<p>Although this article does't have anything to do with college apps and theater programs, I thought a few might enjoy reading it, as graduates must look for work in the Wal-Marted American theater scene.</p>
<p>Scott</a> Walters: The Wal-Marting of American Theater</p>
<p>Sorry - LOL! The title seems like a downer - think I’ll skip it.</p>
<p>I don’t understand this statement in the article:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I thought that there were many areas of the country where an actor could work professionally and steadily at a high level in regional theatre.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are certainly areas outside of NY where an actor can work professionally (not always steadily) at a high level. I imagine the author of this article is referring to the fact that auditions for national tours and for many regional production companies are held in NY.</p>
<p>^^ Exactly. </p>
<p>I’ll use a friend of mine as an example. My friend, Steve, has been a working actor for over 35 years. He lives with his wife and two sons in Minneapolis and works all over the country in regional theaters. Casting sessions, however, are held in New York, so he must fly into NYC on a regular basis to be seen and cast for work. Steve fly’s into NY about once or twice a month to be seen. He’s even come to NY to audition for plays at the Guthrie (in Minneapolis) as the theater uses a NYC Casting Director.</p>
<p>Actually that’s not totally true. There are many auditions held in major metropolitan areas - Chicago, LA, etc. Yes, more are held in NY but many are held regionally. More talent is in NY so that’s where the CDs and theatre get the most bang for their buck. I don’t get this article at all and I would never compare theatre to Wal-Mart!</p>
<p>I’m not sure how the author thinks theatres could run comprehensive training programs either. </p>
<p>The article says that many colleges offer theatre programs to make money, but I don’t know how accurate that is. Running a theatre program is expensive. It’s my understanding that the tuition of students in any given institution’s less resource-hungry programs help provide the financial support for the theatre program.</p>
<p>Well I bit the bullet and read this and I just gotta say it’s very strangely written and the point is extraordinarily unclear, but to a degree I do think I get it. The author is lamenting the disappearance of actual art. Think about all of the really second-rate touring shows moving around the country. They hold auditions in NYC, put together a cast, board a bus, and slap up a show in city after city for 6 months. Some of these productions are much lower quality than community theater. The costumes, the props, and often even the performers are disappointing. We saw one recently that really brought the point home. If one of our very good local theaters did the same show I have no doubt it would have been a far superior effort. Broadway is filled with shows now that are more tourist attraction than artistic endeavor. I get it and I get why this is seen as a distressing development. </p>
<p>But, don’t get me wrong. I’d be pleased as punch if my kid was in the cast.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ve seen a lot of national tours over the years, including many non-Eq tours but I’ve never seen one that could be described as much lower quality than community theatre.
Auditions, casting, boarding a bus, and shows in city after city is basically a description of how national tours work. I’m not sure I’m understanding your point.</p>
<p>I have seen shows like Flossy describes. For example, several years ago we took a chance on a Man of La Mancha, brought by a major touring company, with a Don Quixote who couldn’t sing (he did the Henry Higgins method), a Sancho Panza who refused to use a character voice, and was at least 8 inches taller than Don Quixote, and a pit that consisted of a drum set and two synthesizers, which we could see from the very expensive balcony seats I’d splurged on because my D adores this show. There was no way we could have known how poor and honestly insulting this production was, based on the websites and the advertising. Reluctantly, I have been leery of those kinds of productions ever since.</p>
<p>I’m not convinced American theatre is going down the tubes, but I do think there is a homogenization where someone thinks audiences are going to give standing ovations just for being given the opportunity to spend a ton of money and sit in a big theatre where someone is singing and dancing. I try to support regional professional and community theatre as much as possible - I feel they honor the contract between performer and audience with more consistent respect and dignity.</p>
<p>I wonder if there is a difference between MT and straight theatre when it comes to tours? Personally, I wouldn’t necessarily expect a touring company MT production to be that good. I’ve seen MT shows at a major regional theatre in Philadelphia that I thought were flawed.</p>
<p>How much touring of straight theatrical plays occurs anyway? </p>
<p>Fishbowlfreshman, do you have any comments on this thread?</p>
<p>I personally thought the article was sensationalist and its primary purpose was that writer marketing himself as the inventor of the phrase, “Walmarting of American theatre.”</p>
<p>First, as to low quality touring shows–I’m assuming these are non equity tours. Equity tours are usually of high quality although you can always find examples of poor casting decisions or poor directing–that has always been true. Heck,I’ve seen productions on B’way that were deeply flawed. That doesn’t mean much, to my mind. Some productions at any level will be flawed for a wide range of reasons. And I don’t believe there are that many straight touring shows (?) </p>
<p>Second, there are zillions of fabulous regional theatres around the country and many high quality actors who are making a living doing this. Not a Wall Street living, of course, but you don’t become an actor for the money. </p>
<p>I think American theatre is vibrant and alive. It’s true the stereotype is for the audience to automatically give a standing ovation, but I always see that as American enthusiasm and support for the live arts. Some shows are certainly dreck in my opinion (I am not a fan of a certain style of MT for instance, my own taste)–but so what? PEople have been sounding the ‘downfall’ of B’way for as long as I remember and well before. And there have been crappy shows produced for decades. And there have been brilliant shows produced for decades. It’s true that there are some Disney-ized or pop-ized shows but these are known to be churned out for tourists or to attract theatregoers who normally don’t go. There are also exceptional shows and I’ve been privileged to see many (I do usually avoid the Disney/pop sorts out of my own taste). In regional theatre, I have to add I’ve seen more outstanding productions than not.</p>
<p>I mean, yes, many shows are bland and want bland semi-talented actors, but I remember that being the case in the 1970s too. And yes, there is more pressure for the big shows to have a certain look, but there are many many niches for others, far more - with the robust regional theatres - than there were a few decades ago. I think many more Americans have an interest in live theatre, so naturally some of it is going to be bland to appeal to bland tastes–ok. That doesn’t mean that’s the only game in town.</p>
<p>Thanks Emmybet. Exactly. I’m not bashing touring shows and have also seen some great ones. I was trying to understand the weird article. We are also very lucky to have an excellent community theater in our region with a previous director who is a pretty impressive retired professional. He does it for love. The set designer puts in weeks of painstaking work just because he deeply cares about the artistry. The orchestra is, well, an orchestra. Compare that to cheesy cardboard backdrops dragged off a bus, a piano and a synthesizer, and actors and dancers who obviously needed a few more rehearsals. It was bad. And, yes it was non-equity.</p>
<p>But, it’s also more work opportunities for our kids and I don’t dislike Wal-Mart. I’m headed there this morning!</p>