School play ethical dilemma - do you think this is fair?

[Sixerseconder]

I was just wondering if I could fish for opinions on whether or not this situation is fair. I’m feeling rather conflicted about it, even though it’s my child who benefits.

My dd is 11 and in Year 6. At her school, the two year 6 classes join together to do a play, as one of their end of primary school celebrations. In recent years, the play has been a musical.

My dd is a really good actor, I would say one of the best in her year. She won a school competition last year where all the kids in her year recited a poem from memory - she did a funny one by Roald Dahl and she got to perform in front of the governors. She’s also had major roles in all the previous school plays. She’s confident and she’s funny. I’m not just saying this as a biased Mum - I fully recognise the many things she is absolutely terrible at, including anything sporty. She can’t draw either. But when it comes to exuberant acting and making people laugh, she can do it.

The problem is, the one thing she is shy about is singing. She doesn’t have the most amazing singing voice ever, though she can sing in tune, but she is adamantly opposed to ever singing solo in front of other people.

And the school play this year, as it has been in recent years, is a musical. For this year 6 school play, they held auditions (for previous plays further down the school the kids were asked to write down their top 3 choices of parts and teachers allocated them, my dd always ended up with a big part). And these auditions were singing only, and took place in front of the whole of year 6 and all the year 6 teachers. The children were told they could either sing a song on their own or with some friends, but had to sing at least a few lines solo.

Dd decided not to do a singing audition. I obviously wasn’t there, but dd tells me that almost every other child in Year 6, including all the other girls, auditioned. Many of these kids were clearly terrified of singing in front of so many people, and many couldn’t sing very well or in tune, but, unlike my dd, they faced their fear and did it.

However, when the parts were allocated, my dd was given the main comic role - it’s a role that had a lot of speaking lines, and didn’t have many solo singing lines, and those it had the teachers told her she could sing in a group rather than on her own. She’s in every scene, she loves the role, and she’s so good at it and so funny (I’ve seen a dress rehearsal as I’m helping put costumes and props together.)

But... many of the kids who actually sang by themselves to audition, and who were very shy, and sang very quietly or a bit out of tune, have been given rubbish parts. Two of them don’t actually have any lines, and just follow around my dd (they’re playing her servants, which rubs salt in the wound, somewhat...)

Many of the mothers of the kids in her year are really unhappy with this. They think the auditions were a stitch up and the teachers had decided who would play each part before they even held the auditions. And they don’t think it’s fair that my dd gets a huge, fun part when she didn’t have the courage to audition. I’m not really sure how to respond when I hear these whispers/insinuations, because, on one level, I can see how good my dd is in that part, but on the other hand, I can see the injustice of it.

So, what do you think? Should my dd have been given the main comic role because of her natural acting talent? Or should she not have been given a major part because, unlike other kids who probably have worse voices and far less confidence than her, she couldn’t pluck up the courage to do a solo singing audition?

The school is at fault for unfair distribution of parts. As other posters have pointed out, it's a horrible lesson to the other dc when the same kids get the big parts every year.

I'm also a bit about the premise of your thread, OP - it comes across as a boast to me, tbh.

I had to do the singing audition when I was in year 6, I knew if I didn't do the singing one and only the speaking one, I was less likely to even get a one sentence part (it happened to my brother 2 years before)

How ridiculous OP

Posted too soon....
How ridiculous, and that the whole school knows she didn't audition and that parents are being cross about it.
There are 4 weeks left of primary school. Let your daughter embrace her part and enjoy. If parents want to flag it up with the school then fine. But honestly it sounds like she was right for the part, also I'm sure the smaller parts will have opportunity for dancing etc.

I'm also a bit hmm about the premise of your thread, OP - it comes across as a boast to me, tbh
Clearly that's all it is

Why not respond to the other parents with what you've said here OP.

Tell them that your dd is the only one who could have done it due to her awesomeness and talent that is far, far better than anyone elses. Tell them that there was no choice because the others have worse voices and crap confidence.
Does your dd have the same opinion as you OP?

