<p>"Mediocre acting isn’t as obvious as bad singing or weak dancing."</p>
<p>I'm sorry I have to offend WallyWorld by not using a quote block as I do not know how to create one. Fishbowl, that's a real innerestin' sentence. What makes you believe this?</p>
<p>That's because we're used to seeing mediocre acting. All you have to do is turn on your TV. But let someone sing off key and feel yourself sliding up the back of your chair ... :)</p>
<p>I thought you probably meant that about the TV, but isn't that true about singing and dancing on the TV, the radio, CDs, etc., also? Could it be that you're more sensitive to the acting because it's your thing? Anyone else have the treat of seeing a movie of Hilary Duff acting AND singing? Hehe.</p>
<p>Fishbowl is correct. While there is no question that there are many students pursuing musical theatre who are also gifted actors, it is something of a mistake to assume that their training will equip them to do classical drama at the level it is now practiced at our country's best Shakespeare festivals and regional theatres. Almost two years ago, in response to a question about the necessity of the MFA for students who have completed a BFA, I wrote:</p>
<p>"The training value of the MFA, for a student whos been through an intensive BFA program, lies in three things: continued work on the voice, continued work on the body, and work in the classical repertoire. No one in Music would ever suggest that someone with a Bachelor of Music degree was finished with his or her training. Four years is not enough time to master an instrument, or to have learned enough classical repertoire. The parallel in the theatre world applies to actors who want to perform Shakespeare and Chekhov at major regional theatres. They need that additional training, at some point in their lives."</p>
<p>This is one of the reasons that OSF and other theatres which hire a company for an entire season tend to rely on actors who have been through rigorous MFA programs. They also need actors who can play a variety of parts, not simply the roles which they are currently "right" for. There are some, not many, BFA actor-training programs which offer the same kind of training as MFA programs. But they require, as Fishbowl has said, a commitment of time and energy which leaves little room for singing and dance, much less liberal arts. </p>
<p>Actor's careers move in occasionally mysterious ways. An MT graduate of ours from the mid-90's did some national and international tours, some film and television, the occasional cruise, then got married and decided he wanted a steadier life. He was accepted into the MFA Acting program at the University of California, San Diego, and has moved into the regional theatre circuit. Could he have gotten there directly by training at NCSA? Sure, but that wasn't what he wanted to do at that point in his life. I also know that he wouldn't have been ready for that kind of intensive training when he was 18. Fishbowl and Thesbo are. </p>
<p>So, Wally, if your D is ready for MFA-style actor-training, then she really should look to the intensive conservatories. She will get better training than she would at schools like ours. But if she wants a somewhat less intense college experience, if she wants at least some time to read literature and history and philosophy, if she thinks she'd like to have a social life outside of theatre, then she should look elsewhere. She'll find her path. I don't think you need to worry about that.</p>
<p>Hope this helps.</p>
<p>Many great posts above. I don't know if I expressed this as well, but lots of what I am reading now correlates with what I was trying to say earlier to Wally about the importance of picking the educational path that suits one's interests, needs, skills, desires, and eventual goals. So, if someone wants to pursue joining a professional Shakespeare company, for example, I can see why she would look into a BFA in Acting at a conservatory or pursuing a MFA. Those who pursue BFA in MT degrees are truly hoping to do work on the musical theater stage. That doesn't mean they cannot act and it doesn't mean they do not do straight theater. But it makes sense for them to train in singing, acting and dance as they want to be able to perform on the musical theater stage. I see those who train in BFA in Acting programs getting cast in musicals and vice versa. But basically, it comes down to choosing one's educational path that fits their own goals.</p>
<p>I think there are a few suitable paths. Those who find success often come from various paths. Many who opt to do a BFA in a university setting rather than a stand alone conservatory want the eductional background that they believe may contribute to them being a stronger actor. Others want something different...maybe ONLY acting classes. That suits their needs, their goals. Those who want to do musicals, need to train in three skill areas. I don't think their acting training is weak but acting is not all that they do. But they do need to know how to act. Just being able to sing, won't cut it in MT that well. Certain educational paths make sense for different people but also make sense for the career paths that they seek. My feeling is that those who do BFAs in MT are seeking work in MT, though can also work in straight plays. But if they only wanted to do straight acting, they likely would not choose to do a BFA in MT Program. </p>
