The Green Room - Will You Accept Any Role?

Reply #50 - Feb 13^th, 2008 at 10:35am

spiker Offline
All Access
I'm a fruitcake.
Salt Lake City, UT

Gender:
Posts: 5576

Quote:

I guess I'm just flabbergasted that if time is such an issue, why bother auditioning for a show where there's a good chance that you won't get the part you want?

Nobody goes into an audition thinking there's a good chance they won't get the part they want, or they wouldn't audition at all.

Maybe it is prima donna behavior. Whatever. When I auditioned for To Kill a Mockingbird at HCTWV, I was an unknown commodity around here. If I had said, yes, that I would accept any role, I may well have ended up a townsperson with no lines, rhubarbing in the background of scenes. Would I have gotten to know some people in the theatre community and made connections that would have helped me at that moment? Yes, undoubtedly. Would I have spent an awful lot of money on gas and a ridiculous amount of time away from my family to play a "role" that I've done plenty of times before? Yes. Has my acting career in Utah suffered because I wasn't in that show? No. It's a matter of priorities.

"...there are more people alive now than have died in all of human history. �In other words, if everyone wanted to play Hamlet at once, they couldn't, because there aren't enough skulls!"

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #51 - Feb 13^th, 2008 at 10:39am

spiker Offline
All Access
I'm a fruitcake.
Salt Lake City, UT

Gender:
Posts: 5576

Also, I agree with Kate that it's like interviewing for a job. We have the right, as actors, to make sure that the theatre, the role, the director, the situation are what we want/need at that point in our careers. Saying that we should be happy with whatever leavings we are thrown shows an opinion of actors as lower class citizens in the theatre world that I dislike immensely. It's a collaborative art form and actors should be part of the collaboration.

"...there are more people alive now than have died in all of human history. �In other words, if everyone wanted to play Hamlet at once, they couldn't, because there aren't enough skulls!"

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #52 - Feb 13^th, 2008 at 10:42am

Cheeky Monkey Offline
Diva
Austin, TX

Gender:
Posts: 7832

spiker wrote on Feb 13^th, 2008 at 10:35am:

Maybe it is prima donna behavior. Whatever. When I auditioned for To Kill a Mockingbird at HCTWV, I was an unknown commodity around here. If I had said, yes, that I would accept any role, I may well have ended up a townsperson with no lines, rhubarbing in the background of scenes. Would I have gotten to know some people in the theatre community and made connections that would have helped me at that moment? Yes, undoubtedly. Would I have spent an awful lot of money on gas and a ridiculous amount of time away from my family to play a "role" that I've done plenty of times before? Yes. Has my acting career in Utah suffered because I wasn't in that show? No. It's a matter of priorities.

That's an interesting way of thinking about it. Saying you'll only take certain roles could RAISE your value in their eyes. I like it.

"Depends. Did you feel anything for the pumpkin? The midgets?" -Wildcard&&&&If Mary Matalin and James Carville can make it work, ANYONE can. The end.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #53 - Feb 13^th, 2008 at 10:46am

Rosie Poppins Offline
All Access
Still I'm incandescent
Salt Lake City

Gender:
Posts: 2623

Quote:

Again, I'm back to the philosophy that no part is less than another. �An actor stands to gain as much from being part of an ensemble (classic definition, of course) as they do from a leading role.

No part is less than another, I agree and I challenge you to find one place where I've said anything different. �
However, I have preferences about how I choose to spend my time. �It's not attention or needing to be in a speaking role - what if the choice is between two speaking roles? �If I played the part of Dr. Chausible in a production before (or Gwendolyn... or Jack... all three are good examples because I worked with 3 people who chose to do the same role again in a recent production I directed...), would it really benefit me to accept the part again? �Growing and learning aside, if I really was through with playing Chausible, I should have a right to say so and make that decision. �It's not about lessening the value of Chausible - or saying no to a production... just, I've played the part before and I do not want to do it again.

Quote:

I doubt a company is going to offer a "receptionist" position to someone who answered the ad for the "accountant," and even given that, a "receptionist" has certain requirements, as well.

