#76
Posted: 11/9/06 at 5:56pm
I, personally, would like to see some non-traditional casting for the cardboard cut-out soldier.
Sunday in the park @ studio 54 — Page 4
#77
Posted: 11/9/06 at 5:57pm
'they very well could, and that would be just fine with me, because then it would make sense. but if one of her brothers happens to be of another race, and both parents are the same race as Audra- something's amiss.'
Then I submit that you should calm your fears (ok...not fears...it's the best word I can come up with right now) until you find out the casting for the role of the father.
However...it still wouldn't bother ME...but that's just me.
Then I submit that you should calm your fears (ok...not fears...it's the best word I can come up with right now) until you find out the casting for the role of the father.
However...it still wouldn't bother ME...but that's just me.
"I'm so looking forward to a time when all the Reagan Democrats are dead."
#78
Posted: 11/9/06 at 5:59pm
I'm not at all uptight. I liked Brooklyn. (sort of)
and I love colorblind casting and wish it was used a whole lot more. just not when the character is based on a real person. I love the idea of the casting for les miserables. and I would love to see somebody of a darker skin tone tackle the role of Bobby. so don't go throwing adjectives around about me without even knowing me. I wouldn't do that to you, or anyone else on the board.
there is no "u" in opinion.
and I love colorblind casting and wish it was used a whole lot more. just not when the character is based on a real person. I love the idea of the casting for les miserables. and I would love to see somebody of a darker skin tone tackle the role of Bobby. so don't go throwing adjectives around about me without even knowing me. I wouldn't do that to you, or anyone else on the board.
there is no "u" in opinion.
"I'm an American, Damnit!!! And if it's three things I don't believe in, it's quitting and math."
#79
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:00pm
"the VAST majority of the audience does not have any clue what Seurat looked like."
but we sure he's not black "
How are you sure of that?
(I am talking again about this collective audience who does not know this person, not someone who looked him up beforehand.)
To me the fallacy is applying these external standards to art.
The dogs are in George's head, maybe, just as George is in ours. He looks however he looks on that stage at that moment.
I agree with the poster who said the real key is, I am REALLY excited the show is coming! I only care that the actor playing George does a great job.
but we sure he's not black "
How are you sure of that?
(I am talking again about this collective audience who does not know this person, not someone who looked him up beforehand.)
To me the fallacy is applying these external standards to art.
The dogs are in George's head, maybe, just as George is in ours. He looks however he looks on that stage at that moment.
I agree with the poster who said the real key is, I am REALLY excited the show is coming! I only care that the actor playing George does a great job.
I stand corrected, you are as vapid as they say.
#80
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:01pm
I don't think anyone here is racist or against diverse casting. It's not the issue that is being presented. The issue that is being presented is should we disregard the color of the skin of George (whether he was a historical figure or simply a person who once existed on the planet)WHO WAS a real person. Diverse casting is in no way a distraction unless it's historically inaccurate. I think it is irreponsible to dismiss the fact that theatre is a vehicle to learn about history. It would be a disservice to culture to present inaccurately whatever elements are real regardless of how insignificant they are to the production.
#81
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:05pm
"How are you sure of that? "
Well, according to the photo you posted before, abvious ly he's not black, or else his face will be painted as black.
I'm somehow a traditional person to somethings and this is one of a kind. George Seurat is a real person and he's not black, so he should be not black on the stage, unless you can convice me that he's black.
Well, according to the photo you posted before, abvious ly he's not black, or else his face will be painted as black.
I'm somehow a traditional person to somethings and this is one of a kind. George Seurat is a real person and he's not black, so he should be not black on the stage, unless you can convice me that he's black.
Somebody sit in my chair, and ruin my sleep, and make me aware of being alive!
Updated On: 11/9/06 at 06:05 PM
#82
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:06pm
'I think it is irreponsible to dismiss the fact that theatre is a vehicle to learn about history. It would be a disservice to culture to present inaccurately whatever elements are real regardless of how insignificant they are to the production.'
I don't believe I agree with that. I once heard art described as a 'lie that illuminates the truth.' The emotional, spiritual, political truth of the piece is, I believe, more important than the historical truth.
I don't believe I agree with that. I once heard art described as a 'lie that illuminates the truth.' The emotional, spiritual, political truth of the piece is, I believe, more important than the historical truth.
