99seats: "So, as I mentioned here, I've been stewing on some thoughts, partly stirred by Ian Thal's comments to this post that came along at just the right time. Ian wrote:
There's a real need for arts conservatories to train students in technique and history of various forms, and this certainly has great values when it comes to painters, illustrators, filmmakers, dancers, actors, and techies-- artists who need practical training.
I found this funny because I'd just been talking to a friend about my undergraduate college."
3 comments:
I think this article is very interesting. Everyone knows that when you go to a conservatory program for undergrad in theatre, that is basically all you do. But I think his point about not having other experiences to use is a good one. Most people want to go from college to a good theatre job, after all that's why they came to school. But i think some of the more talented and respected people in our industry have done other things with their lives to get to where they are today.
Its a hard thing to figure out: whether to try and go straight into the industry or take some time and get some life experience first. I think if a job comes your way: sieze it.
I went to a small liberal arts school for my BA and then took two years to work professionally before started grad school. In undergrad, we had a very large "core curriculum" that includes classes in all the disciplines, but the philosophy was not to teach you all the knowledge in the world, but the techniques and skills to acquire and synthesize that knowledge into something useful. I was fortunate enough to get professional work right out of undergrad and during those two years I got a better grasp of how theatre functions in the "real world" and solidified my career goals. Grad school is a way for me to focus on the specific content that I didn't get in undergrad that will give me a professional advantage in the field. Having a larger grasp of the world outside theatre has been a professional asset to me and I'm glad I chose a more traditional undergraduate program as opposed to a conservatory, but I can easily see arguments for both sides, making the decision either way valid and equal depending on your professional careers goals and personal interests.
Before I came to CMU, my mother and I had endless debates about conservatory vs. liberal arts training. She believed that I should go to a liberal arts school with a program in theater and then, if I wanted to, I could go to grad school for more training. One of the benefits of going into theater at a conservatory as opposed to visual art or music is that theater is about storytelling which is so closely linked to society and culture that there is no way to study one without being exposed to the other. Over and over again, we are exposed to things outside our field as we do our daily work. Including history, architecture, engineering, literature, current events, psychology, business, and many others. I don't think that we have to be as isolated as we are and encourage people to go as far out of the school as they can and go for the "depth and breadth" that CMU toots its horn about.
Post a Comment