Griffin Matthews’ Post- Page 4

[fitzdavid2]

Posted: 6/6/20 at 3:35pm

I think Michael you make a very convincing argument.  What is encouraging is that the discussion here which, for the most part, is energized and thoughtful.   And it's interesting that there is a striking degree of diversity on stage in terms of talent, as opposed to on the creative and management side.   Furthermore, I think there is some credit due to the producer and director who assented to take this journey with a hitherto unknown writer.  So many writers don't even have such an opportunity.  I did see the show at Second Stage and it was a hit and miss proposition;  I felt it was inventively staged and choreographed, the story was worth telling, but  the score were less than compelling  and the book felt ordinary,somewhat by the numbers...one felt that a new librettist would especially have been very helpful .  One wonders how pliant the creative team was with regard to working on/fine tuning the production in those elements.  And since this was a few years ago, I wonder what work these artists have done since...

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 6/6/20 at 3:59pm

Michael Bennett said: "As a theatre director, I'd like to add thatthere is a lot of kumbaya going on right now about raising the profile of diversity and anti-racism in the theatre, but scarcely no talk about the role of the audience, and what efforts are going to be made to inspire audiences that stories of POC are universal and worth their continued interest."

I think part of the problem is that audiences don't always trust that colorblind or color conscious casting is being done thoughtfully. To take the example of some recent revivals, I saw Children of a Lesser God, Saint Joan, Carousel, and Oklahoma. Oklahoma was great. Children of a Lesser God was beautifully acted but otherwise was just serviceable. Saint Joan was a bit of a mess. And Carousel seemed to switch from being a color conscious choice to being afraid to say anything. Are there going to be people who don't want to see colorblind casting at all? Yes. I overheard conversations at Saint Joan and COALG to that effect (it's amazing how many racist conversations you can overhear at the theater). But I think part of drawing open-minded audience members in is giving them the confidence that the casting choices are adding to the production and making it better. That people are doing more than just asking for credit without fully doing the work.

[Wick3]

Posted: 6/6/20 at 4:00pm

I agree with Michael. 

That's why I thought Scott Rudin had an amazing chance to cast a POC in the Hello Dolly! revival a few years ago.  I saw the show a few times with Gavin Creel as Cornelius Hackl and also Christian Dante White (Hackl understudy who happens to be POC) and much preferred Christian Dante White's performance. Given how Bette Midler was already starring in it, that show will recoup so why not cast a POC in some of the roles? That was 2017 and the opening night cast of leading and minor roles were all white. 

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 6/6/20 at 4:15pm

VintageSnarker said: "Michael Bennett said: "As a theatre director, I'd like to add thatthere is a lot of kumbaya going on right now about raising the profile of diversity and anti-racism in the theatre, but scarcely no talk about the role of the audience, and what efforts are going to be made to inspire audiences that stories of POC are universal and worth their continued interest."

I think part of the problem is that audiences don't always trust that colorblind or color conscious casting is being done thoughtfully. To take the example of some recent revivals, I saw Children of a Lesser God, Saint Joan, Carousel, and Oklahoma. Oklahoma was great. Children of a Lesser God was beautifully acted but otherwise was just serviceable. Saint Joan was a bit of a mess. And Carousel seemed to switch from being a color conscious choice to being afraid to say anything. Are there going to be people who don't want to see colorblind casting at all? Yes. I overheard conversations at Saint Joan and COALG to that effect (it's amazing how many racist conversations you can overhear at the theater). But I think part of drawing open-minded audience members in is giving them the confidence that the casting choices are adding to the production and making it better. That people are doing more than just asking for credit without fully doing the work."

This is because much of the 'color blind casting' choices on Broadway are actually tokenism. Albeit, often well meaning tokenism by mostly white creative teams attempting to be diverse, but tokenism nonetheless.  Something I've heard from many POC this week - which I've heard before - is 'actually, we really are okay for you to keep your Hans Christian Anderson tale set in Norway white.'  Many in fact are tired of being made an example of 'diversity in action.'