<p>One degree is not "better" than another overall, but each degree or school program needs to match up with the individual and their needs and goals for the future. It doesn't matter if X percent of MT trained actors would not be hired at Y Shakespeare company because those actors, for the most part, were focusing their training on work on the MT stage or performing comedies and dramas as well. Someone who is trained as a classical actor will likely be seeking and most suitable for a Shakespeare company. However, there is crossover. I've seen professionals trained in straight acting who do some musicals and some trained in MT who do professional straight acting. As a whole, one would expect more MT trained actors to do MT and more classically trained actors to do straight drama. But I do beleve there are some who do both, even if they are stronger at one than the other. Careers evolve and I don't know that every career is always a straight linear path. It is more important that each student make the choice to seek an educational path that FITS them. I think it is pretty individual. As we have all seen in playbills time and again, some very outstanding and accomplished performers don't always have the expected educational background that fits the accomplishment. </p>
<p>I also do not think the MT trained actor is diluting anything because that actor must be skilled at more than acting. If they only focused on acting, without singing and dance training, they'd be at a disadvantage for many roles on the MT stage. I don't think that those who pursue MT training are deluding themselves into thinking that they are getting the best training to join a Shakespeare company. I don't think their goal is to be in a Shakespeare company necessarily. They are seeking training that fits their goals. That doesn't mean they can't act in straight plays but simply that their overall goals are not to only do regional Shakespeare. They might seek straight acting work along with MT work, but their chosen training was to fit certain goals and interests. I don't think anyone was saying that the BFA in MT programs turn out a slew of candidates seeking to join regional Shakepeare companies. I think they turn out some who do well in that genre but the majority are not seeking that sort of work primarily. If that was their primary goal, I doubt they'd have sought a MT degree as much. However, some very strong actors are in BFA in MT programs. Likewise, some very strong singers and dancers are in some BFA in Acting programs. They made choices as to what training path they wanted that fit their goals. </p>
<p>As others have said so well above, I don't think there is any "correct" choice when it comes to education. What is "correct" is quite individual based on someone's skills going into it, their talents, their needs, their interests and their eventual pursuits. I think that is why when one looks at a playbill for a Broadway show, for example, one finds bios of professionals with very very varied backgrounds....from no education to BFA, to BA to MFA, you name it.</p>
<p>Fishbowl, you always make my points better than I do.
That adequetly describes our D with regard to straight acting, talented but not trained.</p>
<p>Doctorjohn, Thank you for your clarity and honesty.</p>
<p>Quick forum lesson on how to make quote boxes. I cant do it exactly otherwise you would see a box not the syntax. </p>
<p>In front of the quote type this
[ quote ]
only no spaces between the brackets and the word “quote”.
At the end of the quote do this
[ /quote ]
Same thing, no spaces</p>
<p>Wally et al,</p>
<p>I've logged on and the header I get extort's me to contribute...</p>
<p>"It appears you have not posted on our forums in several weeks"" - it tells me.</p>
<p>I have not posting for several weeks as the semester begins because it is an insanely busy time - I have no idea how some other folks do it. Anyway, having spent some time away from this (and I include myself in this as well) - it is sometimes a bit humorous, when looked at with a bit of a distanced perspective, how topics go back and forth, and ever so many smaller details are questioned, challenged, dissected.....</p>
<p>I once took a philosophy course in college, and the final exam consisted of one word -"Why?"</p>
<p>That is the question. What's the beef? Why, on the discussion board - "Musical Theater Major" - do we continue to discuss the relative value of a BFA in Acting? </p>
<p>There are undergrad programs in acting, vocal performance, dance, and musical theater. They are all performing arts - they all have a place on various stages across the country - isn't that great?</p>
<p>I do not know what motivates your passion on this topic, but it seems you are fond of mentioning that the fine, classical stages and companies that you have experieced have a notable dearth of MT BFA's associated with them. If this were true (that would be as a globally accepted verifiable fact that would apply everywhere that Shakespeare - or whatever else, in your mind, qualifies as worthwile acting, is performed) - again I ask. Why?</p>
<p>Are you surprized that the teams that perform annually in the Superbowl are notably lacking in baseball players? Oh, sure there is the occasional Herschel Walker - but generally those who specialize in football don't rise to a professional level of excellence in baseball as well.</p>
<p>People who study MT tend to do MT related activities - not a hard concept.</p>
<p>Truth - the truth is there are MT folks that get great jobs acting and acting folks that manage just fine in musicals. Stephen Henderson is classically trained as an actor - he been on Broadway in a musical - his classmate at Julliard, Patti Lupone, is classically trained in acting and has won awards and made her mark in musical theater. Jerry Orbach, Jesse Martin, Bebe Neuwruth, Megan Mullally, Meryl Streep, Barry Bostwick, Christopher Walken - and scores more are all folks with musical theater roots that have distinguished themselves in either dramatic or comedic performances as well. It is all good. It is not Black and white.</p>
<p>This rambling must end - but, in the end, I still wonder why the MTmajor boards do not discuss MT as a university or conservatoty undergraduate training ground - those interested in other majors should have those discussions on boards dedicated to those majors.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I once took a philosophy course in college, and the final exam consisted of one word -"Why?"
