fjays
|
Can Angel be played by a woman?Just a question.. Can Angel be played like a woman?
Of course, the character would still be a man playing a woman though.
Thanks haha
|
Pannic
|
I don't really see how it could really work. The audience might not get it.
|
LittleGavroche
|
If there was some way to make it impossible to guess she's a woman, then yeah, but I find the idea very unlikely.
|
teapot
|
I probably support gender and race blind casting if it doesn't affect the storyline, but I have to say that having a woman play Angel just seems wrong to me. The essence of Angel, the incredible sweetness of the character would be destroyed by any hint of stuntcasting or even inadvertant parody. Angel has to be very carefully played to avoid any false note that would render him less "pure" for lack of a better word. I do not feel it would work artistically to cast a woman playing a gay man in drag in this role.
|
fjays
|
|
teapot
|
Why the sad face, fjay? I hope it wasn't anything I said. I certainly didn't mean to hurt your feelings, if I did. I know another young woman who would rather be Angel than anyone else in Rent, but I just don't think it would be the right way to conceptualize the character, even with the most androgynous female in theatre! There are other great roles, hon, if you were looking for your own... you will find another character with whom you connect as strongly!
|
IndigoMedusa
|
Nope. To have a woman play Angel would really lessen the effect of the whole relationship.
|
fjays
|
| teapot wrote: | | Why the sad face, fjay? I hope it wasn't anything I said. I certainly didn't mean to hurt your feelings, if I did. I know another young woman who would rather be Angel than anyone else in Rent, but I just don't think it would be the right way to conceptualize the character, even with the most androgynous female in theatre! There are other great roles, hon, if you were looking for your own... you will find another character with whom you connect as strongly! |
Nah it was just our school is considering doing the school edition, but we don't really have anyone who could do the role justice at all, except for one of my friends..
|
Monsieur D'Arque
|
No, Angel cannot be played by a woman without descending into parody.
And, according to a post on the Other Shows board, Angel can't be played by a straight man, either, because that would be insincere and not groundbreaking or real...
|
-Dave-
|
I would personally prefer to see Angel played by a man, however I not violently opposed to the idea. Especially in your case, where there is not really an alternative/a woman is the best choice.
I agree, though, that the fact that the actress is in fact a woman should be hidden/not emphasised, so as to let the audience still get into the story of him being a guy...er girl...er...you get what I mean
But yeah, for professional Broadway-esque productions of RENT, I would go with a guy, but am not aggressively against it 
|
Belle
|
| Monsieur D'Arque wrote: | No, Angel cannot be played by a woman without descending into parody.
And, according to a post on the Other Shows board, Angel can't be played by a straight man, either, because that would be insincere and not groundbreaking or real...
|
we can't expect people to, y'know... ACT, play a role, now, can we?
Mig Ayesa made the most adorable Angel I've ever seen, and is unquestionably straight. Only issue I had was his Christmas costume didn't do much to feminise his figure, but hardly his fault.
I do think, in an emergency situation, Angel could be cross-cast and covered by a female swing - as in, if all the guys in the cast have caught flu and the show must go on, but not as an artistic decision.
If anyone could be cross-cast with minimal effect on the storyline, it'd be Mark... If Mark were a girl you'd lose Maureen BECOMING a lesbian, and possibly need to explain why Roger's best friend is a lesbian... They have a very blokey relationship. but it could be done. You'd need a woman with quite an alto tho.
|
High-baritonne
|
| Monsieur D'Arque wrote: | And, according to a post on the Other Shows board, Angel can't be played by a straight man, either, because that would be insincere and not groundbreaking or real...
|
Seriously? So I can't play a straight guy, too bad I've just been making out with two girls the past three weeks! You should have told me!
|
ActingDude17
|
My Drama teacher applied for the script and said that in the licensing agreement you have to say you will cast a man in the role of Angel.
|
sopranodespair
|
| ActingDude17 wrote: | | My Drama teacher applied for the script and said that in the licensing agreement you have to say you will cast a man in the role of Angel. |
Sounds like a strict rule to me. Roles are cross-cast ALL THE TIME.
But I do think Angel should be cast as a man, but he could be played as a woman if she's the best one for the role. In professional theatre, though? No.
|
Pannic
|
| Monsieur D'Arque wrote: | | And, according to a post on the Other Shows board, Angel can't be played by a straight man, either, because that would be insincere and not groundbreaking or real... |
That's preposterous. It's called acting.
|
Belle
|
| ActingDude17 wrote: | | My Drama teacher applied for the script and said that in the licensing agreement you have to say you will cast a man in the role of Angel. |
I can see the sense in that actually. It's one thing to cast Angel as a woman if there's no-one else in an emergency, but I can see it being done as a way of toning down all that nasty "gayness" in the show by prudish teachers. That should not be allowed.
|
MunkustrapQC
|
What's the big deal with the fact that a straight man can't play Angel?
