Talk:Color-blind casting

Untitled

Would not the reciprocal, a white actor playing a traditionally black part, come under this definition? Are there any examples of this occuring? LukeSurl ^{t c} 19:56, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

see my addition on this point Neddyseagoon - talk 08:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not convinced by that example. Casting all the white characters with black actors and the black character with a white actor isn't colour-blind, because the colour still matters; I'd call it inverted casting, or role-reversal casting, or something. --Paul A 08:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

True, but it's the closest parallel I could think of. Black actors playing traditionally white parts is more common in the period 1970-present than vice versa, and before that "white actors playing traditionally black roles" didn't occur since there were (relatively) so few black actors.Neddyseagoon - talk 10:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

The most famous incident I can think of is when Laurence Olivier "blacked up" as the role of Othello.theolimeister (talk) 18:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Some other possibilities for discussion

I was the person who requested this article, thanks for starting it! There are several additional things that I think it might be interesting to address, if references are available. Just off the top of my head:

• The mix in theatre, musicals, television and film. My understanding is that it's most common in theatre and very rare in film, but that might be wrong.
• The prevalence in different countries. The sources I've seen suggest it was pioneered in the UK, with companies such as the RSC, but I don't have a perspective on other countries.
• More precision on 'historical' -- several sources suggest that more recent historical figures eg Queen Victoria or Churchill would not be as easily accepted as distant historical/Shakespearean figures.
• The difference between roles explicitly known to be white eg English kings, and roles with a strong presumption of white race, but which isn't explicitly stated in the text eg Hamlet.
• Recent criticisms on race grounds eg see http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/20/AR2005052001944.html & http://www.cre.gov.uk/Default.aspx.LocID-0hgnew0bh.RefLocID-0hg01b00100600g003.Lang-EN.htm
• Other potential criticisms, such as difficulties in understanding family relationships (eg a white child of a black parent might raise confusing suspicions of illegitimacy in the audience).
• The use of colour-blind casting as a defence of an all-white cast in situations where the people portrayed would tend to be an ethnic mix, eg criticism of The Class: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/tvblog/2006/07/colorblind_casting.html

Espresso Addict 01:07, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

What about in Doctor Who? Specifically the Shakespeare episode? Or doesn't it count because it's talked about in the episode? If that's the case, what about when The Doctor became John Smith in order to hide? Martha talks about some of the students being biased towards her for being from 'Good old London Town'58.161.68.56 (talk) 04:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Can't watch the Doctor Who episodes that do that - totally unable to suspend disbelief. Same with the ridiculous Merlin episodes that feature a black Guinevere: for God's sake, the actual meaning of her name is "blonde"! RomanSpa (talk) 20:39, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

another notable example

Cleveland Brown in Family Guy and the Cleveland Show is a primary example. He is played by Mike Henry who also voices African american character Raillo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.92.255.42 (talk) 02:55, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Hermoine

This should be added? No? I'm also thinking the backlash of John Boyega as Stormtrooper Finn in The Force Awakens belongs (nothing ever said they had to be white, but racists had a thing about it). – Muboshgu (talk) 17:15, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

B-b-but the racists were perturbed! Yes, let's ignore the existing material in the vast general canon which still exists despite Disney declaring it defunct, showing Finn as white, or the content of Harry Potter and Rowling's original drawings which define Hermione as 'white', when fans of pop-media are immense sticklers to changes for little to no reason, regardless of appreciable race/ethnicity involved.

To say it was colour-blind would be to make the assumption that the choices were made out of a choice to use the best actor available, a road often leading to accusations of whitewashing when 'white' actors are used, rather than say, deliberately portray them contrary to the original material. Given Boyega's minimal experience, poor performance in the movie itself and JJ Abram's openness about deliberate choosing specifically non-white characters, and his plans to introduce likewise changes in sexual orientation for no reason other than the sake of it, it fairly easy to ascertain that it's Colour-discriminate casting. 31.205.111.215 (talk) 19:40, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

JJ Abrams deliberately casting actors of colour means it's not colour-blind casting, that's right. But if I remember correctly it was explicitly pointed out that Hermione in Cursed Child was colour-blind casting. Other than that... "changes in sexual orientation for no reason other than the sake of it", do I laugh or cry? So there's reason for everyone being straight in most movies that goes beyond "the sake of it", when it's basically non-compliant with reality? Including LQBTIA+ characters in stories adds to credibility; it doesn't need any specific reason. --79.254.100.94 (talk) 17:15, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