Precisely. �A company would never operate that way because there are different skills and different requirements of accountants and receptionists. �While both are important, and neither has a 'level', it is important to evaluate my skills and where I want to develop. �If I'm offered a speaking role and I really want to develop my ensemble skills, shouldn't I seek a production and role where that would be more intensely developed? �If, longterm, I want to be a good dancer, shouldn't I seek a role where dancing is required? �Not all roles require all skills. �And just because different roles require different skills doesn't mean that they are less than or more than one another.

Quote:

guess I'm just flabbergasted that if time is such an issue, why bother auditioning for a show where there's a good chance that you won't get the part you want?

Because I want to strengthen my auditioning skills - and you never know what the director is going to see or decide.
(refer to my earlier post about being cast as Blanche.... total shocker)

Let me make one thing quite clear: I never explain anything.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #54 - Feb 13^th, 2008 at 11:22am

The Professor Offline
All Access
Caution: This Sign May
Be Ambiguous.
Yonder

Gender:
Posts: 6288

I agree with Kate and Spiker on this. It may be a bit prima donna to say that I'm only interested in certain roles in certain shows, but so be it. If I'm only interested in those roles, it's in everybody's best interest to say so on the audition form. I understand that it means I might not be cast at all, and I'm O.K. with that. I take this on a case-by-case basis. Sometimes, if it's a theater or director or show that I'm particularly eager to work with/for/in, I'll take whatever comes along, for the experience. Other times, I'm more particular. I do have a life outside the theater, and as Spiker says, I have to prioritize my activities.

For example, when StageRight was down here in the valley, it was approximately 10-15 minutes away from my home, and about 15-20 minutes away from SLCC. So it was fairly simple for me to fit work calls, rehearsals, performances, etc., into my schedule, even when I teach early evening classes. If I had a class that got out at 6:50 p.m., I could usually make it to rehearsal by 7:15, and most directors were willing to accomodate that (as long as I told them up front about the problem). Now that the company has moved to Layton, that changes things dramatically (as it were). The commute both ways is much longer, meaning I have to factor in the cost of gas, the fact that I'll be getting home later (and still having to get up early in the morning to get to work), etc. So it will have an effect on the decision-making process. I know it sounds egotistical, but I'm at a point in my life where I don't want to do shows simply because there is a show to do.

My skills are as varied as they are impractical.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #55 - Feb 13^th, 2008 at 12:14pm

Rosie Poppins Offline
All Access
Still I'm incandescent
Salt Lake City

Gender:
Posts: 2623

The Professor wrote on Feb 13^th, 2008 at 11:22am:

I know it sounds egotistical, but I'm at a point in my life where I don't want to do shows simply because there is a show to do.

Not egotistical.
It sounds human.

I loved Spiker's description - we actors are part of the collaborative process. �No one would blame a director for turning down the opportunity to music direct a particular show... or blame a stage manager for turning down the opportunity to play stagehand for a production. �Again with no levels - there are just different requirements and skills for different roles. �

Yes, a person who participates as ensemble may have skills to play a speaking part and maybe someone with a speaking part would be better suited to ensemble. �I don't see why labeling ensemble or chorus is so offensive - just as I don't see why stagehand is an offensive title for someone who does just that. �Just because it's labeled 'ensemble' doesn't make it any less important to the production. To go back to the analogy - the team of accountants that backs the lead accountant isn't any less important, and being on the team has a different requirement than being the lead. �It also requires a different skill set. �
In a production, the ensemble is required to 'blend in' with one another and not draw focus when someone is delivering a line. �The leading role needs to do some of the same, but needs to be more focused on delivering lines well and drawing focus to themselves. �If I'm really good at blending and not so good at delivering lines, I don't want to invest my time in a production where I will be blending in when I could be invested in a production where I am challenging myself and learning how to deliver lines. �Or perhaps it's the other way around... �or perhaps I just don't like the character... or perhaps I'm too emotionally connected to another character... or... or... or...

The Professor's point is well-made. �External factors are vital to consider and as a Director, I would never fault someone for their statement that they don't have time for a role because I do not know what goes into that criteria. �"Not enough time" can mean "I have two young children at home and my wife works nights, so I don't have time at all" �or it could mean "I can't afford to drive all that way to develop skills I actually already have" When someone auditions, perhaps they are going for the audition experience only... I don't fault anyone for that either. Those are difficult skills to develop outside the actual context.

