BackStage Utah

To you Directors, what do you think of the audition-sheet question, "Will You Accept Any Role"? 

My current director admitted he uses the question as a test, and if you mark 'No', he probably won't cast you.  But as an actress (who's never directed) I've never seen a problem with marking no.  After all, there are some projects that draw your eye because of what you'd learn from being a specific role, or sometimes being any other role just isn't worth the time commitment, especially when there are multiple plays you're auditioning for.  It doesn't mean you're a diva or hard to work with, or that you're secretly saying "I'm so good I better be this role, or else...!"  Just that for whatever reason, you only want to do that show if you're that certain character.  Am I wrong?  Has this been a trick question all along?  Does this mean I should always mark "yes", regardless?

The idea of using it as a test is childish and idiotic, in my opinion.

If a director expects actors to take that question seriously and to answer honestly, and we honestly answer "no", they need not call us back for a different role than what we indicated on the sheet.  Duh directors.  Duh.

I've used the question often and continue to do so.... and it isn't a trick or a test at all. Reinforcing what DK has said, to use this question as some kind of test is a mark of an immature and untrustworthy director (hell, just the preposition is duplicitous and passive-aggressive.... knowing that this is the way this person operates, why would anyone willingly work with him?).

The question IS useful as a time saver and focuser. I want to know what to consider you for... and don't want to waste time and energy slotting different casting options that the bottom will eventually fall out of when an actor declines a role offer.... This, by the way, is a MUCH greater sin than specifying that you'd only consider a particular role.

I always answer this question with an honest "no."  But I didn't used to.  I did my fair share of ensemble work, trust me.  But when I got really busy with school and work, I usually requested only being offered a lead or large role or nothing.

I don't think directors use it as a test, because I have yet to experience not being cast when saying no to that question.  In fact, every time, I got the role I requested.  BUT - I am very aware of my type.  I am not going to pretend I'm perfect for a role when I'm not, even if I would love the challenge.

Knowing your type is HUGE.

P.S.  I have never auditioned for a show I couldn't do.  I've never dropped out of a show.  That's just tacky.

Quote:


Hehe.... that's twice today......

shimmer wrote on Feb 6^th, 2008 at 11:12am:


While I have issues with the whole "type" thing, I agreee completely that you have to be realisticc about where you fit. If I go in saying I will only accpet the romantic lead, 9 times out of 10 I will be wasting my time and theirs..

Cheeky Monkey wrote on Feb 6^th, 2008 at 1:22pm:


Exactly.

Like Shimmer, I've done my share of "chorus" type roles over the years. I only audition for roles I'll accept. More often than not, I  go in with two choices: the part I want, and the back up. The back up is where I end up if I'm cast.

At this point, though, I'm starting to go for the "back up" parts outright.

As an actor AND director, I have definite feelings about this. There is nothing wrong with audtioning for a specific role- real actorsusually have a specific role in mind.The people that don't are those who just are doing theatre as a hobby/lark. Those are the ones I don't want to cast. Directors should not just assume it means the actor has a big head.

When I direct, I admit that I do like to read "yes" to the question, but I don't use it as a test. But as an actor, I am always afraid to answer"no,"becuase so many people do that. I used to just leave it blank,but that came back to bite me when I got cast in a role I didn't want in "Much Ado About Nothing" at Stage Right, and I left a bad impression when I declined, whichI still bad about. I should have just written "no."

Basically, I both the"test"mentality and not being honest on your form are wrong. There was nothing wrong with me only wanting to play specific roles in"Much Ado"- but I was dumb about how I handled it, and I wouldn't blame them if they didn't want to cast me again.

Quote:


I think enough water has passed under the bridge that you'd be fine auditioning at StageRight again.  Just let them know what parts you're interested in.

Quote:


I think that's probably just as unfair of a way to judge an actor as dismissing them if they put "No.", for different reasons.  There are so many reasons that a person would do any role, aside from having a casual approach to acting and a lack of commitment.

Sometimes you just really want to work with a particular director, actor, or at a particular theatre.  Sometimes you're trying to build up your resume.  Maybe you're not all that familiar with the show, aside from the general plot line, and don't have an intimate knowledge of all the characters.  Also, it could be possible that you really love that particular show and will play any part just to be in it at all.

Personally, I am at a point where I absolutely just need more experience.  I put everything I have into every role I play, no matter what the part is, or where the performance is.  I really would play any role right now, because there is always something you can learn from a new part, a new theatre, a new director, etc.  Any play that I love, I would play any role.  Sure, there are parts that I really want or would prefer sometimes, but usually that doesn't preclude the desire to be in the show.

