Gender and Roles

[Theatrefanboy1]

Posted: 12/5/17 at 3:52pm

Hello,

I'm hoping people would be able to give me some insight into Gender and Casting Roles where the role is typically cast as one gender and if there are any actual implications on licensing where it doesn't specifically state.

With so much about gender neutrally and equality in the world I was hoping to produce a musical where the character is a "Girl", she even refers to herself as "She", "Girl", "lady".  Now my question is two fold. 1) Would it be acceptable to cast a male in the role (I think it would take on an amazingly beautiful twist if the character just happened to be gay) 2) while I understand that changes to show themes or songs could be a termination of the licensing and illegal. Would there be any implications to change lyrics to "He" "Guy" "Boy" etc. Or if anyone knows if the licensor would be open to the discussion.

 

Thanks so much for all your thoughts

[JudyDenmark]

Posted: 12/5/17 at 4:05pm

To the best of my knowledge, it's a case by case basis depending on the show. You could certainly reach out to the licensor with your plan, and they'd be able to tell you whether it's an option for that show based on what the creator has determined. Good luck! (Edit: someone from the licensing world, please correct me if I'm wrong. I don't produce shows.)

In terms of whether it's generally "acceptable" (outside of licensing issues), I think you're right that the world is changing and that this will be done more and more often. Personally, I'm a fan of taking risks. Will there be people who hate what you've done? Sure. Will there be people who love it? Sure. But that's kind of the point of making art.

One thing I'd be careful about is putting a man in a role that's distinctly female or that deals with women's issues. We don't really have "gender appropriation" in our society, but I think something like that could come dangerously close depending on the show. Like, I think most people would agree that it would be very inappropriate to cast a white Motormouth Maybelle singing "I Know Where I've Been," and the same consideration should be taken before casting a man to sing, say, "Me and the Sky." No matter how creatively done. 

Updated On: 12/5/17 at 04:05 PM

[whatdoesntkillme]

Posted: 12/5/17 at 10:41pm

I've read many licensing agreements that specifically state that gender-bending roles aren't allowed. So even if you don't change the text, it's still an issue with most rightsholders. That said, if you believe it's appropriate and can make a strong enough case to successfully convince the rightsholders, then go for it. But if they deny your request and you go ahead with it, technically you are violating the agreement. 

[dramamama611]

Posted: 12/5/17 at 11:01pm

From a legal standpoint you cannot do anything you are suggesting without permission. Changing anything violates your agreement. Impossible to say whether you would get permission as it strictly depends on the authors of any given piece. Ask the people whom hold the rights, they'll be able to find out for you.

Updated On: 12/6/17 at 11:01 PM

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 12/5/17 at 11:32pm

Look, if you're a school or a small community theatre, I highly doubt that anyone will hunt you down and shut your production down just due to some gender blind casting. There might be a problem if there's any changes made to the script, but if you're doing something like Alex Newell playing Asaka in the Once on this island revival, I doubt there would be much of a problem. If you're a bigger theatre, I would check with the rights holders, if you're not don't sweat it and claim stupidity if anyone comes after you.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 4:26am

^Such bad advice.

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 10:53am

^Not really. It's just the truth. I doubt they would go after a school production for some gender blind casting, so long as the text isn't tampered with. If text will be changed, it's probably best to check and I doubt that there would be a problem.

Do you mind me asking what show and what role?

[dramamama611]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 11:03am

Just because they might not get caught doesn't make it right.  At all.  And it would be particularly "wrong" to let everyone associated with the production to think it was "ok".   

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 11:10am

Get off your high horse. No one is asking any questions. Not the actors, not the rights holders, not anyone. There are tons pf productions out there that don't even pay for the rights and no one stops them. They aren't watching that closely. It doesn't make you morally superior because you have to ask permission for every little detail. Just put up a cast list and if there's a problem with it, deal with it. No one's putting drama teachers in jail for gender blind casting and that's the truth.

[nasty_khakis]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 11:11am

Growing up in a small town doing theatre I was always flabbergasted when the directors (not very smart ones usually) would just cut entire scenes or songs, add songs from other works not even by the same writers, re-order scenes, etc. One particularly dark experience in high school I actually reported it to R&H to try and get it shut down but the only change that time was changing "hell" to "heck" and they didn't care.