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I believe you and that kills me. LOL x 10. You thought it was a wonderful exercise in mind expansion and I thought it a waste of time and money. </p>
<p>
[quote]
This rambling must end - but, in the end, I still wonder why the MTmajor boards do not discuss MT as a university or conservatoty undergraduate training ground - those interested in other majors should have those discussions on boards dedicated to those majors.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>First, it is concerning that someone weighing in on this topic in this forum cannot spell conservatory. Second, that lame attempt at a slam means you either wanted to slam someone you dont like or you didnt read the entire thread. </p>
<p>The relevance of this topic is just as it was begun. What is the lay of the land for straight actors at schools known for MT. Seems like a pretty relevant topic for the MT forum!!!!</p>
<p><a href="that%20would%20be%20as%20a%20globally%20accepted%20verifiable%20fact%20that%20would%20apply%20everywhere%20that%20Shakespeare%20-%20or%20whatever%20else,%20in%20your%20mind,%20qualifies%20as%20worthwile%20acting,%20is%20performed">quote</a> - again I ask. Why?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I dont know what to do with the stuff in the parenthesizes. Now there is a rambling! Not sure what that means. As to why; there was a disconnect from what was being said, previously stated several times, and what my research told me. Using your analogy the baseball players have been adamant that they can play football just as well as the football players. Turns out they can, but not at the highest levels.</p>
<p>Why is that so grating to you guys? I troubles me not one iota that my kid cant do MT as well and you guys can. This just smells like ego to me. </p>
<p>
[quote]
People who study MT tend to do MT related activities - not a hard concept.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Another ridicules comment. I thought there were hundreds of hugely talented MT types waiting tables in NY? So, they would rather wait tables than work in the best acting gigs on the globe? Really? Hmmmm?</p>
<p>WallyWorld,
I am laughing myself silly at the thought of you criticizing someone else's spelling. I mean, come on, really!!! Hahahaha.</p>
<p>Before you try to take away my coffee pot, let me tell you that with your posts to read I don't need any coffee! :p</p>
<p>Come on, Wally - lighten up on the spelling! I will grant you that there are misspellings on this site on this site that just drive me nuts - but that was obviously a typo - something I can accept more readily. I'm assuming that ridiculous in YOUR statement
[quote]
Another ridicules comment
[/quote]
is a typo as well.</p>
<p>And, I do indeed know a few very talented people waiting tables in NYC, who have had job offers from a couple of the Shakespeare companies and turned them down on the advice of their agents, who thought they really needed to be in NYC available for auditions during the time frame.</p>
<p>I also know actors (drama and MT) who turn down parts for a variety of reasons, some of which mystify me, but it's not my call to make.</p>
<p>I really wish someone did not criticize someone else's spelling, let alone an obvious typo, in the first place, but especially when one's own posts are repeatedly full of misspellings but readers leave it be. I think it is better to stick to the thoughts expressed. </p>
<p>Wally, I have to say I thought of you the other day when my daughter, who attends a BFA in MT program, told me that her Voice and Speech Class this year will focus on Shakespeare :D. </p>
<p>MTDog, you make many valid points. </p>
<p>MTMommy, keep drinking your coffee and hopefully nobody is going to question if you had it today! :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Disclaimer: I am sure my posts over the years contain typos. Let me acknowledge that off the bat and so no need to let me know. Thanks.</p>
<p>I am also wondering just what are these "highest levels" of acting. I am gathering Oregon Shakespeare Festival is one of your examples. What about Broadway or film? I believe Meryl Streep has a background with MT (though before you tell me, yes, she has a BA at Vassar and a MFA from Yale), but has made her mark in major motion pictures and is an acclaimed actress. Is that level "high" enough? By the way, have you heard? Ms. Streep is to play Mrs. Lovett in the movie of Sweeney Todd and so is crossing back to the MT genre, though on film. Johnny Depp is Sweeney. I'd have to check his background but he is known for acting but yet is crossing to a MT role. (edit, just looked it up; he dropped out of HS). Look at Jerry Orbach. I do agree with MTDog that there are those who have trained in MT who have made their mark as actors and those who have trained in acting who have made their mark on the MT stage at the HIGHEST levels. Certainly Broadway and award winning films are considered by many to be a "high level", not just Oregon Shakespeare Festival.</p>
<p>How is it that this forum has been absolutely dead for nearly a week and somebody comes out of the blue to blast me as a dunce and there are three posts of support in 15 minutes? Must be just coincidence? So lame. </p>
