Wednesday, May 14, 2014

A Discussion in THTR 454

In one of my acting classes, we always discuss the department-produced shows the week after they have gone up. One of these days, we discussed the play The Dining Room by A.R. Gurney. The play follows eighteen different families (different family for each scene) around a single dining room table, examining the dying upper middle-class culture of tradition, and how the shift towards societal progress has changed these types of families.

We always talk about moments that worked and moments that didn’t work. When talking about moments that didn’t work, our professor baited us with this:

“I didn’t get at all what the play was examining, and that has largely to do with the casting. Can anybody tell me why?”

Though I had not seen the play myself, I had inkling of what she was going for after sitting through our discussion of the play’s main themes. It seemed like I was not alone as everyone fidgeted uncomfortably in their seats, but said nothing.

“It may not be the most politically correct answer…” she prodded.

“The cast was multi-racial,” someone finally chimed in.

She slowly nodded and said “That’s it.”
Because The Dining Room spans the late 19th into the late 20th century, the upper middle-class culture being presented is better known as the WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) culture.
We then launched into a discussion of the validity of colorblind casting, and when it was appropriate and when typecasting was completely necessary.

“Well, it’s not like you can have a white man play Othello,” said one student.

“Olivier (referring to acclaimed English and very white actor Laurence Olivier) did it,” someone else countered.

Though brief, it was a truly fascinating discussion about artistic liberties, and the limits of an actor’s imagination.

“I personally believe that we’ve all felt what it’s like to be oppressed, to feel less than, and that we would be able to draw upon those feelings if a white guy had to play a character that was traditionally black.”

“Here’s the thing,” said Jade, one of my fellow African-American actresses “I think that by being a black man, you have an innate sense of what being a slave means, and I just don’t think that anybody else can know what that feels like.”

This back and forth went on for a while. I chimed in that while I understood that some roles are meant to be played by a certain race, roles that should be open to any race often go to white actors because of old-founded stereotypes of the “average” American. Others noted that the fact that our department has to have two “diversity” shows in order for actors of color to get cast is absolutely ridiculous.

What I ultimately took from this discussion, however, is how complex this issue is, and how there isn’t one right or wrong answer. My scene work for this class had me playing a heavily persecuted Jew. Part of my professor’s reasoning with this casting was that African-Americans had an instinctive understanding of what it meant to be oppressed.

But, on the flip side, how could I, a 21 year old girl, possibly understand the ramifications of years and years of cruelty put upon a middle-aged Jewish man?

As we ended our discussion, my professor said something that I hope will stick with me for years to come:


“I so admire your idealism and your purity in your idealism. Don’t lose that. It’s too easy to lose that in this world, but don’t think that just because the system says you can’t means you can’t talk about these things. This is the important stuff we should be talking about.”

Friday, May 9, 2014

Social Bookmarking Soulmate

I think I found the one.

I know it sounds crazy, and we haven’t officially met yet, but sometimes you find people and BAM! it just hits you, right? Let me introduce my new significant other.

Her name is celechi zero.

Okay, so I don’t actually know if she is a girl. Is it bad that I assumed that she was a girl because she was looking at articles that dealt with female portrayal (and all its faults) in the industry, among other things? 

Maybe it is. I’ve become pretty cynical these days.
I digress.

The top tags for this…person are as follows: racism, Hollywood, sexism, race, film, culture, rape, casting, colorism, feminism.

Any of these sound familiar to you?

I’m just gonna lay it all out there. celechi seemed to line up pretty perfectly with what I cover in my blog. They say opposites attract, but sometimes, you stumble upon the perfect match.

celechi zero is a quiet one. She (or he) doesn’t really comment on the articles she (or he-okay, for all intents and purposes, we’ll call her a she) bookmarks. Merely, she highlights sections of the article that stood out to her. I like that. Sometimes standing behind a statement is all you need to do – no embellishments, no add-ons. This one’s got quiet strength.

celechi’s bookmarked about ten articles, meaning she’s knows how to play the field, but she’s still new to the game. One small drawback (everyone has their flaws, guys), she seemed to have bookmarked a whole bunch of articles in August of 2013, a couple in December, and hasn’t bookmarked since. It’s okay! I’m sure she’s still out there fighting for the cause, as they say. Maybe she just wanted to make her legacy short and sweet. To the point. I like that.

The best part about celechi? She bookmarks some really, really interesting articles. If I could, I would talk about all of them, but here are a couple that really stuck out to me:

What’s The Difference Between Cultural Exchange and Cultural Appropriation? on “The Good Man Project” – The writer tackles the issue of cultural appropriation, and how often the issue is taken to either extreme: complete ignorance or wracking guilt over each little thing. The writer suggests that in order for cultural exchange to happen, there needs to be a mutual understanding of respect. For so long, cultures persecuted through oppression have been carefully picked through by well-intentioned white people, these people only glorifying certain aspects of that culture that they deem is “exotic” and “cool.” The writer insists that if you are a guest, act like a guest. Treat the culture with honor, not as a weird ritual. Only then can free-flowing exchange happen without fried nerves.