I'd actually say with swapping genders most creatives wouldn't care as long as the play isn't about gender themes (making Eliza a gay man in My Fair Lady or the student male in Oleana) and would probably say "let me know how it turns out." I have heard playwrights like Nicky Silver talk about how they won't allow any changes in casting or words because it's "his name out there. they'll think Nicky Silver's writing doesn't work, not the production."

[SeanD2]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 12:22pm

Theatrefanboy1 said: "1)Would it be acceptable to cast a male in the role (I think it would take on an amazingly beautiful twist if the character just happened to be gay) "

This right here is the biggest problem with your proposal. You're looking at casting a person of another gender because it'll change the focus of the play. That's a BIG no no. 

However, you often have more latitude if the character is still the originally specified gender but is being played by a performer of a different gender. Think Brian Bedford's Lady Bracknell. It's still up to the right's holder though, and you should ALWAYS check with them. 

[adam.peterson44]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 12:30pm

GeorgeandDot said: " Get off your high horse. "

Ironically, GeorgeandDot, it is you who comes across as extremely arrogant in this exchange, not dramamama.  You are basically saying that you don't care what the writers have specified in their contracts about how their work should be presented, but that as long as you feel like doing it and think you can get away with it and not get caught, then it is okay.  That is pretty much the extreme of arrogant high-horse riding right there.  Dramamama's caring about the author's wishes for how their work is to be presented comes across as exactly the right kind of caring that human beings should have for one another.

[adam.peterson44]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 12:33pm

And another comment about the specific gender-bending proposed by the OP:

 

If you look back at Tony nomination threads over the years, you will notice that each year there are approximately 25 or so roles eligible to be nominated for leading male role in a musical, and usually about 8 or 9 female leading roles in a musical.  So proposing to change a role from female to male (or just cast it that way) is a bit like proposing to change a role from an Asian character to a white character (or actor).  There is already so much under-representation, that proposing to cast a less-common female role with a male actor is regressive in terms of giving opportunities where they didn't previously exist, whereas going the other way could open more doors, as they did with Hamilton for actors of colour. 

Updated On: 12/6/17 at 12:33 PM

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 12:49pm

adam.peterson44 said: "GeorgeandDot said: " Get off your high horse. "

Ironically, GeorgeandDot, it is you who comes across as extremely arrogant in this exchange, not dramamama. You are basically saying that you don't care what the writers have specified in their contracts about how their work should be presented, but that as long as you feel like doing it and think you can get away with it and not get caught, then it is okay. That is pretty much the extreme of arrogant high-horse riding right there. Dramamama's caring about the author's wishes for how their work is to be presented comes across as exactly the right kind of caring that human beings should have for one another."

No what I said is that if you aren't touching the text, I doubt there would be a problem.  I'm discussing situations like Alex Newell as Asaka or Titus Burgess as the Witch or something like that where the gender of the character is not changed.  If you're changing the text (pronouns included), probably check, but I doubt that they would have a problem so long as it isn't something ridiculous.  I'm not talking about disrespecting the writer or the text.  I'm just saying that if you're not touching the text and you're a small high school or middle school or something I doubt anyone would be upset that you didn't get "permission."  Schools put girls in male roles all the time, so why would it be any different the other way around?  

Also, your second statement is so ridiculous I can't help but just laugh my a** off at it.  Also, I'm not being arrogant.  I'm just saying what I've observed over the years.  Most rights holders just care that they get paid.  Of course there's the exception, but most of the time, they don't care.  Call me arrogant if you want, but I've been around a lot longer than you probably have and I'm certainly not the one acting all morally superior.

 

[SeanD2]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 12:56pm

GeorgeandDot said: "I'm certainly not the one acting all morally superior."

You're right, you're not. A morally superior person would honor the contract they entered into and not break it just because they think they can get away with it. That's the behavior of an immoral person. See: Trump, Donald J.

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 1:21pm

Yeah I'm ****ing done with these boards

[kdogg36]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 1:35pm

SeanD2 said: "GeorgeandDot said: "I'm certainly not the one acting all morally superior."