I think as long as the actor is good, a straight man can play a gay role, and a homosexual can play a straight role...
There's no problem with that...
In a french production of Rent in Quebec City three years ago, Angel was played by a straight man, and Roger was play by a homosexual, and there was no problem, at all! They were absolutely amazing!
|
Monsieur D'Arque
|
I was being ironic, and talking about the post that said Brokeback mountain wasn't important or groundbreaking because it was just "straight guys playing gay guys."
|
High-baritonne
|
| sopranodespair wrote: | | ActingDude17 wrote: | | My Drama teacher applied for the script and said that in the licensing agreement you have to say you will cast a man in the role of Angel. |
Sounds like a strict rule to me. Roles are cross-cast ALL THE TIME.
But I do think Angel should be cast as a man, but he could be played as a woman if she's the best one for the role. In professional theatre, though? No. |
Why do you think it is a strict rule?
Jonathan Larsson wrote RENT to make people realize that you shall not judge anyone because they're Gay, have AIDS, etc..
So making Angel a woman, or letting a woman play him will be showing people the opposite.
|
Belle
|
| High-baritonne wrote: |
Why do you think it is a strict rule?
Jonathan Larsson wrote RENT to make people realize that you shall not judge anyone because they're Gay, have AIDS, etc..
So making Angel a woman, or letting a woman play him will be showing people the opposite. |
If it is part of the amateur license agreement, then it's a strict rule.
Making Angel a woman to show diversity and acceptance and gender-bending, queering the norm, great.
Making Angel a woman so we don't have to have gays in the show, bad.
How do you make sure you get one and not the other?
|
highkick49
|
There are a lot of restrictions when it comes to the casting of RENT, a lot of them have to do with genders and race.
I think it's very smart because obviously the playwright intended for certain races and genders to play these roles and feels like if it isn't done that way then it loses the sanctity of the play.
Respect it for what it is, because it wouldn't be a restriction if the playwright didn't have a reason behind it.
|
sylvesterm11
|
| highkick49 wrote: | There are a lot of restrictions when it comes to the casting of RENT, a lot of them have to do with genders and race.
I think it's very smart because obviously the playwright intended for certain races and genders to play these roles and feels like if it isn't done that way then it loses the sanctity of the play.
Respect it for what it is, because it wouldn't be a restriction if the playwright didn't have a reason behind it. |
Do you know any of the restrictions off the top of your head?
|
fjays
|
Hey, I am totally respecting the show for what it is.
But if there is noone else for the part, and what, the whole show has to be pulled because there isn't someone right, then I don't see the problem.. obviously thats if you are forgetting the rights and all that...
At least in school/community theatre..
|
ActingDude17
|
| highkick49 wrote: | | I think it's very smart because obviously the playwright intended for certain races to play these roles and feels like if it isn't done that way then it loses the sanctity of the play. |
The characters are modern New Yorkers. They could really be any race. Plus, their race has nothing to do with the story. So why not have a Caucasian man play Collins and an African-American man play Mark (for example)? I don't see why it matters, other than keeping tradition with previous casts.
In a show like A Raisin in the Sun, however, all the main characters would have to be African-American. The play is partly about race.
I do think that Angel should be played by a man, though, and under no circumstances should be played by a woman. If a woman is Angel it defeats the whole purpose.
|
sopranodespair
|
| High-baritonne wrote: | | sopranodespair wrote: | | ActingDude17 wrote: | | My Drama teacher applied for the script and said that in the licensing agreement you have to say you will cast a man in the role of Angel. |
Sounds like a strict rule to me. Roles are cross-cast ALL THE TIME.
But I do think Angel should be cast as a man, but he could be played as a woman if she's the best one for the role. In professional theatre, though? No. |
Why do you think it is a strict rule?
Jonathan Larsson wrote RENT to make people realize that you shall not judge anyone because they're Gay, have AIDS, etc..
So making Angel a woman, or letting a woman play him will be showing people the opposite. |
Sorry. I didn't explain myself clearly. I accidentally put that Angel can be played AS a woman and what I meant was being played BY a woman. I don't agree with changing the character's gender, but the gender of the person playing Angel isn't as big of a deal.
|
Belle
|
| ActingDude17 wrote: |
The characters are modern New Yorkers. They could really be any race. Plus, their race has nothing to do with the story. So why not have a Caucasian man play Collins and an African-American man play Mark (for example)? I don't see why it matters, other than keeping tradition with previous casts.
In a show like A Raisin in the Sun, however, all the main characters would have to be African-American. The play is partly about race.
I do think that Angel should be played by a man, though, and under no circumstances should be played by a woman. If a woman is Angel it defeats the whole purpose. |
I think Angel - the character - needs to remain as a male who dresses as female. The person playing the role could be any gender.
