top of page
dezitibbs

Representation: As Long as They’re Pretty, Why Should it Matter?

There’s been a lot of buzz around the recent news that Jeremy Jordan would be taking over for Gideon Glick as Seymour Krelborn in the off-Broadway Westside Theater’s production of Little Shop of Horrors. I’ve had my own problems with this production from its inception mainly because I was just bored with the casting especially since there was such an innovative production happening elsewhere in the country. However, this recent casting update has made me think. 

My first instinct was “Jeremy Jordan is certainly an unexpected choice for Seymour.” When I think of Jordan, I think of a hunky, strapping young man due to his performances in Newsies and Bonnie & Clyde where he was the beautiful, young dreamer scrappy leader. Then, I remembered his arc as Winn Schott on the CW’s Supergirl. In that show, he was the nerdy sidekick that could never get the girl. I remember laughing as I watched Mellisa Benoist’s Kara walk around pretending that Jeremy Jordan wasn’t a total dreamboat. After my initial disbelief, I started to believe this awkward side of Jordan; it was endearing. I applauded him for his ability to tap into different parts of himself. This casting choice has seemed to strike the theatre community in a different way, though. Why? 

Some fans of Little Shop are furious that someone as “conventionally attractive” as Jordan is playing the notably dorky protagonist. Some die-hard Jordan fans are ecstatic that the leading man is returning to the stage again and don’t understand why some people are so angry. “It’s called acting. He can do anything!” To those fans, I pose that the question isn’t “Can Jordan play this role” but instead “Should he?” This casting “controversy” is highlighting a different aspect of a problem with which professional theatre and especially Broadway has been wrestling for years: Representation. 

A lot of voices have come up to hold Broadway accountable for their lack of representation over the last couple of decades. We’ve opened the conversation to really dive into the concepts of race, sexuality, gender, and a lot of other forms of identification. But representation isn’t always as stark and drastic as that. Since its inception, there has been a “standard” for how leading men and women on Broadway are expected to look in regards to “body type.” Broadway audiences have grown to expect these chiseled and tall models to lead their musicals. This kind of expectation has barred a lot of actors from getting the opportunity to headline shows. For years, these actors were subjected to dorky friends and supporting contracts until 1982 when Little Shop of Horrors premiered. Finally, there was a leading man that was written to represent all of the men that before had gone unseen. Even now, 40 years later, Seymour is still one of the most popular and only examples of such a male protagonist. 

“Type” is a buzz word in situations like this. “Type” can be a cage. When a casting director sees you as one thing, it’s very hard for them to see you as anything else. Normally,  actors that are labeled as short or scrawny or fat are seen as sidekicks and supporting roles. Now there’s nothing wrong with playing a sidekick, but actors that fit into these character tropes rarely get the opportunity to show the true extent of their training and talent. Actors that fit more into the mold, however,  are more likely to be given these opportunities because they embody what people expect from a leading man. That being said, you can understand why people could be upset that someone that has originated such roles as Jack Kelly in Newsies and Clyde in Bonnie & Clyde (both ruggedly handsome, bad boys) gets the opportunity to live as Seymour whereas actors like George Salazar or Gideon Glick aren’t likely to be given such an opportunity with Jack or Clyde. 

Personally, I think Jeremy will do a great job because I think he’s a very talented actor that does his homework, but this casting choice sparks a conversation that’s bigger than one actor playing one role. When are we going to stop seeing a homogeneous pool of actors telling every story? In a perfect world, everyone regardless of body type, skin color, or “type” is given equal opportunity to play every role, but that’s just not the world we live in right now. There are a handful of roles for people that look like George Salazar and Gideon Glick and an infinite number for people that look like Jeremy Jordan. We need to demolish the standard.

1 view0 comments

Comments


bottom of page