The Deaf and Deaf/blind community is upset because a deaf/blind actress was not considered for casting for the role and they felt as a community this robbed the story of it's message and robbed a great opportunity to use an actress from the community.
Here are two articles that describe the controversy:
This is a Youtube video from a Deaf women who feels a deaf/blind actress should have at least been taken into consideration. She also says a hearing actress was taken into consideration because she was famous and that would bring more money into the play.
This is the general community's response to the article the day after it was written:
Our group felt that if the Deaf/blind community is denied opportunities to represent their community what can they do to work and express themselves as a whole? We felt the casting should have represented a more accurate role and expressed accommodation for the actress choice since this movie is about "Miracle Workers."
Do you think a Deaf/blind or Deaf actress should have been cast and do you think this is a realistic expectation from the Deaf/blind community?
Do you think a Deaf/blind or Deaf actress should have been cast and do you think this is a realistic expectation from the Deaf/blind community?
I am confused at whether or not they "auditioned and did not consider" deaf/blind actresses, or if they just did not audition them at all. From one of the articles, it seems clear that they did not audition those with said disabilities for the lead part at least. I feel like broadway is a business...it is not an organization designed to help people in any way. I guess I don't really care about broadway and what they think and who they think should prance around on stage.
ReplyDeleteI do, however, strongly disagree with discrimination based on a disability. I feel like it should be illegal to refuse to audition those with disabilities. At the same time, we can't go around telling producers, writers, and artists of other kinds how to run their stupid plays. We shouldn't at least: we should not try and choose who should be in a play and use their disability to get them into the play.
I think that it is totally realistic to audition anyone at all and to consider them as maybe filling the part. Rejecting a person based on their disability should be illegal. In the end, they said they cast a star so that they could bring the money in. And let's face it, that's pretty much the objective in any kind of entertainment business. I personally think that I way rather see a play with an authentic actor that actually lives such a difficult part as Helen Keller did--I think the producers are stupid to not think of that themselves. It would be a great play.
Honestly I think people's arguements and time and money could be better spent. I can understand why they cast Abigail and I can understand why the Deaf and deaf/blind community would be upset about it. But I really don't think it's a big enough deal to cause so much disagreement. I think that in general, you should hold auditions, allow everyone to give it a shot and choose the person that does the best job. Like Britany, I was also confused about how the auditions worked out. I don't doubt at all that a Deaf actress could do a wonderful job of portraying Helen- but I also think that a hearing girl can do the job just as well. It really comes down to who's the better actress whether Deaf, hearing, blind, whatever- and go from there. I really liked Britany's comment about how Broadway is a business, not a civil rights organization. They were choosing an actress and they chose a talented one so just leave it alone. I think everyone could spend their time and arguments in much more productive ways.
ReplyDeleteI really don't have a strong opinion either way on this one. Obviously casting Abigail Breslin could be a good move for publicity and the overall success of the play. I do agree that the auditions should be open to anyone and that Deaf/blind actresses should be equally considered for the part. I too think that the part should go to the best girl for the part and for the play.
ReplyDeleteI feel that both sides of the argument have very valid points. Although it is true that in order to make money on Broadway, the investors have to be satisfied and tickets have to be sold, it is also true that the part of Helen Keller could easily and effectively be played by a deaf/blind actress. The director says that he chose Abigail Breslin in order to sell tickets. But personally, I feel that if I knew the part of Helen Keller was being played by a deaf/blind actress, it would make me much more interested and inclined to go see the show. As I said before, both sides of the argument have very valid points, and this is a debate that may never really be resolved. However, as shown by the responses that this issue has occasioned in the deaf/blind community and other communities, it is an issue that must be carefully weighed. I understand that it is important to choose the best actor or actress for a part, but in situations like this, deaf/blind actors and actresses should absolutely be considered. There is a very good point, one which I fully support, in the last part of the third article: “If an African-American does not play a role written for an African-American actor, if a Chinese-American does not play a role written for a Chinese or Chinese-American actor, what role can he or she expect to play? If deaf or blind actors cannot expect to play characters that are deaf or blind, what roles can they expect to be considered for?”