Schele William's discussion about her perceived problems with the attempt at making the current revival of WEST SIDE STORY more 'diverse' were eye opening and speak to the problem directly.  The solution is for inclusivity to be part of the creative process, not the reinvention of it.

[MikeInTheDistrict]

Posted: 6/6/20 at 4:18pm

Michael Bennett said: "As a theatre director, I'd like to add thatthere is a lot of kumbaya going on right now about raising the profile of diversity and anti-racism in the theatre, but scarcely no talk about the role of the audience, and what efforts are going to be made to inspire audiences that stories of POC are universal and worth their continued interest.The commercial theatre exists principally to make money. It isalways going to be geared towards what is perceived to be what audiences are willing to pay money for. Most audiences in NYC and across the country are white. You can't just change the programming and expect a different outcome. Audiences largely pay their $175 (plus services fees) for the privilege of beingentertained. They have a limited threshold to show up out of obligation or for a history lesson. Theatre can't exist in a vacuum. The commitment to educate and inspire has to to extend beyond the footlights to those coming to the theatre. If not it doesn't matter how many opportunities we give POC."

I'm not sure what you mean by "change the programming." It's not like Broadway is a monolith that has presented work that appeals to only one audience. Good work by people of color HAS proven commercially viable in the past and continues to do so. Furthermore, these works don't constitute "history lessons", but vary from fantastical reinterpretations of American mythology (The Wiz and Hamilton) to character-driven dramas of universal resonance (August Wilson) to, yes, studies of race in America (A Raisin in the Sun). There is already proof of concept there. It may present a barrier-to-entry to some, but audiences don't have problems finding the common humanity in characters across age, gender, time period, or geographic milieu.

EDIT: My original response had this sentence: I have more faith in theatre audiences than to assume that they need to be spoonfed the ability to empathize with people with different gradations of melanin.

One second thought, I don't know if this is necessarily true, lol.

Updated On: 6/6/20 at 04:18 PM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 6/6/20 at 4:38pm

MikeInTheDistrict said: "Michael Bennett said: "As a theatre director, I'd like to add thatthere is a lot of kumbaya going on right now about raising the profile of diversity and anti-racism in the theatre, but scarcely no talk about the role of the audience, and what efforts are going to be made to inspire audiences that stories of POC are universal and worth their continued interest.The commercial theatre exists principally to make money. It isalways going to be geared towards what is perceived to be what audiences are willing to pay money for. Most audiences in NYC and across the country are white. You can't just change the programming and expect a different outcome. Audiences largely pay their $175 (plus services fees) for the privilege of beingentertained. They have a limited threshold to show up out of obligation or for a history lesson. Theatre can't exist in a vacuum. The commitment to educate and inspire has to to extend beyond the footlights to those coming to the theatre. If not it doesn't matter how many opportunities we give POC."

I'm not sure what you mean by "change the programming." It's not like Broadway is a monolith that has presented work that appeals to only one audience. Good work by people of color HAS proven commercially viable in the past and continues to do so. Furthermore, these works don't constitute "history lessons", but vary from fantastical reinterpretations of American mythology (The Wiz and Hamilton) to character-driven dramas of universal resonance (August Wilson) to, yes, studies of race in America (A Raisin in the Sun). There is already proof of concept there. I have more faith in theatre audiences than to assume that they need to be spoonfed the ability to empathize with people with different gradations of melanin. It may present a barrier-to-entry to some, but audiences don't have problems finding the common humanity in characters across age, gender, time period, or geographic milieu.

"

Mike, forgive me, in my original post I rather condensed a lot of ideas for simplicity sake. My blanket argument is that I'm seeing a lot of reactionary responses (including at the regional and even community theatre level) about a renewed pledge for diversity, anti-racism, increased ethnic programming on their stages etc, but almost none of these vows for change are taking into account the ticket buying audiences, who at the end of the day ultimately fuel the decisions a theatre makes, because it is ultimately about butts in seats.

