The casting of Cynthia Erivo as Jesus Christ in the Hollywood Bowl’s 2025 production of “Jesus Christ Superstar” has sparked intense debate. For some, Erivo’s portrayal is a triumph of representation, celebrating the diversity and inclusivity that art embodies. Others see it as a trespass, arguing that it redraws the boundaries of who Jesus is and can be represented as.
At the heart of the controversy lies the question of whether Jesus’ historical specificity can be reimagined without erasing his identity. Some argue that Christianity’s adaptability across cultures and centuries justifies creative liberties, while others believe that altering Jesus’ maleness and ethnicity undermines the theological and historical integrity of the figure.
Erivo’s casting has been met with accusations of blasphemy, with critics questioning her suitability due to her gender, sexuality, and race. However, Erivo has responded to the backlash with confidence, stating, “Why not? You can’t please everyone. She is legitimately a three-day performance at the Hollywood Bowl where I get to sing my face off.” Erivo’s experience playing Mary Magdalene in a 2020 concept album and her previous work in productions like “Wicked” have prepared her for this role.
The debate highlights the complexities of artistic expression, cultural sensitivity, and historical context. While some see Erivo’s casting as a celebration of diversity, others believe it challenges traditional depictions of Jesus. As Sarah Parkhouse, a biblical scholar, notes, women have long been involved in retelling and reimagining the Jesus story, and this casting choice can be seen as part of that tradition.
Ultimately, the question remains whether this casting choice is “inclusive” or “offensive.” It may depend on one’s perspective on art, history, and the delicate balance between creative expression and cultural reverence.
