English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I always wondered if there was some sort of recourse in hollywood, or broadway about not casting someone for a part because of physical features. I couldn't refuse to hire a teacher just because they were black, but can I choose not to have a black Jean Valjean without recourse. It would be flat out discrimination, but what if the part requires a certain type of person? What are the rules about this sort of thing?

Once I saw Les Mis and Fantine was Black, and it kind of threw me off because I had never seen the show before. So I found it a little odd that she was black and epinone was Blond...but turned Asian as she got older.

2007-02-18 18:22:20 · 7 answers · asked by alwaysmoose 7 in Arts & Humanities Theater & Acting

7 answers

Actually, casting is a process that places very stringent limitations on type and appearance. That does not make it discriminatory. Any hiring process is determined by factors that weigh one applicant's qualifications against another's. An employer in any industry is allowed to hire anyone they want for any reason they want without explanation -- they simply cannot deny access to the job application process based on standard discrimation criteria (race, gender, sexual orientation, age, etc.) However, a professional basketball team is able to exclude female 'applicants' - until or unless a female basketball player can demonstrate her ability to compete on the same level as a male player - and that she was discriminated against on the basis solely of her sex, and not on her ability to perform the job.

In casting, all professional casting notices expressly state a non-discrimination policy, though that in no way means that it is a level and open playing field. Playwrights famously place restrictions on who they want to cast and those casting criteria. I worked with a world-famous playwright who immediately judged auditioning actors when they walked in the room (before the actual audition) on whether he wanted to sleep with them. Edward Albee was famous for his exacting criteria in casting his play Three Tall Women, demanding that all audtioners be at least a certain height, and refusing to see any actresses who were too short.

Also, bear in mind that discrimnation involves classes of people who have an historically and legally recognized history of exclusion from opportunity. You cannot claim discrimantion because you are an actress who is too short for Mr. Albee's play. Similarly, if you can't sing well, you cannot claim discrimination because you were not cast in an opera or a musical.

2007-02-19 01:03:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

It's an interesting question.

If you "choose not to have a black Jean Valjean," are you making that decision BECAUSE the actor in question was black...or because you had a stronger actor as an option?

As for what the part "requires"...that's a dicey point. Directors are notorious for going "off-road" with their casting decisions, bending genders, etc. You have to allow for creative license, and ultimately the market controls.

HOWEVER, I think that writers are also involved in the equation. I know for a fact that Edward Albee gets VERY hands-on with the casting process for major revivals of his works. And, if you remember "Children of a Lesser God," by Mark Medoff...there's actually language in the printed version of the play REQUIRING theatres contemplating a production to cast hearing-impaired actors in certain roles.

2007-02-19 02:45:03 · answer #2 · answered by shkspr 6 · 0 0

There aren't set in stone rules. There's no law saying that you can't have an all-asian cast of Pacific Overtures for example, (which the show was written for) or that you can't have an all-white Crucible. Some directors use the philosophy of color-blind casting which while is more fair for the actors does lead to the whole "Why is she black when her brother is white?" thing at times.

More or less it's a fine line that modern directors have to walk. Being faithful to the original script versus being relevant to modern audiences as well as making opportunities for actors of races that aren't well represented.

2007-02-18 18:30:19 · answer #3 · answered by mugenhunt 6 · 1 0

The show is all about the producer/director's vision, and as an artist they can draw the picture any way they want.

Now if a person was not allowed to audition for the part, based on sex or race, that would be discrimination.

2007-02-18 18:28:16 · answer #4 · answered by Havana Brown 5 · 0 0

I think private industry shouldn't be regulated. If you're movie is about asians you can't hire black people to play the roles - in movies the race of a person is a material thing -

2007-02-18 18:30:09 · answer #5 · answered by Ginger P 2 · 0 0

Being a teacher has no race qualifications, and it would be illegal to hire by race.

When casting a movie, the production team can cast whomever they want for any part. And they don't have to give a reason why.

2007-02-18 18:31:51 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

To me, Biden is so for sure the main suitable individual to be president. Edwards relatively has not extra experience than Obamma yet they the two seem have some megastar-means. If Sen. Clinton is nominated, i ought to correctly vote for a Republican for the 1st time considering that I registered in 1972.

2016-10-02 09:13:57 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers