Acting in BFA in Acting vs. BFA in MT Programs (and more)

[doctorjohn]

<p>Look what happens when I go away for two days! ;-)</p>

<p>Wally, you've certainly incited a good debate: are MT majors as good at acting as Acting majors? Let me answer it slightly differently than Lisa, Eve abparent, mtmommy, and Susie (who wrote terrific responses by the way). Our answer is, they'd better be. I don’t see significantly different acting challenges between Light in the Piazza and Proof, for example, or between Carousel and Liliom, if you get my drift. So we don't have lower expectations for MT majors. Have some of our MT majors struggled in acting class? Sure. But we think the acting training helped them, and some of the kids who struggled the most have been our most successful graduates. On the other end of the scale, MT majors have played leads for us in straight plays, the most notable example being Hamlet.</p>

<p>You asked some other questions. </p>

<p>"So, it sounds like the programs more coexist than are segregated. Is that common for schools who offer both disciplines?"</p>

<p>More common than not, I think. Very few schools have the resources to offer entirely separate programs for Acting and Musical Theatre. The three that occur to me are CCM, Michigan, and NYU. Carnegie has the resources, but chooses not to segregate its performers. The rest of us put Acting and MT majors together in acting classes.</p>

<p>"Have you identified any personality traits or skill sets that lend themselves better to a coexisting platform for straight actors as opposed to stand alone acting conservatories?"</p>

<p>Skill in singing and dance, and a desire to continue training in those disciplines, is probably the most important factor. A passing interest in musicals, or at least not an overwhelming hatred for the art form, helps. Students who just hate musicals, and want to do nothing but edgy, avant-garde theatre, probably won't be happy at a school like ours. Not that we don't do that kind of theatre. This year, for example, we're premiering a play by the terrific African-American playwright, Kia Corthron, about the health care crisis, doing a crazy off-beat play by one of our alumni, Carter Lewis, and doing Paula Vogel’s And Baby Makes Seven, which we’re staging in a non-linear style. But we’re also doing Hello, Dolly! Does the thought of that make you gag? Take us off your audition list.</p>

<p>“If the potential for overshadowing exists (not saying at Otterbein but generally speaking) then would you say the advantages are more performances to audition for?”</p>

<p>Yes, as I’ve said before.</p>

<p>“Would you also say that there are more chances to pursue dance? That is one thing we have noticed about straight acting conservatories. While there is plenty of ‘movement’ and vocal stuff, the abilities to continue on with rigorous dance courses which appeals to our D are pretty slim from what we have seen.”</p>

<p>I’m not terribly knowledgeable about the curricula everywhere else, but I’d be inclined to agree with that. We require our Acting majors to study voice in the Music Department, and we require them to take basic ballet, modern, jazz and tap. If their skills are more advanced, they can dance every day. I haven’t seen that option at the straight acting conservatories.</p>

<p>At the same time, because we’ve put our resources into dance, we don’t have as much in the way of movement as SUNY Purchase, for example, much less Juilliard. We have one combat class, not a certification program. We touch on commedia and clowning, but we don’t have classes in them. We do, however, have an Alexander/Feldenkrais specialist who works with the students. We do the best we can with what we’ve got.</p>

<p>Finally, about your question related to Ashland. I went to the bio page, as you suggested, and looked at the educational background of the company, and you’re certainly right, almost all BFA and MFA Acting majors. I think there are two factors here. One is, as Susie suggested, that not many MT majors audition for OSF. I didn’t see any musicals in their season this year. So there may be something of a self-selection process taking place. It’s slightly different at the Utah Shakespearean Festival, where they do one musical every season, and as a result almost always take two or three of our rising seniors as interns. They sing in the musical’s ensemble, fill out the Shakespeare casts, and sing, dance and act in the Greenshow. So Utah wants actors with musical training, if not MT degrees per se.</p>

<p>But there may be another factor which is worth considering. Theatre companies, like other companies, have hiring preferences. Artistic directors tend to like graduates from certain schools. They like the skills those graduates exhibit and they tend to share the same taste in actors. It’s the same in business and law. Some firms I know want the best graduates from Harvard; other firms wouldn’t touch a Harvard grad with a 10-foot pole. So one factor for your d. to consider is, where does she want to work after she graduates? If it’s at OSF, and similar companies, it might be worth looking at the bio’s to see where their company members went to school. Of course, the artistic director may be different five years from now, but styles and tastes do tend to persist.</p>

<p>Food for thought. Hope this helps.</p>

<p>P.S. Thanks, fishbowl. We're real proud of our girl.</p>

[doctorjohn]

<p>One more footnote. Susie mentioned Elon and USC as places where Acting majors can get training in voice and dance. Add Otterbein to that list, please.</p>

[soozievt]

<p>DoctorJohn, thank you so much for the time you devote to explaining these issues as well as Otterbein specific topics. You are an invaluable asset to this forum, let alone to your students. </p>

