Is Oklahoma OK?

Comments

Yeah, that's EXACTLY what the hard-working, long-suffering 5th Ave FOH staff needs: a bunch of whiny, pretentious, WHITE, rich theater patrons having some ridiculously unnecessary PC circle jerk between shows! you do know there are ACTUAL, REAL PROBLEMS IN THE WORLD, RIGHT? fuck you all until you bleed!

legacy builder on February 15, 2012 at 6:17 PM

I had no idea Donald Byrd was on board as choreographer for this! He got a Tony nom for The Color Purple. Now I am excited to see it. I hope he can mount his "Harlem Nutracker" here some time. He's been making waves in Jerusalem too - here's an article on the recent debut there of his "Maybe a Genesis", based on a dance work first performed in Seattle:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-04…

Here he is talking about it:
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/83639214/

gloomy gus on February 15, 2012 at 6:33 PM

So what's the answer, to avoid casting black actors as villains? I imagine that it's difficult enough for black theater actors to find roles without this hand wringing.

Joe Glibmoron on February 15, 2012 at 6:55 PM

We obviously can't have a black guy playing Othello, since it'd make people uncomfortable.

Joe Glibmoron on February 15, 2012 at 6:58 PM

I agree with the richness of the sarcasm, #1-5, but I'm also glad to see that the management of the 5th isn't hiding behind their own creative decisions. I've seen the production and I LOVED IT. But Seattle is a process town so if people feel the need to whine, the 5th has done MORE THAN ENOUGH to deal with the issues.

on February 15, 2012 at 8:05 PM

The greater injustice would be to deny black actors roles that are challenging to our morality and sense of right; THAT - more than the role - would extend our nation's unfortunate racial history.

malamute on February 15, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Goldyfucker's too busy curled up with his copy of Mein Kampf to respond.

BetarayBilly2 on February 15, 2012 at 8:29 PM

It seems to me that part of what is underlying this whole issue is the fact that people go to this type of musical exactly so that they do NOT have to feel uncomfortable or even very surprised. They know exactly what to expect (except the unimportant details, like, "wow, I loved what they did with the light there!"), and they can leave as exactly the same person they walked in as. Isn't that sort of a major aspect of the genre of the musical? And why they keep producing this kind of dated, mid-century pablum?

Jude Fawley on February 15, 2012 at 8:36 PM

@6, I don't know about my fellow nobodies, but I wasn't being sarcastic in the least. Byrd's a genuine artist. I'm delighted the 5th would engage him to create something engaging, and in an area so surprising not only to the likes of @9.

gloomy gus on February 15, 2012 at 8:57 PM

(Minus a million points to me for putting "engage" and "engaging" in the same sentence. Argh.)

gloomy gus on February 15, 2012 at 8:58 PM

@9:

Having attended the opening night performance, and as a long-time practitioner and patron of theatre, yes, I did - very briefly - wonder about the decision to cast a black actor in this role. But, as Goldy (and other reviewers) have pointed out, Mr. Scatliffe gives us a much more nuanced portrayal than the simple antagonistic foil Judd is in many productions.. As such, it is both artistically relevant - even historically accurate to some degree - and certainly elevates the character to something near tragic; an accomplishment that only serves to remind a contemporary audience of how "Oklahoma!" changed the entire paradigm of the American Musical.

And frankly, it's exactly the sort of risk-taking challenge that 5th Avenue audiences have come to expect - and to relish, during Mr. Armstrong's tenure as Artistic Director. It's just damned good theatre.

Just because it's a musical, doesn't mean it can't be edgy...

COMTE on February 15, 2012 at 9:33 PM

Seems to me that they are doing it right. They have actually gotten people talking about Oklahoma.

on February 15, 2012 at 9:35 PM

@12, I didn't actually mean to criticize the production itself - I'm in favor of edgy, interesting choices in general (I can't really have an opinion about this specific choice due to my lack of familiarity with the show; the only think I know about "Oklahoma!" is that it has the song "76 Trombones" in it, and that's not even true). I was just observing that, to a lot of musical-goers, edginess just isn't what they paid for, and I wonder if that is a part of the problem, not just the sense that the black-white dynamics hint of stereotypes. It's easier to protest, "this is racist," than it is to admit, "I don't want to think about race at a musical."