A very late response but the comment was made in clarifying the difference, and why accusations of racism shouldn't be brought up in such a way, in response to colour-discriminate casting and assumed colour-blind casting of a play, which shouldn't be automatically associated. RE: Sexuality-casting, this is a different issue as sexuality is not "visible"; sexuality is not an element of a persons visual characteristic, and changes to an established canon or story in such a way as Abrams supports do not necessarily or even likely add credibility - inclusion itself isn't realistic (itself laughable in Star Wars...), and can itself alone be damaging; unless the story is well written with it as a focus or melds it into their personality in a way that is believable. Simply signposting a person's sexuality without it being story or character-wise meaningful is just hackneyed immersion-breaking, the only point of which is virtue signalling. It's damaging to the original creative vision to willy-nilly change things for virtue signalling, with another of Abrams' decisions, to make Star Trek's Sulu gay, coming under fire from the original actor George Takei, himself a gay man, because he believes it runs against Gene Roddenberry's creative vision.

The best option would be to create your own culture than to subvert the old, and that way you can produce something of the highest credibility.

But that's all tangential. 31.205.111.215 (talk) 11:44, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Request moving page to Non-tradition casting

Color blind casting includes all races, including white, which would make white washing color blind casting. But it describes the practice of casting a non white actor in a traditionally white character. DJokerNr1 (talk) 06:37, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

White washing is only color-blind casting if race is not a factor in the casting. Historically, this has not generally been the case. Roles like Charlie Chan or Silas Lynch weren't cast color-blind. They were specifically called for a white actor. In modern times, often roles are specifically rewritten as white (with "caucasian" specified in the casting call) because it is felt that the film will sell better in some territories as a result. 76.14.28.144 (talk) 22:25, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

What about B.D.Williams in Batman then? He wasn't chosen despite of his race but because of it, you can read it in the Wikiedia entry on the movie. I'm not saying we should come up with an article on "blackwashing" or anything like that (though I don't feel okay about "whitewashing" being the counterpart to "non-tradition/color-blind casting" as the former have some clearly negative overtones to it) but let's get things straight I say. Jaro7788 (talk) 07:20, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Seems to me before you can call this non-traditional casting, that you need to define traditional casting. Once you do that, anything else is non-traditional. There should also be gender-blind casting (I don't know that anyone has done it), and maybe some other things that aren't traditional. Gah4 (talk) 18:44, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Why is this article called color-blind casting and not non-whitewashing

This article is supposed to be the opposite of the whitewashing in film) article. So why does this article try to portray this as something 'normal' or acceptable' when whitewashing is portrayed as something terrible? Non-whites acting white historical figures in film is much more common than whites doing the same to non-whites, and yet an attempt is made to try to portray this as something positive and just a way to help non-white actors be seen? What kind of bullshit is that? I'm not very familiar with Wikipedia but if people agree, I'd contribute to completely revamping this entire article into being just that, an opposite of whitewashing but for when non-whites are used to play the roles of historical white figures. 194.237.157.205 (talk) 11:20, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Add 2016's grease.

2016's Grease Live was also an example of colorblind casting. It took place in the 1950s, where racism was common. Actors such as Keke Palmer, Vanessa Hudgens, Carlos Penavega, Mario Lopez, etc were in the movie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6001:E790:5800:2DE6:3859:8451:35D1 (talk) 03:15, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

But was it really blind, or was it intentional? They are very different. Gah4 (talk) 18:45, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Annie

Annie is another example of color blind casting. For example, Annie, who is traditionally played by white actresses, has been played by Quvenzhané Wallis, a black actress. She was born around the time Katharine Hepburn, Bob Hope, Buddy Ebsen, Gregory Peck, etc all passed. Audrey Hepburn and Lillian Gish passed 10 years prior. Anyways, please add Annie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6001:E790:5800:B0FC:59FD:41BF:6D59 (talk) 05:20, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

I disagree. It was intentional. The role was changed to black so it could be a vehicle for Willow Smith. When development took too long they changed to a new black actress.Correctron (talk) 06:27, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Does color blind casting include white people? or should it be renamed non traditional casting?

i am asking this because the term colorblind imply its color blind even when it comes to white actors, but the page gives the impression (with examples) that it's a practice that casts POC actors in traditionally white roles. AmateurFilmcritique (talk) 10:21, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