“You know what Susan? We were surprised how it was all done too. I think they should review how they run these things, quite honestly. It’s all been very bizarre. Hey, I like your hair today, is it lighter?”

Or something along those lines.

The school have handled the whole thing badly, your daughter shouldn't have any part-she didn't attempt to overcome her fear of public singing yet others who did have basically had it thrown back in their faces by her getting a large part again .
I can fully understand why other parents are pissed off, the message the school are sending out with this dick move is not a good one

Whilst the ops dd might be a good actor but the teacher auditioning doesn't know if she was the best actor as they didn't offer acting auditions and whilst ops dd might have been the lead in previous years it still doesn't mean she was the best then.

DD can sing, dance and act. Always has but when it came to primary school plays and nativities she was always 3rd or 4th villager or the Christmas lobster.

The same children got the leads every year because they apparently were the best.

Welcome to real life. We talk about equality but it really doesn't exist.

Same kids always got the main roles when I was in school. Same kids for sport or whatever activity.

It really is all about picking the best or who is the most popular.

Sad thing is the majority of students never get a chance to try out different things in school because of this. Isn't that what school is supposed to be about learning and trying out new things in a safe environment?

It does seem odd she didn't even audition and then got a big part.

It could appear to others shed above having to audition and her roles going to be a done deal anyway.

If other parents do mention it I'd say how surprised you are too.

It might look like you've had a quiet word along the lines of 'dd would love a part but she doesn't want to sing is that OK?'

This happens with the shows and sporting events at schools. I've seen kids represent the school for a sports event but not turn up for the training even though the letter home stated 'no training no spot on the team'.

If my dd had not turned up for training the rule would have been applied of course.

I wish schools (and other professional organisations) were more honest and not make rules they can't or won't enforce.

It sounds like the school has handled it badly.

You could argue that the teachers were already aware of who could act and should get the primarily acting parts like the one your DD has through other things the children have done in school, but they know less about who can sing so these auditions were to find people for the parts that involve a lot of singing, hence the audition requiring singing.

A bit like if there were parts requiring musicians, you would not hand every child in the class a violin and ask them to play something because you already know who can play the violin and roughly to what standard.

Yes your daughter should have the part because she is a good actress.
However the school was wrong in how it gave out the roles. But that is not your fault.
I would say, “We were surprised too. You should talk to the teachers.”

Could it have been the case that the audition was a singing audition to see who could sing, rather than an overall audition for the parts themselves? Maybe the teachers already knew who could act but weren't sure who the best singers would be?

I'm a drama teacher and direct around 20 plays a year in an age 3 -13 school. I have a variety of different audition types - some (usually class plays) we read the play one lesson and I cast it from that. Others (the big musicals for example) have a singing, acting and optional dance audition followed by a callback audition for those we want to see again. Often, that is focused on singing and does not include good actors. That does not mean they won't get a good part. It's just harder to get to know a child's voice type, range and stamina from one short song. So large speaking parts with no solo singing can often go to a child who has not had a callback audition. And parents have said in the past that that's unfair - but I think they've misunderstood the point of the audition process.

What I wouldn't do is allow a child who hasn't auditioned to be in the cast or turn down a child who has auditioned. Being brave enough to audition gets you in but it doesn't determine the size of the part you get.

At the lower end of primaries (ie reception and Year 1) school plays that give a dozen children a couple of lines each and let some be choir and some be dancers and some be farm animals or whatever, work just fine. There really aren't very many kids who are noticeably 'good' at acting, singing or dancing when they are that little: probably the best you can hope for is they remember what they are supposed to say and don't pee or puke or burst into tears on stage. Once they get a bit older, the need to give the entire class a 'moment in the spotlight' ought to diminish: there will be the kids who simply don't like performing much along with maybe one or two who are both keen and good at it. And a smart teacher, really, will know how many DC are both enthusiastic and competent, and pick a play that has enough parts for those kids.

If your DD was unable to audition because time ran out, then that's the schools fault, not hers.