Basically, before I audition, I ask myself "If I don't get the part I want, do I still want to do this show?".  If the answer is "No.", I simply don't audition.  Your opinion of how a role should be cast and the director's opinion of how a role should be cast, will vary quite a bit, so by saying "I will only do this show if I get this particular part.", in my opinion, you are only limiting yourself and your own opportunities to learn and to grow.  Personally, I almost never get cast in the roles I actually want.  So, if I didn't say, "Yes." to the any role question, I would probably just not get cast.  To me, when it comes down to playing a role I don't want as much, or not doing a show at all, I'll take a role I don't want as much.  Most of the time, my passion is for the art or the show, and less about a particular character.  I can get pretty down on myself when I'm really gung-ho about a certain part and then I don't get it, which used to happen to me quite a bit.  I've found it better for my emotional well-being to audition for a show rather than for a part.  Everyone has dream roles, but some of us want to act because, well... we want to act.

If I got turned down for a show because I love theatre, and try to be flexible and easy to work with, I would feel pretty insulted.  Just because an actor is willing to compromise, does not mean they are any more or less dedicated than somebody who answered those questions differently, it's just a different kind of honesty.  If you've never worked with somebody, and have no clue about if they take productions seriously and do the best that they can, those questions really aren't going to tell you much either way.  Sure, it might help you weed out some larks, but who knows how many hard-working, dedicated, and passionate people you've dismissed because your opinion of how a question should be answered and their opinion of how a question should be answered differ?

kastlyn wrote on Feb 7^th, 2008 at 6:53am:


As would I. Only a stupid director would do that. I didn't meant that at all, but looking at my post, damn, that's exactly what I said.

I love actors with a good attitude who are healthy and honest in their expectation and dedication to an audition.

Whether they will accept any role is up to them.  I'm not in this to dominate anyone or test anyone or trick anyone.  However, the audition scenario itself is a test, so often, implied conspiracies can be formed by nervous actors.

What are some other conspiracies/myths have you seen besides this 'any role' one?

I'll answer my own question to start - I've seen actors that believe I am literally out to make them feel bad.  That as a Director, I want them to do poorly.  This is so untrue. You doing well as an actor makes it easier for me as a Director.  I want the actors to be good!

kastlyn wrote on Feb 7^th, 2008 at 11:00am:


I so agree that a director doesn't know your capabilities. �I've let people read for things before and been ultra surprised by what I saw. �I made an assumption about them and the result prevented me from seeing their true capabilities. �I freely admit that as a director I need to be more flexible with initial impressions.

And.
Sometimes, an actor isn't what I want for a part. �It doesn't fit with what I see. �A wise person once explained to me that you shouldn't apologize for who you are. �If you are an orange and the director is looking for an apple, be the best damn orange you can be! �You never know when that director will remember you... (And yes, I have remembered people from previous auditions and called them to participate in current auditions.)

Kastlyn, you hit on a nerve of mine with your last paragraph. �See, back east, 'romantic lead' means something very different than it does here. �Here, it means you are a stick and 18 years old with blue eyes, blonde hair, and bad acting choices. (Attention: I shall be winning the generalization award today.) �Back east, 'romantic lead' means you are interesting, clever, look attractive, and make great acting choices. �Attractive is very different here...
Along those lines, though. �I once waltzed my way into an audition where I expected to not be cast. �I truly didn't believe the director would see me as the lead or the secondary female character. �I fully believed at my core that I was auditioning for practice. �And I wound up getting cast as Blanche DuBois. �Um, yeah. �I'm so not the traditional Blanche. �But the director encouraged me to read for it and then saw what he wanted there.

You just never know, so don't go preventing yourself from giving a good audition every time, no matter your insecurity and doubt - or your perceived inability or lack of 'type'.

Quote:

Not necessarily.  I got cast as a romantic lead last winter.  I was double cast with Brittni Bills.  We couldn't be more different.  I couldn't be less of a romantic lead.  I'm pushing 40, easily 15 pounds overweight, short, etc.  Brittni's...none of that.  So.  Just saying. 

kastlyn wrote on Feb 7^th, 2008 at 11:50am:

Seriously?  Around here?

spiker wrote on Feb 7^th, 2008 at 11:52am:

I was with you in that show!  And I was floored to be cast as the vixen, as I too am a touch overweight, not very leggie, and a brunette to boot.  But look at how good of a show it turned out to be!  It truly was the exception.  But as proof of how rare an exception it was, look at our doubles... yours was Brittni Bills, mine was Barbie.   

Quote:


Likewise!

Wouldn't it be fun to start a Shakespeare company? Kastlyn is so right. Sigh. That would be awesome.

Quote:


What he said.

Rewarding, agreed.

It just happens some of my closest friends have started their own theaters. As Dave Letterman would say,"I wouldn't wish their problems on a monkey on a rock."

kitchensinger wrote on Feb 8^th, 2008 at 11:47am:



That would be an incredible idea....however from the looks of the block, I would expect the owners are holding out for big bucks for a development of somekind......anyone got an old church their not using?   