<p>Yes, thanks for mentioning Otterbein as an example of a school where Acting majors can get training in voice and dance. There are many schools that have such an option. I was just trying to point out to Wally that since his D seems to be a singer and dancer and wants some training in that, even though she is seeking a BFA in Acting program, that there are SOME BFA in Acting programs where this is very possible. I gave just a few examples like Elon, USC, Tisch (Playwrights or Strasberg studios) but clearly there are way more and frankly, we should be saying Otterbein as a prime example because this is, after all, an OTTERBEIN thread :) !</p>

[WallyWorld]

<p>Doctorjohn,</p>

<p>If you feel that this is off the Otterbien topic and want to move the discussion to the main forum, I don’t think anyone would mind.</p>

<p>This is not the direction I had intended this conversation to go. I don’t even think I’m the one who “incited” it but am certainly willing to spirit it along. By the way, am I the Lion, the Tiger or the Bear? In spite of this direction I do have a much better understanding of the “lay of the land” at multi-disciplinary programs and am convinced that some of you truly do like to be helpful. Thanks.</p>

<p>Fishbowl: hope your doing well. I had not thought about a “dumbing down” effect. Your post gave me something to ponder though. If there was any effect I could come up with.. ( based on your points Otterbein is a likely exception,) it would be that top straight acting students go to their “Ivies” and the caliber of straight actors in schools who offer MT is lower so the MT students compare pretty well to them. I have know knowledge of that, its just a logical supposition. </p>

<p>Few people have more of an appreciation for watching MT and an appreciation for the talent and work it must take to do what they do than me. There is no question that they are exceptional human beings. The part that I have difficulty with is what I have already articulated. Many of you MT stage moms have every right to be very proud yet I get this sense that there is a feeling that it is the norm that any one of these students/actors could step off stage at any time and fly the space shuttle or dawn a gown and perform an appendectomy. And while that sounds a little outrageously exaggerated those types of claims have been stated elsewhere on CC. </p>

<p>The June 2, 2003 issue of Time magazine did a feature titled “Bigger than Broadway” which was their pick for the top five regional theater companies in the country and the results were not surprising, at least to me. All exceptionally successful companies who have done amazing things for a long time. . For the purposes of school selection (not this discussion) I have spent many hours on each of their web site. I have studied the bios of over 300 actors at these five companies as well as some others including a favorite of mine, Shakespeare and Company. I tried Utah’s but could not find the bios. </p>

<p>You can read the article here <a href="http://www.osfashland.org/news/articles.aspx%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.osfashland.org/news/articles.aspx&lt;/a> </p>

<p>If it is true that MT grads are just as strong at straight acting why is it that of the over 300 bios of actors working at these top of the top dream companies that I have reviewed, I have yet to find one with an MT educational background? Not one. </p>

<p>It’s been explained that it can be very difficult for even highly talented MT types to find work. These companies (including OSF) are holding auditions at many "Ivy" MT schools and are attending their showcases in NY and LA. Some of these jobs are dream gigs. </p>

<p>My research conflicts with what has been set forth as truth on this forum so I would welcome you to tell me what I have missed. </p>

<p>OSF never does musicals and I would presume their answer would be that they look for exceptionally talented actors and if they have singing training that’s even better. </p>

<p>
[quote]
But there may be another factor which is worth considering. Theatre companies, like other companies, have hiring preferences.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I hear what you are saying but that does not seem to be true with them. With about 100 actors a rough breakdown would be 5 Julliard, 4 Yale MFA, 2 CMU, 2 NCSA and so on so clearly there is not some major program preference. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Of course, the artistic director may be different five years from now

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ironic you would say that as OSF has just announced the hiring of a new one.</p>

[soozievt]

<p>Wally writes:

[quote]
If there was any effect I could come up with.. ( based on your points Otterbein is a likely exception,) it would be that top straight acting students go to their “Ivies” and the caliber of straight actors in schools who offer MT is lower so the MT students compare pretty well to them. I have know knowledge of that, its just a logical supposition.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm sorry, but I do not understand this "supposition". While some very good BFA in Acting programs exist where there is NO BFA in MT program (examples: Purchase, DePaul, BU, Julliard, Rutgers), some very strong BFA in Acting programs ALSO exist where there is a strong BFA in MT program. There are many examples. Just giving a few...Otterbein, CMU, and Tisch. I have never heard of any demarkation that those in the acting programs at schools that also offer a MT program are of a lower caliber than those who have opted to attend acting programs at schools that do not also offer a MT program. I hardly think, for instance, that a BFA acting student at BU is more talented than a BFA acting student at CMU or Tisch. My daughter's close pal who is a terrific actress, has won state and NFAA awards in straight theater, attends the BFA program in Acting at BU and was rejected at CMU's (though waitlisted) and Tisch's acting programs. That doesn't mean anything, as we see opposite results all the time too but just saying that CMU or Tisch were out of her reach for acting, yet she is in a superb BFA Acting program at BU. </p>

