Are We Talent?
Tue, 24 Sept 2002, 07:28 pmGilly26 posts in thread
Are We Talent?
Tue, 24 Sept 2002, 07:28 pmAs the lovely Jenny McNae pointed out at the judging of the 2002 Youthfest, actors and models have long been called simply 'talent'. Is this acceptable by todays standards? Personally, I do not believe that those of us taking the stage should be refered to as simply as 'the talent', and we do in fact have names. This is similar to pole run a while ago of how actors should be known as, be it their character name right through a 'hey, you'. The question I am putting forward is how should the actors/model/dancers of today be known? Is 'the talent' simply enough?
Ponder for a while...
Alan
Ponder for a while...
Alan
Re: Are We Talent?
Wed, 25 Sept 2002, 08:57 amWalter Plinge
In times past, actors, singers and dancers were thought of as... well, a lower class of people. Entertainers, almost selling themselves to make a living. We all know this is not true. These days some of the most powerful people in the world are performers... (no political inuendo intended.) We have movie stars dominating modern culture and although I feel that perhaps their wealth is excessive and their self-pride pitiful at times we cannot simply brush them off as "talent." Performers, of any kind, are artists. They express dynamic emotions and emote powerful responses from their audiences. Watching a show is more than observing people pretending to be characters, we can be transported into the most amazing places. That "buzz" you get when watching a wonderful show (or performing in one) is almost indescribable and this is not created by "talent." Is is created by sensitive individuals, who are truly human and in touch with themselves. I think they deserve a great recognition (all performers - not just the superstars aforementioned) for exposing themselves... opening up to criticism to do justice to a role, or a performance. They deserve a name.
- ···
- ···