Metro News: The acting profession is as unpredictable as a soap character’s family tree and those at the top will have had their fair share of trial shifts and tribulations. Only two per cent of actors actually make a living from acting alone and 90 per cent of actors are out of work at any given time so that means, more often than not, actors have to make money elsewhere.
4 comments:
While I agree with the sentiment of this article, that classism is alive and well in the industry, that it is terrible to shame people for deciding to pay their bills and taking stop-gap jobs, I find myself wildly uncomfortable with how some of the points are made in this article. I feel like saying “Actors are stereotypically quite insecure, emotional creatures” dehumanizes actors in a weird way and also down plays the actual issue here. Most people in the entertainment industry don’t get paid enough to pay their bills when they have entertainment jobs, you have to have money to get those jobs in the first place often times, society glorifies the place of the entertainment industry beyond all else without giving true opportunities to make it, and we devalue other jobs that are great for entertainment workers in-between gigs (such as security guards, baristas, etc.) that we don’t consider any of those jobs “real” even though we rely on those same jobs to support us every day.
This article ignores a major root for this issue: artists are not compensated properly for the work that they do. The energy that an artist’s work is not “real” work and therefore does not deserve as significant paycheck as it is owed is a really frustrating and real issue, especially in a country that often sees arts programs as a waste and is quick to trim them down. We should be acknowledging the fact that wildly successful and popular artists are forced to do the work that all of society enjoys on top of juggling several survival jobs, just to be able to keep a roof over their head and pay their bills. This article started off with a promising title, but I was not pleased with how the article patronized artists as sweet and sensitive little things. These artists are people who are working so incredibly hard to pursue a passion that benefits so many communities, and they are not recognized and supported in the ways that they work so hard to do in their work. Society glorifies arts as a result of suffering, the product of an artist is an almost badge of honor for their pain and struggles. The pain that a person faces and chooses to implement into their art should not be a result of the fact that we do not appreciate them and value their work enough that we refuse to pay them for the time and labor they do.
I agree with what my colleagues have said above: I had higher hopes for the content of this article, and was a little confused that, albeit dark humor, the writer still discussed her multiple jobs and the acting profession with a lot of humor. Isn't that the point she was trying to get away from? Additionally, the phrase "Actors are stereotypically quite insecure, emotional creatures and mental health issues are widespread in the creative industry" was so problematic for me. You can be incredibly strong and independent and still struggle with your mental health. Generalizing and saying that all actors are insecure and fragile is, I think, inappropriate and supports the idea that the arts are a really more of a hobby and less of a profession. However, the impetus behind this article is a real one and I think the writer began from a good place. This industry is ridiculously hard, for actors, designers, managers, you name it. It is still not seen as a real profession by society in general, and this leads to the fact that Emma brought up, which is that it is not funded as one either. Until we, as a society, compensate artists appropriately for the work they do, this industry will continue to be seen as a hobby, those engaging in work outside of it seen as entertaining failures, and the arts will continue to remain a place for only the fortunate ones to fully "succeed."
The general idea of this article is certainly important to talk about when it comes to careers in the arts and entertainment industries, although as some have pointed out the author makes some unfortunate generalizations and comments that undermine what they're trying to convey. To start, Nicola points out that "The acting industry systemically favours those with existing privilege, financially or otherwise", which is something I've noted a few times in various articles because it is a harsh but true reality of our industry. Earlier this week I had commented on the #PayUpHollywood article which centered around low wages, where the author noted that "our silence is what maintains the status quo". As Jessica, Emma, and Ally point out, we also need to be paying a livable wage for the work we do in this industry. Otherwise, we run into the same problem seen with Hollywood assistantships where it takes money to make money.
Post a Comment