<p>The comparison of talent in these "suppositions" seems odd to me. Another example....I know many highly talented young actors who have opted to NOT pursue a BFA, but have chosen the BA with a possible MFA route instead. Some of these actors chose to attend Brown, Yale, Harvard, Vassar, Tufts, and Northwestern, which are all fine BA schools. They are not lesser actors. They chose a different educational path. Some of these students were ALSO accepted to very good BFA in Acting programs. Some of them won NFAA Awards, some have been on Broadway (before college), and some have gone on National Tours. </p>

<p>From what you have written about your daughter, she is highly talented in acting and wants to pursue a BFA in Acting degree program. However, she is ALSO talented in singing and dancing, based on your posts about her training, productions, and interests. Like others that I know who are talented in singing/dancing, she WANTS an ACTING program. That's great. She easily could go for a BFA in MT based on the talents you have outlined but she doesn't WANT to do that, totally cool of course! But IF she had chosen to do a program that allowed her to keep training in acting, dancing and singing, I doubt you'd think of her as a "lesser actress" because you have said she is an outstanding actress (I believe you have said she'd have no trouble getting into DePaul, which is a top Acting program, and no trouble making the cut....which is saying a LOT about your confidence in her as an actress....no problem, you are her Dad of course, though many of us who think our kids have talent do get very nervous about the odds at top programs). So, if your D had chosen a MT path, she'd STILL be a great actress as you say she is very good at acting. She'd just also be continuing to keep up with her singing and dancing. Even now, her training time is split between acting, singing and dancing, as is her production time (she is a principal in a musical this fall, you have mentioned...congrats by the way!). So, I don't think her acting chops are "diluted" by the fact that she also trains in singing and dancing and puts on musicals. She could have opted to do so in college. She'd be equipped to be in plays or musicals. The educational path is a choice. Talent is still talent and she wouldn't have lost being a great actress had she opted to keep up with her singing and dancing.</p>

<p>Lots of talented young actors I know, also opt to do some training in directing, due to interests and talents in that domain. Some have skills in more than one area. That doesn't make them less of an actor. This is also true of older actors. My D's director in a professional musical in summer of 2005 here, has been in Broadway musicals and is about to be in a new Broadway musical about to open, yet has directed many plays and musicals. He is obviously skilled at more than acting and singing. </p>

<p>CONTINUED>>>>>>>>>>></p>

[soozievt]

<p>Personally speaking, I have a kid who is an actor and also sings and dances and trains in all three (as it appears your D does as well, for the time being). But those are not the only things she does well. She is NOT unique this way whatsoever, as I know others I could say the same thing about, but we all know of personal experiences. She also works as a musical director, choreographer, accompanist, musical arranger, and writer. She likes all those things and is skilled at them. While her training and goals focus on performing, she can DO other things. One can have a huge passion such as Acting or MT but also have other talents, skills, or interests. That doesn't dilute their primary passion or talent.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Many of you MT stage moms have every right to be very proud yet I get this sense that there is a feeling that it is the norm that any one of these students/actors could step off stage at any time and fly the space shuttle or dawn a gown and perform an appendectomy. And while that sounds a little outrageously exaggerated those types of claims have been stated elsewhere on CC.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't know any MT actors who can do those things, but clearly there are MANY MT actors who can do STRAIGHT THEATER, which is what is being talked about here, I believe. Some are pretty darn good at something else too. Some MT actors that I know are astounding academics, writers, composers, or even athletes. One of the top MT young people I have seen on stage, has a BFA in MT in a top program and also did a full premed curriculum. She's been on a National Tour and in a movie, has choreographed shows, and is opting now for med school, I am pretty certain. Most kids I know are not choosing such a path, but my example is that some highly skilled MT actors are skilled at something else...straight acting, a related field, or maybe something else entirely.</p>

<p>When you speak of top regional theaters in the country, many of which you speak are the ones that focus on straight theater, not MT. So, I would expect that their acting roster be filled with those who did a BFA in Acting or a BA followed by a MFA. Now, if you talk about some top MT regional theaters, you will see many actors on their roster or in their playbills who have MT training. Some may have straight theater training, some may have no college at all. But to only discuss Shakespeare type or other straight theater companies and how their actors don't come from MT backgrounds, doesn't tell the story. Look at playbills for MUSICALS. Many actors have voice, acting and dance training who make it in top MT venues.</p>

<p>If OSF "never does musicals", then naturally, they are not overtly seeking MT trained actors. They'd probably seek those who have BFAs or MFAs in straight acting. </p>

<p>I've taught school. A high school is going to hire someone who is trained to teach high school. An elementary school is going to hire someone who is trained to teach elementary school. There is crossover, of course. MT actors, who are good actors, cross over into straight theater ALL THE TIME! Straight actors, who have singing and dancing in their background, also cross over into MT, all the time! This summer I saw a play locally starring Equity actors. The lead male was in several BROADWAY MUSICALS. However, this was a straight dramatic play. He was superb in the role. Most MT actors won't do well on stage unless they can ACT....except perhaps in a singing/dancing ensemble that doesn't require scene work or solo singing.</p>

