Fat Women On Stage & Screen
We wrote about Neil LaBute’s play “Fat Pig” way back in 2006 (links to a cached version of the post since mopie.com is still intermittently down) so it’s been on the radar for quite some time. But Sheila sent along this article in the Guardian, in response to the new London production of “Fat Pig,” that extends the discussion to the topic of fat women in theater, in general.
Big women on the stage. By and large, they get a bum deal. If an operatic audience can translate a statuesque and well-fed soprano into a consumptive waif with tiny, frozen hands, and go home streaming snot and tears even though Mimi’s build is more matronly than miniature, why should a theatrical audience not be asked to accommodate a curvaceous Cordelia, a jouncing Juliet, a delectably plump Helen of Troy?
It might be impossible to imagine a fat “straight” heroine in a conventional film, in which Knightley-esque proportions are the norm…But on stage I infinitely prefer a big presence and a big body to the kind of antiseptic, neat-calved, pretty-pretty who packs too many vowel sounds into her Shakespeare – “Oh, my Lo-or-ord!”
It’s an interesting perspective, but the author makes a couple of mistakes. Firstly, in invoking Marilyn’s Law (oh god, not the size 16 thing again, please) but more importantly, in implying (well, outright saying) that many if not most if not all conventionally thin, “pretty-pretty” women can’t act.
I would love to see more fat women on stage and screen, even just more normal-sized women would be a great start. But I also don’t think we need to tear down the “pretty-pretty” girls while we do it. It’s not their fault that they have thin bodies, and it shouldn’t negate their acting abilities. It would just be nice to see them joined by an equal number of larger bodies—who can also be “pretty-pretty,” as we all know.
Posted by mo pie
Filed under: Advocacy, Art, BFD Classic, Celebrities, Fat Positive, Fatism, International, Marilyn's Law, Meta, Theater
Email us
This is something that I have harped on before, but, I personally think it is more important for mainstream dramas (i.e. House, Lost, Greys Anatomy, Bones, etc) to have moderately overweight girls, more so than fat girls. Because a fat girl can simply play the role of The Fat Girl or the Fat Friend whereas a moderately overweight girl brings things that much closer to reality.
Having a bunch of everything would be more like it, though.
As a budding director at a community theatre and as a fat woman, I have struggled with this issue. In casting a play i have a hard time with the balance of casting a heavy woman without making a play About Weight – from Romeo and Juliet to Neil Simon. For some reason adding that extra element changes everything. If it’s a romance do they fall in love *despite her size*? Is she secure enough to love? What will his friends think? Agh. I know these questions shouldn’t matter but they seem to and I’m not sure what to do about it.
I’m with Usually Lurking on wanting moderately pudgy or, hell, average-sized women on stage and screen — preferably without making the play about weight. If the average American is a size 14, having a size 12 onscreen or stage should NOT BE A BIG DEAL.
And yet, it is.
Agh. I know these questions shouldn’t matter but they seem to and I’m not sure what to do about it.
LyL, all of those are great questions. My personal opinion:
Unless the play dictate how someone looks (i.e. Abe Lincoln = Tall, Thin and White) then simply deal with the reality.
If a heavier woman would actually change the role (and that is what you want) then change the role.
If you believe that her weight would make her more insecure, well, they call you “director” for a reason. This is your call.
Usually Lurking: I agree that we should have actresses of all sizes on screen, but think it’s just as important that large fat ladies and inbetweenies get screentime. Because at present, when there IS a fat girl, especially a large one, she’s there BECAUSE she is fat, not because she is a woman who happens to also be fat. There are few exceptions to this. It’s sad. Of course inbetweenies are subject to this to, but are more commonly subject to the “mom” or “dowdy” typecasting.
Lyl: It really depends on if one is going for ultra realism…though I have seen period musicals (Victorian) where they stuck all the fat girls as the poor people while all the rich ladies were thin (and I couldn’t figure out the director’s reasoning for this other than modern day preferences). I was thinking, “if you’re gonna segregate, shouldn’t it be the opposite?”
I don’t think it always matters. If you want to cast a fat Juliet because she’s the best actress for the role, all we need to know is that she is madly in love with Romeo and that Romeo is madly in love with her. Most of the audience will take the ride with you, especially if your actors are strong. Sure, some people will say “oh, that’s not realistic or gross”but sadly some people say that about people of color playing traditonally “white” roles (not roles where skin color is specific to the text but roles created and traditionally played by white people). Personally, unless weight,skin color, ability, height, etc, DIRECTLY conflict with the message of the piece than I say, cast whoever can act the role the best.
One interesting data point has to do with the play “‘Night Mother.” Some might recall that Kathleen Bates got a lot of attention for that play (and was passed over for a movie version, which is a separate story). Not a lot of people remember that the playwright had originally conceived the character as an anorexic. Obviously that turned out not to be essential to the story.
