Estate of Edward Albee Yanks Rights to Production Over Casting of Black Actor — Page 4

Lot666 said: "icecreambenjamin said: "I would love to know how many of you are white, but I can clearly tell from some of your posts.

Also, Lot666 your statement about Benton is so unapologetically racist I literally cannot even begin to comprehend you right now."

You're right; you clearly cannot "comprehend" me. Your assumptions are quite wrong, but believe what you need to believe.

I'm sorry if you don't understand that you made a very racist statement. What I can't comprehend is someone watching such an anachronistic show as The Great Comet where there's strobe lights and techno beats and actors playing instruments and dancing in the aisles, but yet having a problem with the actress' skin color not being period correct. That's your own personal prejudice. There's nothing wrong with Benton and apparently the Tony Award voters agree. I guess black girls should just stick to playing maids in your world.

Lot666, the role of Natasha has never been cast white, so it was obviously the director's intent (approved by the writer, who played opposite a nonwhite Phillipa Soo and Denée Benton). The problem really is yours and not anyone else's if you can't imagine seeing a black woman play the protagonist in this story, especially since literally nothing in the production is played for realism. (I'm surprised you're more upset about this than seeing a black woman as the sister of a white man.)

To the person who said something to the effect of having an all-white production of Fences because it should go both ways, no it shouldn't go both ways. To have an all-white Fences or Dreamgirls or Miss Saigon goes against the very fabric of those shows; these have characters facing white privilege in the pursuit of the American Dream. The race of the characters is essential to their motivations.

There is no such a thing as reverse racism, which is what some on here are essentially arguing. Yes, it can go both ways and white people can play roles originally played by black people if the race isn't a consideration for that role. For example, Natasha can be played by a white woman, but for now, it's a black woman who is glorious and is Tony-nominated for her work. But see how easy it was for me to place a white woman in a role originally played by an Asian or black woman but it's so much harder to do the opposite? Why is that and what does that tell us about ourselves? I applaud directors and producers and casting directors who push for actors of color and challenge their audience to accept something they wouldn't normally see. No one sees Groundhog Day and comes out questioning why there was an Asian redneck or saying that the cameraman would never be Indian because his parents would have pushed him to be a doctor instead. No, those are the characters, those are the actors they chose, and we accept it without batting an eye. That's the kind of colorful theatre I want everywhere I turn.

@icecream I appreciate your very firmly held convictions on this, but I'd still ask you to view it through the slightly different lens I have been bringing up repeatedly, viz., that this is not a color blind production but one that expressly sought to cast a person of color for the purpose of exploiting the color of his skin to make a point, a point that runs very contrary to the play Albee went to the trouble of writing. As has been rehearsed, Albee has not vetoed actors of color willy nilly and has spoken extensively to this subject. This is not about denying actors opportunities but of maintaining control over what story is told. Casting an actor black qua black in this circumstances changes the story as much as making up your own dialogue and adding it to the play. We can discuss whether we give authors too much control over their literary property, just as we can discuss racism in the theatre, but can we please do it in an intellectually defensible way? I welcome the opportunity to hear you out in this context.

icecreambenjamin said: "Lot666 said: "icecreambenjamin said: "I would love to know how many of you are white, but I can clearly tell from some of your posts.

Also, Lot666 your statement about Benton is so unapologetically racist I literally cannot even begin to comprehend you right now."

You're right; you clearly cannot "comprehend" me. Your assumptions are quite wrong, but believe what you need to believe.

I'm sorry if you don't understand that you made a very racist statement. What I can't comprehend is someone watching such an anachronistic show as The Great Comet where there's strobe lights and techno beats and actors playing instruments and dancing in the aisles, but yet having a problem with the actress' skin color not being period correct. That's your own personal prejudice. There's nothing wrong with Benton and apparently the Tony Award voters agree. I guess black girls should just stick to playing maids in your world."

You're way out of line now. I neither said nor even remotely implied that "black girls should just stick to playing maids", and if you continue with such defamatory accusations I will report you for abuse.

Once again - because I've already alluded to this above, although several of you are bent on ignoring it because doing so reinforces your erroneous assumptions - my problems with The Great Comet go much further than the casting of Ms. Benton as the princess. However, I did not delineate my other issues with the show here because this is not a Great Comet critique thread and I therefore only mentioned what was relevant to this discussion. Since you insist on dragging this further off topic, The Great Comet is indeed "an anachronistic show" with "strobe lights and techno beats and actors playing instruments and dancing in the aisles". I also thought the same-sex pairings in the ensemble tableaux were ridiculously anachronistic (and before you also label me as homophobic, I am gay), Ms. Benton's voice was weak, the score was largely forgettable, there were too many voices competing to be heard over a near-relentless din throughout, and it was telling that the people behind the show originally thought it best to include a character and plot outline in the Playbill. Overall, I thought The Great Comet was rather a mess, especially in light of the premium ticket price.

