Post 10: Privilege Blinds: The Movement of Improvement.

Brian Eugenio Herrera named and effectively described a concept I had not allowed my mind to fully realize before reading his article, “But do We Have the Actors for That?’: Some Principles of Practice for Staging Latinx Plays in a University Theatre Context. Although it became clearer to me through this reading and our class discussion, Patricia Ybarra is owed credit for introducing the term “Coalitional Casting” to my ears and consequently the multitudes of theatre goers and theatre makers who support the deployment of what Herrera calls, “ethnic surrogation as a strategic means of underscoring the structural gaps that exist within the American theatre.”

There are so many strong points worth repeating for the sake of exposure and further discussion. In order to limit the branches on this tree, let’s answer just a few of Osi’s questions.

1)     Herrera offers that the coalitional casting approach can effectively balance out “privilege to amplify awareness of racial and ethnic inequality rather than efface.” I don’t disagree with what I gather is his intention and motivation for saying this. However, I disagree if we are considering this balance could be attainable through this means over the course of one lifetime.

In trying to answer this question, I found myself torn by the word “privilege,” to which I found an article from the New York Times Magazine, July 14, 2015 entitled, “How ‘Privilege’ Became Provocation.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/19/magazine/how-privilege-became-a-provocation.html

In this article Parul Sehgal approaches privilege from several vantage points stating, “It’s the fumbling hope that acknowledging privilege could offer some temporary absolution for having it”, privilege was “intended to be an enticement to action, and it is still hopeful, if depleted and a little lost. It is emblematic of the kinds of pressures we put on language, our stubborn belief that the right word can be both a diagnosis and a cure”, and “privilege stains. Which might explain why this word pricks and ‘opportunity’ and ‘advantage’ don’t. ‘I can choose to not act racist, but I can’t choose to not be privileged,” a friend once told me with alarm.”

The most poignant picture for me was Parul’s offering of a commencement speech by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie at Wellesley College where she, a highly-educated woman didn’t emphasize how the graduates had been helped by their education, but how they had been hindered by it. She told them, “she hadn’t always been alert to the ‘nuances’ of people who were different from her. ‘Privilege blinds, because it’s in its nature to blind,’ she said. ‘Don’t let it blind you too often. Sometimes you will need to push it aside in order to see clearly.’”

It is an unfathomable chasm from which to rebound in order to truly find equality of race and equality of the social system. It would take many lifetimes to begin to identify, name, and remove pieces of privilege as it stands currently, and that is if each and every one of us is diligent in the doing.

This does not in any way remove my desire to be a part of the movement of improvement for the sake of this generation and all generations to come. Privilege is relatively ubiquitous to the point of being “baked into the cake” [thank you Dr. Fletcher for this helpful visual] of society. To un-stir or un-bake this inequality seems impossible, though innovators like Ybarra and Herrera help the movement gain teeth by describing, naming, and offering possible solutions while presenting our obligations as much as our opportunities in this movement when we are faced with the decisions in whatever role we play (director, castor, actor, audience member, etc.).

So, I ask you: If you do not understand what privilege you currently have and unconsciously choose to entertain, how can you, whomever you are, truly find equality.

2)     It didn’t occur to me prior to this week’s readings. However, I am wrestling with directorial decisions I made in the spring of 2016. I was hired to direct the spring musical at a school that was new to me. The first decisions deal with “what musical?” That affects not only the moral and interest based on what’s popular in the school but also if students have knowledge of that particular musical or similar musicals in the same style or time period. My decision was primarily made using the pieces that are most important to me for the sake of the students.

A)     Getting as many students involved as possible (so long as there is financial and personnel support).

B)     Knowing the talent pool, hierarchy of what’s been done and why, loyalty issues, and how much you must ‘do as the Romans do.’

C)     What shows, styles, and experience opportunities haven’t been given to the students yet.

D)     Cost of rights for the show.

In considering these, I found that there was a large amount of highly talented acting men that needed to be represented and a younger level of singing ability due to average age and experience of the choral singers who planned to audition. So, I went to work looking for a large show, with lots of heavier acting male roles, but with well written music that was accessible for the beginner or intermediate (younger) musicians. FIDDLER ON THE ROOF was a unanimous hit! We got more than fifty students actively involved and there was a lot of talent and heart in the project.

Here’s the kicker: The majority of the population of the school was Hispanic. Golde was played by a very tall, talented, white girl, but beyond that, most of the cast was very different than the original Broadway cast. None of them could grow beards (which was a definite strain on our budget, trying to stick to the facial hair of the religion and culture) or speak Yiddish, nor did they understand much about the history or culture of this play though I facilitated as much as their time and patience would let me.

Did I misrepresent the show by choosing and directing it with a demographic of students that wasn’t physically, culturally, or experientially authentic? Did I imbed in them anything other than a love for a story that is worth experiencing and re-telling for an audience to experience? It in many ways is a universal story of suffering and a challenge to find what is most important to you in life, to not take anything for granted. But these articles and this conversation made me question the nuances of my choices, what I’m still proud of and what I may no longer be proud of in my casting choices, in my show choices, and in what I represent when I make any decisions. I am more aware, and for that I am grateful. I am most thankful for the continued discussion and the compassion for us to move forward with the conversation that I will name: the movement of improvement.