Maybe the auditions were to collect information that they were to consider with past performances etc?

Poor management by the teachers.

The parents and kids are probably jealous because your DD is always the star turn.

The school have messed up.

In our school we make sure that a child only has a big role once so that more children get a chance. They are primary children, not West End performers.

It's also part of their education to learn drama skills. Putting the best actors in the main roles all the time is like only asking the best mathematicians to answers maths questions in class.

Where is the opportunity for the others to have a try? They may not be as good but so what. No-one cares. All parents think their child is wonderful on stage no matter how awful/great they are.

I think as your child did not gracefully decline the role and, as her parent, you didn't tactfully steer her in that direction, you are both going to have to face the flack.

This has just happened to my DC and whilst not the OPs or her daughters problem - it is grossly unfair.

My DC loves drama and is good at it - auditioned for a part, not a main one, because said there was no point as certain people would get them - absolutely correct! No point in auditioning for other parts - as did just not fit the role.

The school then put in kids that had not learnt the songs or practiced a part into quite a few roles.

If you have auditions you put those DCs in that auditioned. MY child is miffed and quite rightly so - there was a rule and that rule was followed by some and they did better than those who did comply. It is patently unfair.

SO OP - your daughter should have auditioned regardless and then no one would have an issue.She did not and she should not have major part. People have every right to be miffed - the school is at fault.

DD can sing, dance and act. Always has but when it came to primary school plays and nativities she was always 3rd or 4th villager or the Christmas lobster.

This has just made me spit out my tea! This was me at primary school. I was a perfectly reasonable actor yet had parts in the nativity including Second Cow (I wasn't even allowed to moo) and that especially well-known nativity role, the Christmas Eskimo....

OP, your DD clearly isn't at fault at all here and I'm sorry about the whispering parents. It sounds like she'll be terrific in her role. I really do think it's crap though when schools cast the same few children year after year in the best roles, especially if they've auditioned. My DB always got good roles, as did my best friend....tbh years of being Second Cow Without The Right To Moo, or equivalent, didn't do much for my confidence. Eventually in my final year I got a good part - after doing an audition!

But she DID go to the auditions. She wanted to recite a poem and the auditions ran out of time becaue they prioritised the singers. I think that is not quite the same as her not even turning up at the auditions.

Agree the school should have held two sets of auditions. But would any of the other parents have told their child to turn the part down if they'd been in the same position? I very much doubt it!.
Like you say other children get to shine on sports day or in art, this is your daughter's talent let her enjoy it.
If anyone says anything agree the school could have handled it better but once offered the part if you'd insisted your child didn't take part it would have broken her heart and as her mum you couldn't do that to her.

This is why my school alternated play/musical for its main show each year, so that the non-singers would always have a shot at something as well. Maybe suggest that for future?

When you are a teacher choosing parts for a play you obviously want to choose the best children for the roles. After all, you want the play to go well.

It's not as if the teacher's don't know the children- they weren't approaching the auditions cold-I sure there will have been some discussion between them and your dd- they probably tried to persuade her to audition because they knew she would have been the best for that role.

The children cast her servants must have been really rubbish!

No teacher is going to choose children for leading roles just because they had the courage to audition while better/talented children stand at the back.

And have you tried to get any Y6 children to sing in front of an audience? It's usually impossible with all the pre-teen angst or trying to look cool in front of friends going on! Only the usual shwbizzy handful will sing confidently in front of others.

I have auditioned children in an out of school group.

We often did singing only auditions. That was because we often knew either though a workshop or just generally watching their ability through the year, who had acting ability & would be reliable to remember lines & take direction.

The ultimate aim is to cast children who are right for that character & to give them something that is within their capability.

I would absolutely cast a talented child actor who was reluctant to sing in a comedy role as it’s often one of the hardest kind of parts to carry off.

Massively unfair, basically teaches the other kids that there's no point putting themselves forward for anything as they are never going to get it anyway.
Horrible behaviour by the school, your daughter should not have taken the part.