Either way, the actor knows what they need and want. �I want them to enjoy being part of the production, so I, as a Director, choose to see it from their point of view and react accordingly.

Let me make one thing quite clear: I never explain anything.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #56 - Feb 13^th, 2008 at 12:45pm

Wc365 Offline
All Access
The Random Element
West Punkt

Posts: 11610

I find myself in an indefensible position.

I concede.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #57 - Feb 13^th, 2008 at 3:23pm

kitchensinger Offline
Ingenue
in my kitchen

Gender:
Posts: 912

Here's a question along this topic that (I don't think) has been addressed yet:

If a director's looking at two people for a role, and one of them says that they will accept any role, and the other says they won't, does this influence who the director chooses for that particular role? �What I mean is, do you directors find yourselves rewarding the actor who will only accept the one role as a means of getting BOTH talented actors in your show?

Quote:

When someone auditions, perhaps they are going for the audition experience only... �I don't fault anyone for that either. �Those are difficult skills to develop outside the actual context.

I've heard differing viewpoints on this. �If it is NOT considered poor theater etiquette to audition just for the "audition experience," then I'd certainly like to start doing this. �How do you handle it though? �Should you tell the director at the time of the audition that these are your intentions so that you don't create a headache for him/her at the time of casting? �Or should you just not show up to call-backs?

"I have noticed that nothing I never said ever did me any harm."--Calvin Coolidge&&&&"Some families go water skiing together; others go camping.....our family does THEME PARTIES." --my brother Ben

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #58 - Feb 13^th, 2008 at 3:53pm

Cope Offline
Ensemble
Just keeping it real
SL Valley

Gender:
Posts: 150

I just wanna clear some stuff up. �It's funny how we all perceive the value of words differently. �Maybe I should study that in school... �Oh wait. I did.

Quote:

2. �Use of the word, "ensemble" to mean "Chorus" or "Extra." �In my years of schooling in theatre, I was trained to the ideal that a cast (indeed, a theatre company) is an "ensemble," meaning everyone pulls together as a unified team under the belief that there are no small roles, only small actors. �To use the term "ensemble," therefore, as a euphemism for "non-speaking role" rubs me more wrong ways than you can imagine.

Ok, so you don't like the term "Ensemble." �I really didn't mean to offend you with that term. �My understanding of what that word means and your understanding are different. �Maybe you are right. �I don't claim to know everything

�Ok, so lets just use the raw term of "non-speaking role" to explain myself.

I was not trying to imply that the "non-speaking roles" are less important to the show. �I have had all types of roles in theatre and understand the importance of each one. �I have been in shows where the "non-speaking roles" carry the show. �I have also been in shows where the "non-speaking roles" are weak and the show suffers. �I have also been in shows where everyone is strong.

Moral of that whole explanation: �Every role is important.

Maybe my love for theatre isn't as strong as yours, but I do love performing and I love making money doing it. �Even so, there are other priorities in life (as the others have said). �Call me a prima donna if you'd like, but sometimes I only want to do certain shows if I am offered certain roles. �

Let me explain the last situation I was in. �I just graduated school and had a job offer where I was going to have to travel a lot. �If I took the job, I couldn't do any theatre for a while. �But the job paid really well. �There was a show I wanted to do, but for me It wasn't worth declining this job offer for a "non-speaking role". �So I auditioned and marked that I would only take a certain role. �I didn't get cast and so I went with the other option. �It was a good choice IMO. �

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #59 - Feb 13^th, 2008 at 3:59pm

The Dark Knight Ex Member
www.maniccity.tv

The Professor wrote on Feb 13^th, 2008 at 11:22am:

�I know it sounds egotistical, but I'm at a point in my life where I don't want to do shows simply because there is a show to do.

If that is egotistical, then I am an insufferable, arrogant ass.

Oh, wait . . .

http://www.maniccity.tv/

"The power is not in the mask. It's in whether we chose to wear it."
-Peter Blustrinsky

Back to top

IP Logged

BackStage Utah