How do you feel about a non-disabled person playing the role of a disabled person on the Fox series "Glee"?

Was there a disabled actor who could play the role of Artie as well as the actor they have? If the answer is no, then I see no problem with it.

BTW, I love Glee and I think all of the kids on there are fabulous and I wouldn’t change any of them.

The best person should have gotten the job, and if that is a perfectly able person then that’s ok with me.

It’s called acting.

Does everything have to be a big deal?

Because this role requires very high quality singing, I think that trumps employing a disabled actor since they could not find one.

There is a disabled actor who plays an able-bodied actor on CSI.

I find it exactly as offensive as the following:
1) A rich man playing a poor man
2) A non-religious person playing the role of a religious person.
3) A meat-eater playing the role of a vegetarian
4) A Canadian playing the role of an American.

@Sarcasm
You always know how to word event perfectly

Why not allow a person who is actually disabled play the role?

Part of the point (and I have no idea, i’m just guessing here) is probably that the field of acting is very limited in who they hire. Why not put pressure on them to expand their criteria?

I wasn’t offended by Tom Hanks playing Forrest Gump, or DiCaprio playing Artie Grape, or Dustin Hoffman playing Raymond Babbitt, or Jodi Foster playing Nell, or Sean Penn playing Sam, or Juliette Lewis playing… the other sister, or that kid who played Pumpkin in Pumpkin. So, I feel fine about wheelchair guy. Did you know he’s in a boy band?

So what about Hugh Laurie as House? Not only is he able-bodied in real life, he’s also British!

@SheWasAll_ : Hahaha… the nerve!

If a disabled actor auditioned for the part but was passed over for no good reason, then I would be upset. However, a large part of acting is a) being able to portray someone you are not, and b) being passed over in auditions just because the director likes someone else better. Without knowing who auditioned and their abilities not only as a singer but also as the right person for the part, I cannot second-guess the casting decisions.

I got my first acting gig because I looked right with the two leading ladies in the play. I was fatter but the same height and had different hair color.

I love that show!

I actually think it’s a good idea, because I’m assuming that while practicing dancing and such other things, the actor falls a lot, no? And if it was an actual disabled person, they could get hurt even further, no? But that’s just my logic. ;)

Also, I agree with @Darwin‘s point about “being able to portray someone you’re not”

I understand both points of view. The casting director is obviously looking for the person he or she feels will best interpret the role. But I also work closely with the disabled community, and I see how they’ve had to fight to get into the workplace. They have advocacy down to a fine art. They look at how Hollywood has been virtually off-limits to people with disabilities, then when a position comes up where being a wheelchair user would actually be an advantage, the role goes to an able-bodied actor. I’m not in the least bit surprised they’re pissed.

I don’t assume that anyone is in the wrong here. This kind of tension is healthy. The disabled are quite right to be in the faces of people in power, forcing them to weigh their decisions carefully. The industry will tug the other way, trying to assure their artistic freedom, and that’s as it should be too. This is how we arrive at equitable middle ground over time.

An actor is an actor. It’s his job to portray somebody other than himself.

I have seen a black singer play a Scotsman in Lucia di Lammermoor. I have seen a Vietnamese actor with a non-native accent portray the brother of a blond American-born actor in a stage play where the race of the brothers was not an issue or even mentioned. I have seen sighted actors play blind people in the story of Helen Keller. Why in the world should we suddenly set a standard for actors to possess the traits of the characters they portray? We’re going to play hell finding anyone qualified to take a role in a Shakespeare play, never mind the part of a space alien. How many Greek kings are around who were born sometime before 429 B.C., who’ve killed their fathers and married their mothers, and who feel like taking an acting job?

@Jeruba, I agree with the point you’re trying to make, but..
The fact is that there ARE wheelchaired people out there who can easily play the role of someone in a wheelchair [Of course, the major part of that show is the singing. I’m sure that’s a much more important qualifier than being handicapped].
Greek kings obviously aren’t actually available.

What about all the other actors on Glee playing 14–17 yo’s when they’ve been able to vote ffor years?

Oh god. Yeah. 2 of the students are 27. I think one of the teachers is only 29.

The point is to help a marginalized group get good jobs when as @Harp mentioned it can already be difficult for some to get into the workplace, especially one in the media.

