De Flore's Summary:
Over the past years, ‘diversity’ has been propelled to the forefront of agendas for the UK film and TV industry. Across media outlets, we are seeing casts increasingly representing minority groups in leading roles and storylines discuss their lived experience. Yet, while the media has attempted to shine a light on the underrepresentation of minority groups, especially of ethnic minorities, behind the scenes the industries remain predominantly white in leadership. Watson (2022) argues that this trend shows that the diversification of casts is consumption-driven, with on-screen diversity being simply implemented to meet audience demands. Representation has been turned into a commodity (Saha and van Lente, 2022). This essay assesses the ways in which diversity is used within casting by white-dominated hierarchies to preserve their power of influence. It tackles the definition of ‘diversity,’ presenting a range of theories on racism in the entertainment industry and assessing the practice of colour-blind casting. Ultimately it finds that while the way in which diversity has been implemented has for the most part benefitted a white-dominated hierarchy, it has the potential to make changes in the habits of the casting executives, and eventually shift power dynamics within the industry.
Introduction
Over the past few years, ‘diversity’ has been propelled to the forefront of agendas for the UK film and TV industry. Diversity, as it is presented in the media industry, attempts to shine a light on the underrepresentation of minority groups, especially ethnic minorities (Saha and van Lente, 2022). Yet, the UK film and TV industries remain dominantly white, within their management structures and on-screen (Cochrane, 2022). Identifying the demand made by audiences to see diverse actors, the entertainment industries are merely meeting audience demands (Watson, 2022; Leong, 2013) and have made race representation into a commodity (Saha and van Lente, 2022). Additionally, diversity has become a buzzword, an easy solution to a complex problem. Through Anamik Saha’s theoretical framework on this issue, this essay explores how ‘diversity’ is implemented as a tool to maintain white dominance within the industry hierarchies (Saha, 2018). Furthermore, this will explore theories of racial capitalism by Melamed (2015), Leong (2013), and Bhattacharryya (2018), as well as Hesse’s concept of racialised governmentalities (Hesse, 2000) and assess the practice of colourblind casting in relation to this issue. Please note that some resources will be US-based due to the lack of academic research into the UK casting industry. Finally, throughout this essay, I will draw from my own experience as a casting assistant at Nancy Bishop Casting where I have worked for the past two years.
Defining the Casting Industry
Before delving further into the concept of diversity, I would like to define the demographics, hierarchies, and logic of production in the casting industry. Casting focuses on researching and finding the right actor to play a character, whether in film, theatre, TV or commercial (Catliff, 2013). This definition is already steeped in notions of meritocracy, which will be explored through the position casting directors have in the industry. In terms of business, casting is an industry, where commercial norms are embedded within the practice. For example, casting directors can help secure financing by hiring A-list celebrities, which is essential to the success of a project (ScreenSkills, 2022). The casting industry is primarily made of freelancers working for their client, the production, on short-term contracts (ScreenSkills, 2022). Demographically, the industry is led by women, specifically white women, with 70.4% of women casters in Hollywood, 54.8% are white, and 15.6% are underrepresented (Women and Hollywood, 2019). In comparison, out of the 29.6% of men casting directors, 27.4% are white, and 2.2% are underrepresented minorities (Women and Hollywood, 2019). Casting directors overlook the whole casting process alongside casting associates, who can act as substitutes to casting directors and casting assistants who provide administrative help on projects (ScreenSkills, 2022). The typical path to enter the industry is by interning as a casting assistant, training beside a casting director, and moving up into job positions (ScreenSkills, 2022). This is where industry norms of nepotistic recruitment through informal networking and meritocracy are passed down to assistants (Randle et al., 2014). This is often dictated by one’s socioeconomic background, with the means to have enough economic capital to cover not being paid (Randle et al., 2014). While this is the internal hierarchy within a casting business, the perceived hierarchy for actors is that casting directors hold the position to decide whom to hire, when in reality, that is the position of the producer or director. However, it is important to understand that the role of a casting director is not neutral; they are trained by industry norms and processes of production, which, unintentionally, can inform which actors get visibility (Warner, 2015). This will be apparent in my exploration of diversity within the casting industry.