You cite some of the greatest plays in the American theatre - black or white - and I don't disagree with an audiences ability to connect with the universal messages of great theatre. My fear is in the reactionary aspect of what's being spoon fed at the moment - i.e that in their need to immediately address the issues, theatre producers / production companies etc aren't going to sufficiently look across the footlights at the issues literally facing them.

And the history lesson I mean isn't historical plays. It's the history lesson of this moment.  You can't rely on passionate supporters on Instagram this week showing up once the cause has lost its immediacy in a couple of months.  The search for the solution to this problem has to be a long, sustained commitment that is more multifaceted than some of the lip service being offered at the moment.

Otherwise, like an immediate apology to 'do better' - its ultimately meaningless.

Updated On: 6/6/20 at 04:38 PM

[MikeInTheDistrict]

Posted: 6/6/20 at 4:52pm

Michael Bennett said: "Mike, forgive me, in my original post I rather condensed a lot of ideas for simplicity sake. My blanket argument is that I'm seeing a lot of reactionary responses (including at the regional and even community theatre level) about a renewed pledge for diversity, anti-racism, increasedethnic programming on their stages etc, but almost none of these vows for change are taking into account the ticket buying audiences, who at the end of the day ultimately fuel the decisions a theatre makes, because it is ultimately about butts in seats.

You cite some of the greatest plays in the American theatre - black or white - and I don't disagree with an audiences ability to connect with the universal messages of great theatre. My fear is in the reactionary aspect of what's being spoon fed at the moment- i.e that in their need to immediately address the issues, theatre producers / production companies etc aren't going to sufficiently look across the footlights at the issues literally facing them.

And the history lesson I mean isn't historical plays. It's the history lesson of this moment. You can't rely on passionate supporters on Instagram this week showing up once the cause has lost its immediacy in a couple of months. The search for the solution to this problemhas to be a long, sustained commitment that is more multifaceted than some of the lip service being offered at the moment.

Otherwise, like an immediate apology to 'do better' - its ultimately meaningless."

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I reconsidered my original response, particularly the point about audiences not necessarily needing to be spoonfed. I agree with your concerns. I, too, don't want to see this important moment in the discourse around race in our country reduced to lip service, whether it's from corporations posting "Black Lives Matter" on Instragram and then doing nothing to address the topic, to Broadway producers resorting to cheap tokenism that absolves the theatre audiences themselves from their responsibility to examine their own attitudes, prejudices, and behaviors around race.

My hope is that audiences will not be mollified by a quick salve of a few actors, writers or directors of color being paraded around for a brief moment, and then a return to the status quo, but that a real shift will result from the wider conversation around race that's happening in this country. I hope it results in a lasting shift in the way things are done on Broadway,

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 6/6/20 at 5:53pm

Michael Bennett said: "Schele William's discussion about her perceived problems with the attempt at making the current revival of WEST SIDE STORY more 'diverse' were eye opening and speak to the problem directly. The solution is for inclusivity to be part of the creative process, not the reinvention of it."

Is this on Stars in the House? I haven't watched in ages. I'll have to look into it.

[Fan123]

Posted: 6/6/20 at 8:40pm

Michael Bennett raises a really insightful point. It sounds to me as though some of the issues in the case of Witness Uganda/Invisible Thread, might have related to Diane Paulus and the white behind-the-scenes players wanting to market the show to white audiences; a good thing in itself, but they seemingly went about it by changing the show to make it more easily palatable to white audiences. Changing the title to something more 'universal'/generic, cutting a reference to slavery because "no one" wants to hear about it, relying on feedback from others rather than their own opinions as to whether or not the show was working. It's interesting that Paulus' statement mentions that she "immediately fell in love with" the show before any changes were made, but that the confidence apparently wasn't there from her and the white team members that white audiences would feel the same way. Did they distrust the material by a black writer, or did they distrust white audiences to be able to get on board with the material? And if the latter, does that make it 'more okay' that they wanted the changes made?
(I'm selectively highlighting things and speculating about people's motives here of course, and I might be utterly wrong. And this comment is not intended to discount the assertion that these, and the other, incidents Griffin Matthews mentions also occurred due to racism and/or general bad behaviour.)

