Auditions

My Fair Lady
AUDITIONS
6th & 7th July
Director Marg Kinneen
Music Director Justin Freind

Principal & chorus roles
Oct / Nov Season - Regal Theatre
Call Carol 93322955 or 0409089977
for your audition appointment

ADMIN NOTICE

This post has been removed at the request of

"Alan D. Thompson"

who has advised me that he considers the content may be defamatory.

http://www.mds.rmit.edu.au/law/node24.html#SECTION000121000000000000000

Cheers
Grant

Now that the sort of stuff we need to know about..thanks for the info! It puts a whole new meaning to the title "My FAIR Lady"

Well this may be true (I'm not commenting either way) but I feel it would be appropriate for you to put your name next to your allegations.

Pseydonyms always suggest more of someone slandering than they do of someone telling the truth.

[%sig%]

Good on you Justin for your reply to this allegation...

I'd like to say to our mystery writer, that I'm a little shocked to see sour grapes coming from ANYONE in the cast of Les Mis, or indeed, anyone associated with Les Mis...

All the cast went into their rehearsal/performance season with full knowledge of the conditions regarding payment or non payment as the case may be... to assert allegations on Pat's integrity, when he came through on everything he told us he would, is rather shameful...

For your information... I have it on good ground that Pat was and still is visiting family overseas as he does every year... and Pat has not changed company's, rather he is simply a part of another company, 'On Stage Productions'...

The registering of this company was never done by Pat but by his partner...

Slander, or allegations resembling slander, should be weighted before being thrown into the public arena... and certainly should carry a name...

I hope My Fair Lady is a huge success for all concerned...

Thou venomed swag-bellied barnacle!

I have to agree completely with Justin Hammond. Not that people who have had past bad experiences with dodgy operators shouldn't warn others via websites like this. Rip-off merchants (or those who don't actually defraud anyone but simply take advantage of the naivety of ambitious young actors) prey on the fact that many non-established actors, especially ones new to the field, haven't always been good at communicating with each other about when things have gone wrong (no-one likes to go around saying "I did such-and-such a show and it sucked"). Websites like this can go a long way into putting more power into the hands of the performers and stage-workers, allowing them to promote ethical operators and discourage dodgy ones.

However, there is a world of difference between giving a warning and putting your name to it, and simply giving criticism without making yourself accountable for your words. I've heard a number of stories about different people, similar to the one which I assume relates to the person who is subject of Les Miserables' post (yes, I have heard of her as well - never worked with her, so I can't really comment myself). In quite a few of those situations, however, there was more than one side of the story. The trouble with posting a few narky comments, with no description of the context in which your criticisms arose, is that it is impossible for anyone who doesn't already have an opinion on the person being criticised to know whether the comments are well-founded or not. For all I know 'Les Miserable' may be a rival operator trying to slander his/her competition (not that I think you are, I'm just making a point).

Putting your name to such criticisms helps others in a number of ways. Firstly it gives some measure of guarantee of the accuracy of your comments - you are letting people know that you are staking your own reputation on what you are saying. Secondly, it allows people to know the context of what you are saying - ie whether you are just some bitter individual who has a personal dislike of the person who are criticising, or whether you are giving an objective and helpful warning. Thirdly it makes you legally accountable for what you are saying. Defamation is a serious business, both for the person who makes the comments and sometimes even for the board on which they are posted. Whilst this might be a motivation to NOT put your name after a post, remember that 'truth' is still a valid defence against defamation suits and that in any event an operator who truly has something to hide isn't likely to want their name dragged through the courts. Basically, putting your name after a post like that lets others know that you stand by the truth of what you said and you are utterly certain of its accuracy.

Again, I'm not knocking your intentions 'Les Miserable' in posting the warning - full credos to you for that. I also suspect that you had no intention of hiding your name at all - I've seen you post under that pseudonym on numerous occasions before, and you probably just didn't think to change it once you were already logged in. I'm just hoping that future comments in a similar vein may be posted with a little more accountability of their own.

