BackStage Utah

spiker wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2009 at 8:04pm:


What I don't understand, and have never understood any time this subject has arisen, is isn't there an established business model for funding a theater, that has been in effect ever since Flo Ziegfeld had his Follies? �Isn't the method for funding a show that you find Backers and "Angels," people who want to support the arts, and have the means to do so, and feel like your production company or theater is a worthwhile investment? �From what I understand, Broadway houses don't and haven't charged the actors fees to participate, they wouldn't have drawn the kind of talent they wanted. �I mean, I am having difficulty imagining Fanny Brice making the name for herself she did at the beginning if the Ziegfeld Follies had charged her a participation fee. �There were people, people who weren't actors, people who felt she was worth the investment, that funded the shows she was in.

Aren't angels and backers the way to fund, if you haven't got the means on your own? �And face it, what artist does? �Finding investors is part of the game. �I mean, what was the entire show The Producers about, if not for Bialystock trying to find investors?

And if we're stating credentials, then I am Jeremy Young and you can see my face looking at you at the bottom of this page. �I have been involved in community theater in Utah Valley for the last 14 years, most recently having graduated to directing theatre. �I am a student at UVU studying cultural and social linguistics, while working full time as a support rep for a local webhosting firm, and part time at a telephone conferencing company, all of which has left me with little time to be onstage, yet has not diminished my side interest and research into the history of American theater.

The Phoenix theatre wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2009 at 6:56pm:


Hi Collin. I'm JC Carter. I've spent over 25 years in theatre as an actor, director, lighting and sound designer, set designer, board operator, make-up artist, house manager, and, most recently, as a producer for two local theatre companies. Hell, I've even had "Costumes" listed as one of my credits...

When I read your recent reply on your audition posting, I figured you'd learned the error of your embarrassing ways... I guess I was incorrect in that assumption...

As many have stated, charging a performance fee to an actor is reprehensible. Without actors, there is no theatre, just Vaudeville. One of my theatre professors, Dr. Kim I Brewster, I think, stated that all one needed for a stage was a couple of boards and some cinder blocks, that it's the actors that bring the production to life, and they need nothing but their own talent to do just that.

Sure spaces cost an arm and a leg. Try getting into the Rose without a 501C3 and see what it costs you! (we were lucky to break even) but if you believe in your production, you will move Hell and high-water to make that happen. You will find a space to perform and to rehearse, even if it means calling in all your favors and kissing a lot of ass to do so. I think one of the best examples of such chutzpah is our very own board moderator, Kate... She has produced some amazing shows with little more than a belief and a few dollars in her pocket.

I've had actors come into my auditions and rehearsals with little or no knowledge of theatrical (or any kind of) acting, and I've taken the time to coach them and train them free of charge. Why did I make such a magnanimous gesture toward them without thought of my own recompense? Because I'm independently wealthy? HAH! I wish! No. I do it for the good of the show. If I'm taking a chance on an inexperienced actor then it falls on me to make them as strong as all the other performers so the show has cohesion and consistency.

I've also worked with some of the best and many of the worst theatre companies in Utah, and none of them had the audacity to charge a fee. Many of them, in defense of not being able to pay even a stipend to the actors, stated what you stated... that their theatre was a training ground and actors were honing their skill, which they should consider their reward. Please note again... NONE of them charged a performance fee.

Look, if you want to offer an actor's training course at the Academy, that culminates in a performance by the individuals in the study, and charge them for that, by all means do so! That's acceptable, as you're not holding open auditions, and everyone is coming in with a larger expectation than they get to do "x" show.

In the end, while getting paid is nice, what's most important to any actor (or any other person involved in the production) is that it's FUN. And it's no fun paying $50 just for the privilege of being there.

One other thought: For the past two years I have been paid for every acting gig I've had.  Even if it was only $50, it was still something.  And the thing is, I didn't specifically seek out paying work.  I sought out directors I really wanted to work with and roles I really wanted to play.  It just so happened that there was money attached to each one.  My point is that with that much paid work available, why would quality actors pay you?  The fact is, they wouldn't.  Professional actors definitely are interested in improving upon their work, and often pay for workshops led by credible, well-known and well-respected directors or actors.  They don't pay for the opportunity to do a show. So, that leaves you with, what?, people who can't get cast at any of the theatres that will pay or at least not charge them?  That can't be a pool of very good actors.  And limiting yourself to working with actors who are limited by their own abilities doesn't seem like a very good business model.  To create the best work, you've got to work with the best people you can find. 

And yes, I realize that you've decided to discontinue charging actors a participation fee.  I fear that you've already done the damage in terms of how you're seen in the community and you have a lot of repair work to do in order to attract great actors.

The Phoenix theatre wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2009 at 6:56pm:

Frankly, the whining here is coming from you. Running a theatre is a hard business, no doubt. Asking talented actors to perform for little or no pay is unfortunately part of the realities every startup must face.

Shifting your financial risk on to your actors is not acceptable. If you can't produce it, don't do it.

The Phoenix theatre wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2009 at 6:56pm:

How's this? I am Mark Fossen, actor/director/dramaturg/teacher for 20 years in Chicago and San Francisco.

In Chicago, I ran my own company (Gillarlaine Productions) and then was part of the Artistic Triumvirate of another (Hope And Nonthings). I worked with countless other Non-Equity storefront theaters in many capacities, and am completely familiar with the economics.

I have also worked with bigger companies like the California and Idaho Shakespeare Festivals, Berkeley Rep, and Steppenwolf.

I am a teacher with the Theatre Arts Conservatory, and would counsel each and every one of my students that a "participation fee" is a scam and nothing but. It is a shameful activity, and your continued defense of the practice just puts your theatre in a worse light.

And let's get down to brass tacks: someone is getting paid, aren't they?

Collin,

There are some hot-button topics on these boards, and it can be easy for the unwary to stumble onto them.  I'm reminded of one of Norm Peterson's comments on Cheers:  "It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I'm wearing Milk Bone undershorts."