Role Distribution, Show Selection and Audition Pools

[lillibet]

This subject came up tonight at Steering Committee and there just wasn't time to explore it past the immediate issue at hand, but it seemed like there was more discussion to be had and perhaps more voices to be solicited, so I thought I'd go ahead and post about it. You don't have to be part of Theatre@First to have an opinion. I'm going to start with a poll, so I can get an overview, but I do encourage you to comment, because I realize this may have a lot of nuances and complexity for many people that won't be captured in my options.

[Poll #1498617]

Comments

[aphrabehn.livejournal.com]

For me, it's all about the quality of the show. I moan about a lack of decent roles for women - particularly women over 30 - but that gripe is more with playwrights focusing less on interesting female characters (and yes, this may be a controversial opinion - eh, maybe not.) Nothing is more disheartening than going through the Stage Source audition listing and realizing that at least 75% of the roles are for men and most of the females role call for 25 and under. And those are usually less interesting IMNSHO.

However, I'd rather see a well done all male cast of, say Glenn Garry Glen Ross, then a poor attempt at cross-casting it. Same for an all female show. Some stuff works with cross-casting, much doesn't.

12 Angry Jurors is a good example. It works in the original all male format, but today an audience would have more difficulty buying into it, since we all have to do jury duty. But something specifically written for one gender, like Top Girls...that would be tough to cross and I'm not sure it's a good idea.

In the end, it's about putting up a good show.

[dpolicar]

today an audience would have more difficulty buying into [an all-male 12aj]

And yet, the most recent major nationwide theatrical production of this show was done precisely this way.

[jim-p.livejournal.com]

Interestingly enough, the last time I pulled jury duty the jury WAS all-male. But there were only six of us, and deliberations never got that intense...

[aphrabehn.livejournal.com]

Let me rephrase it then - audiences would not have a hard time with cross-casting for it, as opposed to some shows where cross casting seems forced.

[chanaleh.livejournal.com]

For instance? 1776? :-)

(which technically has two female roles, but really.)

[fenicedautun.livejournal.com]

off topic, but i've always wanted to see/do a fully cross cast 1776 (all male roles played by female and vice versa, because you do need to keep vocal ranges consistent within the congress). But I'm perverse.

[chanaleh.livejournal.com]

I thought Wellesley had done an all-female one? But I suppose that's different than featuring Abigail and Martha in drag. ;-)

[dpolicar]

(nods) Absolutely.