[joevitus]

Posted: 6/6/20 at 9:18pm

VintageSnarker said: "Michael Bennett said: "As a theatre director, I'd like to add thatthere is a lot of kumbaya going on right now about raising the profile of diversity and anti-racism in the theatre, but scarcely no talk about the role of the audience, and what efforts are going to be made to inspire audiences that stories of POC are universal and worth their continued interest."

I think part of the problem is that audiences don't always trust that colorblind or color conscious casting is being done thoughtfully. To take the example of some recent revivals, I saw Children of a Lesser God, Saint Joan, Carousel, and Oklahoma. Oklahoma was great. Children of a Lesser God was beautifully acted but otherwise was just serviceable. Saint Joan was a bit of a mess. And Carousel seemed to switch from being a color conscious choice to being afraid to say anything. Are there going to be people who don't want to see colorblind casting at all? Yes. I overheard conversations at Saint Joan and COALG to that effect (it's amazing how many racist conversations you can overhear at the theater). But I think part of drawing open-minded audience members in is giving them the confidence that the casting choices are adding to the production and making it better. That people are doing more than just asking for credit without fully doing the work."

I mean, you have to consider honesty in casting, too. Someone mentioned The Front Page above, but a colorblind Front Page would be bizarre because it takes place among journalists in the 1920s. There would have been zero people of color present in that office. That's simple reality.

I think musicals fair better because no one expects reality--at least not literal reality. A production of Green Grow the Lilacs with a black Laurey would be odd. But a production of Oklahoma! is different. And there's the one-way street nature of the suggestions. People will suggest a mixed race Front Page or Oklahoma!, but mixed race casting for the family in A Raison in the Sun or for the people living on Catfish Row in Porgy and Bess would not (and I'd agree should not) be tolerable.

Interestingly, works of the very far distant past--whether we're talking about Elizabethan drama or Greek tragedy--are also different. They essentially take place in imaginary worlds now (maybe always did) and so the race of the person cast means nothing in terms of believability or probability. An African American Hamlet or Marc Antony, an Asian Cordelia or Rosalind, a Hispanic Brutus or Prospero or Miranda or Lady Macbeth poses no problems.

The terrible fact to be fact is that our country's history, and indeed the history of most currently existing nations, is a history that includes intense racism, and we just can't present works written even as late as the mid-1960's and pretend we always lived in an equal opportunity, colorblind world. We just didn't--to a frustrating extent we still don't--and even most of our great works were written in a different world. When we ignore the racial realities of casting, we ignore history--we don't fix it or resolve it. We bury our heads in the sand.

So the issue of how to effectively bring more people of color I think comes down to what Queen Alice suggests: new works (outside of musical theater, where color blind casting is effective). Works that reflect the world of today, where in fact no matter what setting, it's normal to see a mixed race group of people. Even this presents certain problems, for the fact is that people still self segregate, even in mixed workplace environments. We can't present a world even today where nobody recognizes or cares about race because that simply isn't true. But to me, new works in contemporary settings are the best bet for truly breaking the barriers on Broadway.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 6/7/20 at 12:25am

I'm reminded of the controversy Barnes and Noble faced this past February when for Black History Month they announced a series of classic literature titles to be released with central characters redrawn on the cover as people of color.  What was surely a well meaning gesture of "inclusion and diversity" by a presumably mostly white Executive and Leadership board of B&N was understandably met with dismay (and foreshadowing our current moment) incredible frustration by minority communities.  As if the greatest gift we could give possibly give POC is the opportunity to play traditionally white heroes from classic literature written by white authors.

Of course, in hindsight, the decision seems so foolhardy you can hardly believe it got past the first pitch meeting,  but I think it's actually not dissimilar to what we've been doing in the theatre for the past twenty-five years. We applaud how far we've come when we can have a POC play Christine in PHANTOM OF THE OPERA, and we literally do a minority body count on revivals of traditionally all white musicals, like HELLO DOLLY, to either champion or denounce the progress we've made in diversifying white theatre. 

