Just caught some of the 'I'd Do Anything' BBC show. I know this probably sounds very Un-PC but a black Oliver Twist would have no credibility considering he's supposed to come from a wealthy upper middle class 19th Century white English family.

The black boy actually has some real talent, so certainly deserves some kind of part - maybe even Dodger - but not Oliver.

And what on earth qualifies John Barrowman to be a judge? Does that man have to be on everything?

...Oliver Twist wasn't a real person. ...it's all pretend.

But the story is set in a real place in a specific period in history.

If we were casting a musical about the fictional son of a Massai tribal Chief in 19th century Kenya, would it be credible to cast a white boy? It's no different. The audience needs a degree of credibilty.

The Cat wrote:
a black Oliver Twist would have no credibility considering he's supposed to come from a wealthy upper middle class 19th Century white English family.


Didn't he come from a Northern town and walk 150 miles to London ?

Actually, it more than 150 miles to London from 'oop Norf. What the Dickens are you on about?

I agree that Oliver Twist can't be black as he has to fit in with the history against which the story is set. If they change it to modern times then it'd be different. A lot depends on the standards set by the producers. If their standards are less than high then they'll cast anyone in any part. I always think that if you're going to mess about with a story so much you might as well write your own original one.

Oliver Twist is a very established and loved character. Where he was born doesn't change his heritage. That's one of the main points of the story. If he was born in modern times it wouldn't matter what colour he was, but 19th century England didn't have wealthy upper class black families. Part of the audience could easily work around that, but others would find it distracting. It's nothing to do with racism, it's about accuracy and continuity.

The saddest thing about the 12 boys chosen for the final stages is that only half of them can hold a note, and only about three of those can act. Contest over really.

As for the women auditioning for Nancy. I found them all equally unlikeable. They each seemed to be performing for themselves rather than for their audience. Maybe that was just nerves, but it's not a good sign for a proposed West End production.

I can't watch these TV shows.

When one original idea comes up (auditions - 9 years ago - I refused the role as Judge on Popstars because it had been done before - before even New Faces...) they simply copy it again and again less and less well.

Just like music really.

What are we going to get served up next?

Hmm.........."The Battle of the Bands".???


....the winner gets a gig....

The Cat wrote:
But the story is set in a real place in a specific period in history.

If we were casting a musical about the fictional son of a Massai tribal Chief in 19th century Kenya, would it be credible to cast a white boy? It's no different. The audience needs a degree of credibilty.
Nancy was a child prostitute... how much credibility are you going to insist on?

I forgot the -

Nancy is a grown woman throughout the story. There is no child prostitution involved. Dickens hints at a dark past but there are few specifics other than that she used to steal for Fagin.

I'm glad you added the

Mart wrote:
What are we going to get served up next?

Hmm.........."The Battle of the Bands".???


....the winner gets a gig....

I think this has already happened on C4 with the unsigned competition. Someone called Envy and Other Sins won -although apparently they'd already been signed! Confused? I certainly am!