The price of desperation

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Eric Storm on August 20, 2008 at 7:19pm

Hi Jules, well, you've hit the nail on the head. I don't know what the answer is. I have used actors inthe past for a project I tried to get off the ground, to no avail by the way, but at least I paid expenses. I wouldn't dream of asking people to learn songs, script etc without some recompense, but there are those that do. So I guess it's up to actors to say no way, without pay! Best, Eric.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jules Kingham on August 24, 2008 at 7:06pm

Hi Eric. Thanks for responding to my rant. It would be nice if the majority of actors stood up for this principle and perhaps paying expenses as a minimum would become the norm. But alas, some professionals, especially those just starting out are so over keen, that they fork out just to take part and don't realise that they are just encouraging exploitation. I really feel that actors are often treated abismally and should not put up with it!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Zoe Hinks on October 6, 2008 at 10:16pm

Dear Jules, you are raising a valid argument and as an aspiring actor, writer and director myself I can relate to your comment on a number of levels.
However you can look at it in a number of different ways. Yes of course if you look at acting as a profession, a plumber or electrician as you say, then it is not worth your time. But if you look at as an art form, then you will find artists in many trades who are not only willing but happily will share their talent without pay. If a painter would only paint a picture for money how stilted and shallow their development would become! The same applies to musicians, writers and in fact craftsmen in so many areas. If you are a creative person then you need space and opportunity to grow, and by that I am not merely refering to fame and fortune. If you are fortunate enough to gain the intellectual satisfaction from all your paid jobs then that's great but not all young performers are so lucky. Many of us may throw our life and souls into project not just "for a credit on their CV" but because they want to be involved in something challenging, fresh and exciting. And seriously, if you think that the only people who should attempt put on theatre or film are the ones with money, well I think that's very sad indeed. It is true that young actors should be aware of being exploited, I agree. However I think you'll find it is the obsession with getting exposure that lures them into such traps, no one can force you to work for nothing. You say that none of us are in it for the money, that it is a passion. Passion does not have conditions. It is a burning desire to create. I still have this. I know many who share my view. We all like to eat. But there are so many ways to make money, and theatre is way of life, not just a job.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jules Kingham on October 9, 2008 at 9:58am

Hi Zoe - thanks for your comments. I do appreciate fully the sentiment about passion and burning desire and my words are not meant to imply that acting and all things related are just a money making job. But I think many actors will agree that the very fact that they do love their art, makes them so vulnerable to the people that want to cast them. There has to be a limit to indulging one's desperation to perform because it is so open to exploitation. My feeling about payment relates also to respect and status. If one is talented enough to be cast, bearing in mind the training and effort it takes to get even the occasional professional role, then one should be treated as a professional with all the respect and at least some reward that such a position deserves. Instead, casting people often implement all the expectations and tasks that are expected of a cast member including the personal expenses etc. onto a performer without any consideration that would be given to a professional from another field. I totally see the creative arts as something way more flexible and unorthodox than other professions and I know that passion has no conditions, but professional conduct HAS to have a few conditions! Also, you mention painters and craftsmen, the difference between these kind of artists (which does in fact include writers too), and performers, is that they can indulge their arts, ie, produce a product of their creation, WITHOUT outside help. They can use their talent and have something to show for it. An actor needs outside help in the sense that they have to be chosen to work by other people and this makes it impossible to use their talents in a self contained way. This makes them open to abuse.

Jules.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Keith Hill on November 13, 2008 at 8:58pm

I wouldn't be indignaant about that. How any individual manages their career is their own business. Equity wold say everyone should boycott all unpaid work, whereas the realities are, I think:
1. when we can afford to do unpaid work, or uneconomical/ poorly paid work, if the quality of the project warrants it, we will.
2. We all hope never to have to do something 'just for CV', but that need will popup throughout the career.
3. there are too many people who think they are actors (who are just not good enough to warrant the title) who so clutter the picture that it is hard to get near the paid work because the producers, rather than risk a new face turning out to be a muppet, keep turn to the same boring old dull safe faces.
4. all overcrowded professions, and those to any extent dependent on government money, are underpaid
5. No plumber will work for nothing because we face highly unpleasant consequences if they walk away They are seller's market. No-one dies or ruins their carpets if we walk away. They just get another actor, and if hat person is a duffer, still no-one dies. We are important, but no-one apart from actors ever gets why. also about half the population thinks we are risible oxygen thieves, while evryone needs the plumber at some stage.

I take the view (and its entirely personal) that the test as to whether I do a job is: is it good? If good, does it in any way damage my career or limit my options? If not, can I afford it, or shove the money up? If all three tests are passed I do it (or go for it, at least) because I can't call myself an actor, by my lights anyway) if I am not working at it or something that contributes to it.

There are, incidentally a number of other professions where undertaking some work without payment is becoming, by a creeping process, a condition of being allowed to continue in business. If you ever meet a criminal defence solicItor, (whose working hours and conditions are quite a lot worse than ours in some ways) see if ne can explain to you the process by which, the more serious an offence he is defendijg, the lower is the hourl;y rate, until, on some opf the more complex murders, it can get below the national mimum wage.

We are in a mess that we've been in for over four hundred years but it could be worse, really.

ho! ho!
Chin up!

▶ Reply to This