Because the argument has been just that - how can we add 'diversity and inclusion' to white theatre.

Thank God, what is finally coming up is that this has, in so many ways, been a misguided band aid solution to a much more systemic problem. And, for the record, I'm not saying POC shouldn't have the opportunity to play classic roles. I also don't think there should be a lynch mob organized to go after a director if she feels the heritage, time period, and location of A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC warrants a production having an all white cast.

What I do think we need is more diversity in what we create and produce (and who creates and produces it); we also need to foster our audiences, so that the viability of what is produced is shored by patrons (not just on Broadway) who are willing to take in the universality of stories written by and performed by people who look different from themselves. To my earlier point, this is a quagmire I don't think is being looked at closely enough in the current 'we'll try better' lip speak. Ultimately, theatre is always driven by audiences and what they will, money in hand, show up for. Without factoring their role into the equation- nothing will really change.

What many said in their denouncement of Barnes and Noble was that what the offering 'should' have been was the championing of literature by POC to stand alongside classic literature. That new black heroes should also be given the opportunity to join the ranks of beloved white characters.

I think this would be an incredible goal to aspire to.

 

[chrishuyen]

Posted: 6/7/20 at 2:13am

Michael Bennett said: "Of course, in hindsight, the decision seems so foolhardy you can hardly believe it got past the first pitch meeting, but I think it's actually not dissimilar to what we've been doing in the theatre for the past twenty-five years. We applaud how far we've come when we can have a POC play Christine in PHANTOM OF THE OPERA, and we literally do a minority body count on revivals of traditionally all white musicals, like HELLO DOLLY, to either champion or denounce the progress we've made in diversifying white theatre."

It's funny you bring this up, because I recently had a conversation with my friend about the all black cast of Hello Dolly, which I had only just seen a video of.  Before watching it, I didn't think it would phase me much, since I'm on the younger side of theatergoers and fairly used to colorblind casting.  But there was something about seeing an entirely black cast just performing a show without any mention of racial stereotyping or anyone resigned to stereotypical characters.  Unlike colorblind casting, the fact that the whole company was black made it seem to me like they could just exist in their own skin in this utopia of a world where no one could judge them for it because everyone else looked like them as well.  I'm not sure if I'm explaining this well, but it's just been so different from any other show that has a black character (usually either playing a stereotype or dealing with specific racial issues) or colorblind casting (where the presence of other races still lends some implicit bias).

Of course, I'm sure this cast of Hello Dolly was done mostly for commercial and marketing purposes rather than a specific statement on racial equality (though feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), but it just seemed like a chance to let these actors be seen as "American" rather than "African American".  And I'm not saying that all traditionally white shows should just be revived with entirely POC casts, but I think part of the flexibility of theater IS how universal the themes can be, even if they're written by an all white creative team. 

Of course, the best way forward would be to bring more POC creators to the Broadway level or any other space where they can get recognition, whether that's the playwright, director, or producer.  But most white theater doesn't seem to be specifically "white" to me, and I think casting it differently can also change how we perceive the show or a certain race.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 6/7/20 at 3:22am

joevitus said: "I mean, you have to consider honesty in casting, too. Someone mentioned The Front Page above, but a colorblind Front Page would be bizarre because it takes place among journalists in the 1920s. There would have been zero people of color present in that office. That's simple reality. [...]

The terrible fact to be factis that our country's history, and indeed the history of most currently existingnations,is a history that includes intenseracism,and we just can't present works written even as late asthe mid-1960's and pretend we always lived in an equal opportunity, colorblind world. We just didn't--to a frustrating extent we still don't--and even most of our great works were written in a different world. When we ignore the racial realities of casting, we ignore history--we don't fix it or resolve it. We bury our heads in the sand."

I'm going to have a difficult time since you ruled out musicals. I care so little about plays that I can't really pull references that easily. First of all, I agree theater should be amplifying and producing works by artists of color about their own experiences, but also anything else they might want to write about. (Though I personally had zero interest in Straight White Men, I am also tired of non-white playwrights being boxed into stories about family dramas and first generation immigrant experiences. It's lazy inclusion and also the plays are usually pretty boring.) Black artists also shouldn't be forced to write about slavery and trauma to be produced. If they want to tell those stories, great. If they don't, there should also be room for stories about joy and romance and community and ambition and whatever else they want to write about.

