Young People
Tue, 7 Aug 2001, 01:31 pmmelissa21 posts in thread
Young People
Tue, 7 Aug 2001, 01:31 pmWith the large numbers of young people now using this site, I felt none should miss out on a post which is now some way down the board (buried by Mr Gambles incessant ramblings, I'm kidding, the boy has now seen the error of his ways). After a lengthy debate about audiences and their leaving in interval, a debate which should remain buried, the following emerged:
'As a rule, we avoid employing the services of anyone younger than 18, simply because people of that age, while enthusiastic, are not usually able to be committed to one project for several months at a time, due to studies, personal relations and the general "finding themselves" issues. We do, however, have an average age of between 25 and 35. An ideal age as such people have well and truly found themselves, and are in theatre for the sake of theatre, and not just for the sake of something to do.
I'm not saying all younger people are unreliable, but I have to say this rule was introduced because there had not been a past production where at least one person of that age didn't decide to quit a show midway because of a relationship breakup! No joke! '
Thought I'd get some other opinions on this.
Melissa
'As a rule, we avoid employing the services of anyone younger than 18, simply because people of that age, while enthusiastic, are not usually able to be committed to one project for several months at a time, due to studies, personal relations and the general "finding themselves" issues. We do, however, have an average age of between 25 and 35. An ideal age as such people have well and truly found themselves, and are in theatre for the sake of theatre, and not just for the sake of something to do.
I'm not saying all younger people are unreliable, but I have to say this rule was introduced because there had not been a past production where at least one person of that age didn't decide to quit a show midway because of a relationship breakup! No joke! '
Thought I'd get some other opinions on this.
Melissa
RE: Young People
Wed, 8 Aug 2001, 08:39 amGenerally the most passionate people in live theatre are the teenagers. By comparison, the older members of a group will appear jaded. If the passion of the younger members can be harnessed, great things can happen. Unfortunately, that passion is hindered by very nature of the teen years, which is their educational commitments and their need to explore various skills and ideals - which makes it extremely hard for such people to ground themselves in one area (ie: theatre). There is nothing wrong with an individual dabbling in different things, but unfortunately it is financially and creatively detrimental to a single project where total commitment from beginning to end is necessary.
Long term members of a group are often former "younger" members who have proved to be reliable in the past and have grounded their interests in theatre (I'm one of them!). But the majority of past young members have long since left theatre to pursue other interests. So the group is left with the dedicated members, anyway.
There are certainly older individuals in theatre who are very unreliable, but the advantage with older members who have been involved in the same group for several years is that usually a producer KNOWS which of those older people are unreliable and can immediately choose not to work with them if they feel they will harm the production. This doesn't apply to younger people who are relative newcomers to the group, and it is impossible for a producer to judge whether such members are going to prove reliable or not.
This may not be an issue for school productions or government-funded projects, but in a production that is reliant on a solid box-office return for its survival (such as self-funded amateur groups), the producer cannot afford to take such risks.
Yes, it is a generalisation, and exceptions are made on occasion. A compromise that is made, is the placement of a younger member in an expendable role (ie: assistant stage-manager) which won't greatly affect the quality of the production if that member abandons the show. But if that person proves to be reliable in that role, then they will be considered for a more substantial role in a future production. This procedure also applies to all new members regardless of their age.
It is not a prejudice against young people that forces a group to exclude them from productions, but the unfortunate need to be as sure as possible from the very beginning that every means has been taken to ensure a successful production. This is why the older members often are seen as the "staid, boring, stifling old establishment". They have realised that enthusiasm and talent is not enough. At some point, the boring reality of commerce has to be considered, and it is the "boring establisment" that is forced to make those unpopular "prejudicial" choices.
Long term members of a group are often former "younger" members who have proved to be reliable in the past and have grounded their interests in theatre (I'm one of them!). But the majority of past young members have long since left theatre to pursue other interests. So the group is left with the dedicated members, anyway.
There are certainly older individuals in theatre who are very unreliable, but the advantage with older members who have been involved in the same group for several years is that usually a producer KNOWS which of those older people are unreliable and can immediately choose not to work with them if they feel they will harm the production. This doesn't apply to younger people who are relative newcomers to the group, and it is impossible for a producer to judge whether such members are going to prove reliable or not.
This may not be an issue for school productions or government-funded projects, but in a production that is reliant on a solid box-office return for its survival (such as self-funded amateur groups), the producer cannot afford to take such risks.
Yes, it is a generalisation, and exceptions are made on occasion. A compromise that is made, is the placement of a younger member in an expendable role (ie: assistant stage-manager) which won't greatly affect the quality of the production if that member abandons the show. But if that person proves to be reliable in that role, then they will be considered for a more substantial role in a future production. This procedure also applies to all new members regardless of their age.
It is not a prejudice against young people that forces a group to exclude them from productions, but the unfortunate need to be as sure as possible from the very beginning that every means has been taken to ensure a successful production. This is why the older members often are seen as the "staid, boring, stifling old establishment". They have realised that enthusiasm and talent is not enough. At some point, the boring reality of commerce has to be considered, and it is the "boring establisment" that is forced to make those unpopular "prejudicial" choices.