<p>I think your D, or anyone for that matter, should pursue the path that she wants and that leads to HER goals. If she would like to work in regional theater that focuses on straight acting, such as OSF, then a BFA in Acting might be a good path. If she'd like to also train to do MT AND ACTING, perhaps a BFA in MT might make sense OR an ACTING BFA where there are opportunities to take courses or minor in voice or dance and musical theater productions in the college's lineup. Only she can determine which sorts of training fits her interests and goals. But one type of training isn't necessarily BETTER than another but simply FITS one's interests, skills, and goals. For those who want to pursue a life on the MT stage, it makes sense to get training in acting AND voice/dance. Some do straight acting programs because they have the voice/dance chops and still pursue MT gigs. Different strokes for different folks. </p>

<p>Lastly, my D had the great fortune to perform for three years around the country in a two- person production with symphony orchestras. A major aspect of this experience was the adult actress with whom she worked. This woman went to CMU. She has one of the most amazing voices I have ever heard. She has been in several Broadway musicals, including playing a lead role that the multi Tony winner actress who played it did not sing all 8 performances each week due to the demands of the role. This woman performed the lead twice/week. She has been in many operas as well. She also owns an opera company. While she is an amazing singer, her acting blew me away. What made her standout on stage with the symphony in the shows my D played opposite her in was the way she ACTED the roles. Her acting training at CMU obviously had an effect because she was WAY more than a singer. She was and still is, the epitome of an ACTRESS. So, with all the rehearsals and performances at major venues that I was at when my D performed with this woman, I truly observed that someone who is trained as a MT actress and opera singer can be a phenomenal actor. She is just one example but I got to witness it up close. I can't even fathom her doing the roles I saw her do if she merely was a great singer (which she is). It would never have been the same. Her expressions, characterizations, and physicality on stage made her singing come alive.</p>

[dancersmom]

<p>WallyWorld:</p>

<p>You say that, "Many of you MT stage moms have every right to be very proud yet I get this sense that there is a feeling that it is the norm that any one of these students/actors could step off stage at any time and fly the space shuttle or dawn a gown and perform an appendectomy. And while that sounds a little outrageously exaggerated those types of claims have been stated elsewhere on CC." I truly don't recall any of the moms or dads on this forum making such exaggerated claims. Yes, there have been some proud proclamations of kids' accomplishments, but I do not recall any hype. Except, oh yeah, from one poster. You may recall writing this on June 14, 2006: "Our daughter will be a professional actor and will be accepted to top programs. Not bragging just very thankful of her incredible gifts in this area. She will be Juliet professionally probably more than a couple of times." I'm sure that your D is quite talented and you have every right to be proud of her. Just be careful about casting the 1st stone at other parents.</p>

<p>You asked an intriguing question regarding why you found no MT trained actors among the 300 actors at Time Magazine's top 5 regional companies and your own top picks. I believe that Doctorjohn’s earlier response probably explains much of the phenomenon. Companies tend to like the students coming out of certain favorite programs. Some theatres have a working relationship with certain schools. Cincinnati’s Playhouse in the Park, a regional Tony award winner in 2005, hires interns only from Ohio State’s MFA program. Those interns probably have a leg up over students from other programs when it comes to later getting hired at the Playhouse or at other Southwestern Ohio companies. I also suspect that company directors probably favor straight actors over MT performers because they assume that the MTs prefer to perform in musicals and would not be entirely happy working with a straight acting company. </p>

<p>Your implication seems to be that MT performers are inherently less able actors because of their training. My family and I were warned by teachers and performers in our area as early as when our D was in middle school that we would hear that argument when our D began her college search. We were told that there is some friction between some of the straight actors and some of the MTs at most schools. Both groups believe that they are the more talented. The straight actors claim that the MTs aren’t real actors and the MTs say that the straight actors are grousing because they can’t sing or dance. I think it’s a shame that this kind of divisiveness exists. I see it as evidence that the students who engage in that type of one-up-manship have some inner doubt about their own level of competence. Someone who’s truly self-confident and has a strong sense of self doesn’t feel the need to play that game.
Kathy</p>

[soozievt]

<p>This "conversation" prompted me to want to look at a regional playbill. This summer, I saw Pippin at the Goodspeed Opera House. This production will shortly go out on National Tour. For those who are unfamiliar with Goodspeed....</p>

<p>"Dedicated to the preservation and advancement of musical theatre, Goodspeed produces three musicals April through Decemeber on its mainstage in East Haddam. Seventeen Goodspeed productions have gone on to Broadway, receiving more than a dozen Tony Awards. Goodspeed itself has been awarded two Special Tony Awards, one in 1980 for outstanding contributions to the American musical and a second in 1995 for distinguished achievement for a regional theatre. </p>

<p>Located in rural East Haddam on the Connecticut River, the historic Victorian-style Opera House takes musicals from the past and brings them to life for today's audiences."</p>

