What are the rules about specifiying character ethnicity?

Most of my characters are African American, so I find myself specifying that in case it isn't obvious to the reader.

When I have a character whose name reveals his ethnicity, like Detective Sanchez, I will usually just write (40s, thin) rather than (40s, Mexican, thin).

With minor characters I usually don't specify ethnicity if it doesn't feel relevant.

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks.

Your approach sounds right. Specify when it's necessary to understanding the story, avoid otherwise. I'd recommend choosing ethnic terminology/categories from a specific source so that your use is consistent (I usually go by the categories in the census).

I wouldn't count on name revealing ethnicity, personally.

Ahoy Allison,

Heretic made some great points. But I'll add my two cents.

If race is an essential part of your story, mention it. We usually leave it open for interpretation unless race is a specific issue or character trait. If race is irrelevant, I wouldn't mention it.

Oh, btw, welcome to the boards. :)-Andrea

I think I have generally indicated ethnicity for all my main characters and not for minor ones.

As I write this - I wonder why I do that. I think I may have been doing it wrong. Hmm.

Most of my characters are white, and I never mention their ethnicity in their intro...

BUT...when I do write non white characters (and I do quite often), I do include their ethnicity in their intro.

You know, when you really get down to it, characters' dialogue, mannerisms, etc. could/should give their ethnicity away, or at least provide a clue.  As in, if there was literally no character description, no info given to where we're supposed to be, an astute reader should be able to visualize what the character looks like (ethnicity) and where the story is taking place by what the character says, how they say it, and what their mannerisms are like.

The assumption is if you don't mention it, they're white. You might think you're leaving it open for casting purposes, but that's not how it shakes down.

It's up to you to bring ethnicity into scripts, unless the story is inherently ethnic. Give even minor characters ethnic names or explicitly ethnic in description. Use cultural references or ethnic colloquialisms in dialogue. At the very least it makes the read more interesting.

Quoted from Dreamscale Most of my characters are white, and I never mention their ethnicity in their intro... BUT...when I do write non white characters (and I do quite often), I do include their ethnicity in their intro. You know, when you really get down to it, characters' dialogue, mannerisms, etc. could/should give their ethnicity away, or at least provide a clue.  As in, if there was literally no character description, no info given to where we're supposed to be, an astute reader should be able to visualize what the character looks like (ethnicity) and where the story is taking place bu what the character says, how they say it, and what their mannerisms are like.

Sometimes.

I have a script with an African-American lead. But there is nothing about his mannerisms or dialogue that would clue on the ethnicity. He could just as easily be white.  

It led me to my question above - like you, I never specify "white" for my characters when they are white. I often do specify ethnicity when they are Black, Latino, etc. Made me wonder - am I somehow thinking that in my mind is white the default and everything other than that the exception that has to be mentioned?  

Percolating.....

Quoted from eldave1 Sometimes. I have a script with an African-American lead. But there is nothing about his mannerisms or dialogue that would clue on the ethnicity. He could just as easily be white.   It led me to my question above - like you, I never specify "white" for my characters when they are white. I often do specify ethnicity when they are Black, Latino, etc. Made me wonder - am I somehow thinking that in my mind is white the default and everything other than that the exception that has to be mentioned?   Percolating.....

Some actors with bargaining power will insist that the ethnic makeup of tertiary characters (memorable characters like CASHIER, WAITRESS, and CUSTOMER #4) reflect the population at large unless there's a "story reason."

I've dealt with ethnicity differently in different scripts.

In Timmy, no one's ethnicity is mentioned at all. My head-canon is that Jake and his mother are Black while the androids are White, but it's not important to the story.

In Who Wants to Be a Princess?, the setting is 100% fictional and I mention important characters' fictional ethnicities. The broad description of each gives a clue as to what real-world ethnicity I had in mind, but there's a lot of latitude there so long as the actors aren't too dissimilar (for example, Plainsmen could be just about any Asian, Native American, or Pacific Islander group... but they ought to be from one group). It's mentioned that about 20% of each country is racial minorities (for example, Glennish people living in an Aurentian-majority country), and that extends to tertiary characters.

In Glass House, I mention just about everyone's ethnicity including Caucasians.

In other scripts set in the modern world, I generally leave ethnicity out of most character descriptions figuring it was a casting issue. May need to revisit that assumption.

Moved this to Scriptwriting Class. It's a good question.

I think it's a matter of if it's absolutely crucial to the story.

This article sums up some good points.

True story: A producer once wanted Julia Roberts to play Harriet Tubman.  ::)

https://freshmenscreenplay.com/the-best-way-to-describe-black-characters-in-a-script/

The races are clearly identified (in the scripts) but why? Because it’s crucial to the story. and how are they identified? he doesn’t beat around the bush he straight out says African American.

The Get Out example is a good one cause it's definitely crucial to the story.
Likewise in a movie like Crash & Blackkkklansmen.

Interesting, otherwise do we assume when reading the default is white? Probably.

Welcome, Allison!
A few links FYI.

https://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?b-knowyou/
https://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?b-cc/m-1124159895/
https://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?b-screenwrite/

That’s a good article Libby and I generally agree with it, but I’ve read that you’re supposed to capitalize Black when referring to ethnicity.