There is an enormous difference between objecting to reverse whitewashing/revisionist history and suggesting that all black girls should play maids.

Updated On: 5/19/17 at 12:27 PM

Kad said: "It's weird to criticize a show you acknowledge as being deliberately anachronistic for being "ridiculously" anachronistic."

I have to think you're just being obtuse. The show's rampantly anachronistic nature is part of my problem with it, and I thought that the same-sex couples were even more improbable than a black princess in 1812 Moscow. Same-sex couples in Russian high society are even an anachronism in 2017.

Updated On: 5/19/17 at 12:34 PM

HeyMrMusic said: "Lot666, the role of Natasha has never been cast white, so it was obviously the director's intent (approved by the writer, who played opposite a nonwhite Phillipa Soo and Denée Benton)."

This is irrelevant; I never said it was not the director's intent.

HeyMrMusic said: "The problem really is yours and not anyone else's if you can't imagine seeing a black woman play the protagonist in this story, especially since literally nothing in the production is played for realism. (I'm surprised you're more upset about this than seeing a black woman as the sister of a white man.)"

Are any of you reading what I wrote? No one is questioning whether The Great Comet is realistic - it's not, and as I've said repeatedly, I did not care for the show's take on Russian history and War & Peace.

HeyMrMusic said: "No one sees Groundhog Day and comes out questioning why there was an Asian redneck or saying that the cameraman would never be Indian because his parents would have pushed him to be a doctor instead."

Groundhog Day is a contemporary story and the characters are therefore not bound by the constraints of a specific historical era. It's not War & Peace.

Sondheimite said: "This is a small theatre in Portland, this is a non-issue because this production would have lived and died and been done with. Did the estate of Albee do this to intentionally be "racist"? I doubt it. But making the choice to take on this battle in 2017 comes off as kinda racist. I get all the issues (the production didn't even have the rights to the play...) and both sides of this coin... But it just seems like a pointless and idiotic thing for the Albee Estate to do.



"

If this small theater in Portland and, more specifically, Mr. Streeter, hadn't put this all over Facebook and made sure it got to the media, no one would have known about it. The Estate did what it felt it should do and it did not do it publicly - read their statements, as they even mention the Facebook post.

My bringing up Groundhog Day had nothing to do with Natasha, Pierre..., it was just a general observation. Since I've posted, you've clarified that you just don't care for any aspect of the show. You were the one who initially brought up the character's race without context. And from my point of view, and clearly not just mine, your original posts sounded like racist comments. I still don't really understand why you can't let the race of Natasha go when it's the opposite of a literal representation of the story. I wonder what your vision of the musical would be.

I am a person of color and I can definitely see that this is NOT a case of racism at all. This is clearly a case of the estate protecting the original author's intent and the integrity of the play.

You have to set some sort of boundaries or else theatrical companies/directors will just run amuck with your work. Respect the author's vision.

Lot666 good to know what feelings you've got boiling under the surface.

HeyMrMusic said: "My bringing up Groundhog Day had nothing to do with Natasha, Pierre..., it was just a general observation. Since I've posted, you've clarified that you just don't care for any aspect of the show. You were the one who initially brought up the character's race without context. And from my point of view, and clearly not just mine, your original posts sounded like racist comments. I still don't really understand why you can't let the race of Natasha go when it's the opposite of a literal representation of the story. I wonder what your vision of the musical would be."

I wonder how many times I will have to state this: I understand that Great Comet is not intended as realism. I simply don't care for its approach, and the casting of one actor is hardly the only aspect of the show that I have issues with. And again, I "brought up the character's race without context" (as you put it) because I was trying to stick to the topic of the thread.

wonderfulwizard11 said: "henrik, I think there are ways that interpretation could go very wrong in the wrong hands, but with the right director it could be an interesting take on the material. I see your reluctance, but I don't think that interpretation automatically lends itself to racism or extreme vulgarity.

It never ceases to amaze me how any time there is a thread on race in casting some idiot has to ask "why can't we do an all-white Fences, then?" For the love of god, they aren't the same thing, and if you don't see that you are either willfully ignorant or just plain ignorant.



I agree, WonderfulWizard I tried to phrase my post in such a way as to voice my impression of how Nick as a black man "might" play very coarsely and badly. But I'm certainly open to being shown how it could play well.

However, having said that, I can easily conceive that the estate might reasonably have serious reservations perhaps in line with my own apprehensions.



"

Updated On: 5/19/17 at 01:35 PM