By this logic, gay actors shouldn’t be given straight roles
As a gay film producer, I call ‘nonsense’ on Doctor Who and Queer As Folk writer Russell T Davies (inset below) saying ‘straight actors playing gay roles is the same as black-face’ (Metro, Wed). This ‘who may play what role’ rubbish has gone too far.
It’s called ‘acting’ for a reason – pretending to be someone you are not. Most gay people I know (myself included) have no issue with straight people playing gay roles. If these rules were extended, then gay actors should not be allowed to play straight roles, surely?
I recently produced a gay film and my cast contained mainly straight actors in the gay roles (and a gay actor in a straight role). Does Mr Davies want us to make actors kiss another guy in the audition so as to prove their gayness? His views do not represent the gay community or the gay film industry! Andrew, Kent
So writer Russell T Davies opines that straight actors playing gay roles is the equivalent of ‘blacking up’. What about gay actors playing straight roles, as in Hot Priest in Fleabag? I understand the actor playing that (straight) character is gay in real life. It’s called acting. Gigi, London
Is Russell T Davies saying only blondes can play blondes or only murderers can play murderers? Fred Macey, Thornbury
I thought the idea of being a good actor or actress was supposed to be that one could tackle a variety of roles and not have to stay exclusively within one’s own ‘zone’, for want of a better word. To act is not to be yourself, surely?
I’ve often listened as someone describes the intense research they do for a role and how they get into a character. Surely that’s at the heart of the thespian craft? Heather, Bradford