As I’ve touched upon actors playing characters of different races, I think this is extremely relevant. Perhaps Hollywood could learn a lesson or two when they choose to exercise this practice, and maybe, just maybe, it could become a practice that didn’t feel so exploitative.

Anna Gunn and ‘Breaking Bad’s’ Skyler White: Just the Tip of A Very Big Iceberg on The Huffington PostMaureen Ryan talks about the problem with Skyler White and the immense sexist backlash that character has faced on Breaking Bad. Ryan claims that the character was written stereotypically in the beginning, and was only fleshed out and made a complex, multi-faceted character in the show’s later seasons. She questions whether Hollywood is actually beginning to take steps towards consistent three-dimensional female characters, or if their lateness only fuels the hateful and repellent attitudes of the sexist minority that has dominated Hollywood for decades.

With television shows like Orange is the New Black and Mad Men that heavily feature female characters becoming more common, this article touches upon a very topical subject. Are the tides finally changing in Hollywood? It’s ridiculous that Anna Gunn has had to deal with so much vitriol, but progress is never an easy road to take. Overall, I think this article gives great insight into how Hollywood might slowly, but surely be changing for the better, which offers great balance to my constant critique of its old-world gender normative practices.


I will never be able to thank celechi enough for introducing me to so many great articles. Isn’t she just great?! I really hope you like her guys, because I think I’m in it for the long haul. 

It Gets Better...Unless You're An Actor

Remember the It Gets Better project? After the tragic suicides of LGBTQ youth across the nation, CEOs, celebrities, and just plain ol’ people came out in droves with short, inspirational videos encouraging these teens that life does get better, despite the hardships they face now. I believe that this project is beautiful and moving, and I am in no means making light of the situation or the efforts of powerful people.

That being said, I can’t help but ask the question, in the context of Hollywood entertainment, does it get better? If you take a closer look at LGBTQ actors, I think you’ll find that they face similar discrimination, though it may not be as outright as physical violence.

For instance, one of the most visible out-and-proud actors is Sean Hayes, who is most famous for his portrayal of the flamboyantly gay Jack McFarland on the NBC sitcom Will & Grace. He won an Emmy, and was nominated another five times for his work (in addition to countless other nominations for other awards). The character of Jack is up there with the George Constanzas and Fraisers of legendary sitcom characters, so in that regard, it’s no wonder that Jack will always be an evident part of Sean Hayes.
However, when Hayes played opposite Kristin Chenoweth in Promises, Promises on Broadway, many (quietly) questioned Hayes’ ability to play a straight character with the prominence of his sexuality. In a highly controversial Newsweek article, writer Ramin Setoodeh noted that critics ignored “the big pink elephant in the room:”

“Hayes is among Hollywood’s best verbal slapstickers, but his sexual orientation is part of who he is, and also part of his charm…But frankly, it’s weird seeing Hayes play straight. He comes off as wooden and insincere, as if he’s trying to hide something, which of course he is. Even the play’s most hilarious scene, when Chuck tries to pick up a drunk woman at a bar, devolves into unintentional camp. Is it funny because of all the 60’s era one-liners, or because the woman is so drunk (and clueless) that she agrees to go home with a guy we all know is gay?”

Setoodeh received extreme backlash for his suggestion that Hayes was unable to successfully portray a straight character because of his sexuality. But what Setoodeh touched on is a very real problem for LGBTQ actors, gay men in particular.

Perhaps the only actor to really break out against this is Neil Patrick Harris, who just ended a nine year run as the very straight Barney Stinson in How I Met Your Mother. In truth, Harris undoubtedly had the luxury of already being an established television star through Doogie Howser, M.D. and the beginning of HIMYM before he publically came out, though no one questioned his ability to play Barney after he went public.
Timing is an incredibly important aspect for actors when they come out. Harris waited until he was already on a hit television show. George Takei waited long after his successful stint on Star Trek to publically come out. Controversially, after a slew of romantic comedy box office gems, Rupert Everett came out and simultaneously argued that gay actors should stay in the closest because “the fact is…that you could not be, and still cannot be, a 25-year-old homosexual trying to make it in the film business.” Even with Harris’ success in HIMYM, one has to wonder, due to the sitcom’s broad comedy, if part of the humor of Barney’s emphatic bro-chismo is that we all know the truth about the person saying the lines.