I think the more generic problem is that there are a lot of preconceptions about what a given character should look like that can influence a director to choose a less talented performer. Audiences can get used to unconventional casting more easily than producers assume they can, however. I took my mother to see Roundhouse’s production of “110 in the Shade” a couple of years ago, for example, and she never commented on the colorblind casting.
Miriam hits the nail on the head with her comment on “110 in the Shade”. LyL, if you substitute “black” for “fat” in your questions, it will be immediately obvious that they are questions that don’t matter at all, and that the right actor for the role is the best one you can find; nothing else matters. A really GOOD actor can make an audience believe anything; that’s why they call it ACTING.
By the way, that should have been Roundabout, not Roundhouse. I, apparently, go to the theatre too much.
To put another twist on it, in Shakespeare’s times, all the roles were played by men / boys. Can you do that now without it being perceived as a political statement. I had a personal experience with that once when telling a story at a fat feminist conference. About a half hour before the show (which was in a Las Vegas nightclub, by the way – something I still capitalize on), I realized that a lot of women in the audience would be lesbians. I realized that there was no reason whatsoever to specify the gender of the person who fell in love with my main character, so left it unstated. The straight women didn’t seem to notice, but at least a couple of the lesbians thanked me for not making the assumption.
As a former actress, I have to say that many casting directors toss away a lot of talent because of looks, and prefer to cast better-looking people who often don’t have the same level of talent. Yes, there are MANY thin, talented people out there, but looks seem to be the number one priority.
It’s hard not to be bitter about it, after you’ve spent so many years learning your craft in school, in tiny, thankless roles, in shows with little or no pay, etc. and basically paying your dues over and over and over, just to watch someone get a role over you because they look better in the costume. Especially if they’re not that good, lol!
I think it would be lovely to see some larger women in movies and television shows who weren’t always relegated to the funny best friend role, or the pining for the hot guy they can’t have role.
Where is it written that larger women can’t be self confident sex goddesses. Just once I’d like to see a movie or a tv show where the hot guy pines for the larger, sexy woman who won’t give him the time of day.
Does being overweight always have to equal being insecure?
I also agree with the point about not tearing the thin girls down. The goal it to make size meaningless, not to transfer the prejudice from one group to another.
There is an interesting discussion in the comments for the article, including the author replying to a commenter who brought up the issue of tearing down all thin actresses. She clarifies her idea of what a ‘pretty-pretty’ actress is:
“Argh! That was what I most wanted to avoid. I really am not dissing slim actresses, which would certainly be unacceptable – and ridiculous. Actresses of all shapes and sizes are fine by me, although I do think we should see more large ladies playing the plum roles. The pretty-pretty is not representative of all slim actresses, however. She is the kind of actress whose looks do her work for her – literally, she ‘looks the part’, so she doesn’t have to play it – she is prim, and over-enunciates, and looks soulful a lot. You couldn’t imagine her having a big dirty guffaw on or off stage. That’s my bete noire.”
How funny that I was just going to bring a theater-related item to Mo’s attention, and then here was this thread, all ready for me to comment! BFD wins again!
I’m a huge musical theater fan and I wanted to give a shout-out to the people who cast Spring Awakening for representing a variety of body types in the current incarnation of the Broadway cast…see a pic of the leading ladies here: http://img110.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sabarnesnoblecall460baj6.jpg
I wouldn’t really describe any of these girls as fat, but I’ve gotten so used to seeing only stick-thin girls up on stage, that it’s refreshing to see some realistic bodies up there. Especially significant is the fact that these are actual teenage girls playing teenage girl roles — so it’s a good thing for the actresses, and good for the audience members who get to see some different types of beauty.
Sorry for the double post, but here’s another pic showing the beautiful and buxom Emma Hunton alongside her (shorter AND smaller than her) love interest in the show. Hooray! http://img376.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sabarnesnoblecall460eaz6.jpg
Lisa, I saw Spring Awakening here in SF a couple of weeks ago and really liked it. (The soundtrack is in constant rotation on my NotPod.) It’s great to know the Broadway cast is so size diverse.
It’s bothered me to some extent for awhile that very thin actresses are cast as attractive lead characters in times when it just doesn’t make sense. They go to all the effort of designing and sewing period costumes, but the person wearing it would probably be considered hideous at the time the story takes place!
Though when I saw the show “Legally Blonde” one of the actresses who later plays a stereotypical/caricature lesbian feminist character was heavy and she was in the opening number as a sorority girl. I’ll admit, that seemed wrong too because for that character appearance was important. (Not to say there aren’t fat girls in sororities too, but it didn’t fit in this particular instance.)