I was wondering how long it would take for this to get to the website...

> All the cast went into their rehearsal/performance season with full knowledge of the
> conditions regarding payment or non payment as the case may be

No, Sonja, they didn't. Nor did any of us have any idea that the show would be double cast, not only principals, but chorus; that some people would be given parts, only to never given the opportunity to perform them...I could go on, but I've said it all before. Please refer to the posts from August last year about that exceptionally difficult production.

> and Pat has not changed company's, rather he is simply a part of another company, 'On > Stage Productions'...

Does that not therefore mean he has changed companies since he is no longer with Music Spectrum? (Which went belly up due to money disputes...) Or with Omnibus? (Which went belly up due to money disputes....hang on there's a trend happening here...)

> The registering of this company was never done by Pat but by his partner...

But you can be guaranteed that Pat will have a share of the profits.

I was in a show with a close relative of Pat's who said, quite unreservedly, that Pat makes large amounts of money from these shows he puts up. Apparently he was able to put an extension on his house after a production of the Sleeping Beauty a few years ago.

The main reason he is able to do this, is 1) because he doesn't pay performers and most tech crew (which is certainly no crime, but is really rather unethical considering the amount of money he makes off the shows) and 2) Because he does not incorporate his company, meaning that all of the profits would have to go back into subsequent productions, not into his pocket.

Now, there are other companies which operate where director and crew are paid but not the actors - WA Youth Theatre and BSX being prime examples. HOWEVER, these companies give their performers access to, and valuable contact with, professional (i.e. not just paid but working in the industry) directors, producers and crew, who have no reservations in later casting these young performers in fully professional productions. As I have mentioned before, Simon Nichols from BSX and Olivia Hogan from WAYTCo have gone on to professional jobs with the parent bodies of these companies. I believe Pat Barton's background is in airconditioning sales, not professional theatre. These companies also have industry nights for the cast, where relevant industry heavy-weights are invited and schmoozed post-show primarily for the benefit of the cast. Cast also get comps (the only reason we got them in Les Mis was because they couldn't fill a show - we only got 24 hours notice to use these comps, and for only one performance. If this hadn't happened, we would never have got them). These companies are also fully incorporated - production staff and crew are on a fixed wage, and any and all profits are put directly back into later productions. No potiential for house extensions there.

I STRONGLY URGE PEOPLE NOT TO AUDITION FOR THIS PRODUCTION OF MY FAIR LADY. Apart from any unpleasantries associated with Les Mis, such productions are extremely damaging to Perth's already struggling industry. 'Producers' such as Pat Barton only give the thumbs up to other would-be entrepreneurs: they essentially say that Perth actors and crew are willing to work for nothing, while alleged producers and directors benefit hugely from any financial success of the production.

> Websites like this can go a long way into putting more power into the hands of the
> performers and stage-workers, allowing them to promote ethical operators and
> discourage dodgy ones.

Hear, hear. Consider yourself warned.

And, yes. This is my real name.

[%sig%]

Hmmm... I certainly did not mean to cause upset to you Amanda... but I need to respond to a couple of things you have mentioned...

> > All the cast went into their rehearsal/performance season
> with full knowledge of the
> > conditions regarding payment or non payment as the case may
> be
>
> No, Sonja, they didn't. Nor did any of us have any idea that
> the show would be double cast, not only principals, but
> chorus; that some people would be given parts, only to never
> given the opportunity to perform them...I could go on, but
> I've said it all before. Please refer to the posts from
> August last year about that exceptionally difficult production.

Amanda... I was one of those people who auditioned for Les Mis and Pat told me right at the onset that this was not a paid job... it's a shame you were not...

> Does that not therefore mean he has changed companies since
> he is no longer with Music Spectrum? (Which went belly up
> due to money disputes...) Or with Omnibus? (Which went belly
> up due to money disputes....hang on there's a trend happening
> here...)
>
> > The registering of this company was never done by Pat but
> by his partner...
>
> But you can be guaranteed that Pat will have a share of the
> profits.