An evaluation of diversity and its ambivalent features
Racial capitalism and diversity
Racial capitalism has connotations of violence and is often seen through a colonial lens when white supremacists would accumulate capital by devaluing human interactions (Melamed, 2015). While this is still embedded within British culture, Jodi Melamed highlights that racial capitalism is increasingly used under “liberal and multicultural terms of inclusion to value and devalue forms of humanity differentially to fit the needs of reigning statecapital orders” (Melamed, 2015). Likewise, Saha’s theoretical framework, it highlights how diversity is used as a strategy to value and devalue ethnic minorities. This is done under liberalist discourses by accumulating capital to keep dominant hierarchies in place. Furthermore, Gargi Bhattacharyya outlines racial capitalism through the context of consumption and how institutions benefit from “corporate antiracism” (Bhattacharryya, 2018). As consumerism is to promote and protect the interests of the consumer, when white hierarchies shape it, the motive to promote and protect ethnic minorities is used to acquire further capital by differentiating the Other as an attractive commodity (Saha and van Lente, 2022). This is a way diversity is ambivalent as it tries to include but ultimately excludes ethnic minorities.
While Nancy Leong explores racial capitalism through examples of affirmative action and law, similarly, racial capitalism can be understood as, “the process of deriving social and economic value from the racial identity of another person” (Leong, 2013). Leong further emphasises the term “thin diversity” to express the aspect of diversity concerned with numbers and aesthetics (Leong, 2013). One where institutions strategically benefit socially and economically from visually being labelled as antiracist. An example would be The Casting Director’s Guild (CDG) which is the official UK union for casting directors, associates, and assistants (CDG, 2021a). In 2019, the union decided to launch the Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion Group (EDI) in an attempt “to promote and prioritise these values in the casting profession, both within the Guild itself, and the work of its members” (CDG, 2021b). This consisted of having multiple CDG members enter this group and oversee different categories of diversity such as race, class/socioeconomic background, disability, access to the casting industry, and LGBTQI+ (CDG, 2021b). Through this group, the institution benefits socially from the visual and numerical label of not being racist, however, the internal hierarchies of the institution have not changed, with one non-white board member. Additionally, through this perceived need of diversity by white hierarchies, they have created a burden of representation as having three members represent race within the casting industry is tokenistic. This is the ambivalence in diversity, it aims to shine a light on underrepresentation yet when it does, it homogenises race and cultures altogether. Therefore, coming back to Melamed’s claim, by using diversity, strategically, dominant hierarchies have extracted the social and economic value out of racial identity by letting others perceive their antiracism as an institution. On the other hand, it is important to understand the difficulty of representation, in the sense that while this is not ideal, this is the first step this union has taken since 1987 to simply promote inclusion openly. Through audience consumptions created by this diverse industry, motives of “corporate antiracism” have been established not only in the CDG but the Casting Society of America (CSA), Casting Director’s Association (CDA) and Spotlight, the primary UK casting database of actors used by casters (Bhattacharryya, 2018).
Diversity and racialised governmentalities a lens into policies in casting
Within casting institutions, diversity policies have manifested themselves through statements on diversity and increasing the numbers of ethnic minorities within the casting industry and its work. Although certain policies are quite recent, they have not yet proven successful within the casting industry. Under Barnor Hesse’s ideologies, I argue that these policies can be explained through the technology of racialised governmentalities, how power naturally operates and representation is homogenised due to industry norms (Hesse, 2000). These norms include nepotistic recruitment, meritocracy, and the need for economic and social capital prior to entering the industry; led by an industry of white women but curated by white men.
The “Statement of Diversity” issued by the CDG, CSA, Spotlight, and CDA expresses how diversity is essential to these institutions, who is diversity aimed at, and what goals are put in place to better the diversity of its members and their work (CDA, 2017; CDG, 2021a; CSA, 2012; Spotlight, 2022). Essentially, this is a promise from white hierarchies to ethnic minorities that they are anti-racist, which has been accepted as a norm of change not reflected in its internal structures. Through these statements, autonomy is its selling point as ethnic minorities, exemplified by the EDI group, are given a ‘voice’ but still work under these casting industry norms. In the case of Spotlight, which is used as a tool to find actors, their statement focuses on casting directors now being able to find a diverse range of talent (Spotlight, 2022). While the internal features of the website, such as the filter for the search engine, have been more inclusive, access to Spotlight is dictated by a costly subscription (Spotlight, 2022). Once more, the motive for diversity is contradictory as it is inclusive to all internally, yet it fails to include talent that cannot afford its subscription externally. This is the case for the CDG as to become a probationary member, one needs two years of experience within the casting industry (CDG, 2021a). Therefore, due to the technologies of racialised governmentality in these institutions, representation within the casting industry is homogenised.