The flip side of this, of course, is that our society has no issue with straight actors portraying LGTBQ characters. In fact, when they do, many of them are nominated for Oscars (see: Jared Leto, Sean Penn, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Heath Ledger & Jake Gyllenhall, Colin Firth, Christopher Plummer, Greg Kinnear, and Tom Hanks, to name a few). Portraying gay characters is often seen as a worthy challenge for any actor or actress.

How in the world is this any different than a gay actor portraying a straight character? How is it that we can ignore the private lives of straight actors, but not gay ones?


I hate to be pessimistic, but as NPH opens Hedwig and the Angry Inch on Broadway, I’m curious to see how many more Barney Stinson-like characters he can land afterwards. I want to believe that “it does get better,” but it can’t only be for people who don’t lead public lives. 

Thursday, May 8, 2014

"Let It Go" Already! Frozen and "False Feminism"

*knock knock knock*

♫ Do you wanna build a snowman? ♬

Yes, if you’re like me, one of the millions of college students who is reliving their childhood vicariously through animated movies, then you’ve been humming that tune to yourself on the way to class for the past six months (in 70 degree weather, no less. #californiaproblems)

As the hype has risen to a fever pitch, however, others have asked Frozen’s disciples to take a step back and really examine whether the film is truly the pièce de résistance of modern feminism in children’s entertainment. In an article written for Medium, writer Dani Colman claims that Frozen left her cold.

“I have made absolutely no secret of how much I disliked Disney’s Frozen. I hated it. I spent most of the movie alternately facepalming, groaning, and checking my watch, and when people asked me how I liked it, I made this face:

Colman notes that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but lays out a point-by-point takedown of the feminist issues the film supposedly tackles, and how, in her mind, when you really look at it, Frozen isn’t that revolutionary at all.

She debunks the “Frozen doesn’t end with a marriage!” argument, highlighting that while there is indeed no wedding at the end of the movie (spoiler alert), it follows to the familiar Disney trope of the “heterosexual happily ever after.” She backs it up with the research that only seven of the forty-three Disney animated features actually have a wedding at the end, but that twenty-five have a “happily ever after,” thereby squashing the claim that Frozen is any different from the others.

What was most interesting to me was her take on the main female characters and the praise that they are strong role models for young girls. According to Colman, Anna is really no different than any other Disney princess (“beautiful, in a gives-Barbie-body-dysmorphia kind of way”), and that her “charming flaw” of clumsiness “seems to be the de facto flaw for heroines who aren’t fully developed enough to have a real flaw – and yes, this would be the point where I compare Frozen to Twilight.

For Elsa, Colman claims that she may be even worse than her sister. “Her sister spends the better part of ten years trying to reach out to her (admittedly misguidedly), and Elsa shuts herself away so steadfastly a psychiatrist might call it pathological. She’s an absolute mess of a characterological self-blame and avoidance, and she deals with her issues by speed-skating away from them.” She draws comparisons to The Lion King’s Simba, and how Simba eventually takes responsibility and goes back to his kingdom, while Elsa is practically dragged to hers against her will. Colman declares that Elsa is overemotional (as she nearly kills her sister with her own snowman creation) and haughty, and yet oversimplified in an attempt to make her relatable and not the film’s true villain.

I found this article through one of my friend’s Facebook wall, and thought overall it was a refreshing take on the film’s so-called radical storytelling. Colman makes the excellent point that because we have been deprived of excellent female characters in children’s movies for so long, we are quick to laud any step in the right direction and gloss over any deeper issues the film may have.

However, as I am someone who looks less at political ramifications the story highlights and more at the story itself, I think Colman ignores the cards the characters were dealt, and the natural instincts the characters would have in those situations.

Yes, Elsa is someone who runs away from her problems, but she has been taught her whole life to be terrified of her own power. It doesn’t seem like much of stretch to think that, in her mind, going back to her kingdom which is entirely against her would only make things worse. As far as almost killing her sister (I think Colman makes a judgment leap with this, for the record. Was the scary snowman meant to be threatening? Yes, but I think it was to forcibly remove her sister from the situation, not kill her) and being overemotional, the girl has been holding back her entire freaking life and when someone is only beginning to comprehend how powerful they are after being emotionally and physically repressed, it’s generally not a good idea to provoke them.

No, Elsa’s not going to be as complex and morally ambiguous as someone like Elphaba in Wicked, of which this character draws deep parallels (“Defying Gravity” and “Let It Go” are essentially the same song, okay?). Elsa also doesn’t have the luxury of a three hour musical or a 300 page novel. At the end of the day, it is a kid’s movie and there’s only so much deep, enriching character development you can pack into an hour and half movie.

Still, this is not an unimportant conversation to have, and the culture normative is ingrained into kids at a young age. We want them to admire the princesses we watch on the screen, and we better make sure that those princesses aren’t teaching them lessons we don’t want them to learn.