Building a Bigger Stage: Some Thoughts on Representation, Casting, and the Stories We Can't Tell Yet

This is a different kind of Backstage Pass post. Usually, I come here with something I want to explain, a story I want to tell, or an opinion I've had enough time to wrestle into submission. This isn't one of those posts. This one is a question. It's a question I have thought about a lot as a director and as the Executive Director of a small community theater in a predominantly white rural county: How do we genuinely work toward greater racial and cultural diversity on our stage when the diversity we would like to see isn't reflected in our current audition pool? I don't have a great answer.

I do know what I don't want to do. I don't want an actor to ever wonder whether we cast them for what they bring to a role or simply because we needed someone who looks like them. I don't want to ask one or two performers to carry the burden of making our theater look diverse. I don't want to select a culturally specific show that we have no reasonable expectation of casting appropriately and simply hope the right people appear at auditions. And I certainly don't want our programming choices to send the message that stories centered on people who don't look like most of our current actors aren't welcome on our stage. Somewhere among all of those competing concerns is a better path forward. I just haven't found it yet.

So, this isn't a post about what Hamilton Players has figured out. It's a rumination on something we haven't, why it's more complicated than it might initially appear, and some of the ways I think we might begin trying to do better.

Ravalli County is not a particularly racially diverse place. According to current U.S. Census estimates, our population is approximately 48,600 people, 90% of whom identify as white and not Hispanic or Latino. That demographic reality affects the potential pool from which our actors come, but it doesn't fully explain our audition pool, nor would we necessarily expect our audition pool to mirror county demographics exactly. Our reality? In an average year, roughly 50 to 100 actors audition for Hamilton Players productions, and typically only one to three are people of color.

Even "people of color" is an imperfect shorthand in this conversation because culturally specific casting isn't interchangeable. Increasing the overall racial diversity of our audition pool would be wonderful, but it wouldn't necessarily make a particular show castable. A show may include characters of a specific racial, ethnic, or cultural background, and one identity can't simply be substituted for another.

I don't know why the racial and cultural diversity that does exist in Ravalli County isn't proportionately reflected in our audition pool. Maybe there are barriers I don't see, including some that extend well beyond Hamilton Players. Maybe we aren't reaching people effectively. Maybe people don't see themselves represented and therefore don't see Hamilton Players as a place for them. Maybe community theater simply isn't of interest to some of the communities we're failing to reach. Most likely, it's some complicated combination of factors I haven't identified yet. So how does a small rural theater work toward greater representation without engaging in tokenism, compromising responsible casting, or choosing productions it has no reasonable expectation of being able to cast? I DON'T KNOW. But I want to, and I don't know where to start.

I have identified several challenges that frame the issue for us. Our first hurdle is figuring out why our audition pool doesn't reflect even the limited diversity that exists in our broader community, and what we can do differently to reach people who aren't currently coming through our doors. While that isn't easy, or we'd be doing it already, it may actually be the easiest of the bunch. It gets trickier from there.

Show selection may be part of the issue. Perhaps people of color or people from different cultural backgrounds don't audition because they don't see themselves represented by the material. Could we just program more culturally diverse shows and hope that attracts more diverse actors? We've considered it. But choosing a show we have no reasonable expectation of casting creates its own problems. It potentially sets the production up to fail, and it can put enormous pressure on the few actors of color who do audition.

Our Play Reading Committee gets to be aspirational, and I want them to be. We should be reading shows that challenge, inspire, educate, and expand our idea of what belongs on our stage. But eventually aspiration has to meet production reality. When someone falls in love with The King and I, In the Heights, Kinky Boots, or Hairspray, part of my job is to ask the less exciting question: "From whom, specifically, do we reasonably expect to cast these roles?" I'm not opposed to the show or its representation. I'm responsible for helping make sure that when we choose a story to tell, we have a reasonable expectation that we can tell it responsibly.

So, what about choosing a show that requires only one or two culturally specific roles? Suppose we select a show with a character written specifically as Black and our licensing agreement requires that the role be cast accordingly. One Black actor auditions. But the role also requires a demanding vocal range, significant dance ability, or the experience to carry a major dramatic role, and that particular actor isn't yet ready for those demands. Being right for a character's identity is one part of casting. It isn't the only part. A performer may be right for a character's racial, ethnic, cultural, age, or other identity and still not yet meet the specific acting, vocal, dance, or technical demands of the role. That's true of every actor who auditions. So, what does responsible inclusion require of us?

Automatically casting someone because of their racial identity rather than because they're right for the role doesn't feel like genuine inclusion. Violating the requirements of the script or our licensing agreement simply to get the show cast isn't an option either. Canceling the production despite having a willing actor could look terrible from the outside and, more importantly, what message might that send to a new performer who took the risk of walking through our doors? Yet putting an actor into a role they aren't ready for isn't fair to the rest of the cast, the audience, or arguably even that performer. There isn't a magic fourth option that suddenly makes that particular production castable.

But maybe there is something we can do about the next production. If an actor isn't ready for a particular role today, how do we help them become ready for opportunities tomorrow? Can we provide classes, workshops, smaller roles, Readers Theatre, ensemble opportunities, mentorship, or other places to develop skills and confidence? We don't have to lower the requirements of a role in order to lower the barriers to developing the skills necessary to play it. That should be true for every actor who comes through our doors.

And there's another side of this equation that I can't answer from my own experience: What does it feel like to be one of the only people of color walking into our audition room? Does being the only one create pressure I don't recognize? Does it feel welcoming, or isolating? Are there things about our theater culture that tell people they belong here, or things we don't even notice that tell them otherwise? And if someone does take that risk, auditions, and isn't cast, do they understand why? Or does it confirm a fear that this wasn't really a place for them after all? Those aren't questions I can answer for someone else. They're questions I need to be willing to ask and then listen to the answers.

For now, I will continue to recommend against productions I don't believe we have a reasonable expectation of casting responsibly. But I refuse to believe that our current casting limitations simply have to remain this way forever. Our goal isn't to make our casts look inclusive. Our goal is to make our theater a genuinely welcoming place where more people feel invited to participate while continuing to cast actors according to the requirements of the work. Those two responsibilities sometimes create difficult choices but abandoning either one isn't the answer.

I don't know what the answer is yet. But I do know that simply wishing for a more diverse audition pool won't create one. I know that choosing shows we cannot responsibly cast and hoping the right people materialize isn't a strategy. I know that casting someone primarily because of their racial identity isn't the kind of inclusion I want us to practice. And I know that avoiding the issue altogether guarantees that nothing will change. So maybe, for now, the answer isn't a particular show or a particular casting policy. Maybe it's curiosity, outreach, relationship-building, training, and listening. Maybe it's looking honestly at who is coming through our doors, who isn't, and asking why.

How do we lower barriers to participation and create more welcoming entry points for people who don't already see themselves here? How do we build relationships with people and communities who aren't currently represented in our theater? And most importantly, how do we listen without beginning the conversation with something we want from them? What might our theater look and feel like from the doorway to someone who doesn't see many people like themselves already inside?

I'd love to reach a point where our community of actors is broader and more representative, not because we need certain people to make a particular show possible, but because more people genuinely see Hamilton Players as their theater, too. I don't know exactly how we get there, but I think it's a question worth asking out loud and then listening to the answers.