<p>For those unfamiliar with Goodspeed Musicals, there is another dimension....</p>

<p>New Musicals at the Norma Terris Theatre</p>

<p>"Goodspeed is at the forefront of shaping the future of musical theatre. At the Norma Terris Theater, located in nearby Chester, Goodspeed develops new musicals and nurtures emerging artists. Goodspeed has launched over 50 musicals into the theatre world at The Norma Terris Theatre during its 22-year history, giving composers and authors the opportunity to develop their material through actual production."</p>

<p>As you can see, both branches of Goodspeed Musicals, are well known in the regional MUSICAL THEATER world. I have the playbill for Pippin right here and decided to browse it. Like so many regional and Broadway playbills, some actors have BFA degrees and some don't and some don't say. Some actors in this cast did list their degree....I see two from NYU/Tisch, one from UC Irvine, one from Baldwin-Wallace, one from FSU, one from UNH, one from Western Michigan U, and one believe it or not who has a BA in Russian Lit from Hampshire College! And just to show that someone trained in Acting can cross over into MT, the Equity Actor who played Pippin, Joshua Park, who has been in a musical on Bdway, went to NCSA, on Wally's A list of acting schools (and it is). So, many of those in the cast don't have a MT degree, BUT many DO. This makes sense as this is a well known regional theater for MUSICALS, not a Shakespearean regional theater. </p>

<p>While I do not have the playbill of the most recent musical at Goodspeed's Norma Terris Theater, I am somewhat familiar with those in the cast, almost all Equity actors (many with Broadway credits), as my D was in final callbacks several months ago for that production directed by a Tony Award winning Broadway director. Most in that cast have many musical theater credits. Many have training in MT programs but many have studied straight acting and I can think of someone in the cast who did a BA program at an Ivy League college even. This show's auditions and callbacks consisted of singing and dancing. </p>

<p>So, we can talk regional theaters, but we need to discuss what sort of regional theaters. A Shakespearean theater is going to attract actors from certain backgrounds more prevalently than other backgrounds and a regional theater that is well known in MT, is going to seek out those who have training in acting, voice, and dance. There will be some with no degree. By the way, in Pippin, the cast all had to be great singers and dancers. Yet, looking at the credits in their bios, several ALSO have straight acting credits including film and TV. </p>

<p>The man who directed the staging for the productions my D did around the country with major symphonies, has choreographed on Broadway, in major opera houses and with major ballets. Guess what his degree is in? He has a degree in cellular biology from Columbia. </p>

<p>So many paths. Playbills make for interesting reading.</p>

[MusThCC]

<p>DANCERSMOM -- you are close to your facts, but not entirely accurate, about Playhouse in the Park's internship program. It is Ohio University, not OSU, which has an arrangement with Playhouse about the interns, although there have been years when there have been exceptions to that. 2 years ago, all the interns were hired directly, and it wasn't part of the educational program with OU. There was an interesting mix in ages and backgrounds. </p>

<p>I don't see a predominance of their former interns popping up regularly, although I can think of one or two exceptions. However, they have no company, and hire for each show individually, with local and NYC auditions, so while interning there is great for getting the staff to know you, it doesn't necessarily translate into favoritism for casting. And, to my knowledge, most of the interns move on after their one year, and don't remain in the area.</p>

[5pants]

<p>Yellow light people....as much as I love reading this discussion...and it is a good one....may I make a suggestion to Collegemom to please clip and paste this converstation into it's own thread under the heading "MT vs Staight Acting"? I think there may even be a thread already started under that title.</p>

<p>I picture prospective students or parents interested in Otterbein reading this thread to further their knowledge on the school only to be detered by this bit of a road block. I am afraid they may not read further....please let's keep apples with apples.</p>

<p>Wallyworld, I believe you originally were seeking the advice of Doctorjohn and that is the reason for posting on this thread. My I suggest to you to perhaps invite him to post on another thread or contact him through PM or email? As WE ALL KNOW doctorjohn is always receptive to Q&A...what a guy!!</p>

<p>BTW, a hint of advice: The bull in a china shoppe attitude isn't as affective here as much as a diplomatic one.</p>

<p>Green light.</p>

<p>SUE aka 5pants</p>

<p>P.S. Dancersmom and MusThCC I am glad to see you posting again. :)</p>

[Collegemom]

<p>Sue Aka 5pants:</p>

<p>Thank You For The Suggestion. I Agree. This Discussion Needed To Be Moved As It Is Not Truly About Otterbein, Though That Is One School Within The Context Of This Discussion. I Think The Topic Started On The Otterbein Thread Because The Initial Inquiry Was To Doctorjohn. However, Dr John Also Contributes To Other Threads. </p>