<p>I came close to using coinkadink but that would have been obvious to even you guys. So yes, I am playing with some words. I know how to spell and am glad to know who would trounce not on the points but the set up misspelled word. You are who you are.</p>
<p>Mtmommy What credibility do you have on this subject? Seriously, lay it out for us. You are good at criticisms but I have made dozens of posts of ideas and encouragement, where are yours?</p>
<p>Soozievt; You do have experiences that has value on CC .Yet if I were moderator on this forum I would restrict posts to a certain word length. This latest post is great, even though it appears orchestrated given its brevity. I would impose a forum rule of no posts over 300 words. If you cant make your point in the space CC gives you in one post I think you should be looking within about succinctness. My eyes glaze over at your posts .</p>
<p>MusTHCC; I dont always agree with you yet you have given very good advice on this forum. You are correct that blasting somebody about a typo is below the pale. Yet this is a response to a consorted effort to blast Wally</p>
<p>Wally, my point was, as I believe was a few others, that attacking the spelling of other posters is not a good thing to do on the forum because it is aimed at the poster him/herself, not the message. I think many found that to be offensive, and in light of the fact that many have not said anything to you about repeated misspellings and the like. I could run down your posts and find many misspellings and grammatical errors, but would not choose to do so. I am not error free myself. Far from it. I would ask that you not do it either to others' posts as you have today and in the past. Now, it seems you want to comment about my writing style. You also mention: "that would have been obvious to even you guys." and that contains insinuations about the posters who post here. My whole point, as was others', is to refrain from such comments. I don't wish to comment about your posting style or text. I think we should stick to the ideas at hand, not the person behind the ideas, nor their spelling. </p>
<p>Why are you asking MTMommy what credibility she has on this subject? There are no requirements or degrees to post on CC's forums. All ideas are welcomed, including your own. On the subject of writing, MTMommy has a lot of credibility in my book considering she has been on the faculty at a college in the Dept. of English. And she knows a thing or two about theater. But even if she were a high school dropout, I'd still value her posts, as I do anyone else's. And when you don't like someone's posting style, the thing to do is to do is not read them. I think the tone of this forum is much better and much preferable if we stick to thoughts and sharing, rather than the people behind the posts, let alone their spelling, number of words, credentials, credibility, etc. </p>
<p>If you make a come back with what I believe you meant to say was "disconcerting" that someone might know enough about the topic if they can't spell "conservatory" (in this case, it was an obvious typo, to even which you are not immune), you have to expect people to feel a sense of an untoward tone and a feeling of personal attack, rather than sticking with the message that MTdog provided. And I do not need to check MTDog's "credentials" to listen to his ideas. I dont need to check yours. I definitely did not observe MTDog call you or insinuate you were a "dunce". I don't think he was blasting you. I think he offered an opinion on the topic about which you have provided your perspectives. He or she is entitled to do that It is when one then questions the person, style of post, level of writiing, background/credentials, that it becomes offensive and a personal attack. As well, this sort of thing brings an argumentative tone to the forum which wasn't there before. </p>
<p>I didn't think anyone was blasting you. I do not believe there was a "concerted effort" (is that what you meant by "consorted", I hope I understood correctly). I think people are giving opinions about the TOPIC. Now that you did criticize a poster (rather than his points) and then the other day refered to another poster as not yet having her coffee, you are opening yourself up to people responding as they take that as offensive. You may not perceive it that way, but apparently when this happens, it brings a response.</p>
<p>By the way, CC doesn't have a forum rule about word count. Sorry. CC doesn't have a rule on the number of quote boxes in a post either. </p>
<p>CC allows posters to disagree with other posters' opinions, ideas, and facts, but does not allow personal attacks or insults. CC doesn't allow posters to question other posters' personal motives or personal characteristics. Courtesy and respect are expected on CC's Forums.</p>
<p>Back on topic....</p>
