
Typecasting: An Enviable Goal
for Minority Performers?
By: Tim Rees
From: Currents Spring 1983 pp. 10-11
© 1983 Urban Alliance on Race Relations
An interview with Jeff Henry, who has worked with black
professional theatre groups in both Toronto and Montreal over the
last 15 years.
Editor: What is typecasting?
Henry: Typecasting is where a performer is repeatedly playing
a part calling for the same characteristics as those possessed by
the performer. For example, Burt Reynolds, Clint Eastwood and John
Wayne are typecast while actors like Dustin Hoffman aren't. For
black pertformers it is a non-issue.
Black performers are repeatedly cast in the same type of role -
the 'black' role, the stereotypical role. The problem then is
stereotyping, not typecasting. The black performer is never able
to develop his own abilities and characteristics beyond the colour
of his skin.
Casting minorities in inferior, subservient roles and white males
in superior roles has been the general rule in movies, television
and theatre. Blacks are still playing the foot shuffling Negro
servant, the lovable but incompetent sidekick, the buffoon
.
Editor: What is the impact of this?
Henry: Not only of course does it limit both the quantity and
quality of work available to black performers, but the
stereotypical images are all caricatures of people who
intrinsically lack something - who are only half human.
Even Indian children want to be like John Wayne instead of the bad
Indians. Black kids don't want to grow up to be the Negro maid or
janitor. They fantasize themselves to be the hero just as Anglo
kids do. But the message to them is quite clear - to be successful
you must fit the mold of the white Anglo-Saxon.
For whites, it breeds a false sense of superiority and justifies
racial prejudice and discriminatory behaviour. If white people
never see black people on TV, in the movies, on the stage, then
they will feel they are the only ones that matter in this society.
Thus, the process of programming racist attitudes is
perpetuated.
The media and the theatrical entrepreneurs, who programme only
that which is profitable, view their audiences as being extremely
accepting of these stereotypical roles. Undoubtedly stereotypes
sell. The public obviously wants to fantasize that they are the
tall, handsome, fair hero, or his woman.
For non-whites it breeds a sense of inferiority, shame in one's
heritage and lower expectations of achievement. And we know that
persons with a poor self-image are less likely to be high
achievers.
Editor: Do you think the position adopted by the media
and the cultural industries is valid?
Henry: Of course they have to make money, but from my
experience they are operating under a false assumption in
believing that the audience wants to watch only white preformers,
and will only accept non-white performers in roles that are
subservient and have no authority. The audience is interested
first and foremost in the quality of the production: that it is
well-produced, well-rehearsed and in good taste. The colour of the
performers has nothing to do with it.
Editor: How do you compare the media situation in Canada
with the U.S.?
Henry: It has been interesting for me to observe the
proportion of whites in the audience of black theatrical
performances in the United States. It is significant. There
appears to be a far greater awareness and interest by the media,
and the ensuing publicity creates and fosters a bigger audience.
Whereas in Canada, there appears to be a total indifference by the
media to promoting black theatre. Perhaps this is because
Americans accept the black population as very much an integral
part of the American reality, while in Canada blacks are regarded
as interlopers, as non-belongers. Black theatre is dismissed as
part of the migrant culture.
I believe that white Canadians would patronize black theatre in
greater numbers if the media were to give it the same exposure it
gives to mainstream theatre.
I have been involved for a number of years in bringing the work of
Caribbean play wrights to Toronto. These are plays that have been
enthusiastically reviewed in other metropolitan centres throughout
the United States and have been major hits both there and in
Britain. They have done badly in Toronto. Part of the reason for
this is that the media hardly recognizes our existence, so we
don't get coverage. Secondly, on the few occasions that we are
reviewed, the theatre critics pan it, not for the quality of the
production, but through a total misrepresentation of the content.
Is this a reflection of Canadian attitudes towards minority
culture - a resistance to accepting different perceptions,
different values, different interpretations of reality?
If Canadians can struggle successfully through the many regional
dialects and accents contained in the Royal Shakespeare Company's
performance of Nicholas Nickleby, black theatre should
equally resist the temptation to standardize and soften its
presentation and lose its essential rhythm.
Editor: What can be done to improve the situation?
Henry: The media should provide the same treatment to black
theatre as it does to the other alternative theatres. That means
not only reviewing the performances but also by providing other
forms of publicity such as doing background articles on the
theatre group itself, the playwright, the performers, etc.
Black theatre itself must become far more aggressive in its
marketing techniques. It must copy and compete with the
sophisticated strategies employed by the major cultural
institutions in the city for funds, for subscriptions, and for
recognition.
And the community itself should be far more supportive of the
non-white arts in general, and can be a significant pressure upon
the media and the mainstream performing arts, to abandon their
traditional hang-ups.
Website design: TG Magazine, 1996