ReplyDeleteI also think that both sides have good points. I am also unclear as to how the audition process was actually in place, but none the less there should be no discrimination. I feel that everyone should have a fair chance to get a job or a role on broadway. I don't necessarily think that automatically a deaf/blind person should get first priority just because the movie is about a deaf/blind person. I do feel that everyone should get a fair chance at auditioning, and let the best man or woman win. Hollywood is a place where all they are thinking about is money. So, it is only obvious to them to get someone to play the main role that is popular so they can sell more tickets. But at the same time it is not fair to the deaf/blind community if they are not allowed to audition based on their disability. I think that with proper explanation of what happened, we could come to an agreement of which side we were on. But it is hard with confusing evidence. I don't think this is a big enough issue that people have to discuss in such great detail. Its just broadway. But the main point of this article is that no one should discriminate based on a disability. Everyone should be given a fair chance no matter what!
ReplyDeleteI do not think that a deaf/blind or deaf actress should have been cast as I think that a deaf/blind person should be acting that role in Miracle Workers. What I mean is: it does not matter who acts as long as the message of the movie is accurate and good. There should not be a totally uproar about whether or not a person with similar disabilities as Helen Keller should portray her in the production because it is not up to them, nor should it be. They should not have a legal right to make sure that a deaf/blind person plays that role because it is not their movie. If they want to make a movie or a production themselves, they are certainly at liberty to do so and pick whomever they want. I would have to say, though, that it is a realistic expectation of the deaf/blind community because they have always held their culture in such high esteem and importance that it could be offending that a hearing person was acting as a deaf/blind person.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Michelle's comment that if members of the deaf/blind community want to make a movie or production and cast deaf/blind actors and actresses, they are at liberty to do so.
ReplyDeleteAbigail Breslin was not chosen because she can see and hear and they wanted to discriminate against deaf or blind actresses; she was cast because of her star status.
The deaf/blind community is certainly free to suggest that a deaf/blind actress be considered. I agree with their argument that casting a deaf, blind actress for Helen Keller could create a buzz and help sell tickets. However, it is unrealistic for them to demand or expect that the director will change his mind.
I find it difficult to blame or make acquisitions towards the deaf/blind community for demanding the director to change his mind; because we are from the hearing world and I don’t think that we can accurately understand where they are coming from. I think that being a part of the deaf/blind community and actually being in it is two completely different things. No matter how many times I may dip my toes into their world I never will be fully emerged in their world or way of life. The deaf/blind community is a way of life and quite frankly a culture in of its self. So, No I don’t think that we can fully blame or make acquisitions towards the deaf/blind community for making demands of the director.
ReplyDeleteMoreover, I do agree that the auditions should have been open to both the deaf/blind community and the hearing community. Who knows maybe Broadway would have found a fabulous talented actor from the deaf/blind community. Furthermore, I find Abigail Breslin to be a talented and interesting young actor. However, I definitely think that Abigail is going to have her work cut out for her. She is going to have to learn the deaf/blind culture in and out, and learn how to portray Helen Keller to the “T” in order for The Miracle Worker to be a big hit and for the deaf/blind community to feel like they were well represented.
Broadway is forst and foremost a business venture. Their goal is to make money. By casting Abigail is this role they are taking an actress that more people are aware of in hopes of increasing sales. In this difficult economy this is critical. I am unclear as to whether people from the deaf/blind community auditioned for the role. And if did, did the director choose simply based on disability? If this is the case then it would be wrong. But if they simply chose who they considered to be the best actress for the role then there is nothing wrong with it. It is a business, and if the deaf/blind community had an opportunity to audition then they should not expect anything more. We shouldn't descriminate against hearing people either. The best actress should get the job.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Mr. Richenthal’s statement: “I would consider it financially irresponsible to approach a major revival without making a serious effort to get a star.” The issue for him is about making money – like many of you have mentioned, Broadway is a business – it is not about representing all people. While I am positive there are good actors among the deaf/blind community, to Richenthal, hiring a deaf/blind actor is an unknown and it would be a major risk. A much safer route is to hire an actor, Breslin, who he already knows will perform well and who will most likely ensure a good turnout.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time, I agree with Danielle’s comment that Breslin has a lot to live (or act) up to. If Breslin performs well and accurately represents the deaf/blind community then I think they (the deaf/blind community) should be happy. So I disagree with Michelle’s comment - I think it would be discriminatory on their part if they were offended simply because the actor was not deaf/blind < is that not exactly what we are fighting against?