The only character who needs to be of any set race is Mark - "Where did you learn to tango?" "With Nanette Himmelfarb, the Rabbi's daughter at the Scarsdale Jewish Community Center".
Mark is clearly implied as Jewish in this line. Everyone else is pretty much free rein, tho there's that old argument about Mimi's "Where the spanish babies cry" line indicating she's latino, but that's not so strong.
|
highkick49
|
| ActingDude17 wrote: | | highkick49 wrote: | | I think it's very smart because obviously the playwright intended for certain races to play these roles and feels like if it isn't done that way then it loses the sanctity of the play. |
The characters are modern New Yorkers. They could really be any race. Plus, their race has nothing to do with the story. So why not have a Caucasian man play Collins and an African-American man play Mark (for example)? I don't see why it matters, other than keeping tradition with previous casts.
In a show like A Raisin in the Sun, however, all the main characters would have to be African-American. The play is partly about race.
|
Race has a lot to do with any story no matter if you're doing Annie or The Colored Purple - audiences have connotations when it comes to different races you could have a black man as Benny and a white man as Benny and have them do the exact same blocking the exact same beats but the audience is going to come away with a totally different story, just because it is different for a white man to be in a position of power and domination then to have a black man in a position of power and domination.
The story also has a lot to do with the lover and the beloved, in RENT the african american characters all play lovers, that tells another story to the audience.
So as much as we want to be colorblind when it comes to our artform audiences are not and we as actors just have to realize the stories that they tell and accept them.
|
Pannic
|
| Belle wrote: | | ActingDude17 wrote: |
The characters are modern New Yorkers. They could really be any race. Plus, their race has nothing to do with the story. So why not have a Caucasian man play Collins and an African-American man play Mark (for example)? I don't see why it matters, other than keeping tradition with previous casts.
In a show like A Raisin in the Sun, however, all the main characters would have to be African-American. The play is partly about race.
I do think that Angel should be played by a man, though, and under no circumstances should be played by a woman. If a woman is Angel it defeats the whole purpose. |
I think Angel - the character - needs to remain as a male who dresses as female. The person playing the role could be any gender.
The only character who needs to be of any set race is Mark - "Where did you learn to tango?" "With Nanette Himmelfarb, the Rabbi's daughter at the Scarsdale Jewish Community Center".
Mark is clearly implied as Jewish in this line. Everyone else is pretty much free rein, tho there's that old argument about Mimi's "Where the spanish babies cry" line indicating she's latino, but that's not so strong. |
Mark doesn't have a set 'race.' He could simply be a religious Jew. Nothing that says he has to be an ethnic Jew (if there is such an actual race).
Mimi, however, is VERY specific. There's not just that one line. There's also thatlast voice mail song, where her mother is on the phone. Speaking Spanish.
Also, Joanne probably should be black most of the time. There's the line 'unwed mothers in Harlem...' granted, this doesn't have much to do with her race, but it does imply a connection.
Going strictly by the book, Mimi is the one with the specifically designated race. Joanne has a vague implication (perhaps the people in Harlem want a black lawyer because they feel it better represents them, perhaps?).
|
Roger's Chica
|
| highkick49 wrote: | | ActingDude17 wrote: | | highkick49 wrote: | | I think it's very smart because obviously the playwright intended for certain races to play these roles and feels like if it isn't done that way then it loses the sanctity of the play. |
The characters are modern New Yorkers. They could really be any race. Plus, their race has nothing to do with the story. So why not have a Caucasian man play Collins and an African-American man play Mark (for example)? I don't see why it matters, other than keeping tradition with previous casts.
In a show like A Raisin in the Sun, however, all the main characters would have to be African-American. The play is partly about race.
|
Race has a lot to do with any story no matter if you're doing Annie or The Colored Purple - audiences have connotations when it comes to different races you could have a black man as Benny and a white man as Benny and have them do the exact same blocking the exact same beats but the audience is going to come away with a totally different story, just because it is different for a white man to be in a position of power and domination then to have a black man in a position of power and domination.
The story also has a lot to do with the lover and the beloved, in RENT the african american characters all play lovers, that tells another story to the audience.
So as much as we want to be colorblind when it comes to our artform audiences are not and we as actors just have to realize the stories that they tell and accept them. |
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with this.
Please research the NYTW production of Rent. Please look up some of the various national productions of Slavic countries. Please look at the fact that there have been "Mimi"s of various Latin origins and also African-American "Mimi"s. Or that there have been "Angel"s of virtually every race.
I very seriously doubt that Jonathan Larson wrote the show so that it could not be cast colour-blind, that goes SO MUCH against what he was going for with the show. Reading the RENT Bible, YES, he was aware the the vocal timbres needed for the roles of Benny and Collins were most often found in black men... but that doesn't mean they were found in all black men. Or only black men.
And for whoever said there were specific rules when it came to casting and races? That's blatantly incorrect.
|
