Define Actor (was Re: Cheap Cheap)
Fri, 14 May 1999, 04:09 pmLabrug10 posts in thread
Define Actor (was Re: Cheap Cheap)
Fri, 14 May 1999, 04:09 pmThank you Joe and Kristine for you encouragement. I'm tending to leantowards Joe.WHY DO WE NEED TO DEFINE THE ACTOR AT ALL?Trying to catagorise thesbians into their seperate groups will bea nightmare experience. You would have things like;Enthusiasts - They do it as a hobby.Dedicates - This is their ambition.Light Hunters - They seek the fame!and probably more! but is it necessary? Anyone of these could bepaid or not, in other words Pro. or Am.Attempting to group US will only lead right back to the stigmasof the current terms, no matter how many groups you have. Iconsider myself a professional actor - I am dedicated, I amambitious and I have been paid for some work. In my mind, tobe professional is not to be paid, but is a state mind andattitude. I attempt to do my best for (almost) any show I am in.Does that make me any different to those who see it as a hobby?No, an why should it.Same goes for directors, technicians, costume designers and anyother crew position. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. THERE IS NO US AND THEM!We all do it to get something out of it. Some do it for money, somedo it for love, some do it for both. Try and break them apart.Theatre is theatre wherever it's done, an actor is an actor wheneverthey desire.If you still feel the need to find a new term, why not call yourselvesPassionate Thebians. That'll keep the punters guessing while we sortthe mess out.Jeff WatkinsStepping off the box again.
LabrugFri, 14 May 1999, 04:09 pm
Thank you Joe and Kristine for you encouragement. I'm tending to leantowards Joe.WHY DO WE NEED TO DEFINE THE ACTOR AT ALL?Trying to catagorise thesbians into their seperate groups will bea nightmare experience. You would have things like;Enthusiasts - They do it as a hobby.Dedicates - This is their ambition.Light Hunters - They seek the fame!and probably more! but is it necessary? Anyone of these could bepaid or not, in other words Pro. or Am.Attempting to group US will only lead right back to the stigmasof the current terms, no matter how many groups you have. Iconsider myself a professional actor - I am dedicated, I amambitious and I have been paid for some work. In my mind, tobe professional is not to be paid, but is a state mind andattitude. I attempt to do my best for (almost) any show I am in.Does that make me any different to those who see it as a hobby?No, an why should it.Same goes for directors, technicians, costume designers and anyother crew position. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. THERE IS NO US AND THEM!We all do it to get something out of it. Some do it for money, somedo it for love, some do it for both. Try and break them apart.Theatre is theatre wherever it's done, an actor is an actor wheneverthey desire.If you still feel the need to find a new term, why not call yourselvesPassionate Thebians. That'll keep the punters guessing while we sortthe mess out.Jeff WatkinsStepping off the box again.
Walter PlingeSat, 15 May 1999, 01:27 am
Re: Define Actor (was Re: Cheap Cheap)
> WHY DO WE NEED TO DEFINE THE ACTOR AT ALL?Sorry - it just comes over me every now and then, must be the medication!> Same goes for directors, technicians, costume designers and any>> other crew position. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. THERE IS NO US AND> THEM!I would like to agree - but in practice it's another story, especialy for the pro's.> That'll keep the punters guessing while> we sort> the mess out.> Jeff Watkins> Stepping off the box again.Your right the BOS's will sought it out for themselves - so let them do it!The differences within our own ranks, is our problem - not theirs!I could get into the techy and actor/light bulb jokes, but this is between ourselves.Also to try and answer Kristines question, about who cares who is 'behind' the show - she is correct, only we do!I can vagely remember being mentioned, in a good light, by a critic once - I think?But when it comes to tech stuff ups, problems with the shows "mis en scene" and/or things that go beyond the excuse of a creative accident. The crit is right on to them in lenght - these I can remember, only too well, in vivid 4 colour wash with all the specials and even dome/limes!We are simply part and parcel of each other (I think that made a good song once!)and who would want to change IT!Joe McCabe
Grant MalcolmSat, 15 May 1999, 08:03 am
Re: Define Actor (was Re: Cheap Cheap)
