OnStage: In recent history, Broadway has accumulated its fair share of shows that deal in the theme of mental illness. From “Next to Normal” to “Dear Evan Hansen”. From “Spring Awakening” to “The Light in the Piazza, the theatre community of late has made mental health a deservedly important priority in their storytelling. Whether it’s Diana Goodman’s struggle with schizophrenic bi-polar depression or the uphill battle with dementia depicted in “The Father”, the theatre community has unquestionably aided in the exploration and normalization the plight of mental illness. In placing characters struggling with these afflictions at the forefront of their storytelling these works have played an indispensable role in humanizing a population and de-stigmatizing their conditions.
9 comments:
This article asks the question, "So if coverage isn't the issue [stopping theatre personnel from accessing mental health care], then what is?" I believe a problem which exists across several artistic fields is the belief that art is solely based on self expression. When strong emotions, personal histories, and years of sacrifice are poured into one's artwork, it can be impossible to separate a failed project with devastating insecurity. While art does not need to be soulless, by applying and discussing more logical and studious practices in art school, professional failure can be readily separated from personal defeat. Finally, as the article alludes, simply acknowledging and discussing the common occurrence of mental illness in our field may move others to comfortably seek help when needed.
I completely agree with Alexa Juno that it is extremely important when Broadway decides to perform a show that focuses on mental illness. In today's contemporary society, mental illness has already been gaining a huge amount of support and it isn't surprising that Broadway is taking a similar approach. This is important to me because I come from a high school where there were many, many students with mental illnesses.
However, these students had resources. Juno points out that despite the amount of support within the stories of certain shows regarding mental illness, there are very few resources for the actual art professionals behind the character. Art professionals are known to be "emotionally unstable" and often suffer with stress, depression, etc. I know that here at Carnegie Mellon there are plenty of psychological resources here, like CaPS, for myself and anyone else who needs them. Shouldn't resources like these be available for the professional world as well?
I think that this article is really wonderful, and it touched on a part of the mental health issue that I had never thought about. We always talk about how important it is to have the discussion about mental health, and break the stigma surrounding it. I have always been really proud of the art/theater industry for doing this so well. Next to Normal was revolutionary in the way that it discussed mental illness, and the way that it portrayed the family of those effected by it. However, it hasn't changed the way that we, as an artistic community talk about mental health, and the way that we act on it. The majority of people that I have met in the theater industry do not take care of their health, not because they don't want to but because the job doesn't necessarily lend itself to a healthy lifestyle. I've had bosses that don't care when I am bleeding or physically look ill, so I can't even imagine how it must feel when the only person who knows how bad your illness is, is you. As a whole culture we have to start taking mental illness more seriously. One in four people will become mentally ill in their lifetime, which means that almost everyone in the world will be affected by it. The country, and other industries are moving in the right direction when it comes to taking care of your mind, it would be a shame to see our industry get left behind.
YES! This is great. I feel that in theater we say so much about how our art is starting to open up the discussion of mental illness, but yet thats where it ends. It is wonderful that these stories are being told, at a community theater level and at the Broadway level, however the real impact of the shows hasn't quiet done its job yet. I hope that one day soon talking about having a cold can be as easy talking about having depression. Its sad to say that I think our community of artists suffers from mental illness greatly. While the focus can be on the why, I think its more important, right now, to focus on the recovery and what we can do to improve it, not root out the cause. We need to find a away to help each other feel comfortable with their illness and accommodate it, with theater being such a social art, you would think this could be easy. But it all goes back to everyones hesitancy to open up and really talk about mental illness, not as it pertains to a character, but as it effects oneself in the here and now, and everything that goes along with having a mental illness.
I agree with the point that the general theater community just acknowledging mental illness is not the same as actually implementing ways to combat it/aid those who suffer from it. Practicality wise, however, I struggle to think of a way that the entire theatrical community (which is not an ORGANIZED community necessarily, as many people work in theater part time or are unable to make living wages and thus have to rely on other jobs/communities for support? would be able to implement the actual needed services to benefit those in the community. The author mentions that the various theatrical unions seem to have coverage for those suffering from mental health, but for non unionized actors, what can they do? Non-unionized actors are not in the """official""" community, so how would anyone even get an accurate reading on how many people may possibly need help? In order for this issue of actually implementing some form of tangible mental health reform, someone or some organization in a position of authority needs to make a serious change.