Also, I understand the argument that “If an African-American does not play a role written for an African-American actor . . . what role can he or she expect to play?” implying the same thing for a deaf or blind actor. However, I think that if a Caucasian actor plays the role better, or if a hearing or seeing person plays the part better, they are the ones that deserve the part! There’s capitalism for you.
I do not think the issue of not casting a deaf/blind actress to play Helen Keller was to deny the opportunity to someone who is deaf/blind, but to make money for the production. I can understand why the deaf community would be upset and or offended but I think they have the wrong idea of why Abigail was casted instead. She is an amazing actress(in my opinion) and has a lot of credibility and status which are two things I am sure the director was looking for in that character. I think it would have been cool to see an actual deaf/blind actress play the part, but the director is more concerned with the profit margin instead.
ReplyDeleteI don’t feel strongly towards one side or the other. I don’t really have a strong opinion on the matter. I grew up in the performing arts, music, drama, musical theatre, etc. and I fully understand what it takes to put a production together. While I was in musicals, rehearsals would begin in December and opening night would be in April, and this was just community and high school theatre. I’ve done many workshops on broadway with various casts and I know that they spend more than just 4 months on a production before opening night. With this being said, I do understand where the Deaf/blind community is coming from. They want to feel as equals and have their culture represented by one of their own. However, having an inexperienced actor or actress would put a major damper on the production process. Broadway and theatre is very demanding and many people are not cut out for it. I believe that they could have put more consideration casting a blind/deaf individual for the role, but I think they honestly did the best they could for the success of their show.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what most people have said, that both sides have valid arguments. I do, however, tend to lean towards the decision the director made to cast Abigail Breslin. I think that Broadway is a business. They have to cast who they think will benefit their production. Like someone said, the directors of these plays are not there to aid deaf/blind actors and actresses, they are there to ensure that their play makes money. I do not agree with discrimination in any way, but I do not think that was the case in this situation. I am a firm believer in hiring the most qualified and best person for a job, no matter what race, age, gender, etc. I believe it is the right of the director to choose who he thinks would be best for the part of Helen, regardless of whether or not she is deaf or blind. Also, like others have said, I do not think this is an issue that should be made into as big of a deal as it has been.
ReplyDeleteTo include or not to include….that is the question, (or law suit). I was impressed with the first article by Ken Marlbourough and his objective informative view about inclusion in the classroom. He shared the purpose of the decision of IDEA and the law of LRE, then explained arguments on either side as to whether students with disabilities are receiving enough accommodations in participating with the main stream classes.
ReplyDeleteConsidering the issue with the “inclusionist’s and the “success for All seems to be an issue tht is blown out of proportion. We all at one point get so caught up in a cause for a special reason and for such things, we forget about logic. I believe there are certain circumstances with different children who may do well all day in a main stream class. However, I also have seen when some of our children with disabilities do very well if they can possibly find one or two certain classes in which they can learn and grow from.
I don’t believe forcing them into complete mainstream is the right answerer for all students. It is like forcing a square peg, into a round hole. Not having your student in the mainstream every day, sometimes it seems they may not succeed, but they will, with hard work at school and lots of love at home.
I think that they should have at least had deaf/blind people audition for the part. But, I think that this is becoming a bigger issue than it needs to be. Obviously, a deaf/blind person could portray the part more accurately, and would have insights that the director and others don't because of this person's experience. However, I agree with some of you that if the role is played well (it is called acting after all:) ), and the overall message is conveyed, that there is no problem casting someone who is merely pretending to be deaf/blind.
ReplyDeleteIt looks like this production of The Miracle Worker is going to be another collaboration of cardboard cutouts for the masses for filthy lucre. While I do think that it makes sense that the producer wants what is best for business, I feel that the art of theater is losing itself in the overwhelming commercial aspect of it. If the producer wanted to create a truly great show, he would consider people who were more appropriate for the part, who could better convey the message of the musical.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that he should be legally required to cast someone with disabilities for the role of Helen, however I do think it is a gross oversight that will cause the show to suffer. It would have been the wiser choice. People want to really see and feel and believe art when they see it. Especially a show that revolves around this matter. He could have made it great, but chose not to.
This is not the first production of The Miracle Worker and so it is certainly not the first time that a seeing, hearing actress has played Helen Keller. Without producers, there is no play, and producers are concerned with casting the biggest names to make the most money. Entertainment is a money-making venture, after all.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I can understand why the Deaf-Blind Community is angered by the fact that a seeing, hearing actress is cast, there is one side of this issue they have overlooked: with a big-name actress that thousands of people will come to see, won't the message of the play garner more respect for their community?