Jude Fawley on February 15, 2012 at 9:55 PM

Trying to take this seriously but can't because "Poor Judd is Dead" won't shutup in my brain.

kersy on February 15, 2012 at 10:22 PM

@14 "76 Trombones" is from The Music Man. Oklahoma!'s signature song is the title song.

Oooooooooooooklahoma where the wind et cetera et cetera.

Genghis John on February 15, 2012 at 11:37 PM

I went to Oklahoma. I thought the artistic choices - choreography, casting - were pretty disappointing. Set design looked much more northwest than Oklahoma 1906. I left at intermission. My disappointment has nothing to do with being white. It has everything to do with stupid casting choices that unnecessarily ruined a classic. And the last thing i want to do is sit around a "town hall" circle jerk listening to people dissect every stupid little nuance of "artistic license" and how important their work is. Blah blah blah. They fucked up a great show. The end.

Brad in Seattle on February 15, 2012 at 11:50 PM

@14 It's easier to protest, "this is racist," than it is to admit, "I don't want to think about race at a musical."

No, I don't think that's anywhere close to accurate. There were SOOOO many things wrong with this production. And for god's sake, you don't do a show if you don't have the right cast. Judd should not be black. Period. In 1906 Oklahoma, he would not have taken a white woman to the box social. The song Curly sings to Judd trying to convince him to kill himself in a self-lynching is a lesson in ad hominem lazy direction. Oklahoma wasn't integrated in 1906. In fact, what advances African Americans had made by moving to this territory in the late 1800's, were unfortunately ripped away from them in that year's Constitutional Convention, paving the way for segregate schools and transportation. SO. If the director wanted to be truly "artistic" and "edgy", he would have had to significantly change the storyline, which never would be permitted by the rights holders of this musical. So, director, I suggest you write your own damned script rather than ruining an already perfect story.

Brad in Seattle on February 16, 2012 at 12:01 AM

Arena Stage in Washington DC did a production of Oklahoma this summer 2011 that was revived from Fall 2010. It featured a black Laurie and Aunt Eller, as well as a multiracial cast. It was a hit in DC.

clearlyhere on February 16, 2012 at 6:16 AM

So, what are we going to do about this? Fire the actor because he's black?

Seriously, my theatre had the same controversy 10 years ago. We had a black guy playing the thug. He tried out for the part. The response from the Artistic director was that we have a real commitment towards color-blind casting, and we're going to stick with it.

Interestingly, just before that play was a version of Alice Through the Looking-Glass, where Alice was played by a Southeast Asian woman. We received a letter during the run from a woman charging that we had "ruined her granddaughter's vision of Alice" as a white, blonde-haired English girl.

Same thing, like it or not.

HellboundAlleee on February 16, 2012 at 9:38 AM

I had to add, since no one else mentioned this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour-blin…

HellboundAlleee on February 16, 2012 at 9:40 AM

On the one hand, I don't really see a problem here.

On the other hand, you're talking about a character that has very heavy THIS PERSON IS A RAPIST overtones, and we probably don't need to be associating black men with that. That happens enough without casting them as rapists in musicals.

Helix on February 16, 2012 at 9:58 AM

@14
The 5th Avenue premiered Memphis and Hairspray. Last season they had the touring cast of Next to Normal. While there are old prude bitches in all audiences it isn't like the 5th is afraid to showcase race and controversy. As if this was actually controversy. It's not.

The 5th would not stay in business and stay relevant producing runs of mothballed classics. Musicals shouldn't be judged as safe theatre for Kansas housewives on sightseeing tours to NYC (nor Sammasish kept trophies coming into Seattle). Broadway and New York certainly aren't fringe, but they've pushed the edge of polite society for a century. Revivals of classics should keep pushing.

SchmuckyTheCat on February 16, 2012 at 10:17 AM

Was the actor unaware that he was trying out for the part of a rapist? Was he unaware that most likely the woman in the scene would be white? He chose to audition for a play knowing the part he was trying out for and knowing that most of the cast would be white. No?