<p>MTDog...I have thought a bit about the question of "why"....no not in the deep philosophical sense....LOL....but as you say, why does it matter if a MT college degree is not the best training to enter into a regional Shakespeare company because that likely is not the goal of someone who pursues such a degree. Why does it matter how well prepared a BFA in MT student would be as an actor if your child's goal is to work in a regional Shakespeare company and has chosen, smartly, a BFA in Acting degree as her training to reach that goal? A BFA in MT is not for her and not the right fit. But it is the right fit for someone seeking a MT career who may also cross over into straight acting given the acting training. </p>
<p>"Why" is a question I had on my mind on the DePaul thread on which I chose not to engage (and am questioning the wisdom now of having enaged in this one) , but why did it matter if DePaul had a cut system you don't agree with (I do not favor it either, truth be told), because your kid just dosen't need to apply there since it doesn't meet your (or I should say her?) college criteria and there are many other fine BFA in Acting programs from which to pick? Others are fine with DePaul's policy and there is no dearth of applicants, so why does it matter? </p>
<p>As I have said before....there are many paths to success in theater....no college, a BA theater degree, a BFA in MT, a BFA in Acting, a BM in MT, a BA in MT, a MFA, a two year certificate training program, etc. There is no one right or better way. What makes a path "better" is finding the one that fits one's OWN goals and interests. If working at some Shakepeare company is a long term goal, it does make sense, I do agree, to do a BFA in Acting program. But it isn't a better degree program, just a better fit for that person's needs, interests and eventual goals. </p>
<p>So, I do ask why does it matter about some of these things? There is no right or wrong. Nobody has to justifiy their choices. Do what you think is best for YOU.</p>
<p>Wally,</p>
<p>I want you to know I did not intend to offend you.</p>
<p>Also, I have never prided myself on my typing, editing, proofreading, or spelling skills - and yes, when I do this it is most often a flow of conciousness - and therefore it can ramble.</p>
<p>Lastly, I agree that there are so many talented MT folks waiting tables - sadly, they are joined, in large numbers, by would-be actors, musicians, and other artists in a society that worries too much about Nick & Jessica and too little about the arts.</p>
<p>Whew, what a passionate group! Sometimes that passion can boil over and get misdirected (when we fight amongst ourselves! :)) but, usually, it is such a helpful fuel for discussions here. So let's get back on track and see if anyone can offer an opinion on Wally's original question, which (I think I have this right!) concerned whether kids pursuing straight acting degrees at colleges well known for the excellence of their MT programs are "overshadowed" or otherwise at a disadvantage.</p>
<p>HAHA...the typo thing really made me laugh, my posts are full of them, it doesn't matter too much to me if anyone on some forum thinks/knows that I don't take time to proof read.</p>
<p>But it just made me laugh because, if I am not mistaken the person who started this thread was Wally and he is also the one pointing out the errors, when the title of this thread is pretty bad, I mean</p>
<p>ACTING in BFA in ACTING vs. BFA in MT Programs (and more)</p>
<p>it's a tad redundant, isn't it?</p>
<p>I'll try: perhaps in SOME PROGRAMS the acting students ARE overshadowed by the MT students, BUT IN OTHERS NOT. That's kind of a big generalization! I don't know enough about most of the programs out there and it's hard to get a sense of that sort of thing unless you are actually (or your kid is) at the school, in the program, to see what it "feels" like. What you are told as a prospective student (the party line, so to speak) could differ from reality.</p>
<p>The only school I'm comfortable in addressing this question about would be the one my daughter attends, Webster University. It's my understanding that ALL the BFA theater students (regional and MT), sophomore level and above are REQUIRED to audition for all upcoming shows for the semester in the first few days of school and that quite a bit of "crossover" casting occurs.</p>
<p>Now, she is a brand new MT freshman, so perhaps I don't have the "proper credentials" to offer this reply; but I will say this: from what I'm hearing, there appears to be no difference from what we were told in interviews, visit, orientation meeting about the opportunities for MT & Regional theater students. They ALL take the same conservatory block for the first 2 years and they ALL audition for the same shows, sophomore year and above. So, training and opportunity appear to be equal.</p>
<p>Perhaps it would be helpful if others could address this issue regarding the particular school they (or their child) attends. Might keep the answers more specific rather than so general.</p>
<p>Disclaimer: If I've offended anyone in the grammar or spelling police, frankly I don't care. :)</p>
<p>My mother always taught me:
"people who live in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones" and
"the pot shouldn't be calling the kettle black"</p>
<p>CKP</p>
<p>The moderator chose the title, not me.</p>
<p>Speaking of that..Collegemom..The post counters seem to have been frozen for a while. Why is that?</p>