Almost every major college in the country has a theater dept. There are professional conservatories that promise to train you in your area of interest. All of these programs (or almost all) have great glossy brochures to lure you into studying with them. These brochures and also websites highlight the graduates that are on Broadway or other nationally known theaters, or in TV/film. They will also highlight designers that have won awards and work fulltime in the industry. What about the rest of their graduates?
10 comments:
I completely agree with the authors main advice of this article, not to "pigeon hole" yourself into one certain aspect of theatre because more often you will be waiting tables to make ends meet and doing a little theatre on the side. I think a of of people are hesitant towards general theatre educations because they feel as though if they din't go into a conservatory program with only one focus, they are copping out somehow. As you listen to more and more professionals however, you learn that even they are doing theatre work that was not in their main focus. Recently, I shadowed the Arts Administrator and a large new performance venue in my hometown. She got her masters degree from Carnegie Mellon but before that, she had studied acting at the University of Illinois. Now, she is one of the best Art Administrators in my hometown. Even my professors have told stories of side projects or having to use skills that aren't part of their job description to get a production finished. I think that it is important to be open to all opportunities to learn because you never know when you are going to have to use a skill no one ever expected of your concentration. Theatre is an ever changing art form.
Like Vanessa said above, the author's advice on being careful of pigeon holing one's self is quite important. I've always been one to learn more than one thing at a time, and I've always thought it to be wise for the reasons mentioned in the article. While I do think that specialization comes with its own benefits such as learning the technical aspect of the craft at a higher in depth level and being able to dedicate copious amounts of time perfecting it, having a rounded sphere of knowledge is equally (if not more) important. Specialization is almost the equivalent to having only one strain of a certain crop. If a disease comes and attacks that one strain, then that entire strain will be completely wiped out and killed by the disease- that crop will cease to exist as we know it. However, if we have multiple strains of the same crop, then we stand a better chance of the crop surviving as a whole since the disease will only affect one type of the crop. Having a broader, general education while still being able to specialize is something that I think is special about the BFA program at Carnegie Mellon because as someone who is interested in Costume Design, I probably would have never went out of my way to learn more about Sound or Lighting.
The opinion of this article’s writer isn’t very prevalent in the context of CMU’s conservatory program. While I can see the merit of this idea of becoming well versed in many things in order to have more options, a general theater education was one of the only things I definitely knew I didn’t want when I was looking at applying to colleges. I remember during orientation week, one of the parents at the freshman drama meetings asked if it would be advisable for their son to pursue another major/ minor that was non-theater related in case it was difficult for him to get a job with his theater speciality. One of the professors replied essentially saying that if he has a backup, he will be tempted to just fall back on that career without trying hard down the theatrical career path he is truly passionate about. Maybe everyone who goes into a conservatory program is relentlessly optimistic, but I think everyone in our class is determined to work as hard as it takes in order to gain success, and we are partly going to need to rely on taking advantage of CMU’s reputation in order to do so. On another note, I think it’s interesting (and maybe slightly telling of the industry’s opinion of designers and technicians) that the author suggests that acting majors should also look into design/ production training in order to have something to fall back on, when no one in their right minds would try and tell one of us DPs that we should try out acting in case our design/ management careers don’t work out. I don’t know if this author understands how difficult it also is to get a job as a theatrical technician/ designer.
I can definitely see the point the author is trying to make in this article. Even though we often hear the suggestion/advice that people shouldn't have a "back up major" if they go into theatre because then it's much more likely for them to switch to that backup major once they experience a little bump in theatre, this article makes some really good points as well. Not having a back up major doesn't mean that you can't learn different things while you're pursuing theatre, whether it be with or outside of the performing arts. I think despite how CMU's program is conservatory and eventually lets us specialize in one specific area, CMU definitely allows us to not limit ourselves to that one specific area within our concentrations, and we should definitely take advantage of that. My experience in different areas of design/production so far definitely not only taught me different skill sets but allowed me to under theatre better as a whole and how everything interacts/functions with each other, which is necessary not only for me to become for flexible in what I can do but also just better understand my concentration (whatever it will be) in relations to everything else.
I liked this article. It shows some of the detriments of a program like Carnegie's, where having you chose just ONE thing to focus in really limits you in the future. A lot of other colleges allow more room to take classes in multiple areas or allowance for a double major. And while I see the argument for Carnegie's way of doing this (you get the most experience and you need to take that many classes in one field to be professionally trained, etc) that isn't for everyone. Before I came here, I was almost blinded by CMU's reputation, thinking "this has to be the best way to do things!!" But now that I am here, I have taken off my rose colored glasses and seen the pros and cons of the style of program more clearly.