> I would like to agree - but in practice it's another story, especialy> for the pro's.I think i'm with Joe on this one. Whatever may in actuality be the case, in practice people will draw the distinction. And it's not just the pro's that think it is necessary to draw this distinction.Take a look at the results for the current poll. Every respondent has indicated they are prepared to pay at least twice as much for a show with the "p" word in front of it, as they will pay for any other show.Incidentally, the responses are split on whether shows are priced too cheaply or about right. However, nearly everyone has said they are prepared to pay at least $15.Out of the 20 odd shows coming up over the next few months, only two are charging $15, most are only $10 per ticket.CheersGrant
LabrugSun, 16 May 1999, 09:21 am
Re: Define Actor (was Re: Cheap Cheap)
> I think i'm with Joe on this one. Whatever may in actuality be> the case, in practice people will draw the distinction. And it's not> just the pro's that think it is necessary to draw this distinction.I can't believe that the distinction AS IT IS will always be made.Sure there will always be a distinction between a show which hasBig Name performers and those which feature your friends, that Idon't expect to ever see die. It can't.What I would like to see an end to is the stigma that the smallertheatre collectives are 'just for fun' or 'not the real thing.'This view point is only amplified by the terms that we have eitherwillingly accepted or given ourselves. I'm not sure which.This situation does not appear in London, and from what I've heard, mostof Europe and America. If this is so, why are we ramming our heads intowalls like this? Why do we (Australia) always seem to be about 10 to 30years behind everyone else in most social aspects?I believe that the majority have adopted there overseas stereotypicalview of Australians - 'She'll be righ' mate. No worries.' Sure it canbe a stress-free lifestyle but very little changes. I really feel thatwe're all being a little too conservative on ourselves, myself included.Only recently have I felt empowered enough to actually discuss it likethis.Our theatre is a huge resource and we shouldn't waste it. We need moreexposure and a stronger attitude.
LabrugMon, 17 May 1999, 11:33 am
Re: Define Actor (was Re: Cheap Cheap)
> MAY THE FARCE BE WITH THEM - AND YOU LIVE IT.> Joe McCabe> Jeff, what it should say is - AND YOU LIVE IT, THE FORCE!You bet! Make a loud noise for long enough and soon somethingwill be done about it, even if it's only to shut you up!I even have my LOUD shirt on.Jeff.
Walter PlingeMon, 17 May 1999, 12:26 pm
Re: Define Actor (was Re: Cheap Cheap)
> Only recently have I felt empowered enough to actually discuss> it like> this.> Our theatre is a huge resource and we shouldn't waste it. We> need more> exposure and a stronger attitude.This is great - we started off with two bits of wood and 6 nails - now end up with chariots, 50,000 extras - all we need now is Charlton to jion in. But unfortunetly this seems like a four handed whist drive - no else seems inclined.Fortunetly what we tend to do is bottle these things up behind four walls and under strict rules of silence, if your caught speaking the 'Secret-ary' will disenvouw any knowledge - evaporation will comence in 10 seconds.I keep saying it - in theatre our biggest re-used and abused resource is people,so why do they all suffer unto the wall after only a short period?It is the nature of incorporation to be democratic, but theatre is not, it's an inversed pyrahmid, with each of it's elements making up the total sum. So when you feel the power and it's motive force use it.MAY THE FARCE BE WITH THEM - AND YOU LIVE IT.Joe McCabe
Walter PlingeMon, 17 May 1999, 12:32 pm
Re: Define Actor (was Re: Cheap Cheap)
> MAY THE FARCE BE WITH THEM - AND YOU LIVE IT.Jeff, what it should say is - AND YOU LIVE IT, THE FORCE!
Walter PlingeMon, 17 May 1999, 02:31 pm
Re: Define Actor (was Re: Cheap Cheap)
> You bet! Make a loud noise for long enough and soon something>> will be done about it, even if it's only to shut you up!> I even have my LOUD shirt on.> Jeff.WOW!!! not the one where only LEE #181 or Rosco #97 gells are a pre-requiste?But it's still not LOUD enough, unfortunetly - there has been no resounding tinkle or re-verb yet! Obviously it's not of concert quantity or amps not working - or do I have Indusrial defeness?Joe McCabe
LabrugWed, 19 May 1999, 09:44 am
Re: Define Actor (was Re: Cheap Cheap)
> But it's still not LOUD enough, unfortunetly - there has been> no resounding tinkle or re-verb yet! Obviously it's not of concert> quantity or amps not working - or do I have Indusrial defeness?> Joe McCabeGive it some time. We've only just started.I can wait a long time if I really want to.
Walter PlingeWed, 19 May 1999, 07:37 pm
Re: cheap churp churping....churped!
> Give it some time. We've only just started.> I can wait a long time if I really want to.I doubt I can wait that long - I'm on the final aproach, flaring out before the 'sharks tooth' or standing by 'on cue' for blackout and then the big 'bump' out.Joe "on stand by to black out..." McCabe