Is there a reason Pat wouldn't or shouldn't have a share of a business he is a part of? I don't know the inner workings of Pat's business, but I do know that it affords an opportunity for those who want to have experience in the industry... albeit unpaid... what Pat does is not abnormal or legally wrong...

Does it need to change? Perhaps... but there will be a whole lot less opportunity to perform in Perth if that occurs...

Just a thought but if the show was a flop Amanda, who would take the financial brunt? I would think it would have to be Pat... surely that means that WIN or LOSE, Pat Barton is the sole person responsible?

You, Pat or anyone else are allowed to be a part of many company's... being in one doesn't negate the validity of another... I am not placing a moral value on your opinion or on the way Pat runs his business, nor can I validate all that you have said in your letter... but everything being correct, I understand your reaction completely...

There is just one thing I cannot understand. Why would you remain in your role and the production when you felt so strongly about these points?

I understand the creative reason... and after seeing you in the role of Mrs Thenadier, I also believe you were a huge asset to the show... it just appears odd that you didn't move on to something which may have in fact given you both payment AND experience... and better feelings about what you were a part of...

I appreciate that it's important for all of us to be paid, so that we don't have to take odd jobs away from our craft... that is a problem here in Perth... we do struggle financially to stay in our craft... but that's when I think we need to make the decision one way or the other... and be happy with our choices...

For those of you out there who want to audition for MY FAIR LADY... take your questions with you to the audition... ask about payment or benefits etc... know what you are agreeing to and then be happy with your decision whatever it may be...

> Amanda... I was one of those people who auditioned for Les
> Mis and Pat told me right at the onset that this was not a
> paid job... it's a shame you were not...

Payment for me was never an issue - I knowingly passed up two paid performing jobs and jeopardised a third by being in the show. I assumed from the outset that I was not going to be paid. Had it been made clear from the outset, however, that there were parties in the production who were going to be paid I would have liked to have know who, when, where, why and how much before I agreed to do the show to make sure I wasn't getting involved with a dodgy operator (which I ultimately did). I assumed everything was going to be completely above board, as they had been in all other companies I'd been involved with. The other companies I mentioned in my previous post have a completely open book policy about their funds distribution. Nine months down the track, I still have no idea where any of the Les Mis money went. I don't care if I don't have any of it or not - I wouldn't be in this biz if I wanted money. But I sure as hell would like a little more honesty and accountablity from any of Pat Barton's companies.

> Is there a reason Pat wouldn't or shouldn't have a share of a
> business he is a part of?

Because in any other business in the country, and most of the civilised world, making huge profits off the backs of unpaid workers is illegal, and down right unfair. Yes, Cameron Mackintosh makes a profit from his shows. But not until every Tom, Dick, Harry, and Mavis involved in his shows gets renumerated in many more ways than just 'performance experience'.

> I don't know the inner workings of
> Pat's business,

Neither, it seems, does anyone else. I would be interested to know, also, if the tax department knows anything about the inner workings of Pat's numerous companies.

> but I do know that it affords an opportunity
> for those who want to have experience in the industry...

No - it definitely does not. Performance opportunity, yes. Industry experience? Absolutely not. Financial benefit is Pat's (and any company he is involved with) primary objective. Not one person with industry experience or contacts was involved in that show (with the exception of many of the performers). Not one person worth his or her salt in the industry saw that show, with the possible exception of John Milson. But then, he is a director highly accessable to the legitimate community theatre scene anyway, as he directs for them almost as frequently as he does within the professional scene.

> albeit unpaid... what Pat does is not abnormal or legally
> wrong...

OK - I'm going to start a business. I'm going to get twenty people to work unpaid making t-shirts. I'll provide them with materials and tea and coffee facilities, but I'll make them pay a $20 deposit on the sewing machines. I'll make them work for 25 hours per week, then around 40 per week in the final four weeks. I'll then sell each t-shirt at $100 each when the materials for each cost me $5. I'm then going to take all of the money I made and send the workers home, giving about half of them (if that) the deposit back on the sewing machines.