I think people are more focused on the issue of this being offensive. I find that the least of what matters here. In my opinion it is more important to support the idea behind the offense which is helping the field of entertainment broaden their hiring field.

When are we going to stop thinking everything has to be fair for everyone? When I was a kid we were taught “life is not fair” so work as hard as you can and make the best of it. Now, every kid that plays a sport gets a trophy. There are no losers! What kind of message is that sending. I’m sure if the producer had a person who was disabled that could play the part better, they would have hired them. It was not a slight on disabled people. PC is going way too far.

well, maybe he just had a leg up on all the other actors that tried out.

Everything doesn’t have to be “fair”. However when we have a chance to create change we should go for it. We are a very lazy society in that way. We would rather make excuses and blame Political correctness than move forward with change when we have the opportunity (in many cases, not all of course).

@RedPowerLady GA. i’m sick of the bleeding hearts saying everything has to be fair and boo hoo if someone doesn’t feel like a special, delicate snowflake for some reason. tough titties.

Yeah, the actors playing the students, some of them are way older than high school students, for example, Mark Sallings, (who plays Noah “Puck” Puckerman) is 27.

And the guy who plays 18-year-old Jackson Stewart on Hannah Montana is actually 32. Am I the only one who thinks that’s kinda creepy? o.o

@RedPowerLady, Create change for who? I think the best person for any position should get the job/part. It shouldn’t matter what their color, religion, race, creed, background, or anything. When we start trying to change in the name of political correctness or anything else we want to call it, we all fall short. For example. What if the head of a school told all of the students, “I know some of you worked hard and made A’s, but some of you didn’t. So I am going to drop everyones A’s and bring up all of the others C’s and you will all be equal as B students. Sounds a lot like spreading the wealth. While it sounds like a nice idea, the A students will learn to not work as hard and still get a B. If a disabled person played the part better, they would have gotten the job.

@missingbite Create change within the entertainment field. In this circumstance to benefit disabled people. There is obviously a job they could fill and did not get the part. In fact how many people who are disabled get parts in the entertainment field?

It isn’t creating change in the name of political correctness. That is a flat out excuse. It is creating change, period.

As far as this statement goes If a disabled person played the part better, they would have gotten the job. That is a pure assumption on many parts. We have no idea if there was a qualified disabled person who played the role well. We have no idea what the audition required (it could have required dancing without a wheelchair for example). We also must consider that perhaps disabled people don’t/didn’t feel welcome within the industry so they didn’t apply (that is half their fault yes and half the fault of the industry).

You do not have to agree with me. As I said I don’t think this is an issue about offense or political correctness by any means. I just see an opportunity to create change.

@RedPowerLady Fair enough. You make some great points. It is pure assumption that a disabled person who played the part better would have gotten the job. We don’t know that the story line next year doesn’t have the disabled person walking again after a new medical procedure.

I guess my point is everything should be awarded to the best person. If it isn’t, then we as a society lose. We shouldn’t give anything to anyone because they are different and vise versa. We shouldn’t skip anyone because they are different.

@missingbite I think we can come to a good compromise on that note.

I know people have covered this already, but I can only assume they are angry either because:
A) He is taking roles from diabled actors, or
B) He is doing a disservice to the portrayal of the diabled

Firstly, I watch the show religiously, and I haven’t seen anything to suggest reason B. As far as reason A, it’s a show about a glee club, and therefore the singing quality should come first. I can understand that it’s food out of the mouths of disabled actors, but I think I would make the same choice given the situation and the context.

Either a disability should be a factor in hiring or it shouldn’t. If people want to be considered eligible without regard to disabilities, then they should not expect the disability to give them an advantage. You can’t have it both ways. Either it is a factor or it isn’t. I say we should be blind to issues of race, color, sex, age, ethnicity, etc., and all other irrelevant factors when hiring, and that also means when NOT hiring. You can’t call for special consideration on the very same grounds that you call for equal opportunity. The person WITHOUT the disability should have an equal opportunity to the person WITH it. No one has the right to demand a job.

Who decides what criteria is involved in picking the best person? Maybe a horrible racist or a sexist, or just an idiot?

I’d say the hiring manager (in this case probably a casting director) or the author of the job description would decide what criteria are involved. Qualifications aren’t absolute but are relevant to some particular function.