In the mean time though, Playbill and BroadwayWorld and various other popular theatrical sites and organizations having quick and easy to access information about mental health is a good step. But it's not the only step. We look at mental illness and say "that's horrible!" then simply turn our heads back. We need to actually face it head on.
I thought this article brought up many important points that aren’t usually addressed very well and that I, personally, haven’t heard much about before. For a community and an art form which brings to life stories including so many personal and hard- hitting issues such as gender politics, developmental disabilities, sexuality, poverty, family relations, and of course, mental illness, I totally agree that the theater community has a hard time discussing these important topics outside of the context of a show, and addressing them within their own groups of artists. I don’t find it surprising at all that performers are more likely than others to develop/ foster mental health issues, not just from the pressure of the industry but from the occasionally devastating characters they need to play. I still remember being shocked when our high school english teacher told us about the possible role Death of a Salesman played in Philip Seymour Hoffman’s overdose, but I can only imagine how difficult it must be to play such a tragic character 8 times a week. The article we read over the summer about Profiles Theater totally shook me to the core, since it made it clear how easy it is for something that terrible to spin so quickly out of control yet still be deemed “normal”. I whole- heartedly agree with the sentiment expressed at the end of the article that, while this is most likely a symptom of the general lack of understanding of and discussion about real-life mental illness, that doesn’t make it okay for the theater industry to continue to show it onstage yet feel uncomfortable discussing in a real-world context, particularly with it’s own performers, designers, and managers who are constantly trying to work up to higher and higher standards.
The almost hypocrisy of theater in regards to mental illness and neurodivergence presented in this article should come as a surprise to me, but for some reason, I almost expected the entertainment industry to fail neurodivergent people in the same way it has consistently, and publicly, failed the physically disabled community for the past several years. Non-disabled actors are constantly cast to play disabled characters (If you are interested in hearing more about this, I highly recommend comedian Maysoon Zayid's TED talk on being a disabled entertainer). Even though we as an industry portray a wide variety of characters from different backgrounds and with different struggles, we fail to continue our efforts to de-stigmatize issues or act to invoke social change behind the curtain and offstage. We put up plays about breaking away from abuse when the actors themselves are being abused onstage (see Profiles Theater). We produce plays with incredibly strong female characters and feminist messages while most successful writers, producers, and directors are male. We advertise theater as being more racially diverse than film and television, when actors of color are extremely limited in the roles they play and any attempt to flip the norm (see Hamilton's casting call last year) is met with outrage. I suppose I logically assumed that entertainment's advocacy to normalize mental illness would also end when the curtain falls.
It really is a shame that – no matter the profession or industry – that mental health care is rarely ever sought out. I have a theory however, that the lack of outreach for help in the theatre community stems from the constant need to be the best. You could be the best technician, actor, dancer, singer in the business but if you have a mental health issue it can be very easy to perceive yourself as inadequate and lesser than others.
Being happy and fulfilled by your job is important in any field – but god forbid you’re an actor discontented with yourself in a current role; they could easily just fire you and get someone a little bit chipper and more enthusiastic to work the show.
I am happy to see topics of mental illness in stage characters, as I feel that theatre is one of the few industries to tackle it directly and actually pretty accurately.
I think it is important to recognize that mental illness is a big problem for actors. Most people will push away how they are doing because they are more focused on the role they play than the actual actor themselves. I thought that the ad in the playbill example was a rather good idea, so that it benefits the company and those coming to see the show. If there was more conversation about this issue, substance abuse, body image issues and many other issues would be more recognized as a problem. I also do think it is important for shows that focus on mental illness to continue to get recognition. The conversation may be hard at first to discuss, but the more is it put in front of people the more likely they are willing to put to fix it. I wish there was an announcement made at the end of every Broadway show, for example the Broadway Equity Helps Fight AIDS announcement, that announces where people can donate to help fix this issue and where they can go to find help if needed. By talking about the issue and giving people more access to find help, this issue will slowly become easier to deal with and face.
Post a Comment