MIRACLE WORKER already drawing protests — Page 3

A deaf AND blind actress would have trouble with this role, only because of the thrashing about and the tirades that Helen initiates on stage.

A deaf actress could play this part just fine! A blind actress would have trouble, because the character flails and fights so much. It would be easy in her "wars" with Annie Sullivan to seriously disorient and injure herself. Hell, even a perfectly sighted and hearing actress could get disoriented and injured, if they're really "going for it" in the role (as they should be).

To suggest that it's "ridiculous" for a deaf actress to play this role is insulting as well as inaccurate.

But the issue is "box office draw" here. He wanted a star. Since Pill isn't a "star," even if she is a reputable working actress, he has decided to cast Abigail Breslin, who will definitely bring in the "American Girl" crowd. I think it's admirable to think that the young girls of Abigail's age will be exposed to one of the best American plays ever written. All because they came to see "Nim" live on stage.

At the same time, it's always good to bring awareness to the issue of casting actors with disabilities, in roles that are obvious indicating it (like Helen Keller) or roles that aren't.

---

The reason there are protests is someone really wants to see a reprise of this fun scene.


Helen Keller Takes a Tumble

"That's why they call it 'acting.'"

I directed a high school production of THE MIRACLE WORKER about 12 years ago. Our Helen Keller was hearing impaired and taught the rest of the cast the required sign language.

---

I think I prefer the training Patty Duke describes in her autobiography, about how her Mommie Dearest-style managers prepared her for her audition. She was blindfolded and they threw the furniture in front of her.

I come at this from the perspective of someone who worked in the disability rights field for about a year. I got out of that for a whole host of reasons, but essentially my view is that it is one thing if there was a blatant choice not to audition anyone with a disability because of disability. It is another thing if they (the creative team) went in with the desire to have a star Helen at the outset, regardless of whether that person had a disability or not, and used that as a basis of who would get an audition and who would get the role. It is not unthinkable that they did not find someone suitable with a disability who did the role in such a way that served the piece and vision the best. If that person who got an audition (and maybe at the end, the role) did not have a disability, even though the character does, well, those are the breaks when the goal is to act the part on a Broadway stage.

I detest feelings of entitlement based on some quality- whether it is having a disability or not- to get any job. These kind of protests irk me to no end because it does nothing to promote equality and the idea that having a disability is just one facet of one's identity, It may demonstrate a lack of intimate awareness of all of the elements that went into a decision to go a certain way, which is counterproductive to making an overall point.

I am not deaf, but I do have Cerebral Palsy and I stutter when I speak so it is not like I am approaching this from an insensitive perspective. I am not saying no actor with a disability should ever be cast in any role where the character is also disabled if he/she can do the role, I am simply saying that other factors shape someone's identity and "fit" beyond whether he or she is disabled or not and those are considered in any decision for an interview/audition and/or job. Discrimination happens and it does suck, but not everything can be chalked up to disability status.

Ok...off my soapbox.

---

Updated On: 10/31/09 at 03:34 PM

Why didn't they protest The Toxic Avenger?
Or Shrek for not getting a real dwarf to play the prince... same with Cameron in casting a Filipina to play Vietnamese roles! Geez!

---

Actually....as a born and raised Alabamian(I grew up about 15 minutes from Ivy Green, where the Miracle Worker takes place), I am deeply offended by the fact that there are no real Alabamians in the cast. This is obviously an attack against Alabama born actors.

As a Christian, I am deeply offended that they didn't hire an actual miracle worker to play the role.

I understand that it is difficult to find another Kathryn Kuhlman, but they didn't even bother to try.

---

Just to make my earlier post clear...I was not addressing the position taken by the advocacy group. I made no mention at all about where I stand on the issue or if I even have a stand.

I was merely responding to people's posts and what they were assuming about people with disabilities. No one can really say that a blind actor could or could not do a particular role. It depends on the actor. (And the director and the play and a whole host of other things.)

Frankly, whatever kind of job it is in whatever profession, I believe that the person who should be hired is the person who is best for the job. That's it. And I know this sounds really selfish, but...when I attend the theatre, I want to be moved and inspired by what I see on the stage. I don't care if an actor actor has 40 years of experience, an MFA, an Oscar, a recent high school diploma or was just dragged in off the street. Just make my theatre experience meaningful!

Having said that, keep in mind that when an advocacy group uses a high-profile event to make a statement, it gets people talking. It raises awareness of the issue, even if the debate tends to lean in favor of the opposing view. And that is sometimes the advocacy group's goal: to get people to pay attention. Again, I'm not saying I support this approach. I'm simply pointing out that it's a common tactic among organizations, agencies and companies as a means to generate publicity. And we have to admit that it works because here we are posting about it!

Oh, and it doesn't hurt the production either...it generates more interest and builds a wider audience. In other words, it sells tickets. So, really, this whole thing is a win-win! (Anyone remember the great "Miss Saigon" debate?)

---

Perhaps a grunt.. But she'll do a helluva job signing "water"!

I want to add to what Pennywise had said. I think that when it comes down to it when you're talking about hiring, regardless of the job, I think that you need to go with the best person for the job. My father got a lot of crap from clients when he was starting his business because of the fact that all the people he hired were women. Did my father refuse to hire or interview men for any of the jobs there? Of course not, it just so happened that the best team he could get was all women.

One mother that he was working with thought that it was great because she had never seen an office like that before. One of the fathers of another family thought it to be sexist towards men. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what the gender is or if the person is disabled or not. The only thing that really matters is if they are the best one for the job.

---

I think a deaf person or a blind person could play this role, sure. (...probably not a deaf blind person, I'm sorry. Even if it's not impossible, casting it would be.)

I don't think there's anything wrong with this considering they were open about their desire for a name. It wasn't just the deaf or blind actresses who were denied an audition.

Are the deaf protestors bothered that the actor chosen isn't blind? Why aren't they including blind people who disagree with the casting? Helen Keller is just as much "theirs".

I don't think she is, though. I think the deaf community relates deeper to Helen Keller's story, because of the struggle to learn and communicate. Learning and communication for a blind person is comparatively simple.