You're right, you're not. A morally superior person would honor the contract they entered into and not break it just because they think they can get away with it. That's the behavior of an immoral person. See: Trump, Donald J."

I think GeorgeandDot is completely wrong, and that your reaction to that error is completely unhinged.

Updated On: 12/6/17 at 01:35 PM

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 1:46pm

I'm really not wrong here. When gender bending a role in a small amateur theatre you don't really need to contact your rights holder if the text is remaining the same. If the role is being performed in drag, it's fine. The OP is doing a gender reversal of the character as it turns out and some minor changes may happen. In that case, maybe check with them, but if you don't they probably won't hunt you down. It's just the truth. You do you. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

[dearalanaaaa]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 6:48pm

Isn't there a school doing an illegal production of Natasha, Pierre and The Great Comet of 1812? Or was that a joke? I'm pretty sure I went to a genderbend Oklahoma once at a school too.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 7:21pm

So if they probably won't care, all the more reason that permission should be sought.   It's not about "getting in trouble" or not for it, it's about doing the right thing, that's kind of what morals are: doing the right thing because it IS the right thing.   If that puts me on my high horse, I will proudly sit there.  

Yes I have changed the sex of characters: with permission.   No, I have never cast a girl to play a boy because that's all I have. I have also been turned down to make such changes - so be it.   Yes, there have been entire plays I've not been able to produce because of minor changes that were refused.   Too bad for me, so I moved on and choose another show.   There are many shows I'd like to produce but can't as my community is nearly all white, too bad for us.  I've even been turned down to change a role written for an African American to white (while no part of the story specifically deals with him be a person of color, in word or action).  I've been granted permission cut a show where only a year or two before others had been refused.  If I want to alter another's work, I need permission -- if I don't want to get permission, I should only do shows in the public domain or start writing my own.  

 

And GeorgeandDot your departure lasted a whopping 25 minutes - and they were delightful.

 

 

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 7:53pm

^Blocked and reported. Keep my name out of your mouth and leave me alone. I can't tell if you're actually ignoring my comments or if you have zero reading comprehension, but you still don't seem to be understanding me regardless. Go ahead and be nasty, but you're just being wicked, self righteous b*tch. Get over it and go home.

Updated On: 12/6/17 at 07:53 PM

[leighmiserables]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 7:56pm

Just a point of clarification — are y'all saying that you shouldn't cast an actress in a role written as male (or vice versa), even if you don't change the gender of the character in the script? Because, frankly, for a lot of high schools, that isn't possible. If I was a playwright, I'd honestly rather have a girl in a wig do a character in my show justice than have the world's worst male actor do it. Also, by those parameters, how is one supposed to cast a gender nonconforming, non-binary or transgender performer in a show? Do you have to get special permission for that? Seems kinda silly to me, really. 

Updated On: 12/6/17 at 07:56 PM

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 8:15pm

^Literally all I'm saying.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 8:48pm

Silly or not, happening or not.....you are supposed get permission.




Reported? For What? DISAGREEING with you? You're the only one that has been irrational or rude.

[leighmiserables]

Posted: 12/6/17 at 8:59pm

dramamama611 said: "Silly or not, happening or not.....you are supposed get permission."

Isn't that kind of incredibly discouraging (and not to mention discriminatory), both to performers who don't consider themselves as male/female and to the directors casting them? I have a nonbinary friend who loves theatre with all of their heart, but has been auditioning for less and less shows since coming out because they feel like they'll never get cast due to their gender identity. Luckily, the director at our school still gives them roles, both ones written as female and male. I genuinely cannot see how you could consider this morally inferior to asking permission, getting denied, and telling sixteen-year-old kids like my friend: "Sorry, you were the best one for the part, but because you were assigned as a female at birth and this is a part written for a male actor, I can't put you in my show." 

adam.peterson44 brought up how: "There is already so much under-representation, that proposing to cast a less-common female role with a male actor is regressive in terms." Is this not the same issue? There are hardly any meaty transgender/nonbinary roles in theatre (especially ones that high schools can do). Does this mean these people should just not be cast? 

I'm really not trying to attack/argue here, I'm just trying to figure out the other side of the discussion as I really, truly cannot see why this seems to be such an abhorrent thing to do.