<p>The Title I Gave The Thread Does Not Encompass The Sum Of This Discussion But It Is Limiting, What Can I Say. The Initial Question Dealt With The Acting Training In Bfa In Acting Programs At Schools That Also Have A Bfa In Mt Program Vs. Schools That Only Have Bfa In Acting Programs. In Any Case, Please Continue Here On This Thread In Whatever Direction The Discussion Flows....</p>

[dancersmom]

<p>MusThCC,</p>

<p>Thanks for your corrections to my post. I promise, I really did know that Cinci Playhouse in the Park works with Ohio U., not Ohio State. Sorry for that slip up!</p>

[5pants]

<p>Collegemom,</p>

<p>Thank you so much!!</p>

<p>SUE</p>

[WallyWorld]

<p>It would make reading longer posts a lot easier if you guys would learn to use quote boxes. </p>

<p>
[quote]
some very strong BFA in Acting programs ALSO exist where there is a strong BFA in MT program.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No question about it. I spent two hours in August with a recent CMU grad working at OSF. Very talented and impressive actor.</p>

<p>
[quote]
MT actors, who are good actors, cross over into straight theater ALL THE TIME!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Then show me the proof because as I posted above they are noticeably absent from the best theater companies in the country. It’s interesting how some of you guys switch so quickly form the notion that employment in this industry is supply driven to demand driven. Which is it?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Your implication seems to be that MT performers are inherently less able actors

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, you guys are just saying they can do it all and I am not seeing them do it all. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Our daughter will be a professional actor and will be accepted to top programs. Not bragging just very thankful of her incredible gifts in this area. She will be Juliet professionally probably more than a couple of times

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That was me Parroting almost verbatim what an industry professional who in the summer acts and directs and during the school year teaches at a BFA ATP said. I am also, unlike some people, quick to recognize what she cannot do. For example she will not accomplish that without the training of a conservatory. She also is very unlikely to end up on Broadway, probably even if she wanted to, it’s just not her personality. </p>

<p>
[quote]
I believe that Doctorjohn’s earlier response probably explains much of the phenomenon.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That’s appears to be not correct. Did you not see my response on that? I wrote..</p>

<p>
[quote]
I hear what you are saying but that does not seem to be true with them. With about 100 actors a rough breakdown would be 5 Julliard, 4 Yale MFA, 2 CMU, 2 NCSA and so on so clearly there is not some major program preference.

[/quote]
</p>

[soozievt]

<p>Wally, </p>

<p>I am not sure I wish to engage much more in this conversation as it seems to become an argument of point by point and proving this or that. It is OK if you disagree.</p>

<p>I'm only responding now because you have quoted me a few times above in your quote boxes :D. </p>

<p>When I made the point that there are strong acting programs that exist at the same schools that ALSO have a BFA in MT, I was responding to earlier questions you raised (I believe even your initial post did) and your assertion that "top straight acting students go to their “Ivies” and the caliber of straight actors in schools who offer MT is lower so the MT students compare pretty well to them." Now, it seems that you agree with me as you state: "no question about it." So, maybe we're on the same page on that issue. Not sure it matters but this is going in circles.</p>

<p>You asked for proof of my statement that MT actors cross over into straight acting all the time. You keep maintaining that MT trained actors are absent from regional theater companies that you follow. I am not here to provide proof and statistics. I have already explained that the straight theater companies may not have BFA in MT trained actors on their rosters because these actors may not opt to become a member of such companies such as Oregon Shakespeare Company. I gave an example of a playbill from a well known MT Regional Theater, Goodspeed Opera House, where there are many trained MT actors. Do these actors have to be in straight acting companies to prove something? They are getting work on the professional stage. Some in the musical playbill I had, had credits in straight dramas, film, and TV. As well, I gave some anecdotal information of MT trained actors, including professional Equity ones, whom I have seen perform in straight plays. I mentioned one Equity actor who has been in several Broadway musicals who I just saw as the lead in a professional drama in my town recently. I mentioned examples within BFA in MT programs, such as at CMU and Tisch (and way more of course) where the MT students are cast in the straight plays. Even DoctorJohn provided some examples of such a phenomenum in his program where the MT students have played leads in some of the dramas. I gave examples of my D's friends who have done lots of MT, who are in professional plays on and off Broadway. Less significant, even my own MT kid has been leads in straight theater productions. I believe 5Pants sons who are in a MT BFA program were in a professional regional straight drama production in the past year. Examples abound of MT trained and skilled actors who appear in straight dramas. They may not join a Shakespeare company as an ongoing member but they do appear on stage in a variety of genres. </p>

<p>The issue about MT trained actors "doing it all".....again, I know many who are skilled at both straight acting AND MT and some also are skilled at other things....directing, choreographing, composing. Actually, the more versatile one is, the more options for work. </p>

