Can we talk about colourblind casting...

[CurlewKate]

...without the thread descending into a woke/anti-woke stramash?

Obviously it's a great advance that black actors now have access to many more parts than they did- and obviously in most cases it makes absolutely no difference to the play, show, whatever. But I was watching Shardlake,and it struck me that it was impossible that the Abbot of a 16th century monastery in rural England would be black. And that casting black actors in positions of power and influence might well give viewers a completely unrealistic idea of the status of black people in British history, and actually gloss over their struggles. So stylised historical figures, as in Shakespeare where we all know there's an element of fantasy (I recently saw a colourblind Coriolanus that was brilliant),no issue at all, of course. But historical dramas that are trying to represent life in the past roughly as it was-maybe actually unhelpful?

Incidentally, I know that one of the main characters in the Shardlake books is black. But he has a detailed backstory, and the discrimination he faced is part of his life.

I'm not entirely on board with it for the reason other posters have already mentioned, that even in historical fiction it minimises or sanitises what non white people had to live with on a day to day basis. Sometimes it feels like virtue signalling, which isn't sincere.

Eugh, just had a flashback to watching Laurence Oliver's Othello in secondary and I'm cringing. Jesus.

If you can’t see the difference I highly recommend you read books such as White Fragility or Why I’m no longer talking to white people about Race.

‘Also, Jesus wasn't white and 'father christmas' aka Saint Nicholas was Italian, but no one seems to care about 'accuracy' there.’

Actually St Nicholas was born in Myra , which was a Greek city in what is now Turkey. But as you say, don’t let’s care about accuracy.

Colour blind casting ought not to be used with historical people - it is misleading. Unless you are happy with Ghenghis Khan played by a woman with blonde hair and blue eyes?

I guess this thread proves that we may have colour blind casting (sometimes) but we're a long way from colour blind viewing.

I don't see why MLK cannot be played by a white person if you are going to say Hamilton (who was white) can be played by a black person.

Because MLK was a story about the civil rights movement. His blackness is part of the story. Hamilton happened to be white, it wasn't central to his character.

Some non-white people in some places and some eras. If we are talking accuracy let us be accurate. Doubt anyone is suggesting Tipu Sultan be played by a white person, for example.

You have just put me off watching this series. Hate inaccuracy in the story line!

Well, that's very true. But I would have thought current productions would reflect that more than the ones made back in the day.

I'm hoping that they don't bugger up the new films for The Dark Tower. Suzannah is one of my favourite characters in the books and her ethnicity and disability are so integral to her character and story

Anne Boleyn was the daughter of a very prominent court official and nobleman. She was closely related to the Duke of Norfolk, probably the richest and most influential man in England after the monarch. She was a lady in waiting to The French Queen in her youth, and then came back to England to take up a similar position to Queen Katherine, first wife of HenryVIII. Before the king and Wolsey intervened, she was being courted by the heir to the Duke of Northumberland.

‘Considered an outsider’ by whom precisely?

It's a thin line.

Having a white couple give birth to a black baby or vice versa, without it being part of the story can be confusing.

Ex, William & Harry being biological brothers but one being black.

Or one of the Obama kids being played by a white person.

I get that if producers stuck with the old narrative, black actors would hardly ever get leading roles.

There must be a way to address it without being confusing to viewers or detracting from the story.

This is interesting - recentish data had B&ME for CSSD intake at around 15% if I recall correctly. Please could you show me where you found this application data @insomniaclife ?

because in the majority of cases it's anachronistic

If, in a tv show that was otherwise presented as being as realistic as possible, someone suddenly comes out with 21st century slang or whacked out a mobile phone and says 'forget sending a raven, a text will get there faster,' (or even a less intentional example like telephone lines being visible in shot) you'll lose the verismilitude of the scene, and it's the same with a character being of black/asian/indian origin in a country that was 99.99% white at the time without it being mentioned or explained.

