A slightly more mature thread on the "color-blind casting" issue

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 12:39am

In the wake of our latest sock puppet thread, I'm still greatly amused by how quickly people get up in arms and become self-righteous about "color-blind casting" both on this board and in real life. Well, there's something I'd like to point out: there's no such thing as color-blind casting. Every casting decision, whether a director will admit it or not (even to themself), DOES include a consciousness of what that actor looks like, including their race. You can be sure that the folks at "Billy Elliot" were quite aware of the fact that one of their Billys was Latino when they cast him, and if they say that race wasn't an issue, that's well, a bunch of bull. Of course it was an issue. They just have decided to (try to) avoid making it an issue.

People are not color-blind (unless of course, they literally are), and I don't see why they should be. Simply acknowledging someone's race is not in and of itself a racist act. It's only racist if you make assumptions about that person based on their race.

I believe in (and support) what I'd like to call "color-FLEXIBLE casting." That is, that a director should be as open to casting actors of various races as much as the play permits (let me say that again: as much as the play permits). This is for various reasons--one, to open up more roles for non-white actors, two, to more accurately reflect the American (and world) landscape, and three, most importantly in my opinion, to keep theatre from being an elitist white art form and to expand our audiences. HOWEVER, unless you are doing some sort of very non-realistic play (I dunno, like "Pippin"), it only makes sense to be conscious of actors' races when casting the show, just as you are conscious of every other atribute of theirs, and of what the characters and play demand. So if you are doing a realistic play, don't try to pretend that the actors aren't the races that they are. That's just stupid. If you're doing "Death of a Salesman" and you have a black Willy, a white Biff, and a Latina Linda, there will not be a single audience member who doesn't register this.

Now how you choose to use race is another issue. Sometimes there are ways of using the text to support certain "non-tradition" decisions. For instance, I recently saw a production of "A Streetcar Named Desire" in which the actor playing Stanley was black. And as was confirmed to me by people involved in the production, they didn't try to do the impossible and be "colorblind" about it--they simply made the character of Stanley a black man. They even used the lines about him being Polish in a way that made sense (although not all of the time). On the other hand, often times because of the text, historical period, etc. of a play certain characters (or even all of them) can be played by actors of any race. But even then there's no reason to be "color-blind" about it because "color-blindness" doesn't exist. And that's okay.

So yeah, Gregory Jbara and whoever is playing his wife must have adopted their son Billy, or maybe Billy was from a previous marriage. Because unless you're doing a non-realistic play (and as far as I know, "Billy Elliot," even though it's a musical, still falls into the "musical realism" genre), when two white people procreate their kid is white too. So I don't see why people think it's offensive for people to get confused by this casting decision. Nobody in that theatre--onstage or in the audience--is going to not be aware of the fact that that kid is a different race from his parents. And that's not a bad thing. The real issue is whether or not the director has found a way to artistically justify and make sense of what the audience sees onstage. Because ultimately, it's the integrity of the play--and the experience of the audience--that matters the most.

Updated On: 10/16/08 at 12:39 AM

[COOOOLkid]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 12:43am

k.thx.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 12:57am

"Simply acknowledging someone's race is not in and of itself a racist act"

The poster you are alluding to did not "simply" acknowledge the fact, but went on to imply that they only wanted to buy his or her ticket the day the white Billy went on.

[eatlasagna]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 1:05am

i saw a production of Streetcar where Stella was played by a black woman... it was actually sandra labeouf aka sandra huxtable... just wanted to share that.. haha...

[Weez]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 5:51am

I liked '110 in the Shade'; no indications that the Curry family were anything but biologically related to each other, but a lovely array of colours nonetheless. You have a split second of "buh?" at the beginning, then you settle into the world of the show and just go with it.

[monkeybutt]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 7:11am

How about The Little Mermiad?? The Mersisters!

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 7:11am

I saw a white guy (understudy) play the role of Tyronne in Fame, i have never laughed so hard considering the fact that his whole storyline (including one of his songs) is about been black.

[winston89]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 7:31am

When it comes to casting I don't think that actors who are playing a family have to all be the same race (look at 110 in the shade and Little Mermaid for examples). But, I do think that if it's like a role like Tyronne in Fame which needs to be played by a black guy for it to make sense.