<p>Even your own daughter is currently training in voice, dance, and acting and doing musicals and straight drama, based on your posts. You proudly maintain she is an outstanding actress and I am not doubting you one bit. She could opt to do a MT program but wants an Acting program. Had she chosen the BFA in MT route, I doubt you'd think she was a lesser actress because she already is an outstanding one. I think you are seeking justification for the options/decisions that you (or your daughter) are making and it only matters that the path she chooses is the one that fits her needs, skills, interests, and goals. There is NO ONE RIGHT path. You posted earlier comparing hours spent in this set of classes vs. that set of classes, etc. In the end, talent, and some luck, in auditions is what will matter....not which degree (or any degree). Training is a must. But there are many paths to life on the professional stage. I have mentioned successful actors who didn't even go to college. I mentioned some who did BA degrees at Ivies or other schools. I can tell you of several of my D's friends RIGHT now who are not IN BFA programs who are currently on Broadway, off Broadway, or on a National Tour. Obviously their path worked for them. Your D should choose the program that works for her and is what she WANTS. I am sure that in the end, her talent will matter and she will have her talent whether she does a BFA in MT or a BFA in Acting, a BA followed by a MFA, or other training. If your D truly seeks a career in straight theater, I can see why she is opting to do the BFA in Acting route. If she wants to do both straight acting and MT, a BFA in MT could get her there. Lots of people who train in MT do indeed also perform in straight plays. </p>

<p>When my D auditioned for an Off Broadway play this past spring, they didn't care that she was in a MT program and not straight acting. They called her into final callbacks for the role. They simply went by her acting audition. That's what happens in this field, not the resume. You have to be able to act, to get acting jobs. This particular job...as it turned out, the breakdown was for a teenager to play a role of someone who acts like she is 10, and so her agent submitted her. In the end, as often can happen, as I have seen this in Broadway auditions, the casting folks can change their mind in what they are looking for. This time, they decided to actually go with a true CHILD for the role, even though that was not the original breakdown. But, the degree mattered not, only the acting skills in the audition. You will see lots of people in MT programs who also do plays. Look at some of the CMU MT grads' resumes...many have done lots of straight theater, one example.</p>

<p>There is no right or wrong here. Please don't ask us to PROVE this or that. We are citing experiences and anecdotes. DoctorJohn gave examples in his program. Believe it or not, that is your choice. It really doesn't matter. It only matters that your child seeks out the educational path that makes sense for her. You say she would like to continue some dance training and I hope she finds a BFA in Acting school where she can do this. I highly doubt her time in dance class will dilute her skills as a straight actor. Some people, including your D, are good at more than one thing. My daughter is currently the musical director of a show at Tisch. She's good at that sort of thing. That doesn't dilute her training or stage credits or ability to get work in the future on stage. If anything, it adds to her marketability to get WORK in general, which is a good thing since acting jobs are not a sure bet no matter how talented one is.</p>

[shortnsweet]

<p>There is always the option I chose. I am a BFA Acting major at Syracuse where I dance (more in fact than the MT majors because I have more time in my schedule because I don't take music theory, piano & etc) and I take voice lessons there as well.</p>

<p>At Syracuse we all take the same acting classes until Junior year then we "split". The acting students go on to do intense acting training and the MT follow more of a musical theater track.</p>

<p>At SU actor majors can and have been cast in musicals---even as leads.</p>

<p>Also, this is just my opinion and from my college audition experience and even from the info on this forum I have read---that the singing voice is what is the first thing that qualifies you, then acting and certainly dance is the last (as Eve said)</p>

[dancersmom]

<p>Thanks Soozie for your excellent post. </p>

<p>Audition season for this year's senior class is about to get under way. I realize that it is a very stressful time for both the seniors and their families. I recall all too well how nervewracking it was for me 3 years ago. I know that I wished someone could tell me which programs would truly be the best fit for my D. Of course, that was something we had to find out for ourselves. Finding a good fit is part art and part science. The "science" part of the equation for us included looking carefully at each school's curriculum, and generally gathering as many hard facts as we could. The "art" part was less tangible. We made visits to several schools to get a feel for their programs. We gathered opinions from many people (including CC posters). D knew several local acquaintances who were applying to theatre programs that year. All of them visited several schools, just as we did. Naturally, everyone compared notes. My D was a bit surprised to learn that some schools she absolutely loved were not liked by some of her acquaintances. In the end, no two students applied to the same list of schools, though there was some overlap. </p>

<p>It is human nature to want our choices validated by others. It is quite natural to feel that if someone else makes the same choice then we are correct. I tried to remember that my D is a unique individual and that it did not matter if her friends and acquaintances made different choices. I think that there's a little part of many of us that thinks if we can just gather enough facts in a very scientific manner, we'll be certain of getting our kids into the perfect program, which will then guarantee professional successs. We all know that this is not true, but we wish it were! We parents would do well to remember that statistics can only tell us so much. </p>

<p>Re: Acting programs produce better actors than MT programs. I do not wish to continue to beat a dead horse. Most of us agree that many performers who have gotten degrees in MT are as skilled in acting as performers who have gotten BFA or MFA acting degrees. I suppose that we should simply agree to disagree with those who feel differently. </p>

