Back to Black

I’m not saying that I know I’m preaching to the converted but it will come as no surprise to regular visitors to this website that a recurring theme is not nostalgia per se, or indeed any notion that Fings Ain’t Wot They Used Ter Be, but a simple (and some might like to think logical) common sense feeling that 21^st Century post-modern PC-fascism has gone about three and a half stages further than is good for the health of humanity.

Over the weekend a media story did the rounds about a Sky Arts short drama series called Urban Myths, in one of which Joseph Fiennes was cast to play Michael Jackson.

I remain unsure that I fully grasped the raison d’être or thinking behind the piece in question but it seemed that it involved an imaginary road trip undertaken by Jackson, Liz Taylor and Marlon Brando – the latter played by actor Brian Cox.

By that I mean to say that I believe it is quite possible (as a matter of fact) that Jackson, Taylor and Brando did actually know each other and may at some stage even undertaken such a road trip together but – irrespective of that possibility – this Sky Arts programme may have been a dramatic recreation of what road trip between these three might have been like.

Anyway, apparently Paris Jackson – Michael’s daughter – had hit the internet declaring her strong objections to Joseph Fiennes (a white man) being cast to play her father.

For those who may have missed it, here is the story as covered by the UK’s – DAILY TELEGRAPH

Some hours later I heard an interview with Brian Cox on Radio Five Live in which he stoutly defending the production’s choice of Joseph Fiennes to play Michael Jackson.

However, the eventual upshot was that within another 24 hours or so Sky Arts announced that it would not be airing the programme as a direct result of Paris Jackson’s objections.

End of story (storm in a tea cup or not) and so what, you might think.

Nevertheless. Pardon me for pointing this out but for years, I hesitate to say decades, there have been instances of strident media commentators and theatre/television/movie pundits and activists complaining about the lack of suitable dramatic parts (or just lack of parts generally) for black people, gay people, women, women of a certain age, disabled people and any other allegedly under-represented and/or disadvantaged minority grouping.

Ordinarily I have little objection to the thrust being made, regarding it as no more than another acceptable and indeed healthy example of lobbying for all sorts of ‘good causes’.

I don’t want to go down the route of discussing the issues as to whether – if you’re casting a costume drama set in 17^th Century England – you are entitled to argue that being encouraged (or forced) to employ a proportion of black actors to satisfy some form of ‘equal opportunity’ initiative or legislation is inappropriate because de facto, to all intents and purposes, there were no black people in England in the 17^th Century and to do so would undermine the authenticity of the project. [There must have some black people living in 17^th Century England, but let’s assume for this item that the likelihood of the average Englishman of the time coming across one must have been as near negligible as it is possible to be].

Historically, of course, there have been famous or notable instances of castings ‘against type’, e.g. female actors who have played Hamlet, or King Lear, for example – only recently former Labour MP Glenda Jackson returned to acting and played the latter in a theatre production to considerable acclaim.

Every decade or so the identity of the actor playing the part of James Bond comes up for grabs.

When a year or so ago, as the then latest Bond movie was launched, Michael Craig made a statement to the press seemingly announcing that ‘wild horses couldn’t drag him’ to reprise the role again, it prompted months of speculation as to which actors might be candidates to replace him.

Tom Hiddleston, Jamie Bell, Michael Fassbender, Aiden Turner and James Norton were amongst those who were thrust – some willingly, some perhaps less so – into the spotlight as potential candidates.

There was also a rash of speculation along the theme “Is it time for the first black James Bond?” and under this heading the prime candidate was (and still may be for all I know) Idris Elba, then starring in the detective drama series Luther.

I don’t see the slightest problem with any of the above.

I certainly don’t see the case for any argument to the effect “Sorry, Ian Fleming conceived James Bond as a white man, therefore a black man cannot play him”.

What I’m coming to is this. I cannot personally see any justification in principle for saying that a white man cannot play Michael Jackson – or indeed any black man – in a drama piece. Or indeed that a black man could not play a white man in one.

It seems to me that the only theoretical headings under which such a claim could be made are either that – as part of some equal opportunity initiative – because there are so few ‘black’ roles on offer, until further notice all ‘black’ parts must therefore be played by black actors, or that because, this case involving a dramatic recreation of a real life historical person who happened to be black, therefore (by definition) a black person must be hired to play him.

Call me a curmudgeonly old git if you will, but – when push comes to shove – I don’t feel that either of them hold much water. I start from the premise that an acting part is an acting part and there’s no reason why any particular ‘type’ of actor cannot be cast in any role. That’s got to be a principle grounded in truth.

Then there’s the thorny issue that producers should be entitled to ‘hire the best person for the job’ (that’s the standard push-back against any proposal in favour of a quota system). In the recent Michael Jackson case the argument would be that Joseph Fiennes might have been the best man for the job in all the circumstances … and so what if he’s white?

Unless, of course, you’re mounting an initiative to do a spot of social engineering and promote the cause of black employment in the acting world. Which you could argue is an honourable thing to be engaged upon.

In this regard I don’t buy the line “All we’re trying to do is proportionally represent the truth as regards proportionality in a multi-cultural society”. I read or heard somewhere recently that the Muslim population of the UK is only about 6% of the whole. Well, surely in that case, only 6% of actors and TV presenters should be Muslim? However, for social engineering and ‘promoting tolerance’ reasons, I’m sure the actual proportion of Muslims currently on screen and radio is significantly higher than that.

I’m just saying.

I never saw it myself, but back in 2007 a well-received biographical movie about Bob Dylan came out called I’m Not There.

It was slightly weird enterprise in that Dylan himself did not appear in the film, save in some old concert footage towards the end. Instead no fewer than six actors played different facets of his character: Christian Bale, Marcus Carl Franklin, Richard Gere, Heath Ledger, Ben Whishaw and Cate Blanchett.

Yes, the Cate Blanchett.

I wonder what the PC-brigade would have made of that.

Probably nothing at all, come to think of it!