However, with casting revivals, I don't think it's as simple as thinking about what's realistic. Is realism the primary goal of the production? Is the concept of the revival to reproduce the story and setting with the greatest historical accuracy and authenticity? I'm not saying this mockingly or facetiously. I do think there are some productions that are trying to be "authentic" and others that really are not. Not every play that is old is revived so we can have an understanding of what the past was like. That's not why someone revives A Streetcar Named Desire or The Crucible or Uncle Vanya. When a classic work is presented as "universal" and still relevant because it tackles gender, politics, journalistic integrity, whatever... it's worth interrogating why that seems to mostly be done with an all-white cast or a few token supporting roles given to non-white actors. If there's nothing in the play that says the story is about whiteness and the production is saying that the story is universal, then why does the casting not reflect the world we live in?

I also think color conscious casting can be a worthwhile endeavor. I am thinking of Kate Hamill plays and the kinds of work presented at various fringe festivals and off-off-Broadway venues. There is usually a fair bit of rewriting or sometimes an entirely original work using pre-existing or real people but letting actors of color play roles that wouldn't be accessible to them if we were being perfectly accurate can be interesting. It can make a statement. You engage an audience with something/someone they are already familiar with and care about (Little Women, Dracula, Edgar Allen Poe, Emily Dickinson, etc.) and use that hook to talk about what you care about as a playwright/director. What can you do with the shorthand understanding of this person/character? What viewpoints can you make seem ridiculous? How can you play with the audience's sympathies and biases and, better yet, make them aware of it? What connections can you draw? 

OK... cutting myself off. It's past 3am and I'm fully rambling now.

[joevitus]

Posted: 6/7/20 at 4:33am

Good points, and I appreciate your response.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 6/7/20 at 11:10am

For the sake of discussion, I put diverse casting in revivals and long running musicals under a microscope because I think it's where we, mostly white, creatives in the theatre most often stamp 'progress' and pat ourselves on the back. And if its been a positive to create more opportunities for POC (mostly as performers) it's also taken the impetus away from the need to champion ethnic voices in the theatre in other ways. Part of the self congratulatory dialogue I often hear from well meaning white creatives is that diverse casting in these situations is 'forcing the audience to look at the play through a different lens.'  Well, sure. But that's usually still saying, 'look how these ethnic performers can illuminate new universal truths about our white stories.'  That's just one example of how we propagate systemic racism in the theatre.

The biggest challenge I see to really facing racism in the theatre headlong is that most of it is often being led by white allies who think they are doing the right thing, but are often missing the point.

 

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 6/7/20 at 1:09pm

A lot to digest in this interesting and important thread. I will say that although I applaud Griffin Matthews for speaking out about his experience doing Invisible Thread, after watching his video, I read some reviews for the show (which I have not seen) and they were all pretty much pans. Is this because the critics were white and the show wasn't for them in the first place? Is it because Diane Paulus and her team whitewashed a show that was originally much better? I don't know. But after those reviews, there's no way Invisible Thread would have made it to Broadway anyway, and it ultimately ran for only a few weeks in its Off-Broadway run. Maybe...it just wasn't a very good show? That doesn't mean to say Diane Paulus and her team wasn't terrible to Matthews - I believe what he says in the video - but he seems to be basically saying, "My show didn't make it to Broadway because of racism," when based on the reviews I read, my response wants to be, "Well, it seems more like you experienced racism while working on a show that was not very good and therefore didn't go to Broadway."