<p>I, for one,am glad that there are so many different types of theatre to enjoy and so many different talented performers. Frank Sinatra and Gene Kelly, two performers I'm sure we all know, were certainly very different from each other. Certainly, both men did sing, act, and dance, but I don't think that they did all 3 equally well. I hope I can say, without getting anyone's dander up, that Sinatra was best known for his singing and that Kelly was best known for his dancing. Do we think less of Sinatra as a performer because he couldn't dance as well as Gene Kelly? And, do we think less of Gene Kelly because he didn't sing as well as Sinatra? I think most of us appreciate each performer for his unique attributes.</p>

<p>I hope that we can remember that each of our student performers is an Individual, different from all others, who is on a journey of self-actualization. Each of us parents is very proud of our S or D and most of us have some nervousness about what the future holds. I also hope that we will be careful of other's feelings when talking about our children. Some of our children have had more opportunities than others - expensive lessons, summer camps, etc. Some of our CC high schoolers simply have a lot of raw talent that has yet to be nurtured by effective teachers. I would hate to cause a talented student who's not had a lot of training to shy away from auditioning for his/her dream school. There's one sure fire way not to get accepted and that is to not try.</p>

<p>I want to wish each and every one of the CC seniors a successful year. go out there and break a leg at your auditions!</p>

[anothermom-w-q]

<p>beautiful post dancersmom.</p>

[mtmommy]

<p>Dancersmom,
Your words are so inspiring! I just love that about all our students being individuals on journeys of self-actualization!</p>

[fishbowlfreshman]

<p>
[quote]
More training doesn't make an actor more talented. It makes them more trained.

[/quote]
... said David Mamet and I agree. However, talent is only the beginning. In four years, I’ll be no more talented than I am tonight, but the supposed talent I have will be a heck of a lot more developed. Working at the highest levels of straight theatre requires not only intensive training, but amazing amounts of commitment to one's art. Some people need more training than others, but I don’t think it’s any accident that the actors at the major regionals in Wally’s link mostly have MFAs or come from acting conservatories where you have no time for any outside interests. It’s also no accident that the one such conservatory with MT makes MT a double major where those students don’t dilute their time with general education. </p>

<p>Ya know … There are a lot of different levels of theatre around and an awful lot of very mediocre actors getting work in many venues … including Broadway. Some are filty rich and famous (and quite pretty) but the bottom line is they aren't very good though the general public may not realize it. Why would they after growing up seeing so much atrocious acting in TV and film on a daily basis being acclaimed as "great performances?" Even worse, some are blinded by the "hotness" of the bad actor. Part of the problem I see in this discussion is just that. Mediocre acting isn’t as obvious as bad singing or weak dancing. There are also a lot of kids - both straight acting and MT – who can play a lot of different roles on their current level. I, for one, have played Nina and Ophelia with professional companies on the small market regional level to rave reviews. Did I play them as well as would be expected at one of the major Regionals? Hell no and it would take amazing amounts of gall to suggest that I did. The spark was apparently there, but I’m not yet developed to that point. I could probably take a decent shot at Hedda right now, but would it even be close to what I’ll be able to do it after these next four years of sweating blood at a conservatory? Absolutely not. If I though so, why would I be wasting my time? </p>

<p>What I guess I’m getting at in the short amount of time I have to write is that yes … there are MT actors who could perform on the upper levels of straight theatre if they so chose and focused their training in that direction. There are also some who could perform with the major operas and ballet companies if they had decided to go in that direction earlier in life and got the appropriate training. However, they don’t and while I don’t think it was intended, I find it somewhat disrespectful to those who have devoted their lives to the art of straight theatre to suggest that an MTer is going to be able to perform the great plays at the highest levels with those people. There might be some, but they're likely as rare as seeing Pluto in the noon day sun. Also, while “Proof” may offer no more acting challenges than “Light in the Piazza,” there aren’t many musicals that offer those challenges strictly from the acting perspective and neither stacks up with Hamlet, Hedda, any number of Chekhov roles, etc, etc, etc. Besides, who was it that won the Tony for playing Catherine in “Proof?” Wasn’t an MT grad was it? Do you think that's just because no MTers auditioned for the role? And what of all these people whose training was in straight acting being nominated for Tony awards in MT with no such people with MT degrees getting them for actor/actress in a play? Is it because they opt to not audition for those roles? Hrmmmm ...</p>

<p>Straight acting on the highest levels takes total commitment if it’s what you want to do and I believe diverting your attention to all these other outside things will dilute your training. Obviously, this is just my opinion, but if you want to do other things, I say get a BA or a lower intensity BFA and follow it up with a Masters when you’re ready to focus. If you want to do MT and nothing else, by all means major in MT, but don’t delude yourself into thinking that the actor training will prepare you the same as if you had studied at one of the acting conservatories with huge numbers of contact hours that leave no time for anything else. It has nothing to do with talent. It’s how you choose to develop it. </p>

<p>(End of rant, off my soapbox, and end of parrot act from my old teacher who I wish I'd listened to last year.)</p>