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: Hand Talent
Wed, 2 Oct 2002, 08:16 pmcrgwllms wrote:
>I remember a woman who's job description was >"hand-talent". Before Jarrod or Dean make >any untoward insinuations, what that meant >was she had such delicate & attractive hands >she was employed in all the close up shots >where she was wearing jewellery or holding >the advertised product, even if another >actor had done the long shot.
Indeed, the Jenny McNae's comments were made during the adjudicator's presentation, during her comments about Seen and Heard Youth's (SHY)outstanding production of 'Finger Food', where upon a food orientated photographer was dealing/working with his 'talent', thus stemming the comments.
Talent in a title most of us would accept greatfully. It gives us a sense of what we have. Talent. And there is not doubt about that. But as a personal preference I would prefer "Is this Alan Gill?" as opposed to "I assume you are our talent?". Before jumping down my throat yet again both ARE perfectly acceptable and one is even slightly more complementary than the other, but my OWN name, not a label, is what I prefer. Now I see I am more alone that I thought.
Cheers
Alan Gill
"Man was given a penis and a brain but only to use one at a time."
- Robin Williams on the Clinton/Lewinski affair.
>I remember a woman who's job description was >"hand-talent". Before Jarrod or Dean make >any untoward insinuations, what that meant >was she had such delicate & attractive hands >she was employed in all the close up shots >where she was wearing jewellery or holding >the advertised product, even if another >actor had done the long shot.
Indeed, the Jenny McNae's comments were made during the adjudicator's presentation, during her comments about Seen and Heard Youth's (SHY)outstanding production of 'Finger Food', where upon a food orientated photographer was dealing/working with his 'talent', thus stemming the comments.
Talent in a title most of us would accept greatfully. It gives us a sense of what we have. Talent. And there is not doubt about that. But as a personal preference I would prefer "Is this Alan Gill?" as opposed to "I assume you are our talent?". Before jumping down my throat yet again both ARE perfectly acceptable and one is even slightly more complementary than the other, but my OWN name, not a label, is what I prefer. Now I see I am more alone that I thought.
Cheers
Alan Gill
"Man was given a penis and a brain but only to use one at a time."
- Robin Williams on the Clinton/Lewinski affair.
- ···
- ···