Les Miserables... just for something different :)

Annabel wrote:
-------------------------------
>I find it interesting that you believe that because some of the cast members in Les
>Mis are uni or school students or first time performers that they are not worthy of
>being paid the same amountas others. How do you differentiate between classifying
>people as professional or amatuer simply on their current form of employment.

OK - I'll use a 'real life' example. I am an occupational therapist - I don't get paid as much as my senior OT because she has more experience than I do. The students we have on prac get paid nothing because they have no experience. That doesn't mean that my senior puts more into the job than I or the student do, she is reimbursed for the years of other work and skills she has brought to the current job.

But that is beside the point.

I think everyone in the cast should be paid, if the techies, production team, and management are going to be singled out for payment. But someone, I can't recall who, mentioned paying SOME of the actors, as some were labelled 'professionals' and some were not. My point was, how do you decide who gets paid if you are only going to pay some. To spell it out more clearly, I THINK ALL OF THE PERFORMERS SHOULD GET PAID, as they all have as much to contribute to the show.

>Also,I think that if maybe you put a little more effort into getting to know your fellow
>cast members instead of ignoring them you may find that most of them have a little
>more experience than you think.

Huh? OK - I'll stop going up to the chorus dressing room between scenes to chat to people from now on, since you obviously think I'm just doing it to ignore them.

Harsh, dude...

Amanda Chesterton