"I'm so looking forward to a time when all the Reagan Democrats are dead."
#83
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:06pm
I disagree vehemently, as both a historian and an artist, Historical accuracy should NOT be a deciding factor in Art.
moulin, you were arguing this BEFORE I posted that picture. As I said, I wasn't talking to you personally, but about the whole audience, who do not know (nor I suspect care) about this matter.
moulin, you were arguing this BEFORE I posted that picture. As I said, I wasn't talking to you personally, but about the whole audience, who do not know (nor I suspect care) about this matter.
I stand corrected, you are as vapid as they say.
Updated On: 11/9/06 at 06:06 PM
#84
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:08pm
"I don't believe I agree with that. I once heard art described as a 'lie that illuminates the truth.' The emotional, spiritual, political truth of the piece is, I believe, more important than the historical truth."
I think we disagree here. I choose not to have a hierarchy of truth. ALL OF THE TRUTH is important not one necessarily more than the other.
I think we disagree here. I choose not to have a hierarchy of truth. ALL OF THE TRUTH is important not one necessarily more than the other.
#85
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:08pm
And if you cannot accept a black George, isn't that your limitation and not that of the production's?
"I'm so looking forward to a time when all the Reagan Democrats are dead."
#86
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:10pm
"And if you cannot accept a black George, isn't that your limitation and not that of the production's?"
I didn't say I couldn't accept a black George. I could absolutely accept a black, white, green, yellow, purple George if it were the truth or if George was an imaginary character. Just like I can accept the the wicked witch of the west was green...because she is only real in our imaginations and not someone who actually lived.
I didn't say I couldn't accept a black George. I could absolutely accept a black, white, green, yellow, purple George if it were the truth or if George was an imaginary character. Just like I can accept the the wicked witch of the west was green...because she is only real in our imaginations and not someone who actually lived.
#87
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:13pm
Well that's your point and respect it. I agree that historical factor should not be the major influence of art, but I think one should make it as close enough to history right (as long as we have those facts)?
Somebody sit in my chair, and ruin my sleep, and make me aware of being alive!
Updated On: 11/9/06 at 06:13 PM
#88
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:14pm
"I didn't say I couldn't accept a black George. I could absolutely accept a black, white, green, yellow, purple George if it were the truth or if George was an imaginary character. Just like I can accept the the wicked witch of the west was green...because she is only real in our imaginations and not someone who actually lived."
Agree.
Agree.
Somebody sit in my chair, and ruin my sleep, and make me aware of being alive!
#89
An entirely hypothetical to demonstrate what I mean by the Artistic intent:
What if the production uses a black George, but the intent is because it is to focus on the reincarnated second act George? (who is completely imaginary)
The first act is a set up, for this character and so George Seurat looks like... him. He does not know the man, just that he may be his Great-Grandfather.
If that is the story Sondheim were trying to tell (and I am not saying it is) then wouldn't the black George be acceptable?
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:15pm
An entirely hypothetical to demonstrate what I mean by the Artistic intent:
What if the production uses a black George, but the intent is because it is to focus on the reincarnated second act George? (who is completely imaginary)
The first act is a set up, for this character and so George Seurat looks like... him. He does not know the man, just that he may be his Great-Grandfather.
If that is the story Sondheim were trying to tell (and I am not saying it is) then wouldn't the black George be acceptable?
I stand corrected, you are as vapid as they say.
#90
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:15pm
I might be inclined to agree with you if this were, say, 1776 and the show's intention is to portray the events that brought about the Declaration of Independence.
But this show is not, in fact, about George Seraut...or even, really, about Le Grande Jatte. It is a modernist rumination on the relationship of the artist to his or her art. And now that I've said 'her', I realize I wouldn't even mind seeing a woman play George. Historical accuracy doesn't really come into play here, in my opinion, because all of the characters (including George) are fictionalized. He's a construct. A device used to explore a theme. Which, come to think of it, is how the character of George views all the other characters in the piece.
But this show is not, in fact, about George Seraut...or even, really, about Le Grande Jatte. It is a modernist rumination on the relationship of the artist to his or her art. And now that I've said 'her', I realize I wouldn't even mind seeing a woman play George. Historical accuracy doesn't really come into play here, in my opinion, because all of the characters (including George) are fictionalized. He's a construct. A device used to explore a theme. Which, come to think of it, is how the character of George views all the other characters in the piece.