My understanding for Grey's Anatomy is that they cast the actors, and then assigned them to parts randomly. It should be the method, not the results. If you explicitly, for example, cast all the white actors to black rolls, or vice versa, or both, then it isn't blind. I am not sure that you can get actors to accept a position without telling them which part is theirs, but that is the way it should work. In the cast of Grey's Anatomy, as I understand it, it was also gender blind. Non-traditional would be used for explicit casting, like an african-american for a Disney princess. Gah4 (talk) 04:47, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Additional citations for verification

This article lacks a lot of references for its examples. They need to be referenced and will otherwise be removed. Furthermore, the examples should either have a "Media" column or be grouped into sub-sections by media (film, TV, plays). The lead section is also lacking in discussing color-blind casting, which from what I have seen has its roots in plays. There is recent coverage about color-blind casting in Hamilton that can be factored in with the background of this casting practice. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 19:53, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Blinded experiment

Should we mention, and link to, Blinded experiment which is the more generic form of blind casting? Gah4 (talk) 05:23, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Note that in a statistical sense, as in Blinded experiment, blind has a specific meaning. That some information is unavailable to the decision process. I am not sure that is completely possible in the case of casting, but it should not include cases where a choice was made to use a specific group for the position. I suspect that excludes some that are currently on the list. On the other hand, I don't completely understand the non-traditional idea yet, though it does seem to me that it should include the intentional case. Gah4 (talk) 00:28, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Color-blind casting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071204232706/http://www.britishtheatreguide.info/news/library/news/bl040101.htm to http://www.britishtheatreguide.info/news/library/news/bl040101.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:39, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Lead section

This contains the wording "the practice of casting without considering the actor's race or skin color". Compare Whitewashing in film "a casting practice ... in which white actors are cast in historically non-white character roles". I suggest that the former statement could equally well be phrased (using the format of the latter) as "a casting practice ... in which actors are cast in roles *which have historically not been associated with their race*" and the latter statement could equally well be phrased as "the practice of casting *white* actors without considering the actor's race or skin color". If color-blind casting means only "the practice of casting non-white actors without considering the actor's race or skin color", then I suggest that the article should say this. Alekksandr (talk) 23:20, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

The whole concept of this article is somewhat confused. We should arguably distinguish between literally 'color-blind casting' - simply casting the best actor regardless of their race - and deliberately casting non-white actors for good reason, as in Hamilton. The latter might be called 'color-conscious casting' but it certainly isn't color-blind. Robofish (talk) 17:00, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm curious, Robofish, what was the "good reason" for casting non-white actors in Hamilton? Walterblue222 (talk) 01:54, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Wow, that was a slow reply. :) Well Walterblue, this isn't really the place to discuss it; but I would say recreating the story of the American revolution with a nonwhite cast is kind of the whole point of Hamilton. The casting draws out parallels between the life of Alexander Hamilton and young black/Hispanic men today, makes that history more relevant to a modern nonwhite audience, and implies similarities between the American revolution and later struggles for racial equality. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I suspect all that was intended. Robofish (talk) 12:52, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

A "slow reply" in what sense? I saw this comment and responded to it. I'm still waiting to hear the "good reason" here... Specifically portraying significant historical figures with deliberately inaccurate race-swapped actors seems wrong to me. Kind of similar to the "we waz kangs" absurdity, where "blacks" claim that their ancestors were kings and queens and royalty, and try to steal the heritage of Egyptians (who were Pharaohs anyway, not Kings).

Do you think it would be appropriate to have Fredrick Douglass played by Reese Witherspoon? How about Martin Luther King Jr. played by Jim Carrey? Or Malcolm X played by Jerry Seinfeld? What about having the Mohammed played by Ian McKellen? Or Ghandi played by Justin Bieber? Walterblue222 (talk) 14:35, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@Walterblue222: Discuss the article, not your opinion of its topic. EvergreenFir (talk) 15:29, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir: Hmm, perhaps you missed the comment I was responding to? The one where @Robofish: made a clearly opinionated statement ("deliberately casting non-white actors for good reason")? I asked what this "good reason" was, they responded with more of their opinion, and I responded to that. If you want to criticize someone for discussing their opinion, you should begin with the person who shared their opinion first - not someone replying to the opinionated statement and trying to understand its relevance. Walterblue222 (talk) 18:46, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Exclusively film?

Is this article exclusively for examples in film/stage? Is television also allowed? If so, how would I go about doing the year? The Verified Cactus 100% 15:00, 2 May 2018 (UTC)