I also liked this article because it highlights the fact that there is no one perfect way to do theater, and that theater is such a collaborative field that everyone needs help from anyone. Anyone who has an interest in theater should allow themselves to learn as much about it as they can, because you never know who is going to need help in the future.
The author of this article may have some very relevant points when it comes to addressing other schools, but I did not find that her points were particularly useful when analyzing the education here at CMU. For one, the programs here are so rigorous, blending two concentrations in a major/minor sort of way is hard enough as is, in some cases (depending on the major) near impossible. Blending design and production with a performance concentration, as Cover suggests, is both impossible schedule-wise, and would necessitate that one audition both for acting/musical theater and whatever design/production field one is interested in. While the odds of getting into one of these options at a school like CMU is hard enough, actually pursuing such an education right off the bat, when both options are trying to cram as much foundational information and technique into your head is almost unthinkable for me. Another thing I had a problem with was this author's opinion that job prospects, not passion, wee enough of a reason to add an entire concentration to one's workload. I find that,especially in design, working from a passionless baseline makes the design process so much harder, and effects the final product in many subtle ways. I strongly believe it is for the best to find one thing for which you have real passion, and pusue that, instead of trying to find as many things as possible to beef up one's resume.
Theater education is so important to me, and I owe a lot of who I am to the education I received in the theater. Schools need to keep they are education around because it helps people come out of their shells and find what makes them special. When I was in high school I started teaching theater to underprivileged kids in my home town. I had taught theater for a long time but never to people who hadn't had it before, and in teaching this class I learned a lot about how important theater actually is to who we are as people. In just 6 weeks of teaching these kids I saw them become completely different people. They were more confident, more open to taking risks, but more than anything they were so much kinder. They were nicer to me and their other teachers, but they were also nicer to each other. Theater teaches people that it's okay to fail, and be embarrassed, and so it you are much nicer to each other. I made my three best friends in the world in theater, and they will be my friends forever because theater taught us how to be who we are while still being together. My theater eduction is something I value over most other things about my childhood and I think every other child deserves it.
I thinks this article speaks more to me from a “make your education work for you” perspective than a champion of a general theatre education. While the author brings up some interesting points about the value of crossing disciplines I have no interest in taking an acting class. Not because I don’t think it’s a valuable skill or uninteresting but simply because it isn’t something I really enjoy. I am however trying to take many classes outside the school of drama in fields such as architecture and interactive environments. A large set of skills can be very useful if they are all skills you can apply and enjoy while you do it. Even if I took acting classes it’s simply not a career I’m interested in pursuing so much of what I gained would probably be lost to time.
I have a few issues with this article, honestly. I see where the author is coming from and how so many students can agree with her, because I too value well-roundedness in theatre. However, I think the demonization of conservatory programs is overwhelming and, in some cases, totally inaccurate. Where oh where did those graduate statistics come from? I highly doubt that every conservatory in the country puts out a 25% employment rate, for one thing, and for another, I don't think this woman really has a right to criticize folks who decide to work in a restaurant rather than a box office. When it really comes down to it, it doesn't matter what you specifically studied in college. You can learn anywhere, from anyone, in any capacity you'd like. You can gain skills from one major that are applicable to other parts of the theatre world. You can be an actress, learn to sew, and take a costuming internship. You can be a designer and work as an ASM off-campus. These things are not difficult to do, so long as you apply yourself. This article seems to push general BA programs to the top of the heap, when I personally find that there is not enough specialization with a BA to pursue any kind of job in theatre past administration! The specialization comes from the work, and the experiences you let yourself have. Not how many letters are in your degree.
This article speaks to me as a kid who discovered theatre in High School and who had no idea if he wanted to pursue an actual career out of it. I went to a college preparatory school, so I was surrounded by every single on e of my classmates going on and on about the importance of college apps, the school pushing me to apply, and all of it seemed so arbitrary. Many of my classmates absolutely did have an idea of what they wanted to study, were incredibly smart and reached out and took their future in hand. Many, however, had no idea what they wanted to do with their life. One friend in particular told me that he was going to college because his father would kill him if he didn't right after high school. Others were going simply because they thought that was simply what you did. I had no idea of the direction I wanted to take, and seeing that, I had no intention of blindly going to some liberal arts college without figuring my life out first. I decided to take a gap year, and it was the best thing I could possibly do. Even getting to that point was a struggle though. My college counselor was onboard, but the dean couldn't even fathom why I didn't want to go to college. She essentially said, in more words, that I would ruin my life by taking a gap year. Well, on the contrary, I started a n internship, got some jobs at local theatres, and ended up at Carnegie Mellon University, so suck it Ms. Srouji!
Post a Comment