"I'm so looking forward to a time when all the Reagan Democrats are dead."
#91
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:17pm
"but we sure he's not black"
They may assume he's French, but beyond that they wouldn't have a clue. Just like if this was a musical about Alexandre Dumas fils, most would assume he was French by looking the name, but how many know that he was biracial? VERY very few. So in casting that musical you could cast a white actor or a black actor in the role and very few would care in the least, either way -- unless the show dealt with how his race had an impact on his life and work, at which point you would need to cast an actor who looks black or biracial. SUNDAY doesn't deal with race, so the race of the actor playing George shouldn't matter.
I've seen black actors play all sorts of characters which were traditionally cast with white actors, from seeing Keith David play Sir Walter Raleigh to Audra McDonald winning a Tony for playing Carrie Piperidge in Carousel (a New England woman from the early 20th century who would presumably be white if one were being historically accurate) to Brian Stokes Mitchell winning a Tony for Kiss Me Kate (playing a touring classical actor -- aside from Paul Robeson touring Othello in the 40s, no black actors toured in leading roles with otherwise all white companies during that period) to dozens of black actors playing all manner of English kings and queens, Italian noblemen and women and other Europeans in Shakespeare and other classical drama. And you know what? No one cared about the race of the actor or thought that it somehow detracted or interfered with the production. Great actors can play almost any role and create sufficient suspesion of disbelief to make an audience believe them in the part and forget any and all notions of historical accuracy or "academic fallacy."
In short, aside from the occasional narrow-minded observer, audiences have proven time and time again to be able to accept nontraditonal casting in all sorts of forms and actors of various ethnicities have had hundreds (thousands) of major triumphs playing roles that moulinrougehk would have denied them the opportunity to play.
They may assume he's French, but beyond that they wouldn't have a clue. Just like if this was a musical about Alexandre Dumas fils, most would assume he was French by looking the name, but how many know that he was biracial? VERY very few. So in casting that musical you could cast a white actor or a black actor in the role and very few would care in the least, either way -- unless the show dealt with how his race had an impact on his life and work, at which point you would need to cast an actor who looks black or biracial. SUNDAY doesn't deal with race, so the race of the actor playing George shouldn't matter.
I've seen black actors play all sorts of characters which were traditionally cast with white actors, from seeing Keith David play Sir Walter Raleigh to Audra McDonald winning a Tony for playing Carrie Piperidge in Carousel (a New England woman from the early 20th century who would presumably be white if one were being historically accurate) to Brian Stokes Mitchell winning a Tony for Kiss Me Kate (playing a touring classical actor -- aside from Paul Robeson touring Othello in the 40s, no black actors toured in leading roles with otherwise all white companies during that period) to dozens of black actors playing all manner of English kings and queens, Italian noblemen and women and other Europeans in Shakespeare and other classical drama. And you know what? No one cared about the race of the actor or thought that it somehow detracted or interfered with the production. Great actors can play almost any role and create sufficient suspesion of disbelief to make an audience believe them in the part and forget any and all notions of historical accuracy or "academic fallacy."
In short, aside from the occasional narrow-minded observer, audiences have proven time and time again to be able to accept nontraditonal casting in all sorts of forms and actors of various ethnicities have had hundreds (thousands) of major triumphs playing roles that moulinrougehk would have denied them the opportunity to play.
"What a story........ everything but the bloodhounds snappin' at her rear end." -- Birdie
[http://margochanning.broadwayworld.com/]
"The Devil Be Hittin' Me" -- Whitney
#92
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:18pm
Absolutely, Robbie.
I say we reunite Kelly O'Hara and Vicky Clarke.
And again Margo makes his usual marvelous points!
I say we reunite Kelly O'Hara and Vicky Clarke.
And again Margo makes his usual marvelous points!
I stand corrected, you are as vapid as they say.
Updated On: 11/9/06 at 06:18 PM
#93
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:19pm
"But this show is not, in fact, about George Seraut...or even, really, about Le Grande Jatte. It is a modernist rumination on the relationship of the artist to his or her art. And now that I've said 'her', I realize I wouldn't even mind seeing a woman play George."
I actually hate the idea that some people think this show is only about George and the painting, but they do include these facts, therefore, though it's art, you still have the historical factors that limited your creation.