Andrew S. on February 16, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Oh, for Christ's sake, Goldy - get la grippe. In any production of Madama Butterfly, has Cio-Cio-San ever been sung by a Japanese soprano? Have you seen the movie version of Oklahoma! with the thuggish, sweaty Rod Steiger playing Jud Fry? Certainly, Kyle Scatliffe is about 100% more attractive to a modern Laurie than Rod would have been to Shirley Jones. It's a musical - not a Sunday school lesson with inherent moral teachings. Here's a clip from the film if you want darkness: http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=rod+…

Rhett Oracle on February 16, 2012 at 1:13 PM

I don't think the fact that he was cast as a "thug" is the problem and it is, in fact, burying the bigger picture that casting black people in period roles that would not have been possible in real life denies our history. Now, if this was a story about an "alternate history", that'd be a different thing entirely...but it isn't. This casting of a black actor in this particular role is essentially white washing our history. This doesn't further the civil rights movement; it denies it.

Baby Blue on February 16, 2012 at 1:22 PM

@26, I think you may have the definition of whitewashing a bit backwards. A black farm hand fantasizes about a white girl (based on her kindness to him while he was sick) and is subsequently threatened with lynching and eventually murdered by the white dude who has his own designs on the the young lady, a dude who is then acquitted in a hastily called mock trial. This sounds completely plausible and in keeping with real American history. If anything, more overt racism on the part of the rest of the characters is what was really missing, and could have been shown without changing a bit of text. The real complaint should be that the production pulled its punches and didn't go all the way. That's the "whitewashing." Curly is, and should be, a charming asshole, and that asshole is the true personification of the American dream. Civilization happens but a lot of non-white folks get hurt on the way there.

I'm not sure I can see the character of Jud as anything but a tragic "Native Son" styled antihero after this production, and I sure don't want to see the jingoistic melodrama of a typical all white "Oklahoma" ever again.

on February 16, 2012 at 1:49 PM

@27 With all due respect, I think you may have gotten tied up in semantics and missed my point.

I agree that a minor tweak of the storytelling would have made the casting decision a smart one.

Baby Blue on February 16, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Has anyone considered that in casting an African American in the role of Jud, there is an implied acceptance of interacial romance? This notion would have actually been quite scandelous during this period of American history, but the 5th pushes us past that ridiculous restriction on love, and insist that we accept that no one in Oklahoma would have found it peculiar for an African American to invite a white girl to a dance. That implication, offered boldly but without fanfare, is the stuff that changes thinking. It strikes me that the 5th's choice in casting Kyle Scatliffe is actually quite progressive - in refusing to accept that African American's actors should not be given the opportunity to play both good and evil characters, they are suggesting that race matters much less than a strong performance. Mr. Scatliffe's performance was powerful and appropriate and his race wsa gratefully incidental.

QueenAnneHill on February 18, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Has anyone considered that in casting an African American in the role of Jud, there is an implied acceptance of interracial romance? This notion would have actually been quite scandalous during this period of American history, but the 5th pushes us past that ridiculous restriction on love, and insist that we accept that no one in Oklahoma would have found it peculiar for an African American to invite a white girl to a dance. That implication, offered boldly but without fanfare, is mature and moral casting – especially in a play that has very little to do with race. It strikes me that the 5th's choice in casting Kyle Scatliffe is actually quite progressive - in refusing to accept that African American's actors should be restricted from playing evil and demented characters, they are suggesting that race matters much less than a strong performance. Mr. Scatliffe's performance was powerful and his race incidental. Or at least, that was the case for me.

QueenAnneHill on February 18, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Is Oklahoma OK?

Comments

Please wait...

Add a comment

Preview

Editors' Picks

The Stranger's A+P Is Back

I Had Never Touched a Gun Before the Las Vegas Massacre. Then I Bought One.

I Think We're Having Fun

We Are the 20%

Matthew Mitnick’s Campaign Meltdown

Person of Interest: Asswolf

Support The Stranger

Comments

Please wait...

Add a comment

Preview

Editors' Picks

Just Can't Get Enough?

Sign up for our newsletter for news recaps, updates, and more!