How much should the public have to say about who makes decisions for a private organization? In a corporate or profit-making environment, picking the deciders does not have to be a democratic process. Not everything is done by majority rule. We have laws to set limits on how hiring is done. Does anyone think we need those laws to extend to artistic decisions?

@Jeruba It also depends on the field. It may simply be that the field has created an atmosphere that makes disabled people less likely to apply. In that case we certainly need to look at disability and not ignore it and just allow for the best person. Now if disabled people did/do feel comfortable that is a non-issue.

An example to make my point more clear: In housing. If an apartment manager posts signs up that says no toys left unattended on patios, no tricycles allowed on property. Then people with children will be less likely to apply. Something similar could be happening in the field of entertainment when it comes to hiring disabled people, they could be being marginalized before they are even considered for the job.

@tinyfaery

But what best were they looking for? I would assume that, because they picked a non-disabled actor, it was best singer.

I for one would like to have seen the role go to an actual wheelchair user. I also would have liked the role of Kwai Chang Caine to have gone to a man with at least a drop of Asian blood.

I am not thinking that the casting director deliberately avoided hiring a disabled person, but I don’t think he/she went out of their way to look for one. Maybe he/she should have. If they were unable to find a disabled person who worked in the part, then by all means they should hire an able bodied actor. That being said, I think that having a disabled person portrayed on a television show as something other than a person to be pitied, laughed at, or admired for their bravery is a step in the right direction.

Hey. I’m not saying it’s wrong. I’m saying that to say the best person for the job deserves the job puts a lot of power into potentially discriminatory people. That’s why there were no women or minorities in high power positions only 30 years ago. Is that where we should be now?

I think a long time ago that was more prevalent. In todays world if an employer was that bad their competition would eventually put them out of business. Today most people see green, as in money, and will hire the best person. If they don’t the competition will.

@missingbite I think you are living in a different world than I.

Uh…no. Have you ever been outside of your little, insulated world?

I just think it is good to see a disabled character on the show and treated the same as everyone else. Having a disabled person cast in the role would have been even better, but there are other requirements (like being able to act and sing extremely well) that necessarily take precedence for the character and show to be successful.

I am disabled and am not the least bit offended. The part should go to the actor that best meets all aspects of the role. I do not feel there should be any sort of accommodation whatsoever in this situation. See ya….Gary/wtf

I’m watching this episode on Hulu right now, and I noticed that they did cast a young woman who is developmentally disabled. Kudos to Glee for that one.

As @Supacase mentioned above, it’s unusual enough to even have a disabled character. The creators of the show should be given credit for even writing such a character—not harassed for hiring the person they thought would do the best job.

My biggest question as an actor is this: How many disabled actors showed up to the auditions? Even if you do audition you might not get the role, but if you don’t audition you have no chance at all.

@SuperMouse I just watched it on Hulu as well, and didn’t they actually cast two? Becky and Sue’s big sister? They both had the same disability, it seems, but I’m pretty sure they were two different people.

@Darwin But like I said above that is part of the industries problem, not just the actors problem. Actors won’t audition if they don’t feel welcome.

@aidje Yes give them props where props are due. Doesn’t mean we have to ignore the other stuff.

@mangeons you’re right! I typed that half way through the episode, before we were introduced to Sue’s sister.

Oh, okay. I watched it this morning before eating doughnuts. : )

Doughnuts and Glee. A good mix, I’ll say!

Well, almost anything is a good mix with doughnuts!

@RedPowerLady – Then more disabled actors with chutzpah need to start going to auditions. The industry won’t go out of its way to seek out disabled actors – there are already far more actors than roles. However, if at every casting call there are disabled actors present, then they will be seen as being available to be cast.

That is what Marlee Matlin did per Wikipedia:

“Marlee became deaf at the age of 18 months due to a bout with Roseola Infantum. That didn’t stop her, though, from acting in a children’s theatre company at age 7; she was Dorothy in “The Wizard of Oz.” Her deafness never held her back. As an adult she said it so eloquently: “I have always resisted putting limitations on myself, both professionally and personally.””