Furthermore, these institutions have also put in place initiatives to increase the number of ethnic minorities within the workforce. This is a common solution to a complex problem, however, Leong outlines that including more ethnic minorities within an institution, does not necessarily mean they are included (Leong, 2013). As previously mentioned, a casting assistant will be taught industry norms through its training with a casting director. Simply increasing the number of minorities working under white casting directors, still means the same industry norms are passed down. This is a form of colourblindness, which will be further explored, exemplified by the guilds, as their concerns lie in the ‘thin diversity’ Leong explores, not with the cultural specifications that come with hiring ethnic minorities (Leong, 2013; Warner, 2015). While I do agree with this statement, it can be argued that due to the casting industry workforce being primarily made up of freelancers, it does enable ethnic minorities, to an extent, to exert power over their own work (Cochrane, 2022). Casting directors from minority backgrounds tend to hire assistants or hire actors on projects from minority backgrounds as well. According to data, out of the 15.6% of women casters who are underrepresented, it was identified that their films featured more underrepresented characters, 45.8%, than without an underrepresented women caster attached, 30.7% (Women and Hollywood, 2019). While it is ironic that I use numerical values to understand diversity, this shows that a small amount of casting directors with their own businesses tend to have more freedom to hire professionals with minority backgrounds. Without generalising, I did witness such practices; working at Spotlight I saw that black casting directors tended to have black assistants and the projects they worked on focused on authentic representations of minoritized groups. This also rings true with white casting directors, and their assistants being usually white. Please note that one cannot romanticise the position of a freelancer. The path to access the casting industry and be considered a respected casting director with some autonomy over their own work is rooted in inequality. Nevertheless, ineffective diversity policies cannot be solely attributed to a single person, workforce, or institution due to the ways in which media is produced and consumed. At each step of production, it is governed by powers steeped in norms. Therefore, this is how the concept of racialised governmentalities helps diversity maintain the status quo.
Colourblind Casting
Colourblind casting is a practice of casting an actor without specifying or considering their race, amongst other features (Warner, 2015). This can be applied within the workplace as well, as shown by the guilds. It has been an increasingly used practice within the film industry; however, it too, underlines the ambivalent features of diversity.
When the BBC adaptation of Sally Rooney’s novel, Normal People was created the three main actors of colour were blindly cast as antiheroes (Frazer-Carroll, 2020). While it can be thought that anyone should be considered for a role. it is important to understand the meaning behind having minorities on screen and how its semantics can impact the audience watching it. This argument is closely related to the one of “not seeing race”, as it can negate the structural racism found that blocks actors from gaining the same opportunities as their white counterparts (Frazer-Caroll, 2020). Colourblind casting in certain instances, such as the popular Bridgerton series, can be enabled to an extent. In season 1, ethnic minorities were finally included in a regency period series with noble titles and cast as leads, which is so rarely seen (Premium Beat, 2022). However, Bridgerton did receive some backlash for not addressing race, which is why I think Bridgerton season 2 was so acclaimed for addressing race with Charithra Chandra and Simone Ashley’s characters. Therefore, according to arts journalist Diep Tran, colour-conscious casting is of necessity as it acknowledges race when casting films (Frazer-Carroll, 2020). She further highlights how it shows the effort writers, directors, producers, and casting directors create in order to consider others for further inclusion.
According to Kristen Warner’s work on The Cultural Politics of Colorblind TV Casting, casting professionals to rationalise the decisions they make, such as colourblind casting, based on meritocracy (Warner, 2015). In Warner’s interviews, she outlines how colourblind casting cannot happen organically even though casting directors seem to think that choosing the best actors to represent the roles, it will (Warner, 2015). This is based on a meritocratic discourse, as casting directors will often speak of casting as an instinct, they will know when the actor fits the role or not. However, this instinct is already shaped by the casting director’s training, industry norms, and the ways films are made. This is another way diversity can disrupt dominant hierarchies; by highlighting how meritocracy is used as a rationalisation to exclude ethnic minorities. To admit and reflect upon those practices are ways diversity can better evolve as a positive action. Warner further explores how casting directors “remain loyal to their commercial imperatives”, as we must not forget that this is an industry, and those imperatives are dictated by a series of production processes (Warner, 2015). As a casting assistant, I find the concept of colourblind casting contradictory. When the casting director and director meet to understand each other’s vision, what comes out of that is the casting breakdown, with the exact description of the character that is wanted. Through Spotlight, these character breakdowns now must have a statement disclosing that Spotlight has no influence over what casting directors post, it is based on the casters’ judgement whether these broad or specific descriptions are necessary or not (Spotlight, 2022). I often find that breakdowns are posted for all ethnicities, however, the choice is already set in stone before the breakdown goes out to agents. Since the vision for that character has already been established writing “all ethnicities” has become an admin requirement, once you go through the final shortlist of actors, one realises that the breakdown, realistically, was not open to every actor no matter their race. Once again, diversity shows its ambivalence through the motives of casting directors, deliberate or unintentional, informed by industry norms.
