Royal Shakespeare Company | The Guardian: He is one of Shakespeare’s most reviled characters, distinguished by his “deformed, unfinish’d” figure. Now, for the first time, the Royal Shakespeare Company has cast a disabled actor in the title role of Richard III in a new production opening later this year.
7 comments:
I love RIchard III, and something directors and actors frequently miss about the character is that his backstory is shaped by ableism. It’s a play that explores what happens when a man who is told his entire life that he can only be evil is finally given the agency to do so. Non-disabled actors can’t find this history in the character; it often comes across like Richard’s disability is irrelevant- or worse, a character flaw. The end of Richard III also hinges on Richard’s disability- if he could have fought on his feet, the war of roses could have ended very differently. In most other aspects, theater makers understand the importance of casting people who share identities with the character they portray, and it’s a disservice to the piece, to disabled performers, and to the theatre industry as a whole, to not do the same with the disabled identity of Richard III. I’m thrilled that Royal Shakespeare Company has stepped up to take on this production in a richer, more inquisitive way.
This is a great step for representation and accessibility within the theatre industry. Often there are stories that are twisted to shape our current view of reality rather than the true story simply because it will keep a lot of people more comfortable. This was a risk that this company took in order to give someone the opportunity to start an incredibly important conversation about what does ableism looks like in theatre. It has been a conversation that has jumped into the front lines briefly over the past few years but due to the pandemic mixed with other issues has been pushed back into the shadows. I agree with a lot of what Hughes is saying throughout this article. Able-bodied actors who play disabled roles simply don’t have the life experience to truly make that character what it needs to be. Representation is such an important concept in theatre to me. I think that everyone should be able to see themselves on stage, everyone deserves that moment.
I think that diversity in classics is very important but very underemphasized. The diversity that is WRITTEN into the piece will even be pushed aside by people who haven't closely read the piece or studied the language. This mixed with the underrepresentation of disabled people in media means that it is CRUCIAL that disabled characters are played by disabled actors. In conversations about able-bodied actors playing disabled characters, the question is SHOULD they rather than COULD they. Of course, an able-bodied actor has the capacity to portray a disabled character (the quality of the performance is up for debate but they are able to), but SHOULD they? In my opinion, disabled characters should be given to disabled actors. Actors should not be limited to only their lived experience, but if a disabled actor cannot book a disabled role because able-bodied actors are saturating the market, how likely will disabled actors be considered fairly for “able-bodied” characters where disability isn’t a part of the show. In an ideal world, anyone could play anyone, but ableism has created a market where disabled actors are disenfrancized. Because of this, special consideration needs to be made to dismantle ableism and give disabled actors a fair chance. This starts in letting them play their own lived experience.
This is a massive step, and I am really happy for Hughes who gets to play this role. It’s no secret that there aren't many disabled people working in theater, both on and off stage. What caught my eye the most in this article was this part talking about how it has been called “problematic” casting able-bodied actors in roles written as disabled. And in short, I completely agree. I am very well aware that the nature of acting is pretending how someone that is not you would talk, behave, walk, etc. But disability being something that can be seen, should be coming from someone who does live with one. Though able-bodied actors surely could portray such a role with great care, there are so few opportunities for disabled actors to be on stage that I think those opportunities should be given to them, especially when it's already in the script.
I am currently in a Shakespeare’s Darkest Plays class and just two weeks ago we read Richard III then followed that by watching some clips of him played by various people. I have to say that this is a great form of representation on stage. In my class, we discussed the fact that Richard III himself is ACTUALLY disabled in the play and usually it is able-bodied actors playing it up and how harmful it could be if not done correctly. The only known disabled actor we spoke of who played Richard III was Peter Dinklage in 2003 at The Globe itself, and how much of a shame it is that nobody of reported significance had done so since then. Arthur Hughes, who even said playing Richard is “a dream come true,” can piggyback off of his personal experiences to truly bring this character to life. I am excited to hear more about his run and hope that there are more casting choices made like this in the future.
I'm ecstatic that a major company is casting a disabled actor to fit a role written as disabled. It needs to happen way more than it does now. But as Hughes says, the real change will only come when disabled actors will start to be cast in non-disabled roles, which would truly bring greater diversity to casting practices in the theatre industry. However, my first thought when reading this article was towards another article that I read a few weeks back that talked about the potential harms to be done in roles that are written to encourage false stereotypes and narratives about disabled individuals and the disabled experience, and worry that these companies won't go about casting and treating roles such as Richard III appropriately and with the respect and care they deserve. Namely, I don't want companies to treat such roles just as good publicity or propagate stereotypes. And, to be clear, the issue I'm referring to isn't necessarily in the casting of such roles but in the fundamental construction of the role itself. If the proper care and attention is given, this shouldn't even become a problem, but it's still something that should be talked about.
I think it is important to hear the perspective of someone who has lived with disabilities and understands what the character is experiencing. This article does a good job of reminding us that disabled actors can play roles of able bodied characters. In the musical we performed during my junior year of high school, one of the ensemble members uses a wheelchair. This experience opened my eyes to see how non-compliance with ADA laws was ingrained in our theater and how easy it was to change that. I hope theaters can make these changes now instead of waiting until they have members in their cast or crew who need these accommodations. On a separate note, it is weird watching how the industry is changing how it engages with the public. The theater pairing with TikTok to connect with a younger audience is a great idea, I just don’t totally understand it.
Post a Comment