I can see where the author’s coming from but I think he’s overlooking something important here. If the characters in a play are South Asian should none but South Asians play them? If black should none but blacks play them? If Hispanic none but Hispanics? But grant the foregoing and here comes the crunch. If the characters are Caucasian should none but Caucasians play them?
This is the real danger. Actors should have the freedom to portray any character, whatever the race. Limit South Asian roles to South Asians and the corollary is, “Sorry, you can’t play Henry V, he was white.”
My most-produced play was written for three men and a woman, but I have yet to see a production (and there’ve been about four) that didn’t have three women and a man play the characters. I strongly believe that a production’s primary author is the director, and the playwright should keep away until opening night. Clearly, this guy’s mileage varies.
if the University bought the play why do they care what the writer thinks? If he wanted to buy it back he owed them the cost of the sets and any ticket sales. This tied up money and the student’s time.
I think it depends on the role race, gender, color, etc. have in the play. I know nothing about this particular play, but just given the title, I would think it may be pretty integral to have actual Indians in the play. I could be wrong in this case, but there are plenty of roles or plays like Roots or The Joy Luck Club, where having ethnically appropriate actors is more desirable. This doesn’t seem like a case of people complaining about a Black actor possibly playing Spider-Man, or being mad about the Black guy in the new Star Wars movie, or being mad about the little Black girl in the Hunger Games movie; it seems like it might be a legitate casting concern. Regardless, given the uproar that occurs whenever a non-white actor plays a “white role”, and the relative death of roles for non-white actors in general, I can’t really get too upset that a playwright is deserious to have the ethnic characters he created be played by people he envisioned. Doubly so when there are basically a dozen or so Indian people in all of mainstream media.
Word. There’s a name for anyone who think that anyone should be blocked from a job or role because of their race: racist.
Acting, by definition, consists of a person portraying a role. The role is always different from the actor. Should only Danish princes be allowed to play Hamlet? If Suh’s reasoning were taken to it’s logical conclusion, there wouldn’t be any more plays, period.
I’m not aware of any such uproar. I wouldn’t be surprised if a few morons on Twitter have complained about a black actor Spiderman or something like that. There are always a few morons on Twitter. But uproar?
First of all, the theater department at a small university in Pennsylvania is unrelated to the mainstream media, and can’t do anything to redress racial imbalance there.
Now suppose universities decide that white actors can’t play Indian roles. Which outcome is more likely: universities will manage to find a whole bunch of Indian thespians, or universities will stop producing plays with Indian roles? If this type of thinking spreads, it will basically mean that plays about certain ethnic groups can’t be produced in most places.
It is not racist to say that somebody is unsuitable for a job for reasons that are actually relevant to their ability to do the job, and for an actor, passing as the person they are pretending to be is relevant. You don’t need to be a Danish prince to play Hamlet, but you do need to play one on TV.
That said, I think you can give a lot more leeway for “race-bending” in local theatre than if this was a big, one-off production like a film or miniseries. Clarion University is not going to be trying to pass their production off as the definitive “Jesus in India,” so local actors performing it as best they can is not obnoxious the way it is when Hollywood decides Tom Cruise is the best person to play a new recruit even though he is clearly fifty years old.
As already pointed out, that’s really easy to say for white actors, when the vast vast majority of the existing roles are for white actors, and minority roles (especially in adaptations) get altered to be played by white actors without a second thought (but heaven forbid the opposite happens — THEN accurate race casting suddenly becomes important). When you have to fight and scrabble and struggle for roles of any significance just because of your race, that becomes a lot harder to swallow. The fact that racebending roles, in practice, happens one way a LOT more than it happens in the other has to be considered, IMO.
That’s not even considering the larger historical context of blackface and the other idiotic stuff that has accompanied whites playing minority roles over the years.
This is the timeline of events according to Lloyd Suh (from the FB post I linked above)
January
Michel: Hey, can we use your play?
Suh: Just in the classroom for teaching, right? Sure
May
Michel: Hi, us again. We’re turning your play into a punk rock musical. Can we talk about that?
Suh: Uh…oookay, I guess. Um, this IS just for class, right? 'Cause if it’s for production, I should tell you I take a pretty hard line on appropriate ethnicities.
crickets
crickets
October
Michel: About that play of yours we’re putting on next month - can the actors have a skype chat with you?
Suh: Say WHAT? (Googles) The fuck you’ve done with this play???!!
Meanwhile, the director’s been having some communication with his agent, did send a cheque for the rights but DIDN’T actually sign a licensing agreement which would have TOLD her that having appropriate ethnicities of the actors was a precondition of being allowed to do it at all. And dodged the agent’s questions about casting, and when called on it said ‘oh, I forgot’
Quite apart from whether you agree with Suh having that sort of requirements for his play, he’s the author. He gets to have requirements. It doesn’t sound at all like he’s been coy or last minute about it. Michel’s behaviour, as described in his statement, is frankly such egregious disrespect of the author, as an author, that she deserves to be sacked, whatever you think about the issue of colour-blind casting.
Whether his statement is accurate - well, I’d be willing to wait and see what Michel’s response is, but he sounds pretty bloody convincing to me.
In other words, the author agreed that the college troupe could use the play however they wished for classroom study purposes, but not for a public production.
The college went ahead with plans to publicly produce a musical version of the play (quite a substantial modification in its own right), with a casting policy the author had specifically said he didn’t* want, without obtaining either official production rights or the author’s personal approval.
What I think is this:
Generally speaking, it does kind of weaken the impact of a performance in a majority/traditionally white culture when nonwhite roles are played by white actors, at least if the play isn’t a well-known classic and the characters are unfamiliar.
Nonetheless, on the whole I think when it comes to a director’s casting decisions for a licensed production of a play, the author should just suck it up and accept the fact that they don’t control the production.
In this case, however, the director appears to have really stepped out of line by not only disregarding the author’s expressed wishes (after he had courteously given her carte blanche with the material for classroom use, to boot), but in neglecting to obtain official permission to perform the play at all.
I’m sorry for the student actors and crew who probably worked very hard on this production and saw it all go to shit due to an administrative dispute, but ISTM that almost all of the blame here belongs with the director.
I pretty much agree with Kimstu’s thorough analysis, but I have to wonder just how “South Asian” one has to be to play a given role. Can a Yemeni person play an Indian? An Israeli? A Jordanian? How about someone from Myanmar or Thailand?
Does Suh see the matter as one of production effect, convincing the audience they are watching events in India; or, is there some artistic significance in having actual Indians on stage?
I assume that a broad concern for giving opportunities to non-white actors is present, but satisfied either way.
This sounds wonderful, but it’s not what happens in the real world. Who do you think has an easier time finding roles to play? A white actor or a non-white actor? If the world worked the way you say it should, they should have the same opportunities out there.