Conclusion
To reiterate, throughout this evaluation of the concept of diversity within the casting industry, I have unfolded the ways in which it can be used as a tool to maintain white dominant hierarchies. Simultaneously, I have tried to identify the concept of diversity as ambivalent with features that can enable ethnic minorities to disrupt the status quo. This has been done in the context of the casting industry, through its professionals, its guilds, and its work with actors. I have explored diversity in terms of racial capitalism, diversity policies, and practices of colourblind casting, with perhaps a more pessimistic lens. Although I highlight that diversification of the industry does not aim to benefit race minorities directly, it has the potential to create a change when its overtly excluding features are disclosed and confront the casting industry itself. To an extent, diversity can be enabled, which is observed through examples of being a freelancer and working on independent projects, colour-conscious casting, and the guild's first notable actions. This juxtaposition created by the concept of diversity of seemingly being inclusive only to differentiate is where disruption of dominant hierarchies is possible. While it is still unclear how policies, institutions, and norms can change, it is by reflecting upon the practices of the casting industry that one hopes it can bring positive action to ethnic minorities in the future.
References
Bhattacharyya, G., 2018. Rethinking Racial Capitalism: Questions of Reproduction and Survival. London: Rowman & Littlefield International, Limited.
Catliff, S. and Granville, J., (2013). The Casting Handbook. London: Routledge.
CDA, (2017). Mission Statement. [online] Casting Directors Association. Available at: <https://www.castingdirectorsassociation.com/about/mission-statement/>.
CDG, (2021a). CDG Statement on Diversity - The CDG. [online] The CDG. Available at: <https://www.thecdg.co.uk/diversity/>.
CDG, (2021b). CDG The EDI Group - The CDG. [online] The CDG. Available at: <https://www.thecdg.co.uk/edi-group/
Cochrane, K., (2022). Casting Research Interview.
CSA, (2012). CSA Code of Conduct. Available at: https://www.castingsociety.com/join/csa-code-of-conduct.
Frazer-Carroll, M., 2020. 'It's dangerous not to see race': is colour-blind casting all it's cracked up to be?. [online] The Guardian. Available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/aug/11/its-dangerous-not-to-see-race-is-colour-blind-casting-all-its-cracked-up-to-be> [Accessed 11 May 2022].
Hesse, B., (2000). Unsettled multiculturalism. London: Zed Books.
Melamed, J., (2015). Racial Capitalism. JSTOR. Available at: <https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/jcritethnstud.1.1.0076>.
Leong, N., (2013). Racial Capitalism. SSRN Electronic Journal, Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2009877.
Premium Beat, (2022). What Colorblind Casting Does for Shows Like Bridgerton in the Long Run. [online] Premiumbeat.com. Available at: <https://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/colorblind-casting-bridgerton/>.
Randle, K., Forson, C. and Calveley, M., (2014). Towards a Bourdieusian analysis of the social composition of the UK film and television workforce. Work, Employment and Society, 29(4), pp.590-606. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017014542498.
Saha, A. and van Lente, S., (2022). Diversity, media and racial capitalism: a case study on publishing. Ethnic and Racial Studies, [online] 45(16), pp.216-236. Available at: <https://research.gold.ac.uk/id/eprint/31186/10/Diversity%20media%20and%20racial%20capitalism%20a%20case%20study%20on%20publishing-1.pdf>.
Saha, A., (2018). Race and the cultural industries. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Saha, A., (2022). In: Race and the Cultural Industries Lectures.
ScreenSkills, (2022). Casting Assistant. Available at: https://www.screenskills.com/job-profiles/browse/film-and-tv-drama/development-film-and-tv-drama-job-profiles/casting-assistant/.
Spotlight, (2022). Promoting inclusivity in our industry. [online] Spotlight.com. Available at: <https://www.spotlight.com/the-small-print/promoting-inclusivity-in-our-industry/>.
Warner, K., (2015). The cultural politics of colourblind TV casting. Abingdon: Routledge.
Watson, R., (2022). Casting Research Interview.
Women and Hollywood, (2019). 2019 Statistics. Available at: https://womenandhollywood.com/resources/statistics/2019-statistics/.
Kommentare