[Valjavarius]

Basically, my best friend is worried because she's without a doubt the best actress in the school and this is her last performance probably ever in musical theatre, but at least in high school. However, there is a better singer than her. But I keep telling her that Eliza really is more of an acting role despite the fact that she does sing demanding songs. Just consider how complex of a character she is despite her simplicity and how complex the relationship between her and Higgins is.

What do you guys think?

[Elena]

Personally, I never favored the whole "singing actress" idea. Acting and singing are both extremely important, but when you get right down to it...acting takes priority. Would you rather see a performance where the Eliza wasn't so believable in her role but just so happened to have a great voice? You need a performer (especially for Eliza, as she is a complex character) who can be believed!

[bwbaby]

I definetly think that if there is a person who can sing very well and act maybe not as well, she should get the part over someone who can't sing very well. I absolutely hate when I see a show and there is a really great actress on the stage, but she cannot sing. For the part of Eliza, you definely need someone strong in both acting and singing, but if you don't have someone like that, then the better singer should get it.

[Sparkling Diamond]

I agree with bwbaby, there is nothing worse than seeing someone as the lead who cant sing! if they are not that hot on the acting but a great singer they can be forgiven a little bit more, although i know first hand how frustrating it is seeing someone play a part you wanted when you know you can act better than thay can!
I think Eliza has to have the perfect mix of being a great actress and singer, kind of an "all rounder", i think eliza is one of those parts that noy everyone can play, you have to be a certain kind of person, its a very demanding role!

[Deirdre of the Sorrows]

I think both are required to play Eliza well, however, I think that acting ability is a little more important than singing. I don't mean to say that the girl should be tone-deaf, but she doesn't have to be Charlotte Church. I believe that as long as she can sing the songs fairly well and is an excellent actress, she should get the part, or at least not immediately be given the brush off.

[dramadude4jc]

My vote goes for the Singer also - I agree with Deirdre, in that you don't have to be a perfect singer, but I have seen too many shows where they cast the best actor, and when they come on to sing - everyone in the audience cringes because - Here come the "sour notes" I think acting can be taught and helped by the Director and the other actors on stage at the same time. Singing, however - it's very hard to teach an ear - and I would rather watch a musical with great singing and sub-acting that a wonderfully acted show that tilts my head like a dog when the solos come. So there is another opinion. PEACE for all!

[Paul W.]

This is a Shavian character..an actress is required.

[liza_minelli]

Personally I think as eliza can be acted over the top, its more of a acting singer. You can't get that top G at the end of ICHDAN flat!!

[Aimee]

I have edited the first post to include the second option, you can vote now.

I have to go with singer first cos I'm one of these people who hate going to see a musical where the singers can't sing. This is nothing to do with your friend but it makes me when I know there are many good sinbgers out there. Equally, Eliza need to be able to act too but on balance
the singing should take priority.

What I mean is if you were to score it and the actress gets 10 out of 10 for acting and 5 out of 10 for singing then she has a total of 15.

If the singer gets 5 out of 10 for acting and 10 out of 10 for singing then she has a total of 15 too.

So, all scores being equal, I'd go for the singer simply because this is A MUSICAL and I think the audience deserve the better singer.

That's my twopence.


However, if your friend can really practice her singing, get that improved to gain that extra point or 2 then.... well who knows?

[Salome]

acting is always first! especially when doing a script as hard as MFL..you cant cast someone who sings well over a wonderful actress. it wont do the show justice!

[Aimee]

Nor can you cast someone who can't sing in a musical. It's an endless argument.

Its all a question of degrees. How bad an actress is s/he? How bad a singer is s/he?

The person has to be acceptable in both, given that they are I'd go for the singer over the actress IN A MUSICAL.

If the singer can't act for toffee then no I'd not cast her but likewise if the actor can't sing for toffee she doesn't get the part. It's that simple to me.

[le_moofin]

With your friend, you said that there's a better singer than her. But is she still good at singing? As long as her singing ability is good (not the best, but good) then I'd say she has the part. Unfortunately, many directors neglect the acting part of a musical... shame on them! Acting is a very big part of a musical. As long as the actress can sing her songs with emotion and feeling, most people will generally overlook a few mistakes.

[GG]

I was in a production of MFL in March of last year, in which our company had a problem quite like this. In the first round of auditions knobody in the company was cast as Eliza. We had two possibiles unfortunatey one could reach the g in ICHDAN easily but was an atrocious actress and the other a fantastic actress with a wonderful voice just couldn't hit that G. the director decieded to go looking outside the company for his Eliza (leaving the company not v. impressed!)

Neway, we all came back to rehersals after the Christmas break to find there was still no Eliza cast (and talk of cancelling the show!).

As it turns out the girl who was a fantastic actress got the part and wowed us all (as we knew she would!), and all her critics!

Tell your friend not to worry Eliza does need to be a wonderful singer but getting the essence of her character is the most important - after that everything else will come good!

