#jcss | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

jcs-study · 17 days ago

Text

JCS Ideas: Casting

After my recent delightful interaction with @averagecygnet-blog that got me spitballing about a possible closing for Jesus Christ Superstar if I was ever to direct the show, I started thinking about all of the ideas I'd ever had for JCS, both big and small. I've posted about them before, but it's never a bad time to take a second look at the accumulation of notions and play around with them a bit. After all, I've been brainstorming how to stage this thing since the first grade.

So, let's start with some casting concepts, not all of which are meant to co-exist in a single production, but presented for contemplation nonetheless. I've probably had more ideas over time than are presented in this post, but for right now, these are the things that typically rise above the chaos in the theater of my mind's eye.

Cast Size and Age Ranges

A lot of JCS productions over the years have tended to over-stack their deck in cast size terms, at least in my opinion. While it's tempting to throw as many people at the stage as one can, I think the show benefits from the opposite of the Cecil B. DeMille treatment, especially given Andrew Lloyd Webber's statement (in Ellis Nassour's Rock Opera) along the lines that he saw it as an intimate drama of three or four people. With that in mind, while also not literally adhering to the letter of that statement (therein lies madness), I'd strip it down. Severely.

You've got your main leads, JUDAS, JESUS, and MARY, who obviously can't pull double duty. Then you have supporting leads, who can double as the ensemble in scenes where they're not needed as a named character -- people like CAIAPHAS, ANNAS, HEROD, SIMON/PETER (getting to this in a second), and PILATE. Lastly, to boost the overall vocal sound and spread things out somewhat beyond the supporting leads, you have an ENSEMBLE of 6 performers.

Not counting any separate understudies who may not appear onstage (and would add to the overall number), we've just demonstrated that at a base level, you can chunk JCS down to 14 people. 14 extremely hard-working, strong-voiced people.

Now, as for age ranges, I go into this in somewhat more detail in the "My Two Cents" section of the Dramatis Personae chapter in my book -- namely, it's possible to cast along an unusually varied age spectrum, so long as it makes sense and feels "of a piece." However, I personally think that youth should be a key component in casting, because of youthful performers' natural energy and vitality, and because it reflects the reality of "Roman-occupied Jerusalem and environs," as the show's setting is described; from what we know of Jewish society at the time, a boy would have been learning his trade by age 10, engaged at 13 (girls would typically be 12), and married by 14 (girls, 13). Precocious and unconscionable by today's standards, no doubt, but the reality.

With the above, and the fact that JCS was developed -- consciously or not -- with clear parallels to the 1960s hippie movements, including the generational clashes between youth and the older "establishment," in mind, I'd seek out a younger cast, with an average age of 18-25, while capping authority figures (HEROD, PILATE, etc.) at around 45.

Narrative Threads

I say, and not without reason, in my book that one of the biggest problems directors face with JCS is probably its lack of dialogue. Christianity has been on thin ice since the Sixties, but at least back in 1970, most people had basic biblical knowledge, specifically of the New Testament, which meant the decision to dispense with a script (which would traditionally, in theater terms, help things out from an exposition standpoint) didn't matter so much. Today, however, there is a glaring lack of knowledge about the story -- among believers and non-believers alike -- that exposes how underwritten the piece is in traditional terms. (Check out the stats on it in my "Historical Background" chapter; they raise gasps and giggles in equal measure.)

As no production is likely to get a special dispensation to add dialogue (nor, honestly, do I think they should, even though I acknowledge its absence as a likely flaw), I have a tendency in my casting thoughts to try to tie together the show's narrative in a neater bow and paper over the cracks in the plaster, so to speak.

(Plus, as a formerly religious atheist, I'm more familiar with the show's characters than most from a biblical standpoint, which often leads down intriguing paths and gives me a chance to flex.)

Thus, ideas like:

Casting MARY as a trans woman of color. In addition to all the dramaturgical and cultural reasons that @griffinmackleroy's idea is brilliant and worth borrowing, it also works for lazy directors like me. Anyone in the audience (or who is cast in the role) who knows (of) or has lived those experiences can fill in their own backstory, and suddenly I don't have to explain who Mary Magdalene is in exacting detail. They know (of), are, or have been that person, can fill in a lot of gaps with headcanon, and we're off to the races.

Casting three performers to play JUDAS' TORMENTORS, PRIESTS, and SOUL GIRLS in triplicate, in a manner that can be interpreted by the audience either as filling those specific roles or symbolic of fate/destiny/motivation. It's a little avant-garde, but it also sells the basic idea that fate was at play, we're only human, however you want to phrase it. (If you find this is too weird or a step too far in an otherwise conventional -- if small -- production, then you keep the same numbers from above for a tight cast size, but you take the 3 PRIESTS' lines, assign them to a single soloist, and double-cast them as HEROD. That also creates a nice little through-line about the ubiquity of authority, how it is more alike than different no matter what paper it's wrapped in.)

