting of Hamilton still works. 

 

Also evidently Hamilton originally had a third cabinet battle about abolition, with Jefferson being pro-slavery. I think it will be on the mix tape. 

Updated On: 10/11/15 at 08:30 AM

[Up In One]

Posted: 10/11/15 at 10:02am

Wouldn't you say Hamilton was written specifically for a multi racial cast and had nothing to do with a color blind casting concept? 

[ChiTheaterFan]

Posted: 10/11/15 at 10:11am

Right I don't dispute that. That's why I used the term color-conscious. But I think you could still do a version of an existing show and consciously bring a different meaning to it by casting a POC. I haven't seen 1776 since I was a middle school kid and saw it as a movie (and I was a brat and didn't pay attention) but I can imagine there being a way to add extra meaning to a song about slavery that is an indictment of our founding fathers (again, haven't seen it but that's how it's been described by folks here) by intentionally casting a black actor. I'm not saying that's what 1776 is going to do since they used the word "color blind" but that phrase seems to be used rather loosely so we don't know what they'll really do at this point. 

 

Either way I've wanted to see this show for awhile so this may be the first encores show that causes me to make a special trip since I don't know when I'll get another opportunity to see it. 

Updated On: 10/11/15 at 10:11 AM

[Kad]

Posted: 10/11/15 at 10:34am

I think people seeing a multiracial cast of 1776 would understand that they are portraying white men. "Molasses to Rum" isn't proslavery so much as it is taking Northerners down a peg for condemning slavery while still enabling and supporting an economy built on it, even though Rutledge is indeed proslavery. Having an actor of color perform the song could emphasize that aspect, as well as the fact these men desiring freedom stole it from their fellow man.

[Up In One]

Posted: 10/11/15 at 10:42am

In my opinion when the plot is specifically about historical white founding fathers dealing with slavery you need to understand that perspective.  For me colorblind casting for 1776 is closer to stunt casting and a directorial choice. Having Rutledge's song sung by a black performer is obvious and a cheap choice.

[Kad]

Posted: 10/11/15 at 10:53am

Don't we already understand that perspective? These events are approaching 250 years old; this is a topic that has been explored in depth again and again, events that have been enshrined in iconography.

While the show does give the appropriate gravity to slavery, the people whose lives it affects remain unseen. What is color blind casting of a show depicting the move for independence but a reclamation of the role of people of color in the nation's birth and history?

[Up In One]

Posted: 10/11/15 at 11:28am

And you have Hamilton for that already. An historically correct 1776 being presented simultaneously gives the achievements of Hamilton more gravitas. I really don't see what the casting would do for a piece written for historical accuracy which Hamilton was not - the perspective of Hamilton is so brilliant trying to graft that onto 1776 would diminish it. 1776 was written by a history teacher if I remember correctly. Not sure if he is still alive but it would be interesting to get his perspective.

[Kad]

Posted: 10/11/15 at 1:25pm

1776 is a very strong piece of theatre- a colorblind treatment of it should not diminish its effectiveness. Seeing as how there has yet to be a major production of the show that has been cast this way (I'm sure it's had to have happened somewhere, but certainly not with such a prominent company), I am eager to see the results.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 10/11/15 at 3:57pm

It's a show that is largely about the way people of one color treated those of another color at a certain pivotal moment in history, with all the characters representing one group in this color divide.   So, it's certainly an audacious idea.  Whether it can work or not.... too early to tell.  (I have yet to see Hamilton, so I'm not able to comment on whether Hamilton deals with color divisions in any way comparable to 1776).