I remember hearing someone complain about the recent revival of Les Miserables. Which when it opened it had a black Javert a hispanic Fantine who gave birth to Cosette who was played by a Filipino actress.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 7:39am

Les Mis is such a compelling musical, I didn't even bother to take account of the race of each person. Sometimes you just have to accept certain things, and let the material work for itself. If the poster in that other thread is not going to buy a ticket unless he or she could go on a day a "white Billy" is performing, then I think that is being a little absurd. I'm sure those kids are probably working their butts off in the show to give the audience a great performance. That is what you pay for, correct?

Look at shows like Spring Awakening. Although race is not crucial to the plot, it is great to see Broadway shows embrace diversity.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 7:45am

Maybe it's just me, but when I see a show, I see human beings up on stage.

I don't see a certain color of human beings.

The revival of 110 IN THE SHADE was beautifully executed, and John Cullum very believably played Audra McDonald's father, because they are good actors and the show is well-written.

[jordangirl]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 7:57am

While I generally agree with Foster's point, I think it does depend on the show, the actors and the storyline. Yes, it worked beautifully with 110 in the Shade ~ especially because we don't see the wife/mother. Yes, it can work with Billy Elliot because adoption could have happened ~ we don't know that.

Then there are other situations. Like when a call sheet went out to cast Gabe and/or Gabe understudy in Arena's production of Next to Normal, my eyebrows went up. (Obvioiusly pre the casting announcement or the entire cast but after the casting of Spencer and Ripley.) It stated "any race" which, given that Dan and Diana were both cast as caucasian, would create a big additional subtext. The implication from the words in the show is that they got married BECAUSE Diana was pregnant with Gabe. So unless you want to add in the whole subtext of Diana obviously having cheated on Dan, you do need to cast that role the same race as the parents. Natalie...you could in theory go color-blind with that because perhaps they did have to go a donor route for her.

While I agree that in a lot of cases it doesn't matter, you definitely need to look at it on a case-by-case basis.

[TonyVincent]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 8:14am

I agree with the OP, and good example, jordan.

One thing that frustrated me was the race-apparent casting in every production of RENT I ever saw. The best, most talented Mimi and Joanne I ever saw were the ones who looked least like their original counterparts (Mimi was white, Joanne was lighter skinned and overweight). These were also on national tours, not Broadway. I can't help but thing that while their talent was certainly Broadway-quality, it was their appearance that kept them from the "big leagues."

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 8:44am

Or you can suspend your disbelief like most drama requires and forget about it entirely.

[BigFatBlonde]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 9:40am

https://forum.broadwayworld.com/readmessage.cfm?thread=877058&dt=90&boardid=1

https://forum.broadwayworld.com/readmessage.cfm?thread=933078&dt=142&boardid=1

https://forum.broadwayworld.com/readmessage.cfm?boardid=1&boardname=bway&thread=905866#2564468

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 9:44am

So could a black actress play Anne Frank? How about Margaret Johnson in THE LIGHT IN THE PIAZZA?

I love this discussion. And pretty much unless you are doing PARADE or RAGTIME where racism is a central theme, I think color blind casting can work for most plays and musicals.

[BigFatBlonde]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 9:50am

"So could a black actress play Anne Frank? How about Margaret Johnson in THE LIGHT IN THE PIAZZA?"

I think "yes" in both cases.

I know it would make no "historical" sense to have a young black actress play Anne Frank. But it could easily make dramatic sense and emotional sense if the actress is good enough.

I'll even take it step further...a visionary director could really bring to the forefront the universal themes of tolerance found in the Goodrich/Hackett play by having multi-racial casting all around.

I'd pay to see it.



https://forum.broadwayworld.com/readmessage.cfm?thread=877058&dt=90&boardid=1

https://forum.broadwayworld.com/readmessage.cfm?thread=933078&dt=142&boardid=1

https://forum.broadwayworld.com/readmessage.cfm?boardid=1&boardname=bway&thread=905866#2564468

Updated On: 10/16/08 at 09:50 AM

[Amalia Balash]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 9:51am

I think theatre inherently involves a suspension of disbelief about all sorts of things from audiences and always has. Backdrops don't look like real life and fortunately most of us don't break into song and/or dance at emotional moments. In Shakespeare's time, female roles were played by male actors. Audiences regularly made a major suspension of disbelief every night. So I've always been in favor of casting any role with any actor or actress who's talented enough to get the audience past one more suspension of disbelief -- be it age, race, sex, or nationality. If the casting occasionally makes me think about the characters' situation differently, that's an added benefit.
Updated On: 10/16/08 at 09:51 AM

[Mamie]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 9:52am

It can also stretch the ability to suspend disbelief to the breaking point. I posted this a couple of years ago - the topic was the worst show I'd ever seen. In an effort to cover as many 'politically correct' points as possible, the director completely neglected the play:

"A version of "The Miracle Worker" staged by Arena Stage in DC a couple of years ago. They went so overboard in being politically correct that they completely lost the story.