I actually hate the idea that some people think this show is only about George and the painting, but they do include these facts, therefore, though it's art, you still have the historical factors that limited your creation.
Somebody sit in my chair, and ruin my sleep, and make me aware of being alive!
#94
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:20pm
"An entirely hypothetical to demonstrate what I mean by the Artistic intent:
What if the production uses a black George, but the intent is because it is to focus on the reincarnated second act George? (who is completely imaginary)
The first act is a set up, for this character and so George Seurat looks like... him. He does not know the man, just that he may be his Great-Grandfather.
If that is the story Sondheim were trying to tell (and I am not saying it is) then wouldn't the black George be acceptable? "
Yes, I can see this. Particularly if we see George in the first act as a reflection of how George in the second act sees himself.
What if the production uses a black George, but the intent is because it is to focus on the reincarnated second act George? (who is completely imaginary)
The first act is a set up, for this character and so George Seurat looks like... him. He does not know the man, just that he may be his Great-Grandfather.
If that is the story Sondheim were trying to tell (and I am not saying it is) then wouldn't the black George be acceptable? "
Yes, I can see this. Particularly if we see George in the first act as a reflection of how George in the second act sees himself.
#95
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:21pm
"Just like if this was a musical about Alexandre Dumas fils, most would assume he was French by looking the name, but how many know that he was biracial?"
Therefore race is not the matter, but I bet if we have his painting, we know his skin colour right?
Therefore race is not the matter, but I bet if we have his painting, we know his skin colour right?
Somebody sit in my chair, and ruin my sleep, and make me aware of being alive!
Updated On: 11/9/06 at 06:21 PM
#96
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:28pm
Dumas fils was a writer and playwright, not a painter (his most famous work -- La Dame aux camélias -- became the basis of the opera La Traviata and several stage and film versions under the title "Camille"). And yes, I know what he looks like -- because I've long found him fascinating and have taken the trouble to do the research -- but 99.9% of American audiences have no idea what he looks like (or care) and probably don't even know his work. So in a play or musical about his life, few would care about the ethnicity of an actor portraying him.
"What a story........ everything but the bloodhounds snappin' at her rear end." -- Birdie
[http://margochanning.broadwayworld.com/]
"The Devil Be Hittin' Me" -- Whitney
#97
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:36pm
Sure not many people do, but they will eventually know cause the media will eventually show us pictures of the real Dumas. Have you ever consider what will happen after this? Do you think people will just say, "This is just art. Let's omitt the fact"? Still some people do care, especially scholars who have power in the art field. I'm not saying creating art has to be bounded by facts, but sure facts still matters in this world and we can't deny them. If facts can be omitted by the majority, it's a whole new world.
Somebody sit in my chair, and ruin my sleep, and make me aware of being alive!
Updated On: 11/9/06 at 06:36 PM
#98
Posted: 11/9/06 at 6:45pm
It's amazing how fast these threads get off the subject.
Butters, go buy World of Warcraft, install it on your computer, and join the online sensation before we all murder you.
--Cartman: South Park
ATTENTION FANS: I will be played by James Barbour in the upcoming musical, "BroadwayWorld: The Musical."
#99
Posted: 11/9/06 at 7:34pm
"I think it is irreponsible to dismiss the fact that theatre is a vehicle to learn about history. It would be a disservice to culture to present inaccurately whatever elements are real regardless of how insignificant they are to the production."
You might as well be mad at the whole book of the show, then. George's story doesn't bear very much in common with the real Seurat at all. I certainly hope that people don't take the first act of Sunday as a biography, because it would be severely misleading.
We know that the real Julius Caesar was a Roman, but he has been successfully played by many talented black actors.
You might as well be mad at the whole book of the show, then. George's story doesn't bear very much in common with the real Seurat at all. I certainly hope that people don't take the first act of Sunday as a biography, because it would be severely misleading.
We know that the real Julius Caesar was a Roman, but he has been successfully played by many talented black actors.
Stop looking at my charisma.
#100
Posted: 11/9/06 at 7:50pm
Mickey C?
My.
I would love to see Daniel Evans in the role, since I enjoyed his work on the cast recording so very much, but the chances of that happening seem slim, since they'll probably want Equity actors.
My.
I would love to see Daniel Evans in the role, since I enjoyed his work on the cast recording so very much, but the chances of that happening seem slim, since they'll probably want Equity actors.
Stop looking at my charisma.
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95