Saturday, September 26, 2015
Elitism in Theatre: The Ignorance of Casting Professionals
OnStage: Last week, I wrote a column entitled How Educational Elitism Is Hurting Theatre, in which I described the challenges facing theatre students who attend schools other than the “top schools” in the country, such as Yale, NYU and Carnegie Mellon. I talked about how people tend to be looked down on or not given as much consideration when auditioning for a role or applying for a job, when they are stuck in this scenario. After taking a glance at the comments section for that column, I felt inspired – if not obligated – to elaborate a bit more on my thoughts on this subject, particularly with regards to how it affects finding work in the industry.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
This is very similar to the other article by this same sight about educational elitism, except more specifically geared towards applying for jobs/ what theater schools are represented on Broadway. It sucks to hear that oftentimes, in casting, directors will care more about what university is on an actor’s resume as opposed to what talents they showed during their audition. Although this is very unfortunate, it isn’t something I’m unfamiliar with. What I didn’t know, however, was what the author talked about in regards to theater technicians having a difficult time moving up in the theater business in spite of years and years of professional experience because they don’t have a fancy degree name. It’s crazy to me that theater professionals put so much value into a degree name, when they themselves should know more than anyone that actors, designers and technicians each have unique qualities that set them apart from everyone else trying to make their way in theater. I think this is a complex issue that doesn’t have a clear cut answer, yet, I also don’t think that it’ fair to write off top institutions such as CMU as being “just for the name”. I think making theater more accessible for everyone will be a group process, and won’t be immediate.
While I agree that no one should be hired just because of the school they attended, there is a reason the top schools are regarded as top schools - because often times they send out very capable and talented professionals. A lot of people who go to top schools and then apply for jobs and get them because they are very prepared for this world. This isn't to say someone who went to another school is not, but why should someone be surprised that a Yale graduate is doing well?
Admittedly my experience working in professional theatre is limited but the author’s point about talented people working in theatre not being able to progress through the ranks seems to be a much smaller issue, at least in my limited experience, than the author makes it out to be. In fact, most of the people I worked with while working at Cleveland Play House, including their Technical Director worked their way up into those positions. Of course that is not to say that it is easy to do but I think educational elitism has less to do with it than the nature of our work. Often times after a show is over designers on the smaller end of theatre end up out of work for at least a bit before beginning the next show. This constant pool of applicants seeking to slide in mean that lots of times positions get filled from exterior means rather than interior promotions.
Just as with his column on Educational Elitism, I agree with the core ideas of the author but I think he is once again being highly judgmental. It's not a good thing that people who don't go to top schools have a hard time finding jobs, but there is a reason that people from Carnegie Mellon are hired so frequently. In my short time here I've seen and worked with the most talented people that I've ever met, and I've only been here for one month. Students here are worked until they either make it or break it, and that's what makes them so great when they leave. However, graduating from CMU might get you a job but if you don't prove yourself in the industry you're not going to last long. I do agree that there a cycle of alumni from top schools hiring only people from top schools, and that's something that I think should change. Everyone should have an opportunity to be successful in the theater industry, but as Cassidy said we shouldn't be surprised when alumni from top schools are doing well.
This article is very similar in content to the one the author published the week before, and is built on the same faulty premise. The author's nonsensical notion that all university theatre programs are created roughly the same aside, this article lacks true support by way of non-personal (see previous article), concrete examples. The author references the "plenty of stories of people" without actually supporting such a sweeping generalization.
This article also ignores the fact that getting into a "top school" is a very difficult and tricky process. It is this selectivity, this culling process that makes a theatre school a highly regarded theatre school. Sure, no system is perfect. True gems will inevitably sometimes slip through the cracks. But just as a graduate of a top institution cannot ride simply on the reputation of the university printed on their degree, those who don't go to a top school can - with enough will power - surmount that obstacle.
Post a Comment