If you keep up with theatrical news, which I for some reason do, you’re aware of the casting and closing controversy regarding Natasha, Pierre, and the Great Comet of 1812. The musical covered Volume Two, Part Five of Leo Tolstoy’s novel War and Peace, but creator Dave Malloy managed to avoid the considerable pretentiousness or obscurity at risk in adapting such a revered text. Rather, the relatability, drama, and philosophizing of Malloy’s piece prompted an extremely positive reception by both critics and audiences. So how did the multiple Tony award-winning, fan favorite, and lucrative production meet its downfall so extremely and suddenly?
The answer has to do with money, fame, and race. Comet began at Ars Nova, a non-profit theater dedicated to new voices in the performing arts. To rise from this relatively instable context to bringing in over a million dollars per week on Broadway constitutes both an achievement and a shift for the people involved. The more attention Comet received, the more prestigious of a cast it was able to bring in. The role of Pierre, played at first by Malloy himself, went to Josh Groban, then to Hamilton alum Okieriete Onaodowan.
Onaodowan had already made history as a black man by playing Hercules Mulligan and James Madison in the hip-hop account of Alexander Hamilton’s life. He had substantial acting experience, but had never before been a household name. This background lends him a politically-tinged fame, furthering the social implications of what soon happened.
Mandy Patinkin is a 65-year-old well-respected, famous actor, both screen and stage, and he expressed a professional interest in playing male lead in Comet, Pierre. Onaodowan is famous, too, but only recently so; hiring Patinkin could very well extend Comet‘s already meteoric rise via his prestige and fan base. Thus, the showrunners announced plans to apparently end Onaodowan’s run early so that Patinkin could take over.
This move received immediate criticism. Many took issue, especially, with what seemed like the marginalization of a black actor in favor of a white one. Those of us outside the negotiations can of course not know for sure the exact context in which decisions were made. It seemed, however, that those who were placed greater value onto the white man rather than his black counterpart. Meanwhile, Ars Nova (the original theater) filed charges alleging that Comet no longer gave public credit to the space and team which had made it possible.
So, the show’s reputation shifted quickly from fun and literary to racist and opportunistic, the idea furthered by revelations of previous tension between Onaodowan and others behind the scenes. Patinkin withdrew, and Onaodowan refused requests to stay on in light of this. It’s been confirmed that other individuals in talks to join the production all backed out, too. As their economic and legal situation worsened, Comet blazed out like its cosmic namesake.
This debacle appears, on the surface, to have limited importance with regards to the rest of the world. Yet, it does in its raising of more significant questions. Black people have historically been represented very poorly in media and pop culture. How should we deal with such a past if we truly want a post-racial world? What is enough, or what is too much? Further, how should we reconcile economic and ethical motivators?
The answers – if singular ones exist — lie obscured by cultural and other barriers. It seems improbable that humans will discover how to please all moralities any time soon, and we risk objective wrongness even if we did. For now, everyone who worked on or invested in Pierre, Natasha, and the Great Comet of 1812 have lost jobs, reputations, and what was otherwise ubiquitously called a masterpiece.
If you are interested in writing an article for Her Campus Davidson, contact us at davidson@hercampus.com or come to our weekly meeting Monday at 8 p.m. in Chambers 1003.