In this absorbing and disturbing comedy Ackles, who has mobility issues, played a minute Congolese woman who is kept prisoner in a box by the author Hans Christian Andersen. Ackles was making her acting debut in the show, but you wouldn’t have known it, for her portrayal was electrifying. Indeed, you couldn’t imagine anyone else playing the role.
But does this mean that we shall now only see such roles taken on by actors whose disabilities specifically meet the requirements of the script? Should we not take Callow’s point that acting is about “the capacity for transformation? Otherwise do we not risk undermining the rationale of theatre, which is about suspending disbelief?
Cranston is a big enough beast to stand up for himself in the debate. But I worry that many smaller projects nowadays simply won’t be able to afford to take the risk of attracting adverse criticism and unhelpful publicity if they ignore the current trend. Would it be possible now to stage a production of John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men without casting an actor with genuine learning difficulties as Lennie?