Other actors also have disabilities: Dirk Benedict, Chris Burke, Richard Burton, Tom Cruise, Oliver Dillon, Dana Elcar, Lou Ferrigno, Danny Glover, Sylvester Stallone, Michael J Fox, James Earl Jones, Kim Tserkezie, Eddie McGee, Jim McSharry, John Hollywood, Daryl Beeton, Nabil Shaban, Mitch Longley, Dan Murphy, and, of course, Christopher Reeves. You may not have heard of all of them – only a very few actors ever become household names – but they were and are professional actors who have played roles in movies, on television, and on stage.

“There are 98000 members of the Screen Actors Guild. Of these only 19 percent earn the $7,500 minimum required by SAG to qualify for benefits.” according to Gail Williamson, coordinator of talent development and industry relations for the Media Access Office, a California agency which promotes accurate portrayal of people with disabilities in entertainment and also helps them find jobs in the industry. Media Access represents 500 disabled actors. 500 compared to 98000 is not a very big ratio. Perhaps if more disabled actors actually decided to put all their effort into acting, as many non-disabled actors do, we would see more disabled actors cast in prominent roles.

To be an actor, whether disabled or not, takes drive, ambition, charisma, and an insistence on doing everything possible to get to the attention of casting directors in a good way. Sitting on one’s butt, saying “It isn’t fair” won’t get anyone an acting job. If you want to act, get out and audition and act wherever and whenever you can. Take acting classes, get to know people who make films or write plays or direct, be on time, be polite, be prepared, and be there.

As a female I have had to do this sort of thing many times in many aspects of life, not just acting. As to acting, I cannot see well at all without glasses, but cannot wear contact lenses. However, I still act without glasses all the time. A director might ask if I can do a part even if I can’t see well, and I always say “Absolutely!” Then I do the part the best I can and other directors hear about me.

As the wife of a disabled man we have done these sorts of things many times also (although he is not an actor).

An interesting discussion on the matter of casting Abigail Breslin, a sighted and hearing actress, as Helen Keller can be found here.

@Darwin Well I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. I think it is the industries responsibility and only partially that of the individual. You disagree. I don’t think there is any resolving this on.

@RedPowerLady I’m curious now. What if they did hire a disabled actor to play this disabled character; would we then be hearing complaints that they were limiting disabled actors by typecasting them as disabled characters?

And Dan Murphy is a case of a disabled actor sometimes hired to play characters that are not disabled, although on screen they spend most of their time in a chair or sitting in a car. He has also played roles onscreen where he is in his power wheel chair.

Jim Byrnes is a double amputee who is well known for playing Joe Dawson in the Highlander television series. He walked with a cane, but in the show his disability was never mentioned (that I can remember), and never seemed to come into play. To me that is a fabulous way to portray a disability. Another disabled actor who is getting work is Daryl Mitchell, although he had a career before his spinal cord injury.

@aidje Well you can’t really have someone in a wheelchair play someone who is able to walk (unless they are)... so I don’t see how that is relevant.

@RedPowerLady: @Marina mentioned one example in the fourth post in this thread. Also, the two posts between mine and yours provide relevant examples.

@aidje My point is that the argument that it wouldn’t be an argument of typecasting them as disabled. That doesn’t even make sense to me. They are disabled so they couldn’t be typecast as such. I mean of course you have to find a disabled person who can also sing. I doubt that is impossible.

@RedPowerLady I am asking if it could/should be argued that we should not assume that disabled actors are only capable of playing disabled characters. The argument would go something along the lines of the following: By arguing that a disabled character should only be played by a disabled actor, it is implied that disabled people are only capable of playing disabled characters. That is simply false, as shown by the examples above, and it is a disservice to the disabled to pigeonhole them in such a manner.

@aidje How can a disabled person not play a disabled character? That is the line of logic I am not following. They could play a fantastic singer but they would still be disabled.

I also do not believe in circular arguments. You simply cannot say that because all oranges are apples that all apples are oranges.

How can a disabled person not play a disabled character?

Because actors become other people on screen with different characteristics from their own all the time. Particularly on film the world and the people in it are edited to match the director’s vision. Thus, a paraplegic can indeed play someone who can walk. They just won’t be seen to walk on screen or on stage.