Combining the roles of SIMON and PETER, in principle/for all intents and purposes if not on paper. Two character arcs that go nowhere become one character arc that goes somewhere, and it flies just fine as long as there are twelve bodies (and one JESUS) around the supper table in Act II.

Casting PILATE as a white cis woman, and more specifically, depicting her as a deconstruction of a modern center-left (American) legislator who means well but lacks the backbone to prevent this judicial murder from taking place because of what it means for her political standing. (I alluded to the idea in brief on the blog, but it's much better explicated in the "My Two Cents" section of my chapter on Pilate, which is the primary link.)

Some of these suggestions also help shake up how male-centric the story traditionally is, which is always a plus.

Miscellanea

These are just ideas that didn't fit in the other two sections, so I'm happily dumping them here.

Fleshing Out a Character With a Deleted Song

For once, I'm not talking about "Then We Are Decided," which I could do (and have done) for hours, though this does involve a priest. I'm talking about the slightly more obscure "What A Party."

The JCS completist in me that recognizes any amount of storytelling, in casting and dramaturgy (more about the latter in the next post) alike, can only help the audience has seen the merit in re-adding "What A Party" to the show, though I've struggled with whether or not it was strictly necessary. At last, I've come to a compromise. If I add it, this is how I'd use it: I'd reassign the "party host" soloist, and in the process, create a character that ties two strands of the narrative together.

When considering the setting of the number, I thought of the Gospel story in Luke of Jesus being anointed in the house of Simon the Pharisee and realized that since "What A Party" doesn't explicitly say he's Simon the Leper anywhere in the lyrics (we only know the soloist is that character in John's Gospel from Nassour), we could instead make him Simon the Pharisee: a priest on the council trying to feel this guy out and being unimpressed, perhaps even discomfited, by the drama brought to his doorstep.

Put yourself in his shoes for a second: you're a respectable religious leader, and before pre-judging this rabble-rouser like your superiors, you want to know what he's all about. You're willing to hear what he has to say over dinner, but he brings his whole crew, including 12 hangers-on, at least one person you know (to preserve my SIMON/PETER doubling, I have one disciple's name escape his memory and have the "Judas, Simon" moment be an exchange of greetings between JUDAS and this person), and a woman you suspect to be a sex worker, with all the judgment of your era implied and applied. (It's entirely possible, given the circumstances, that "You know that you're always welcome..." comes with a backhanded delivery.)

Moreover, they party relentlessly and squabble amongst themselves without caring about the impression they make and whose house they're in. Plus, that Peter guy, a former (?) Zealot, has weapons that are setting off more than a few mental alarm bells. "What a party! Lordy, Lordy..." indeed. It leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

Your inner monologue might sound something like:

"Messiah my tuchus! This rock star and his entourage are out first thing in the morning. I give them my best wine, introduce myself, and ingratiate myself with all of them, and they descend into petty bickering and platitudes about living in the present instead of thinking ahead. Feh. They are out of control, and if this is what our people are chasing instead of us, we're screwed."

More than that, we explicitly make this character one of the priests reporting back in "This Jesus Must Die," maybe "The man is in town right now…" guy, watching "Hosanna" and "Simon Zealotes" with concern, and possibly even the first person JUDAS seeks out during "Damned for All Time," knowing his concerns will be heard.

(You might say, if you're well-versed in Hollywood epics, that this character has similar vibes to Zerah in Jesus of Nazareth. Why yes, yes he does, and thank you for noticing. If you must borrow, borrow from the best.)

Double Trouble

This, honestly, is just an idea I think is neat that other productions have adopted and that I toyed with myself in a possible star vehicle take that never got off the ground (for which see here).

I would like JESUS and JUDAS to have the vocal stamina to withstand alternating roles during the performance schedule (i.e. some nights Person A is JESUS and Person B is JUDAS, some nights vice versa), allowing them to play both sides of that remarkable relationship and giving the cast and audience two equally valid ways to see these powerful characters. (From a selfish commercial standpoint, it also really encourages repeat viewings, given the different interpretations each performer -- including understudies -- would bring to the characters, sort of like how the current [at the time of writing] Broadway revival of Sunset Boulevard has led some theatergoers to come back for a re-watch and compare Caroline Bowman's and Mandy Gonzalez' performances to Nicole Scherzinger's.)

If it helps you to conceptualize this notion, there is ample precedent. For example, Brian Yorkey's 2011 production at the Village Theatre did this to great effect, with the help of two incredible artists, Aaron Finley and Michael K. Lee. Also, Scott Miller's New Line Theatre did the same in 2006 (albeit with the slightly more stable idea of alternating weeks rather than performances) with John Sparger and Khnemu Menu-Ra.

#jesus christ superstar #andrew lloyd webber #tim rice #jcs #jesus christ super star #jcss #jesus christ super-star #ideas

10 notes · View notes