Everyone knows there wasn't electricity in earth 19th century England so it's insulting to your audience to have Elizabeth Bennett pulling out the hair straighteners. Similarly everyone knows that there were very very very few black people in England during that period, and even fewer of them were nobility, so it is insulting to your audience for Elizabeth Bennett to be black (even more so if the rest of her family are white) without anyone reacting to or appearing to notice this. Exactly the same as if she was played by a 6 foot man with a beard or a fifty year old woman, and everyone was still referring to her as a young girl. As a pp said, it's emperor's new clothes syndrome.

15/16/17/18th century England wasn't colour blind so if we pretend it was we are actively misrepresenting history, and those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. We are only in the position we are now (still far from perfect) in terms of race relations because of the way people actively fought for their rights against the way things were then. To randomly pretend that slavery, discrimination etc never existed and therefore minimalise the struggle they devoted (and in some cases gave) their lives to, doesn't sit well with me.

If it's a show that is not trying to be 100% (or even 90%, because no historical drama ever can be) realistic and is deliberately using overtly modern techniques to make it feel more relatable to the audience or as a stylistic choice (bridgerton with the music and dialogue, Reign with the costumes, pretty much everything about Merlin), and colourblind casting is a part of that, that's completely different.

Unlikely, if of Roman origin, to be Sub-Saharan Africans. The Roman Empire covered North Africa, which was populated by people of Mediterranean type (the Arabs do not invade till the 8th century AD). 38% of all burial grounds is interesting. Of greater interest still would be the % of African burials in each of those 38%.
Hadrian was a Berber. So not white (which would not have been a thing at the time) but not Sub-Saharan African either - he would have been described as Nubian, in that case.

Was about to make the same point.

I think it's an example, not the actual figures. The point being made is not how many but that black actors are very welcome and will get lots of parts. White working class actors are now so thin on the ground as to be unnoticeable.

@ ExercicenformedeZ "I always cringe when I see these kinds of threads. It always descends into 'WeLL WhY CAn'T a WHITE AcTor plAy MLK' kinds of nonsense, which is annoying as white people aren't historically discrimnated against"

Exactly. Which is why I am stepping away from the thread. There are enough interesting and good faith posters to have sustained an interesting discussion. But sadly it doesn't take many "But Dr Who was white" posters to make things too unwieldy to be sustainable.

Of course not all black people are or have been downtrodden! Have you met any Nigerians? The most go-getting people I've ever known. I was assuming, maybe wrongly, , that were talking about the UK here which is still around 85% white today.

If you go back in time that figure is way higher. It is very unlikely that any non-white resident of these islands would ever have got a job in the areas I listed above and, as I said before, introducing them into British history in inaccurate roles implies they had a power and a presence that they didn't have. Colour blind casting in historical dramas also sits awkwardly with the idea that this country is very racist and always was. But I'm repeating myself.

Sadly, I no longer read David Olusoga as he has a biased view of too many things. I suggest you read 'The Black Tudors' by Miranda Kauffman for a more accurate stance, on the Tudor period at least.

He most certainly wasn't white.

Sorry you are leaving it was an interesting ride. I also get tired of the MLK lot. I get equally tired of 'white people don't suffer discrimination'. They do and have. The Barbary Pirates are a well-worn trope but they slaved round Northern Europe because white women in particular sold well in markets in Al Andalus (the Iberian Peninsula under Moorish rule), North Africa, the Ottoman Empire etc - mainly as sex slaves. White people today often face discrimination in various parts of the world, and that seems to be okay (the biter bit seems to be the attitude, which is racist, of course, as well as historically inaccurate). White people are also discriminated against in the UK if they come from the 'wrong' demographic e.g are working class, or hold the wrong opionions as is the case for white feminists fighting agains trans ideology who can end up on the end of a very racist stick for being white, from feminists of colour (horrid term) who should know better. Ditto black people who do not accept the 'victim/oppressor' narrative and instead do well, get rich, become Tories - they can end up being told they are 'not black enough' - equally racist.
Racism comes in all colours, sadly.

He came from the Levant, so was probably light-brown, or Mediterranean in colouration. As a Jew, he could have a variety of ethnic presentations. What colour is the Holy Spirit?

lol

He would possibly look like Palestinians do now they’ve been there for thousands of years