Actors being cast in opposite sex or different race historical roles

[WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll]

Sarah Amankwah, who is female and black, was just on the Jeremy Vine show on Radio 2 (presented by Amol Rajan today) and talking about her role as Henry V at the Globe.

Is this not frowned on as cultural/gender appropriation? Eddie Redmayne was condemned for accepting a role as a transgender person and white Ed Skrein was later pressured to stand down after he'd been cast as an Asian character; yet Maxine Peake was widely praised for her Hamlet. Is it OK when a female takes a male role, but not the other way around, because of the vast discrepancy in available female roles owing to how society was so absolutely male-centric for most of history (and isn't necessarily that much better now)?

I personally see no real issue when it's a fictional character whose race isn't particularly a defining characteristic of the role - I don't understand why it would matter if a non-white actor should play James Bond (although he's a very unambiguously male character) and, as for Dr Who, it's a person who keeps regenerating over centuries, so why on earth wouldn't one of the regenerations be as a female?

But when it comes to an actual historical (or living) person, AIBU to wonder why it would be seen as appropriate to cast somebody to represent them who is very clearly the opposite sex and/or from a completely different racial background? Why would they even think to do it, apart from to provoke a reaction or to score some extra publicity?

Sarah is brilliant at her profession, but I just couldn't take her seriously when she performed the St Crispin's Day speech - the same as I couldn't have taken Benedict Cumberbatch seriously as Queen Elizabeth (whether using his own voice or trying to affect a female voice).

Then again, the whole point of it is ACTING - and nobody complains when, say, a Brit plays an American or a Scot plays an English person - so maybe I am BU. I just fail to find such a big elephant in the room convincing at all, but maybe it's my lack of imagination that's wholly to blame?

Is this just another part of modern life, where biological sex/gender boundaries are now often considered irrelevant and maybe even anachronistic as a concept - and is it boorish to even point it out or query it? I'm very now. AIBU to ask the question? Genuine thoughts on the matter appreciated.

@herculepoirot2

But you’re shifting focus - I wasn’t referring to blackface, and we’re not returning to the days when people thought it acceptable, are we? We wouldn’t even consider it. If a black man were to play Henry V on stage, then a white man could surely play Othello. If skin colour is irrelevant, what’s the problem? Let’s see the best actor get the job, whatever colour he may be.

Basically it’s fine for a black actress to play Henry V, but not fine for white guys to play Othello
I don't think anyone on this thread said that? Olivier was a bit wooden, but then he always was..........

Acting is acting and plays are just plays.

To carry a Shakespeare role, actors do just need to be good actors though.

Shakespeare would've liked experimenting, with casting. He wrote directly about race with Caliban, who's been enslaved by another man; delivers some of the best speeches in the Tempest and they are direct attacks on imperialism and slavery.

Akala the London hip hop artist and academic has done some great work on Shakespeare........
( Hip Hop Shakespeare Company)

IsabellaLinton

I am not strictly referring to “blackface” either. A white actor playing Othello is still playing a black man, whether or not he paints his face. It offends people. Let’s not do it.

You are the one who said skin colour is irrelevant, not me. I imagine there are a great many people living lives where they feel their skin colour is very relevant, and it is only claimed to be irrelevant when someone wants to pretend they’re black.

I watched Les Mis this weekend for the 3rd time, and Cosette was played by a black woman. Great. Except young Cosette was white. People who don't know the story would he forgiven for being a little confused.

I'd be interested to know the reasoning as to why they didn't cast a black little girl.

Basically it’s fine for a black actress to play Henry V, but not fine for white guys to play Othello

Actually I do think that, yes.

Have you had much to do with the theatre? I have. I wish I’d been a white man, far fewer male actors than female actors and more than twice as many parts. Vast majority of decent roles in theatre (and film and TV) are for white men. They don’t need to be taking the few parts that are available to black men / women, especially when we are still at a stage where a black woman playing Henry V gets people so befuddled.

@herculepoirot2

I’m sorry, but I don’t follow your logic.

A white actor playing Othello is still playing a black man... it offends people

By that logic, why is it not offensive for a black man to play Henry V, a white man? I don’t understand why one person should be able to play any character, their pigmentation utterly irrelevant - and another not?

I don't really care, but it's amazing the amount of hysteria that happens when a white actress/actor plays a perceived non white role, but how nobody is meant to say anything when it is vice versa. Imo rather than coming across as double standards there should be an all or nothing rule applied...As with most things that involves race/ethnicity, it should never be one rule for one another for the other. All this does is cause more friction.

@IsabellaLinton
I’m not sure what your issue is but self hatred is incredibly sad.
I’m bowing out and really hope you manage to process your issues and possibly get some help.💐💐

If a black man were to play Henry V on stage, then a white man could surely play Othello.

Obviously not!

The fact of Henry V being white is not integral to his story. His narrative arc (or at least, the parts of it that are interesting enough to turn into a play) has nothing to do with his race. But Othello’s does. Without him being black, there’s no story at all.

Ghanagirl

@Ghanagirl

Your faux-concern here is surprising - that’s not what you said to me in your PM.

@herculepoirot2
I wouldn’t bother engaging with @IsabellaLinton
her posting style is very similar to a poster who continually insults Meghan Markle and Serena Williams then when called out claims she’s black or mixed race.

@origamiunicorn
Scarlett Johansson isn’t Asian, Motoko Kusanagi the character is. And there are Asian actors in Hollywood. And at the time there were a lot of people complaining about Angel Coulby in Merlin

I saw the all black version of Cat on a Hot Tin roof, amazing either way

By that logic, why is it not offensive for a black man to play Henry V, a white man? I don’t understand why one person should be able to play any character, their pigmentation utterly irrelevant - and another not?

