David Badiel thinks jewish people are the group that has been neglected in considering diversity. Hmm, i think he may have forgotten women

Please can you say which post you clipped that from? Context is everything.

In response without seeing context.

sometimes casting needs to consider whether aspects of the role are intrinsic to the story being told. And if so, should actor have/not have certain things that may well be v poorly received.

In entertainment, crass casting can mean low audience. And that is a very bad thing in entertainment generally.

Casting is about respect.

Is it? Says who? Do you think every great actress who didnt get a role or even an audition because was a bit too plump or not quite pretty enough feels respected?

Casting is like every other part of a production. It's a cog in the machinery of a business that wants to be the best it can be, in order to make money by attracting the biggest audience possible. Nothing more, nothing less.

Kenny-

You must be aware of the differences between the UK and USA approach to acting?

USA school acting is actor who relates to role personally vv important.

UK being flexible IE convincing and totally believable whatever character is highly valued.

Incidentally. Examples? How do you know the crap actor/s in the production were chosen even if shit?

Have you ever seen any white/straight/male (you talk about men only in your comment)/able bodied actors who were shit?

You believe that Broadway productions actively hire crap actors, in an area where every bum on seat, every review etc means income? In a cut throat, tight margins sector?

It’s called acting.

As someone who regularly went to the theatre, whether it was the West End or Am Dram I suggest anyone else who has a problem with different people playing parts not of their background sits through some of the dire performances I have where they have cast in the name of diversity, sexuality and religion rather than talent and then come back and say only certain parts are allowed to be played by certain people.

I have spent hundreds going to a Broadway show only for one of the main characters be played by someone who got the part because he ticked boxes rather than his acting ability
I can’t believe there wasn’t one male actor anywhere who would have not jumped for the part and turned in a better performance

I have seen some really wooden performances done by people who think because they match the physical/sexual/skin colour/religion they don’t think that they have to act as well

Whilst things like the pantomime dame or even Mrs Browns Boys where the joke is that they are not women. I do have a problem when what is quite clearly a trans man or woman in a film or series (especially a minor role) and we are meant to believe that this isn’t some sort of plot twist. Except when there isn’t a plot twist you think what was the point. Was it just some tick box exercise to show how diverse the producers were

Oh the comments I quoted my post before last.

• Jewish stereotypes. I thought it was common knowledge that a certain set of stereotypes exist?

And that they've been around for an incredibly long time?

The point about specific stereotypes about Jewish people, based on different branch of Judaism etc. Meaning no one set of Jewish stereotypes exist.

I'm not aware of any about rich v poor Jews, or different branches of Judaism. Can you give examples (in a way not incredibly offensive?!).

• FYI there's a related factor here. People who aren't Jewish telling people who are Jewish that they can't be terribly opporessed/discriminated against etc because they are white. Vv unpleasant thing to say to Jewish people.

Those are both Jewish written/created and entirely about Jews.

Reading the examples above.
Those things were not anywhere near ok..
They were about a specific group, written from POV of those IN that group.
Their interpretation from someone from outside. In these cases. Led to fundamentals about the stories they were telling missing. When telling a story that's key stuff.

Grabbing a few comments to do with same area.

'Actually if you think about it being Jewish isn't one stereotyped life either. Orthodox or Reform, rich or poor it will vary tremendously.'

'It's true that not all ethicities are treated the same on this, it basically comes down to whether you are visibly non-white. That's the kine, Jewish people are not treated differently in that. '

The earlier post gave what I thought were really illustrative examples. I've cut out these which loses impact to make briefer-

(About production Falsettos)

'None of the actors or director were Jewish and having the audience laughing at what were intended to be self-mocking in-jokes was really really uncomfortable. Because the audience and the cast were not Jewish. They were laughing at us not with us and certainly not at themselves, as intended.'

(Fiddler on roof production)

'continuously revealing a lack of understanding of the culture it was attempting to portray. For example, the director had Tevye, the male lead, physically threaten women to get them to stay in line. Which just fundamentally misunderstands how patriarchy works in Judaism'

Casting a non-minority actor to mimic that identity feels, to the progressive eye, like impersonation

Of course. But that's the very essence of acting for you. The further you are away from the person you are trying to portray the better we can critique your ability. Otherwise all anyone ever has to do is rock up and olay themselves. (obviously I am not including skin colour in this. That would be silly.)

Casting is about respect. There is something disrespectful about casting an able bodied person in a disabled part. A deaf actor coined it when she said "deaf is not a costume"

Hmm. Tricky one. Acting is a craft. The craft of being utterly convincing as someone you are not, with characteristics you don't have, behaving in a way that you wouldn't, for reasons you can't fully feel because their situation isn't yours and their feelings and experiences aren't yours. So you pretend and you pretend so well that you make people believe it. That's acting.