[what_the_heck013]

Not only is she a complex character, she is the MOST complex character in the show. I vote for the actress who sings.

[jazzygirlsings]

The reason why this role is so great is that it honestly requires an equally talented person who can ACT AND SING...

If you have to choose an actress that is good at either one or the other, the audience gets short-changed.

Yes, if you can act the heck out of it-that's great, BUT you know EVERYONE'S going to be expecting that "G" in ICHDAN and the "G" in "Show Me" to be glorious. The composer wrote those notes for good dramatically linked reasons. The first in ICHDAN is to show absolute elation. The second reflects utter frustration! If you don't do this, then it makes it feel like parts of the score seem totally empty...The audience is cheated out of the composers' original intent.

Yes, if you can sing the heck out of it-that's great, BUT if you are a bad actress, the audience is cheated out of some of the better comedic/dramatic moments in the show like Ascot and the confrontation with Higgins in the end. And if you don't have a good accent, what's the point of the show anyway?

But I do believe that it is an equal amount of both, however you break it down! That's why it is my favorite female role in musical theatre! And also why it is so hotly contested on these boards!

[MsDivaKate]

I say as long as the actress can sing well enough that she can pop out the high G's the role requires, without making them seem strained or anything but beautiful as they should be, she is the correct choice for the casting. I mean we really don't know any of these voices we're judging here. The girl who is the actress might have a very nice voice and be able to sing the role just fine. The other girl who is primarily the singer may just have a voice that is larger in quality or different in colour. Its really hard to judge.

As long as the actress can sing what is required of the role and sound decent on it, then she should be given the role.

However if the singer is chosen, she must do some serious work to not only perfect the accents, but to pull off every other aspect that this character demands.

As everyone has said, Eliza is such a complex role. The woman (or girl in your case) cast must be able to handle all the demands of the acting but still have some glorious high notes coming out of her. Especially in I Could Have Danced...its a song many people are familiar with and are just waiting for that high note at the end. (plus its one of my signature songs and I hate to think of it being dragged through the mud by poor vocalists. I know it happens...I just try to ignore it.)

[audreydarling]

[The Pitlord]

You'd definantly want BOTH. Actresses, please do Pygmalion; singers, please do a concert version!

The integration of singing and acting is the whole point of musical theatre. If you're unable to do both well your performance will not be credible anyway.

[Salome]

Not ot say you'd cast someone who cant sing..but I agree with DivaKate. I'd rather an wonderful actress who can hit the notes than a mediocre actress who can sing wonderfully.

[The Pitlord]

[Salome]

except Hepburn was toally unbelievable as the flower girl. she was only strong after the transformation.

[The Pitlord]

He? Andrews, you mean?

[Salome]

I mean that Audrey Hepburn was too sophisticated to pull of the Flower girl cockney eliza. her accent was forced and her posture not very common. its one of the only problems with the film version of MFL.

whereas Andrews reviews for Liza were all glowing in the fact that she handled both the flower girl and the lady with ease. Andrews, coming from a working class background grew up around cockneys her whole life so she easily picked up on the mannerims and accent.

[jazzygirlsings]

[Cake_in_Song]

I do have a video in my posession that would seriously put anyone off the idea of a strong actress who cannot sing particularly well as Eliza. Really, really disturbing, especially if you're fond of the High G's at the end.

http://picasaweb.google.com/kclfraser/MyFairLady02/photo#5010031667233333218

Then again, I wouldn't be surprised if there are some people out there with videos that would put one permanently off the idea of a good singer who cannot act very well playing Eliza. Bottom line is, you really have to be good at both.

[Salome]

like i said before the actor needs to carry a tune..but i'd rather have someone do justice to Shaw than anything else.

[Mark Walton]

[Cake_in_Song]

[Ghost]

[jazzygirlsings]

[Salome]

..butafter Moss Hart's private sessions with her..she came out transformed. Alan Lerner often said that Moss was Julie's own Pygmalion.

[jazzygirlsings]

So true! Which is why I also give her much credit for transforming into a great Eliza...MUCH better than Hepburn...

[The Pitlord]

Now that we are already into posting links...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HOpYKnbXLs - Hepburn singing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAI5l_miiSY - Hepburn dubbed by Marni Nixon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zA7sidgFGHU - Andrews

It's not a fair comparision, watching just a single number, of course, but fun too see..

[jazzygirlsings]

^Thanks for posting those...

I think Hepburn squinches up her face way too much and tries to hard to be something she's not. I really get no sense of longing from her interpretation. There's something a bit too staged about it all...She has no concept of musical phrasing, either...which is why they brought Marni in...(And Marni's voice is much too expressive and doesn't really fit what Audrey is doing...I would have liked to see Marni sing it and how her interpretation would have been...)

As for Julie, everything, even down to the way she places the money in the basket, is nuanced. You can really tell she wants these things...you can see it in her eyes. It doesn't get over the top or silly. You even begin to feel cold at times when she clutches her shawl to her...