As for our audience...as a regional theatre actor/director/producer, I have to say that I am no longer interested in doing theatre for the boomer generation. Yes, they are the ones with all of the money to buy tickets, but...I'm just kind of done doing theater that is almost exclusively for old white people. So what I personally would like to figure out is how to get POC under the age of 40 to come to the theater...and I don't just mean non-Equity storefront theater that charges only $20 a ticket, because that's not financially viable. I mean, how do we get black people and Latinx people to come to the theater when these cultures for the most part rarely go to the theater because "theater is a white thing?" For the past twenty years, producers from Broadway to Minnesota have been making an effort to produce more theater that will attract a wider range of audiences and still...most theatergoers are older white people. What's the solution? Will this just change over time as these older white patrons literally die off and Generation Z starts going to the theater more? Is COVID-19 going to you, know, speed up this process because a lot of older people won't want to go the theater anymore anyway? So many questions...so few answers. I am REALLY curious to see what the theater looks like after 2020.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 6/7/20 at 2:05pm

Michael Bennett said: "Part of the self congratulatory dialogue I often hear from well meaning white creatives is that diverse casting in these situations is 'forcing the audience to look at the play through a different lens.' Well, sure. But that's usually still saying, 'look how these ethnic performers can illuminate new universaltruths about our white stories.' That's just one example of how we propagate systemic racism in the theatre.

The biggest challenge I see to reallyfacing racism in the theatre headlong is that most of it is often being led bywhite allies who think they are doing the right thing, but are often missing the point."

I agree with you but I also think this a question of what people say vs. what they actually do. I think casting a non-white actor can bring a different perspective or a different understanding to an existing play or musical. But you have to have an idea. You can't just cast Joshua Henry in Carousel or Condola Rashad in Saint Joan and then start congratulating yourself. Obviously this is my personal opinion but even with the altered ending, I didn't think My Fair Lady with Lauren Ambrose had a feminist lens. My Fair Lady with Laura Benanti and Alexander Gemignani definitely did. These things don't just happen. There needs to be a creative vision. Everyone involved needs to understand that vision. And then they need to successfully communicate it to the audience. Even when you're doing the work, you can still fail. But you need to start by actually having that idea for what this new casting illuminates in the play. Otherwise, it's just a trick where you're making the audience do the work of seeing something that isn't there.

[chrishuyen]

Posted: 6/7/20 at 6:27pm

Considering Griffin Matthes mentioned Book of Mormon, I think this would also be interesting for the people on this thread: https://www.w42st.com/post/a-troubling-tony-winner-scottsboro-boys-book-of-mormon

I had seen Book of Morman with my mom early on, knowing nearly nothing about it, and came out loving it.  I ended up having a lot of meaningful discussions with my mom about faith and disillusionment and social issues in places like Uganda, and I always saw Book of Mormon as a satire rooted in some very real global issues (as most good satires are).  Though seeing Michael Roderick's take on it, I think the issue with Book of Mormon is that it doesn't necessarily invite the audience to dig deeper into the issues it highlights.  The Ugandan issues are turned into punchlines and not seen as real social issues, so I could also see how some audience members would just enjoy that during the show and then assume they've just been made up or exaggerated and not think about them later, and I'm guessing not all audience members have as many thoughtful discussions as the people on this board do about the shows they've seen.

[joevitus]

Posted: 6/7/20 at 8:03pm

The Distinctive Baritone said: "but he seems to be basically saying, "My show didn't make it to Broadway because of racism," when based on the reviews I read, my response wants to be, "Well, it seems more like you experienced racism while working on a show that was not very good and therefore didn't go to Broadway.""

But specifically what that he describes is actually racism? The only concrete thing I can determine from his video that would stand out as racism is that they didn't want to cast people too light skinned because those performers may read as "white." But considering that--to this day--Hollywood intentionally casts light skinned black people for that very reason, (including, infamously, the casting sheet for women in Straight Outta Compton), might they not have been wanting to avoid such practices? Mistaken choice on their part, but racist?

Mostly it sounds like he lost control of his material, and the stories of this happening to writers in the director-led age that has existed since about the mid-60's are legion. Indeed, it is the backstory to practically all of the Prince-Sonheim musicals and seemingly Michael Bennett's two big hits, A Chorus Line and Dreamgirls, too. 