So take Daniel Day Lewis in My Left Foot. He won an Oscar because he played the very challenging role of a man with Cerebral Palsy so well.

Actors of that calibre with cerebral palsy will be hard to find, because actors with CP are hard to find in general, and actors of that calibre are hard to find in general. What is more important in the making of a brilliant film - the best disabled actor they can find, or the best actor they can find full stop?

Obviously an actor with CP doesn't need to act the CP, because that's already who they are. But can they act well enough full stop? Shouldn't the job go to the best person for the job, ie., the best actor?

After all, that's the job. Acting. The job is not having Cerebral Palsy. The acting is not the secondary requirement here.

Same argument for the deaf person. Deaf is not a 'costume' of course, but in the case of acting it is a role. And in all roles there is an element of having to take on the characteristics of another person. in this case, the role of a deaf person. You can find a deaf actor, I'm sure, but can you find a really good deaf actor? Would a non-deaf but completely brilliant actor make a better job of the role overall, than a deaf actor who was just an average as an actor generally, even though they were completely believable as a deaf? What if they weren't especially believable as the character in other ways? Because again, deafness is one aspect of the character, it's not everything about them.

If a deaf person took the role of a deaf person having a MH crisis, or being Autistic, would a person who actually does suffer with their MH or who is autistic have the right to say Mental Illness is not a costume? Autism is not a costume?

I'm not saying don't look for characters with specific disabilities, just don't make that the most important criteria in casting them.

Stupid, and incoherent. That's why it doesn't pencil out, it can't. It will never make sense.

So now we are talking about not only "race" but matching specific ethnicity, and religion?

Is it ok for Catholic to play a Baptist?

I saw Temuera Morrison the other day playing a half-Japanese man. Is that off, he needs to stick to Maori roles? Might be a bit limiting?

It's true that not all ethicities are treated the same on this, it basically comes down to whether you are visibly non-white. That's the kine, Jewish people are not treated differently in that. On the other hand if you are brown, you are interchangeable with other brown people to some extent but also you can play white people according to the id pol approach.

The problem isn't that Jews or Muslims or Travelers are treated differently, it's that the premise of the whole enterprise is stupid.

Of course Hoskins had a great career but my point was that what Badiel is saying applies to other groups, I understand his point but it isn't just Jewish people this applies to and on the otherhand as someone pointed out about Muslims it applies to BAME as well, just dividing the world into "white" and "BAME" is too simplistic as the experience of a black person in the US isn't going to be the same as an Aboriginal person in Australia but if we just divide as white/not white lots of people will be lumped into a category and it won't always fit.

Actually if you think about it being Jewish isn't one stereotyped life either. Orthodox or Reform, rich or poor it will vary tremendously.

I think BAME is a horrible way to categorise people (not that they need categorising) as it is implying that everyone who isn't white is the same and will have the same experiences which is just rubbish isn't it. I mean a Saudi prince and an indentured labourer in India aren't exactly having the same lived experience are they.

And i don't think hoskins had a shabby career. Does it matter if he didn't play a role as traveller? Would he have wanted to given usually one off parts in things like midsummer with stereotypes etc? Doesn't that apply to Jewish actors as well, do they want to always play Jewish parts? I don't know maybe they do but Maureen Lipman doesn't appear as a Jewish woman in Coronation St, she's just a grumpy old woman who is pretty astute and quite funny.

Gran I have no knowledge.

Here well I only know England at all really and not much here about traveller things.

So I'm guessing correct if wrong-

Not many actors out circulating general acting area iykwim
Are there many plays etc written? In past/ recent?

And i don't think hoskins had a shabby career. Does it matter if he didn't play a role as traveller? Would he have wanted to given usually one off parts in things like midsummer with stereotypes etc?

Thinking on grans post though-

I've seen points, arguments etc on net about this discrimination/white/Jewish point.

And I mean. It's ridiculous.

Not blaming those who raise it at all it's the current environment for oppression/discrimination etc conversations.

The idea that a group needs to fit into specific defined oppression type boxes of limited number, to be qualified as one that gets shit, IS shit.

I've seen a lot.

Jewish people get loads shit why no one listen care.
Um well erm... White so massive advantage. If not white people can easily see and give shit. White so avoid that lucky you.
WTF? This and this as this means get targeted. And what white definition anyway? Jewish people do not get accepted one of white majority.
You can't get racism! Come off it!
Etc etc.

What's this exchange got to do with the 'you're white' person being staunch fighter for groups who get shit?

