Cross-casting
I want to start this by stating that in regards to auditions for Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead I am definitely considering cross-casting (casting women in male roles and vice versa). I'm not asking a "what should I do" question here, but rather exploring the ethics and considerations around the issue of cross-gender casting.
That said, I'm interested in people's thoughts on the subject.
Traditionally, community theatres do a lot of cross-casting because their demographic tends to be female-heavy, while many plays have few roles for women and the ones they do have tend to be subsidiary.
At Theatre@First I (as well as other directors) have frequently cross-cast roles, usually women-as-male-characters, only once that I can recall a man-as-female-character. I have also campaigned for, been cast, and played to acclaim a major male role (Dysart in Equus). We have done two shows scripted for all-male casts, Twelve Angry Men and Bent; in the former case the director decided to go with Twelve Angry Jurors and cast several women, while in the latter case the director stuck with an all-male cast. We have also done one all-female show, The Vagina Monologues, and are currently in production with a second, Top Girls. We have frequently made other decisions (e.g. having a large chorus in Murder in the Cathedral) to create more female roles.
I don't have the numbers on hand, but for a typical show I'd estimate our audition pool averages 30-40% male. Only once in our history have we had trouble recruiting enough men to play the male roles in a show and we usually do not cast all the men who audition, sometimes choosing women over men for some male roles despite the availability of men.
Now we've got Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead auditions approaching. The other show in production right now is all-female, with a cast of nine. R&G has 16 roles, of which two are written to be female. They each have very few lines, but several of the male roles have none at all. The four lead roles are scripted as male. At the moment, our audition pool is 60% male.
Does it still make sense to cast female-heavy, regardless of the scripted gender of the roles? Is this fair to the men trying out for this show? Is compensating for the historical disparity of roles still an operative principle? I'm curious how people feel about this.
That said, I'm interested in people's thoughts on the subject.
Traditionally, community theatres do a lot of cross-casting because their demographic tends to be female-heavy, while many plays have few roles for women and the ones they do have tend to be subsidiary.
At Theatre@First I (as well as other directors) have frequently cross-cast roles, usually women-as-male-characters, only once that I can recall a man-as-female-character. I have also campaigned for, been cast, and played to acclaim a major male role (Dysart in Equus). We have done two shows scripted for all-male casts, Twelve Angry Men and Bent; in the former case the director decided to go with Twelve Angry Jurors and cast several women, while in the latter case the director stuck with an all-male cast. We have also done one all-female show, The Vagina Monologues, and are currently in production with a second, Top Girls. We have frequently made other decisions (e.g. having a large chorus in Murder in the Cathedral) to create more female roles.
I don't have the numbers on hand, but for a typical show I'd estimate our audition pool averages 30-40% male. Only once in our history have we had trouble recruiting enough men to play the male roles in a show and we usually do not cast all the men who audition, sometimes choosing women over men for some male roles despite the availability of men.
Now we've got Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead auditions approaching. The other show in production right now is all-female, with a cast of nine. R&G has 16 roles, of which two are written to be female. They each have very few lines, but several of the male roles have none at all. The four lead roles are scripted as male. At the moment, our audition pool is 60% male.
Does it still make sense to cast female-heavy, regardless of the scripted gender of the roles? Is this fair to the men trying out for this show? Is compensating for the historical disparity of roles still an operative principle? I'm curious how people feel about this.