I can see both sides of the argument, but I don’t think either side should be making such a huge deal about this. I guess ultimately my opinion is this…it is called acting. Acting is acting. It does not mean someone has to have all the characteristics and traits of the character they are supposed to play. They are not the person they are supposed to play. They just…..wait for it….act like the person. A star was chosen because she is a good actor and can play the part well. Choose the best actor or in this case actress for the job. Sure, deaf/blind individuals should definitely audition if they want. I think it is important to remember the message of the movie, not make a big deal of who played in it. The message is the whole point of it.
ReplyDeleteAlong with many other individuals I think that each side has a valid argument. I can see the benefits of having a famous actress play the part of Helen Keller. However, I think the director should have considered many different people both individuals who did and did not have the disabilities mentioned. The director should then pick whichever individual they think is the best pick for the part. The most important thing when producing a show is to have the best acotr or actress do the part. I think the same principle applies in this situation.
ReplyDeletei think that any actress whether they were deaf/blind or not should have the chance to try out for this part but i also think that the choice that they did make is good because with the familiar face a lot more people will go to the movie. i feel like the deaf/blind community could think of this situation as being good because the story is going to be shared with everyone and that with a famous actor instead of someone who is not well known the movie is going to have more views
ReplyDeleteI was particularly moved by this quote from letters to the editor after the original article was written by the New York Times: “If an African-American does not play a role written for an African-American actor, if a Chinese-American does not play a role written for a Chinese or Chinese-American actor, what role can he or she expect to play? If deaf or blind actors cannot expect to play characters that are deaf or blind, what roles can they expect to be considered for?" I thought that this was an extremely salient point brought up by those who were proponents of the deaf-blind community. I know that the deaf community as a whole is self-advocating and they are quite proud of their actors. I don't think that it is an unreasonable request to have at least allowed a deaf-blind actor try-out for the part. I can totally understand their indignation that a deaf-bind actor was not even considered for the part. I think is was a huge oversight and should not be repeated.
ReplyDeleteI like how Christopher Shinn said "there seems to be hostility towards the idea that the best person to represent disability would be someone who had experienced disability directly." My first reaction was that if they want to truly capture disability or insight into the deaf-blind community, they should consider a documentary on an individual. Even if they were casting for a movie I think it would have been nice to consider an actress from the deaf-blind community, but it is a broadway show... which means no cuts or take twos. I think that would make things difficult, but then again if an actress was up for the part I don't see the harm in letting her try out or play the part. I just think casting a disability for the sake of casting a disability is ridiculous considering the dynamics of broadway.
ReplyDeleteWell this is a different type of argument. I dont think that there is enough information as to the selection process for this play. I understand that those that are involved in Broadway are all concerned about the revenue and money that will be brought in. I dont think that this should be made as big of a deal as it is. I understand that every disability should be treated equally and I would never want any disability to get an unfair stereotype. I just want to know if people that were deaf and blind even wanted to play in the the play. Do any of the people complaining be willing to audition? Maybe there wasnt a very good actress that out did the actress that they chose. I dont know if it matters whether the actress has thaat disability as long as they act and represent them well. I think that the broadway crew figured that the deaf blind community that enjoys broadway and goes is probably less then those that will come for a big name.
ReplyDeleteI think it is quite interesting to read people's perspective on this situation. Althought it does seam more realistic to have someone play the part because it could have much more meaning to people as well as to those who are deaf or blind. Unfortunately when it comes to the movie industry it's buisness and they are trying to attract people to watch it so by having someone famous would bring in more revenue. There are so many examples of movies were a normal or someone without the disability played the role and not someone who actually had the disability and it was amazing. I know that this may have upsetted some but it's buisness would have it been nice yes of course, and i think the movie would have done well but i can understand why they did what they did.
ReplyDeleteHelen Keller was an amazing woman who could never ever be mirrored in any way.That's why we create pictures, songs, poems, and books about those amazing people and we try to recreate in some way the ideas, emotions, and events that they created and were a part of. If we start to change the way movies are made then we put a plug in the fountain of amazing creativity that fuels our love of historical figures. I challenge ourselves to find the best possible person who will fit that role and cast her! Something's gotta give, honestly!
ReplyDelete