Zero. They're saying here's list tick which applies to your group.

NO NO you can't tick that! Put N/A.

OK so this list confirms definitely hyper privileged. That puts you in oppressive scum box. Everything bad ever is your fault. Bye now!

Ancient Gran true. And vv stereotyped, disliked, hated group. Totally as if not people but 'them' iyswim.

IIRC there has been reduction places are allowed to stay for a bit? Which won't have helped.

That's a really tricky area and another thread I reckon unless there's something around acting etc with it? Not my area tbh.

Porfre

'It's not just Jewish characters but also Muslims.

The amount of times I've seen the token Muslim played by a non-Muslim (usually a Hindu, atheist or a Sikh actor.) And it isnt generally seen as an issue.'

The two examples aren't about 'token' Jewish characters.

I'm not sure why you made that comparison?

I don't understand your thinking there. Makes it hard to reply.

Lots of groups get forgotten travellers and gypsies would fall into the same sort of category I think, distinctive cultures but just get lumped in as "white."

'The point being that the outcome of an audience that isn't convinced should be poor ticket sales and reviews, rather than some sort of moralizing over the background, real or imagined, of the actors.'

Ticket sales theatre well yes. Need bums on seats. Larger/more well known venues aren't going to jeopardise that.

Off top of head. Glenda Jackson king Lear she got fantastic reviews. And there was loads of press. Shame sounds like overall production so-so. Her king Lear though was most definitely no problem.

Was that moralising?

What major theatre productions have hired actors to make a point and then because of that, flopped? Not because of anything except audience being turned off by the sort of thing you're thinking of?

Examples?

Oh anyway while reading about those two examples.

I suddenly realised that oh hold on.

I do know exactly what it's like to see people like me represented over and over in ways that are just fgs really?

And that's the group who are all over the place, even less recognition of anything about that group, stereotyped nastily, or have zero characterisation just 'this type you know the sort'). Not all the time. But often something off. But then we're half the population so would be impressive to never get a well rounded, interesting etc female character on film/TV.

xxyzz

Thank you for sharing those examples, they are really good ones.

Incidentally I agree with you and DB about the way anti-Semitism is seen as somehow 'different'.

And I struggle with it. Round here I know synagogues have had security. (Not Jewish so I don't know how widespread etc).

There for years has been not infrequent swastika graffiti and nasty things sprayed area that known as Jewish (even though no longer other groups more live there now).

I heard and saw the results of bomb Jewish charity on a high street years back. Burnt out car, glass blown out shops down whole section etc).

I mean and targeting of schools... It just goes on and on.

And it's somehow... Different?

Sorry went off on one.

What counts as convincing would depend on the production, and ultimately what the audience would accept. It's not like it's something that needs to be hammered out ahead of time in every detail.

The point being that the outcome of an audience that isn't convinced should be poor ticket sales and reviews, rather than some sort of moralizing over the background, real or imagined, of the actors.

The other big factor is the massive influence we get from existing entertainment.

If we're not used to seeing people who are not the characters sex, ball park age, face and body type, whatever. Then it comes as a surprise and makes it more difficult to accept and believe iyswim.

The other really interesting think is mainstream USA output plenty of it, actors just always are the same pretty much.

And I find that weird and ruins ability to suspend reality and immerse.

Robert Downey junior is obvious example. Over and over. I don't see iron Man. Holmes. I see Robert Downey junior doing what he always does.

That's the other extreme isn't it.

Some of the actors in the mainstream output are really good.

Chris Evans. I mean sure only my opinion. But he IS captain America when you watch. He's in my current favourite film Sunshine (Danny Boyle fair few years ago) awesome film. All in that film act their pants off.

Ditto Thor. Also Loki. Thingy. Problem with trousers years ago... Um. Jude law! He can act.

The other extreme from incredible 12yo girl incredible actor playing Hercules in ancient Greek play.

Is someone who looks exactly as character described, then just delivers the lines. That's worse for me tbh.

What things do you mean by convincing? That's a part of this overall conversation. Means different things to different people.

Just that acting is excellent character is embodied well so no time that even slight slip into it's acting?

That's one extreme and anyone could play anyone irrespective of the basics age sex that stuff.

A 14yo prodigy could say give an incredible performance as king Lear but unless it was eg special talented young people performance can't see that happening just generally.

The acting being convincing I'd say more and the look realistic? Potato Potatah prob.

Thing is what different people see as important to them for suspension disbelief/accepting that the character is them iyswim. Really differs.

The bottom line is a great actor can convince across loads of roles. Irrespective of lots of physical characteristics and etc.

So what do you personally mean when you say look realistic?

I've not thought about it for me but will.