Community Theatre Postpones '“Hunchback” Production Due to Casting Controversey

by Chris Peterson

On Friday, the Spokane Civic Theatre announced that it was pausing its upcoming production of The Hunchback of Notre Dame after backlash over its casting.

“The production of ‘The Hunchback of Notre Dame’ is currently on pause as we are listening…” they said in a statement on Facebook. “This decision was not made lightly, but we feel it is the only way to authentically integrate potential action steps and learnings that arise in the coming weeks.”

The controversy followed the release of a cast list that community members said was largely white in a show centered on the persecution of Romani people.

According to The Spokesman-Review, performers of color who auditioned said Romani roles had gone to white actors, and the theatre has since said it will hold a public forum moderated by former NAACP Spokane president Kiantha Duncan, hire an equity leadership consultant, and bring in a dramaturg to help address the show’s historical context around Romani and disability discrimination.

The same report also noted that a white performer, Kailyn Wilder, cast in a Romani role dropped out after saying she understood that the role should have been cast with a performer of color, but also added that she received anonymous death threats for initially accepting the role.

There are a few things that can be true at once here, and theatre people are sometimes very bad at letting multiple truths exist in the same room.

First, the casting concerns are valid. Very valid.

Hunchback is not some fluffy little title you toss on a season because the score is gorgeous and the bells are dramatic. This is a show rooted in exclusion, othering, cruelty, and the violence done to people society decides are lesser than.

If a production of The Hunchback of Notre Dame ends up looking overwhelmingly white in the very areas where it should have shown care, thought, and intentionality, people are allowed to say that something went wrong. They should say it. It’s clear that several performers of color(some who are actually Romani) believed they were shut out while Romani roles went to white actors, and that this was part of a broader concern about systemic bias in the local theatre community.

And let me be clear about where I stand, because I am not interested in pretending this is murky when part of it really is not. I support inclusive casting. I believe that when diverse performers show up to audition, theatres have a responsibility to do more than smile in the room and then retreat into the same comfortable instincts they always do.

And yes, I believe roles of color should go to performers of color. That should not be the controversial part of this conversation. That should be the baseline. Roma and Romani people are an ethnic minority with a long history of persecution, racialization, and anti-Roma racism, which is exactly why this casting conversation matters.

Because otherwise, what are we doing? Producing a musical about marginalized people while sidelining actual marginalized performers? That is not thoughtful art. That is irony with a costume budget.

And here is the other part that should also be obvious, and yet apparently still needs to be said out loud in 2026: it is never okay to send death threats to performers for taking roles.

Never.

Not when you are angry. Not when you think the production made the wrong choice. Not when social media is spinning itself into a frenzy, and everyone wants to prove how morally awake they are.

You do not get to claim the language of justice while terrorizing an individual performer, especially a young one, for saying yes to an opportunity she was offered. That is not activism. That is cruelty with better branding.

And honestly, this is where these conversations so often go off the rails. The institution makes the mistake. Leadership fails to think critically. The people in charge either miss the problem entirely or assume they can clean it up later with a statement and a forum. Then somehow the performer becomes the easiest target because they are visible, reachable, and far less protected than the people who actually built the production around them.

That is backwards.

If a theatre mishandles culturally sensitive casting, then the scrutiny belongs on the theatre. On the director. On the leadership. On the systems and habits that made that outcome possible. It belongs on the people with power, not the person standing onstage in the middle of a mess they did not create.

If Spokane Civic Theatre truly wants to do better, then pausing the show cannot be the end of the story. A forum is fine. Hiring a consultant is fine. Bringing in a dramaturg is fine. Those are steps.

But the real question is whether this becomes a genuine reckoning with who is in the room when these decisions get made, whose concerns get heard before casting is announced, and whether inclusion is something the theatre practices when it is inconvenient, not just something it posts about after the backlash starts.

Civic’s executive director said inclusion is something the theatre takes very seriously and also acknowledged that the issue is institutional. Good. Then this is the moment to prove it.

Because this is what so many of these stories come down to in the end. Inclusive casting matters.

Theatre should be better than this. Better at casting. Better at listening. Better at accountability. And for the love of God, better at knowing where the line is between advocacy and abuse.