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 6/7/20 at 8:59pm

joevitus -

I hear what you are saying, but it could also be argued that a non-black person telling a black person how to tell a black story is inherently kind of racist, isn’t it?

[joevitus]

Posted: 6/7/20 at 11:04pm

Distinctive Baratone,

The most I can say is...maybe? I don't know Diane Paulus, so how can I call it?  Generally, if someone with an extensive background in professional theater says "this actor is going to read as white" that's as much an opinion born out of knowing how things will appear onstage as "a black person must look X way to be really black." I kinda doubt she or anyone on the team was assuming there aren't light skinned African Americans, or placing a judgement on whether light-skinned African Americans are "really" black. 

While I don't deny overt or systematic racism in any part of our society, I don't think that an opinion coming from a white person in contradiction to a black person is de facto racist, even when the subject is a racial issue. I'm very uncomfortable with confusing the sort of sense of entitlement and superiority of vision a person with a track record in the industry has over a relative newcomer with racism. I hope it's clear I'm not cool with someone saying "Oh, let me make these decisions. You're new. I know what will work." I think it's egotistic and elitist. But I'm not sure it is racist. 

We're entering a period where a lot of young people are saying "If you aren't my race/ethnicity/sexuality don't speak or contradict me because that's prejudice and you don't know." And that's kind of a bad line to pull with experts in a field who do know a few things even about other races/ethnicities/sexualities and also what will actually work in a theatrical setting of a given production. I say this as a gay man, for what it's worth.  I don't think there's a one-size fits all answer to this. Definitely someone who is a member of a minority writing a work about that experience should be asked if what's emerging in the production rings true/fulfills the artist's vision. But no doing so may be more about the director's ego that racism. 

[Dolly80]

Posted: 6/9/20 at 12:03pm

I think to simplify this whole thing down for a moment- Diane Paulus just needs to be NICER to work with. I know people who’ve had a horrible time on her shows. I would never work for her after what I’ve heard and she should consider herself very lucky that other stories haven’t (yet) been tweeted.

[Broadway61004]

Posted: 6/9/20 at 4:43pm

The Distinctive Baritone said: "joevitus -

I hear what you are saying, but it could also be argued that a non-black person telling a black person how to tell a black story is inherently kind of racist, isn’t it?"

I agree that idea by itself seems inherently kind of racist, yes.  But what I see in this video is a playwright complaining because a director wanted to change things about his work, which I'm sorry, but happens with 90% of shows that are produced.  Were there some racist undertones to that?  Not saying there weren't--I obviously wasn't in the room where this was worked on so I cannot speak to the environment or the entire process.  But the things he's saying in the video: The director works for the playwright?  Not accurate on any production and that has nothing to do with racism.  The director wanting to change songs and text?  Again, happens to 90% of shows that make it to Broadway and is typically not race related.  The director wanting to recast him?  Again, unless it was in his contract that he was guaranteed this part if they produced his play, there's no reason they cannot do that.  What Griffin may want is a better agent to negotiate his contract next time to give him more creative control, because frankly that's what this seems like--he lost creative control on the show and wasn't happy about the changes that were made.  Again, I'm in no way saying there aren't racial issues on Broadway and I'm not even saying there weren't some on this production--as I said, I clearly can't speak for what happened in those rehearsal rooms.  But what he's saying in that video really doesn't seem so much an issue with racism as it is an issue with him wanting 100% control over his script and the creative team saying no, we want to make changes.

[joevitus]

Posted: 6/9/20 at 5:00pm

I agree. 

[Fan123]

Posted: 6/9/20 at 5:35pm

An additional side note note on this: I've remembered now that I actually did read a review or two of this show back in 2015. I'm pretty certain the below Variety review was one of them; it's pretty harsh. Based on it, I think I assumed at the time that Griffin Matthews was a white guy. Although I didn't make the connection to 'The Book of Mormon' at the time, I was vaguely envisioning a cringe-inducing 'Book of Mormon, but sincere!' type autobiographical white guy show. That's on me for making assumptions, but... the irony now.

https://variety.com/2015/legit/reviews/invisible-thread-review-musical-1201651771/