Dan Murphy is a case in point. He is a quadriplegic who has played a variety of roles. In Kingpin he played the manager of a bowling alley who was not disabled. You just never see him come out from behind his counter. In Shallow Hal he plays a non-disabled cabbie who drives a cab the entire movie. In an episode of American Body Shop he plays a quadriplegic. In Me, Myself and Irene he plays an FBI agent who is not disabled. In There’s Something About Mary he plays the boss’ brother, a quadriplegic complete with motorized wheelchair. In Say It Isn’t So he is one of several disabled actors in the cast, but he plays his part as someone who is not disabled.

Of course, it helps that he looks like this

And, BTW, my children’s high school guidance counselor is blind, but no one ever realizes it until he breaks out the white cane. If he chose to act he could certainly play the part of a sighted person, or like any actor, could play a part where he is in a wheelchair.

It is called acting because you pretend to be something you aren’t while making the most of what you are.

@Darwin Thank you for clarifying and giving me examples. I stand corrected on that point. I honestly could not think of how it would work out but great answer.

@aidje I stand corrected on the point that a disabled person would only be able to play a disabled character. In regards to your point, which I now understand more clearly, I would say that I’m not arguing that all disabled roles must go to disabled people. What I am saying is that it is likely there needs to be a change in the industry so that people with disabilities have more of an equal right to such roles. I am going under the assumption that since some of the disabled community is upset about this there is a serious flaw in the entertainment industry when it comes to higher people who are disabled. I’d like to see the numbers on how many people with disabilities tried out for the role. In my belief whenever there is a role that allows for diversity of any sort we should make sure they are being represented in the hiring process. I know for a fact that in many companies this is still not done (example would be hiring professors of color as I have experience with that directly). Now this should apply to all roles (regardless of ability) but I think starting with roles where someone is clearly disabled would be a big step forward. Perhaps that makes my point more clear, perhaps not.

@RedPowerLady Fair enough. It would appear that in the general matter at hand, I do not disagree with you.

@aidje Glad we came to an agreement. :)

As a woman with a disability, I feel strongly that the industry has not done a good job on this issue. I know a number of people in performing arts who have been egregiously discriminated against. In general, people with disabilities almost certainly do a better job playing people with disabilities than non-disabled actors. They have a nuanced understanding of life as a disabled person and will automatically insert additional layers of realism into the roles.

Hollywood has come to understand the numerous shortcomings of having westerners play nonwestern roles, and film has benefited greatly from culturally appropriate casting, which is widely accepted by audiences. That does not detract from the wisdom of, say, casting the extraordinary actor Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela in Invictus. My point is that it is good for cinema and good for audiences if stage and cinema can reform their casting practices and biases.

I know nothing about the casting of Glee, and I hate to cast judgement on that particular decision, but I imagine that it would not have been hard to find an outstanding singer and actor for the part who lives in a chair, and that the role may have been improved if it had been casted that way.

The Screen Actor’s Guild (SAG) commissioned a report in 2005 that addresses these issues. (The Employment of Performers with Disabilities in the Entertainment Industry, 2005)

A condensed summary of their conclusions:

Performers with disabilities want to see changes in audition and employment practices so that the results reflect the industry’s commitment to eliminate stereotyping in casting and to portray the American Scene realistically.

Collect ongoing data about the employment of performers with disabilities in the same manner as other underrepresented groups to allow accurate comparisons of employment practices and trends in the industry. Reliable methods for the identification of the performers with disabilities will be necessary as not all disabilities can readily be identified through observation.

Advocate for the inclusion of performers with disabilities in all diversity employment initiatives. Address images, language and attitudes that contribute to or hinder inclusion in the workplace.

Educate the industry about the accessibility and accommodation rights and needs of performers with disabilities and how to address them. While most buildings now provide accessible parking and bathroom access, there are still a number of limitations to gaining access to audition sites.Performers do not believe that auditioning in alternate sites, such as parking lots or outside of the casting room, allows them the opportunity to demonstrate their skills in an equitable fashion to
others interviewed during casting sessions.

Provide resources to the industry regarding accommodations, such as how to get a sign language interpreter, companies that rent out accessible equipment such as ramps or trailers, and so on. The majority of accommodations needed by the actors were fairly minor, such as a place and opportunity
to sit down or proximity to a bathroom.

Examine the needs of older actors, specifically those with age-related disabilities, as more than half of the entire membership of SAG is over the age 40. Performers with disabilities who stay in the workforce past the age of 65 are increasingly likely to acquire disabilities.