Quote:

Which is why Sweet Kate is such a GREAT director to work with!!  (And I can't wait until I get to work with her again!!)

I seriously can't believe I missed this thread.  Wow. 

Anyway.  I share the frustration of some of you.  I am a very busy person who loves to perform and sometimes an ensemble role isn't enough for me.  I'm either all in or not at all so it's really a big commitment.  Learning and growing in other roles is neat and I have done that before, but it's not worth the commitment for me anymore. 

Quote:


Wow, um, honestly?

I don't think so at all. 

There are times when I audition for two and three plays that will overlap one another.  I have to prioritize and honestly, for community theatre, this is my life and my time and I'm volunteering.  I should be able to say whether or not I get to accept a role I do not want to play.  "Time" for a role is a precious commodity.  You can see that as prima donna, I don't.  I see it as someone who understands their time, their contribution, and has preferences just like everyone else.  Would I be willing to accept any role?  That depends on a lot of factors, not just on whether or not the speaking parts are available and 'right' for me (or I right for them...)

I have accepted roles in productions before when I just wanted to participate in the production itself.  And I'm glad I did.

It's like a job interview.  If the company interviewing were to ask you that question, you'd feel no qualms telling your possible new boss that you were interested only in certain positions.  Are you applying for an accounting position and the company offers you a position as the receptionist?  I don't think anyone would consider it "prima donna" for you to say no to the latter position.  Qualifications, training, education aside, you would still have the right to say no and not be viewed as unwilling or bad for doing so.  Just because the company might view you as unqualified doesn't mean you don't have an opportunity to get on at another company where your time can be invested in working as an accountant, which may be what you really want....

As actors, so much of the audition/rehearsal process is out of our control.  I don't think it unfair (or at all unprofessional) for us to speak up about what we want and need when we have the chance.  "Will you accept any role?" is a way to do just that. 

What about the "Are you willing to be single/double cast" question? �I've always feared that was a trick as well... are you considered a diva if you'd only be single cast? �Are you distractedly uncommitted if you'll only be double cast? �

Quote:

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.

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


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.

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.

I find myself in an indefensible position.

I concede.

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:


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. �

kitchensinger wrote on Feb 13^th, 2008 at 3:23pm:


In my experience, a part was between me and another girl.  The director pulled me aside and said both the other girl and I said we would not accept a "lesser" role (i.e. featured ensemble vs. lead).  She asked me if I would be willing to take the "lesser role" because she knew me and didn't know the other girl, and wanted us both in the production.  The interesting thing is, the featured ensemble role she was offering me was actually MORE time-consuming then the lead role.  For that reason, I told her I couldn't.  (I was about to graduate and start my family at the time).

Fortunately, I got the role, but the other girl didn't get cast at all.

Questions like these are impossible to answer with a definitive yes or no becuase all directors are so different and it's often incumbent upon your already established working relationship with them, whether that even exists. 

Dotty wrote on Feb 13^th, 2008 at 4:46pm:


And you are right.

Just J wrote on Feb 13^th, 2008 at 5:10pm:


Aha! �I suspected this.

I've often wondered if I say that I'll accept more than just the role I REALLY want, that I'm pretty much giving the role away to someone who marks "no." �So this question really comes down to one of strategem!

So I'm just sayin'.....if you REALLY, REALLY want a certain role, and you think you have a pretty good shot at it AND it's so important to you that you're willing to gamble not being cast at all, then methinks it seems the SMART thing to check "no...I won't accept other roles."

But that's just for all the divas....ofcourse

Quote:


Are you being sarcastic again?!

Cuz if you are, I respect that.

Quote:


What? �Answering posts with sarcasm?

Sure.

Quote:


I know you meant that.

Just being sarc....anyway....I agree with you, mostly. �

Yah, I guess "answering the question honestly" is a simpler way of putting across my point...unless I feel that the competition is such that marking "yes" will lose me the role to someone who marks "no."

I just would like to say that I think asking the question itself is ridiculous. I've almost never seen it asked in any collegiate, semi-professional, or professional setting.

It's putting an undue burden on the actor. Do your casting, make your calls, and make your offers. Once the offer's made, *that's* when the actor can make a decision. Yes, it's easier to know before you make the offer ... but who told you directing was going to be easy?

(If you need to ask the question, asking if you are interested in specific roles is a much more professional approach.)

kitchensinger wrote on Feb 14^th, 2008 at 12:45pm:


How about just putting "Are you an egotistical prima dona, or will you blindly follow my insipid direction?"

Quote:


Are you suggesting that those who want only a certain role are egotistical and aren't capable of following the directions of a director?

kitchensinger wrote on Feb 14^th, 2008 at 12:57pm:


No, I'm screwing around. It's my way.