If Deidre can be Sheila, Can Stokes Be Emile?

Of course he can. That is what theater is now. Get over it.

Do you even have a passing acquaintance with the plot of SOUTH PACIFIC? Nellie Forbush is a racist. She would NEVER be involved in a relationship with a non-white man. If he wasn't white, she wouldn't be surprised that he had dark skinned children. The character of Sheila in A CHORUS LINE is not racially specific. Emile CERTAINLY is.

---

Dumb.

"The reasons that Forbush is hesistant about Emile are many and varied, its not just racial, its cultural, etc."



You say it's not JUST racial..which means race is part of it. If it's part of it then, Stokes really can't do it. And really it's more racial than cultural. The children come out and that's when they have the talk about her issues. That's not cultural. I personally don't think it would fit for a production. I didn't mind so much about the concert.

You had to start a thread for this question that doesn't even warrant discussion?

---

poppin, don' be a douche.

Reasons why Stokes cannot be Emile, as posted in the other SOUTH PACIFIC thread, courtesy of MargoChanning:

1. I like Stokes, but would casting him as DeBecque make any sense in a non-concert staging of the show? The entire issue of Nellie's racism (and surprise at that he has two mixed-race children) wouldn't make any sense with a black man playing the role (and yes, he's light-skinned, but still clearly black -- or at least not white). It doesn't matter in a concert setting, but it does in a full staging. I've always been a proponent of non-traditional casting, except in cases where race is a central issue in the show and would render those aspects nonsensical.

2. It's a sensitive issue and while on one hand it's a shame to deny a charismatic, strong-voiced leading man like Stokes the opportunity to play such a role -- which is why it was so wonderful he got the opportunity to do so in a high profile concert version -- casting him would undermine the show's very potent message about racism and on a basic level be a very confusing to audiences trying to make sense of the plot. Why would Nellie be surprised that Emile's two children weren't white when the actor playing him isn't? So she manages to get past the differences between them in age in background, but discovering that he had been with a Polynesian woman in the past is a dealbreaker for her, although the fact that he's black isn't? I'm sure many in the audience would be scratching their heads at that one.

---

While I agree its a problem on the surface, I dont see it as a huge problem, and the bottom line is this:

To bar a man from performing a piece that he is obviously so perfectly suited for just because of his race is racist, plain and simple. Colorblind casting is just that.

I've seen an opera about Jackie O with a black woman playing Jackie O and there was no problem with it.

The bottom line is this, if you have a problem with it, then it's YOUR problem, and you should think about it.

In many cultures Italians are not considered to be white, race is culturally constructed.

---

Perhaps you should re-read my post.

---

I'm with Rath here.

Fenchurch, you obviously don't have a grasp on SOUTH PACIFIC if you think not casting Stokes is "racist." PLEASE. Go read a book.

---

Why not be color blind in casting Nellie as well -- say Audra or LaChanze -- then with the leads equalized, we can direct our racism toward those dirty, double dealing Polynesians.

And frankly, BSM's Broadway career has been fortified with color-blind casting, why should it make a difference now? If he was vetted by the R&H Organization for the concert, this should not be an issue now.

Lea Salonga as Nellie.

Case closed.

---

I just want to interject that I don't see the need for AUDRA to be doing 110.

Updated On: 12/18/06 at 02:32 PM

I don't understand why someone wouldn't want to see Audra in ANYTHING...particularly in a golden oldie like 110.

---