For additional trivia, when referred to as a group, the Deaf are also capitalized because they think of themselves as a distinct subculture. The only other disabled group that used to was Aspies (those with Asperger Syndrome), and the APA responded by stripping Asperger’s of its name.

It's interesting. If you don't mention an ethnicity in a character description, you're not "leaving it open" or neutral -- you're making them white by default. If you feel like your protagonist's (or another's character) ethnicity doesn't play a part in the story, why not write them as non-white - just to see how it changes your writing? As an example, maybe you'd planned an interaction with the police later in the later in the script - if you're character's now black, how would that scene be different?

If the ethnicity or race is important to the story - I include it. If not I leave it generic and note in my pitches that these character are ethnically and racially open. You never know who represents who and what people are looking for.

That said - certain eras and locations demand certain ethnicities and racial identities to make certain stories go, So then I would include it.

So the default is white. Hmm. Perhaps not.

The default might be "irrelevant."

- I looked at Lethal Weapon - Detective Murtaugh's race is not mentioned.
- Looked at Molly's Game - CHARLIE JAFFEY (Idris Elba character's) race is not mentioned.

Which begs a question for me - I have written scripts when the character could have been played by any race - yet I specified it for main characters who were not white.  Probably not needed uness it is relevant.

If it's not super crucial to the story, I would leave it out. These are crazy times we live in, where people are sensitive about all kinds of minuscule and stupid stuff. Thus, I think it's better to avoid potential problems altogether, if possible.

I got a script request a couple of years ago from a company, and they told me that they liked my synopsis, but after receiving the script, they will have to see if it passes their test. Which was replacing all characters that appear in the first 10 pages from male to female. If the script works for the first 10 pages, they will read on, if not, then they will have to pass. This was a recent practice of theirs. If the script hinged too much on the masculinity of certain characters, then they don't want to be involved with such material. How wacky is that?

Quoted from Demento If it's not super crucial to the story, I would leave it out. These are crazy times we live in, where people are sensitive about all kinds of minuscule and stupid stuff. Thus, I think it's better to avoid potential problems altogether, if possible. I got a script request a couple of years ago from a company, and they told me that they liked my synopsis, but after receiving the script, they will have to see if it passes their test. Which was replacing all characters that appear in the first 10 pages from male to female. If the script works for the first 10 pages, they will read on, if not, then they will have to pass. This was a recent practice of theirs. If the script hinged too much on the masculinity of certain characters, then they don't want to be involved with such material. How wacky is that?

Wacky

Quoted from Demento If it's not super crucial to the story, I would leave it out. These are crazy times we live in, where people are sensitive about all kinds of minuscule and stupid stuff. Thus, I think it's better to avoid potential problems altogether, if possible. I got a script request a couple of years ago from a company, and they told me that they liked my synopsis, but after receiving the script, they will have to see if it passes their test. Which was replacing all characters that appear in the first 10 pages from male to female. If the script works for the first 10 pages, they will read on, if not, then they will have to pass. This was a recent practice of theirs. If the script hinged too much on the masculinity of certain characters, then they don't want to be involved with such material. How wacky is that?

So keep your wedding, ordination, and circumcision scenes to page 11 or later. Got it.

I'm pretty sure the stuff I write would pass this particular test, but it does seem oddly one-sided. It's okay to be explicitly female (for example, giving birth) but not okay to be explicitly male (receiving a draft notice).

Quoted from FrankM So keep your wedding, ordination, and circumcision scenes to page 11 or later. Got it. I'm pretty sure the stuff I write would pass this particular test, but it does seem oddly one-sided. It's okay to be explicitly female (for example, giving birth) but not okay to be explicitly male (receiving a draft notice).

Yeah.  It's stupid

Quoted from Demento If it's not super crucial to the story, I would leave it out. These are crazy times we live in, where people are sensitive about all kinds of minuscule and stupid stuff. Thus, I think it's better to avoid potential problems altogether, if possible. I got a script request a couple of years ago from a company, and they told me that they liked my synopsis, but after receiving the script, they will have to see if it passes their test. Which was replacing all characters that appear in the first 10 pages from male to female. If the script works for the first 10 pages, they will read on, if not, then they will have to pass. This was a recent practice of theirs. If the script hinged too much on the masculinity of certain characters, then they don't want to be involved with such material. How wacky is that?

That's the sort of company I have no interest in working with. Their "test" isn't worth the time it takes, which is barely any.

I'm fine with the Bechdel test. That actually helps identify a problem and address it. This watering down of gender doesn't achieve anything except let the company pat themselves on the back for "doing something" for equality.

Demento: what? Silly people.
I don't think 1917, (which is a terrific movie btw, ) would work with an all female cast.  

Quoted from LC Demento: what? Silly people. I don't think 1917, (which is a terrific movie btw, ) would work with an all female cast.

I’m thinking this production company was responsible for the rebooted Ghostbusters.

Quoted from LC Demento: what? Silly people. I don't think 1917, (which is a terrific movie btw, ) would work with an all female cast.

Funny