A white Porgy and Bess

I know it sounds like hypocrisy to be okay with the idea of an all-black Hamlet but not okay with an all-white Porgy and Bess, but to write it off as such is to overlook that theatrical history (the western canon, at least) has always tilted firmly in favour of "white as default", with talented non-white performers stuck competing for the few roles that have been explicitly written for their skin tone (such as Othello) or hoping for directors who understand that "historically accurate =/= white" or whathaveyou. It's about rebalancing things; as a white performer, I might dream of being in Hamilton one day, but I understand that while this tiny piece of the theatrical canon is closed off to me, I don't have to convince people to look past my skin tone to cast me in the VAST majority of ALL the other musicals.

I understand that people will disagree, and probably with perfectly valid reasons, but to me, a white person playing a non-white role just makes me think of Dudley Dursley with his 36 birthday presents, demanding still more while Harry Potter's lucky to get a toothpick in his stocking.

Honestly, the dream is for racial diversity to be SUCH a given on our stages that you *could* have an all-white Porgy and Bess and it wouldn't ruffle a single feather. If we flip it over to gender for a second, the idea of changing Helena in A Midsummer Night's Dream to Helenus genuinely unlocked some really beautiful new stuff in that 400 year old play, and Emma Rice got away with it where other directors at other venues wouldn't because she has spent her time at the Globe being so transparently committed to getting as many women on the stage as men. Say what you will about the lighting rig (please don't though), THAT'S why I will miss her fiercely at that venue.

The colour of your skin affects your life experience. We might all be the same on the inside, but - for example - a young black man is infinitely more likely to be stopped and searched (or shot) by the police for no discernible reason, or to find himself followed around a department store by suspicious staff members, or fetishised *for* his skin colour, or perceived as less professional than a young white man. While a skilled and talented writer perhaps could understand this, it's only ever going to be from an intellectual viewpoint, as they'll never be able to truly *know* what it's like.

Also, when we say we want to hear more (let's say) Asian stories on our stages, it's rare that the person saying this just wants stories *about* Asian people, maybe with some brilliant roles for Asian performers but written by David Hare or Richard Bean. Why should we accept white writers telling stories that aren't really theirs to tell when a theatre could so easily work to develop and commission Asian writers?

Abby, Baemax, great points. There is a narrowing going on. Jews can’t represent Hungary and white actors can’t tell Asian stories? Gotta be wrong. Hungarians can and should look at Jewish experiences and Asians should and can examine white stories.

The point about colour affecting experience in society: of course. This is often within the writing of a play, in the creation of the character. Does it need separate treatment?

Just musing on this, the question of our day in relation to the arts.

I think the idea of taking Porgy and giving it an updated setting exploring the lives of a different group of people at the fringes of society is a perfectly valid one. As long as it is done with respect and sensitivity.

There is the stipulation from the Gershwins that they didn't want it performed by anything other than a black cast but once the show falls out of copyright, directors will be free to do whatever they want with the material - for good or ill.

Exploring the lives of displaced people through Porgy and Bess seems a valid reinterpretation to me.

The Gershwins were drawn to the story in part because of their own family history. And the music cannot be said to be authentically black. It is very much filtered through Gershwin's own musical style.

It is a very complex topic that raises a lot of strong reactions. Respect and sensitivity are the key.

I think it depends on what you're really writing about. There's nothing wrong about writing a biographical play on the life of some black person, but it is problematic if you want to write about the African-American experience using the point of view of a black character when you are white. That's because your point of view cannot be the one of someone who has actually experienced the issue themselves, and because it's not your story to tell.

I read this essay on Porgy and Bess that said that the opera gave an outstanding contribution to the representation of the African-American community, but by today's standard it would be considered cultural appropriation. But that's not really the case because at the time there was no black composer who could have achieved such a thing because of social obstacles. The general idea is that it's okay(ish) to talk about someone else experience until they cannot do it by themselves: writing Porgy and Bess in the 20s was not problematic, writing it today would be so. I think Othello is different because it's not really a play about race.

Why does it matter? What's important is the quality of the points somebody raises. If you're going to prejudge someone's opinion based on who or what they are rather than what they say then isn't that pretty much the definition of prejudice?

Porgy and Bess was based on a play written by two white writers and adapted into an opera by a white composer and a white lyricist. I find it a stretch to consider it to be an authentic expression of black culture. The musical influences are there, without a doubt. But it very much the product of a composer of Russian/Jewish heritage combining his own style with those he was seeking to represent on stage.

Scott Joplin's Treemonisha is a different matter - written in 1910 by a black composer. Not as frequently performed - but just as important in the history of black writing for the operatic stage.