Oh of course you understand, don’t be so obtuse.

I always wonder if people who make such arguments about Othello have ever seen or read it!

I'd be interested to know the reasoning as to why they didn't cast a black little girl

Very strange. I know for certain that one of the three current little Cosettes is not white but I’ve never seen photographs of the other two. One of the other children’s names would suggest the child is not from a white background. Shows like Les Mis (long running) are strange in terms of their casting and s contracting processes in that some of the cast stay for years, other are only in to cover for 4 or 6 weeks and cast changes can and do happen at various different times throughout the year, often with little warning.

It may be that a white Little Cosette was still in her contracted time when the older Cosette was cast or that older Cosette is coming to the end of her contract and they want to try out a new little Cosette but new older Cosette is still contracted to a different show for example and can only rehearse during the day.

It may be, as has happened before, that all the little Cosettes fell sick at the same time and they had to pull in one of the Little Eponines (I’ve seen a Cosette play a Gavroche before now due to illness!). Les Mis are currently casting for new Little Cosettes so it could be something to do with that. I agree though, very confusing for an audience.

Maxine Peake was brilliant as Hamlet, body language, manner, she was for all the world a teenaged boy, no idea how she did it.

A good actor can play anything.

@IsabellaLinton
I’m not concerned about you but wish you would stop pretending to be a “woman of colour”...

Ah, Eleanor yes that makes sense. I was trying to think of a deeper reason but contract lengths could well be the reason.

Little Cosette was definitely white with long blonde hair. It didn't take away from the performance, in fact it gets more powerful each time I watch it.

Wow, thanks, all, for a very interesting range of responses. For those who've suggested it, it really isn't something that upsets or offends me in any way - it was just my initial thoughts on an interesting discussion on the radio.

My original thinking was chiefly in terms of the sex-swap rather than race, but the fact that this particular actor's racial background was different from Henry V's (the actual man, not necessarily faithfully represented in the play) as well as her biological sex added another dimension to the original thought.

As PPs have very correctly said, the concept of race and racial identity isn't necessarily set in stone, especially when we're going back centuries. I don't think anybody would query Tinda Swinton playing an Icelandic character or Antonio Banderas playing an Italian (assuming the accents were believable), so I think the question of race/skin colour is a lot more transient.

Forcing actors into one of three boxes as to whether they were allowed to play 'Asian', 'Black' or 'White' characters - so a Pakistani actor could presumably play a Japanese person, but not a Cypriot - would be ridiculous and, indeed, yet more bigoted racist narrow-mindedness.

Back to the 'sex' issue, though, if you'd bought tickets for a production of Shirley Valentine, without any advance knowledge whatsoever of the casting, and you sat down to see a man (a traditional male-identifying XY man - the trans issue is another debate entirely) entering the stage and proceeding to perform the whole play on his own as Shirley, to a very high standard - can you honestly say that you wouldn't be in any way surprised or even, initially at first, confused as to whether they'd possibly introduced an additional character or maybe he was the director who'd come on to introduce the play?

Would you genuinely sit there, see him walk on and nonchalantly accept him as Shirley without a second thought? Genuinely, do you think you might be disappointed or even annoyed? Or if he's a very convincing portrayer of the role, would it make no odds whatsoever to you? Are sex-swap productions 'acceptable', but only if people are notified beforehand? In which case, the perceived need to do that would suggest that they are NOT in fact universally accepted. Still

I wouldn’t care a jot if I turned up to a production of Shirley Valentine and a man was playing it. The minute the curtain goes up, I suspend my disbelief.

I think it’s easier to ‘dislike identity politics’ if you are white. I know there are people of all backgrounds who engage to varying degrees with the idea of identity politics, but in my experience it is much harder to ‘opt out of identity politics’ if others/society are placing you within that frame by treating you as ‘other’ (eg if you’re not white).
It surely is obvious that although there is more diversity on our screens today than previously (not hard), it is still much harder for people of colour to break through (and actors of working class backgrounds).
Also, surely everyone can recognise that as most of our western culture/literature was formed by European (white) men, many of our treasured stories feature European male leads. So, less roles in European literature written about/for people of colour... because society was different then. Also surely everyone can get that white people doing blackface is wrong and has very disturbing connotations, different to a person of colour playing a fictional/historical character who happens to be white.

Shirley Valentine would make no sense whatsoever if it was performed by a man. How many down trodden house husbands do any of us know? It’s a poor example.

Sometimes art is meant to challenge us, our preconceptions- cliche but true. Even doing a Shakespeare in contemporary dress or all male Swan Lake a la Matthew Bourne- ok maybe you’ll get a shock if you are expecting traditional productions but plenty of people are up for something different and even expect art to challenge how they view art and experience society.

Fair enough, then, Alsohuman - same question about any historical/established female person/character - would you think nothing whatsoever of it? Maybe you would - that's fine. It was just a genuine question.

That said, though, if everybody can accept a woman playing KING Henry V (rather than King Henry as a Queen), then who's to say that the male actor playing Shirley would automatically be playing a househusband and not a housewife ?

I agree that Othello’s skin colour is plot-relevant in a way that makes simple colour-blind casting inappropriate. But even putting that aside, the fact that the British theatrical canon has a shedload of roles for white blokes and not enough roles for everyone else means that Benedict Cumberbatch probably shouldn’t get a shot at either Othello or Hedda Gabler whereas Sophie Okenedo probably should if the director thinks she can put in the required performance.