Of course the real Helen Keller was from a very conservative Southern family in the late 1800's. (That tells you a lot right there.) This Helen was played by an incredible actress who really was deaf. This worked well for the part. However, she was also black and a dwarf. The father in the family was white (in fact, it was Fred Grandy - 'Gopher' from Love Boat) while the mother was Hispanic. To round it out, the brother was Asian. The play was performed at an arena (round) stage and signers were placed at all 4 corners. They not only signed the show, but they also played the part of the voices in Annie Sullivan's head. For this reason they stood upright on the stage, thus blocking the audience's view of many of the performers.

It was a very noble effort - but it ended up being a terrible case of overkill. You were so confused and distracted by all these different characters and the signers on stage that you forgot this was supposed to be "The Miracle Worker".

I left at intermission - terribly disappointed."

[BigFatBlonde]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 9:53am

That sounds like the work of a bad director and not the result of having non-white actors.

[Mamie]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 10:05am

There was definitely bad direction, but watching a black girl, a Hispanic mother, and a Chinese brother sitting around the table while their white Daddy expounded on 'THOSE damned yankees and those other kind of people' just didn't fly. In fact, it took a great deal of effort just to keep from laughing out loud. And believe me - the acting was quite good. Particularly the women playing Helen and Annie.

[BigFatBlonde]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 10:14am

Okay.. that DOES sound unintentionally comical.

What were some of the "politically correct" points the director was trying to cover with the casting?

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 10:18am

The point about color-blind casting not making historical sense is usually complete BS, because most people are willing to gloss over the myriad other anachronistic stuff in a show except for that big black face where you're used to seeing whitey.

Yes, in some shows, it would be a mess - Showboat, Ragtime, For colored girls who have considered suicide, etc. I'm not sure what I'd think about BFB's multi-culti Anne Frank, but she does make a case for presenting it with a new vision. More often that not, though, race really doesn't matter. Yes, I know it matters, but in the context of most shows that we see on Broadway, it doesn't.

And I'm still pining for Vanessa Williams as Phyllis in Follies.

[BigFatBlonde]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 10:32am

I've seen some amazing changes in audiences over the years.

There is whole new generation of young audiences who don't even flinch when they see a multi-racial cast. That is just beautiful to me.


... but in the not so distant past... you could really sense the audience stiffen a little when a non-white actor started saying the lines traditionally heard from a white actor.

Ultimately, if the show and the actors were good, by the end of the evening the audience didn't see race anymore.

And THAT to me is the REAL "political" magic of theatre.

Updated On: 10/16/08 at 10:32 AM

[Fosse76]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 11:50am

There is a difference between suspending disbelief and suspending reality. In no realm in the universe can a white woman and a black man produce an asian child. It is just not physically possible. You have to confine yourself to the world in which the play exists. In reality, mermaids don't exist. So in The Little Mermaid it doesn't matter what race they are. In The Diary of Anne Frank, the world in the play is as real as the world outside...it is just not justifiable to have black Anne Frank.

Now, that doesn't mean you can't enjoy the performances of a black Anne Frank or a white Effie. But let's not suspend logic in the name of so-called color-blind casting. Plays are trying to make their world seem as real as possible...how can it be realistic if Whoopi Goldberg gives birth to Dakota Fanning after marrying Jackie Chan? In the context of a play you can get over it if it is not attempting the representation of the world as it really exists, but if they are supposed to live in 1920s New York then give me a break.

[Weez]

Posted: 10/16/08 at 11:56am

That's the director's choice when it comes to it; does the director want to go for a naturalistic approach, and cast everyone according to the colour the playwright initially intended? Or does the director feel that naturalism isn't important to their vision, therefore they'd really rather cast talented people regardless of colour? With shows that are about race, the directors will stick to the naturalistic approach, otherwise it won't work. With shows that are less strict about what colour actors they need, then as long as the director does a good show, it doesn't matter.

I love colour-blind casting conversations. They basically go round in circles of "but colour doesn't matter!" and "but that makes it unbelievable!" with a constant chorus of "if it's about race, cast it accordingly; if it's not, do as you will" playing underneath, and occasional sock-puppet cries of "OMG WHY WUD THEY DO THAT?!" and - if you're really lucky - terribly entertaining tangents where we start banging on about how mermaid genetics don't have to be the same as human genetics. XD