Whitewashing and color-blind casting on Broadway
October 22, 2015
Colorblind casting has three parts to it. The first part is where all casting begins: writing the characters. Some casting directors will try to match written descriptions of characters. In both of these examples, writers are justified in writing race into their characters, if they feel itís relevant. In a perfect world, writers would specify characters’ races only when it aids the story’s plot. Examples include Lin-Manuel Miranda’s “Hamilton” and Caryl Churchill’s “Cloud Nine,” both of which have race written into characters to intentionally subvert conventions. However, writers also tell stories that have nothing to do with race, and leave the characters’ ethnicity ambiguous.
This leads us to the second part of the issue: the casting process. Casting directors may logically abide by the writer’s preferred race for the character — if this has been left ambiguous, they proceed to make a judgment based on what an audience may want to see or what makes the most sense. More often than not, white actors are cast in typical English-speaking roles, which has now become so much of a norm that directors subconsciously fill in the blank the writer has left behind.
Casting, the third component, is a political act that involves artistic choices, an expression of creative agency. A character’s race, ambiguous or not, is not the same as an actor’s race, and it doesn’t have to be. Our concern should not be picking the right race for the right character. The problem is having white actors play parts that don’t require whiteness. The solution could be more diverse writing and casting, or an intentional race-swapping so that we balance the scales.
However, blindness toward characters’ races has often gone awry — instances that come to mind are the New York Gilbert and Sullivan Players’ recently cancelled production of ìThe Mikado,î Cameron Crowe’s “Aloha” and the upcoming film “Ghost in the Shell” starring Scarlett Johansson as a Japanese character. Rather than taking advantage of the opportunity to cast diverse actors in diverse roles, these films are examples of whitewashing. “The Mikado,” for example has characters that are clearly Japanese, yet casts white actors. There is no political reason behind this, with an already disproportionate representation of white faces in the media. However, Donald Byrd’s “The Minstrel Show Revisited,” which intentionally calls for white actors in blackface to critique such a practice, is a perfect example of when a seemingly offensive artistic choice is made with a strong political intention, and this is when art does its job well.
At the end of the day, we as audiences and creators must take a step back from what we are watching and see the bigger picture. The only aspect of art that’s in question here is realism. Some might argue that diversity may not tell a realistic story, but in many cases race doesn’t impact the story, so there’s no reason to avoid diversity.
Tackling race in art is difficult in a world that seems to be bursting at the seams with political correctness, but it often fails to meet its own standards. An actor’s race does not define their ability to feel or to comprehend another human, and artistic choices can either have amazing or disastrous consequences.
A version of this article appeared in the Oct. 22 print edition. Email Nishad More at [email protected].
Rick Sanchez • Apr 6, 2019 at 1:15 pm
What a hypocrite of this writer , so color blind casting non-white actors is perfectly okay but if white actors are color-blind casted , it’s white washing ! stop being racist against white people. So if a white actor got casted in a role of non-white because of his ability to ” comprehend another human” , it’s ” disastrous ” because he’s white.
” The problem is having white actors play parts that don’t require whiteness.” yeah but it’s not a problem for a black actor to play parts that don’t require blackness through color-blind casting . wow you didn’t try to hide your blunt racism.
” However, Donald Byrd’s “The Minstrel Show Revisited,” which intentionally calls for white actors in blackface to critique such a practice, is a perfect example of when a seemingly offensive artistic choice is made with a strong political intention, and this is when art does its job well.” another point of racist view=> Only casting white actors through color-blind casting if there is a political intention involved , no requireness for non-white actors.
” A character’s race, ambiguous or not, is not the same as an actor’s race, and it doesn’t have to be. Our concern should not be picking the right race for the right character” Only people with such low respect for the art can make this kind of statement , picking the wrong race for the character is a disrespect for the writer , and the art itself. Race is one of the things that represents humans , through art , it transforms to represents characters => That’s why color-blind casting is wrong no matter what , but at least if you try to practice it , be fair to white actors and not try to enfore your double-standard.
” an already disproportionate representation of white faces in the media” it doesn’t equal the representation of that particular white actor that get color-blind casted , all you see is the color of the skin and look past the ability to portray the character of that particular white actor , you readily to kick out that actor because of some people that she has nothing to do except for sharing the same skin color , and that generalisation at best because White people have different shades of skin color.
” disproportionate ” Whites is the majority in the US , of course there would be more ” white faces ” in the media. If you try to suggest that the percentage of ” white faces ” in the media should be more or less equal to the white demographic in the US then you’re wrong too , Being an actor is just a job for an extremely small group of people in the US , it doesn’t in anyway have to resemble the percentages of whites in the US demographic , it can be much higher or lower .