Are We Talent?

Agreed - but I also think that the term 'the talent' is it is used in a performing arts context has actually taken on further negative connotations than it has traditionally possessed. Today, I think the term is used in the same manner as the term 'human resources' - i.e. as a way of placing performers as a resource to be tapped and utilised in the same way that one utilises production funding and marketing resources. Not that I think that is ever done intentionally, it's just that the people who tend to use the term tend to be involved in the (extraordinarily busy, overworked and underappreciated) production side of things, where they have a dozen aspects of a show to worry about (often things that us performers are barely aware of the existence of) and it seems natural to place locating and managing 'the talent' in the same category as all the other resources.

Of course, I get the feeling that with larger, TV/advertisement/film producers, the commercial resource connotations of the phrase 'the talent', are inserted a lot more intentionally. Frankly, that's hardly surprising - I don't want to sound like a commie here, but it's a simple commercial fact that across most large industries employees are now measured as 'human capital' to be weighed off against other resources - why would the entertainment industry be any different? Then again, accepting the financial/industrial aspect that makes larger entertainment ventures possible is surely part of involving yourself with such ventures, so I'm not sure that one can really complain about it.

Just a few disorded ramblings,
Craig