#26
Posted: 7/5/14 at 5:55pm
I think the first posters on this thread hit the nail on the head. Color-blind casting is justified when (a) it gives opportunities to more actors and/or (b) it tells us something we wouldn't otherwise know from traditional casting, WITHOUT (c) causing more confusion than clarity.
Personally I don't mind if we shrink the historical boundaries of Jim Crow segregation a little in order to make a more interesting cast.
For example, when I was at Columbia U. I directed a production of VANITIES. For reasons of fairness, I couldn't do the play if women of color were to be excluded. So I did a little research and found that some Texas high schools were newly integrated in 1963 (Act I). So I cast a black woman as Kathy and we played her as a black kid who acted "white" in order to fit in with the popular kids, including the other cheerleaders.
But the casting really paid off in Act III, when Kathy is highly alienated from her friends and even from her own identity and life. By giving her a close-croppsed Afro in that act (and without changing a word), we gave Act III a political subtext that most found very moving.
So it was win-win: I provided work for a talented black actress AND I added something to an already excellent play. (In contrast, I would not have cast "Southern belle" Joanne as black. The character's racial ignorance would have only been confusing.)
Personally I don't mind if we shrink the historical boundaries of Jim Crow segregation a little in order to make a more interesting cast.
For example, when I was at Columbia U. I directed a production of VANITIES. For reasons of fairness, I couldn't do the play if women of color were to be excluded. So I did a little research and found that some Texas high schools were newly integrated in 1963 (Act I). So I cast a black woman as Kathy and we played her as a black kid who acted "white" in order to fit in with the popular kids, including the other cheerleaders.
But the casting really paid off in Act III, when Kathy is highly alienated from her friends and even from her own identity and life. By giving her a close-croppsed Afro in that act (and without changing a word), we gave Act III a political subtext that most found very moving.
So it was win-win: I provided work for a talented black actress AND I added something to an already excellent play. (In contrast, I would not have cast "Southern belle" Joanne as black. The character's racial ignorance would have only been confusing.)