Still sound legal and normal? Sounds like a sweatshop to me.

> Does it need to change?

Absolutely, positively and without argument - yes. It only happens in the performing arts because actors and crew are so willing and desparate to be involved in their craft. If the same thing happened in any other industry, Pat Barton would now be cooling his heels in the deepest, darkest jail in the country.

> Perhaps... but there will be a whole
> lot less opportunity to perform in Perth if that occurs...

I don't think so - Pat Barton has put on one show per two years (if that) over the last 10 years. The repeated collapses of his companies have seen to that. There is at least one new show on at the Blue Room every two weeks. Every single company in the ITA does at least four shows per year. If you don't believe me, go and have a look at the auditions section of this page.

> Just a thought but if the show was a flop Amanda, who would
> take the financial brunt? I would think it would have to be
> Pat... surely that means that WIN or LOSE, Pat Barton is the
> sole person responsible?

True - but I understand he didn't pay for the rights for the show, so he saved himself a whole lot of dough there. He didn't even give Schoenberg and Boublil the basic courtesy of mentioning their names in the programme - have a look. Their minor contribution to the show (i.e. writing the entire thing) is not even acknowledged. He also charged phenomenal ticket prices - $30 and upwards? He could have run the show for half its season, on semi-filled houses and still made a profit. Since he didn't pay ushers either (many of whom were parents, who he also didn't give comps to, despite their contribution to front of house) he would have saved himself a truckload. Oh, he found just enough money, however, to pay two of the ushers - his daughter and her husband.

What I'm saying, is he protects himself against any kind of loss, not always using the most legally transparent or financially ethical means. The most he would ever lose is a couple of hundred dollars at the most. Probably about the same amount the unpaid members of the cast and crew spent on petrol money, parking, loss of working hours...

> You, Pat or anyone else are allowed to be a part of many
> company's... being in one doesn't negate the validity of
> another...

Except, and I refer you back to my original post, that every one of them is no longer in existance for exactly the same reasons. Shouldn't that tell you something?

> There is just one thing I cannot understand. Why would you
> remain in your role and the production when you felt so
> strongly about these points?

Les Mis was the show that made me want to become an actor. I saw it when I was 11 and have never looked back. Playing Mme Thenardier was marvellous and I was going to put up with just about bloody anything to do it. You are kind to have made those comments about my performance, because despite the pain and grief that show caused, being on stage was great. Had I known the situation from the beginning, however, I never would have auditioned in the first place. I will never knowingly, in future, become involved, or remain involved, with such an unethical and financially unsound company again.

> I understand the creative reason... and after seeing you in
> the role of Mrs Thenadier, I also believe you were a huge
> asset to the show... it just appears odd that you didn't move
> on to something which may have in fact given you both payment
> AND experience... and better feelings about what you were a
> part of...

My original opportunities in that respect were well and truly gone by the time I became cognizant of the situation with Music Spectrum. If anything else had come up around that time, believe you me, I would have taken it. But - and this is always the case with acting - nothing else did. I have subsequently become involved in several productions which have restored my faith in the theatre, but as you can tell, my, and many others', feelings towards the Music Spectrum debacle are still very raw. Hence my disgust and horror when the same person has the gall to do it yet again.

> For those of you out there who want to audition for MY FAIR
> LADY... take your questions with you to the audition... ask
> about payment or benefits etc... know what you are agreeing
> to and then be happy with your decision whatever it may be...

And I reiterate, I urge everybody NOT to audition for My Fair Lady, or even put money into seeing it. You can take all the questions you like about the financial structure of the company, but I can guarantee you that the only straight answer you get will be that you will not be paid. If you have no moral objection to funding another person's house extensions, that's fine. But for the sake of Perth's legitimate performing arts industry, please, please don't encourage people like this.

[%sig%]

As always an eloquent and well thought out posting, Amanda.

I hope future postings on this topic don't resort to name calling, hair pulling and deviations from the facts, and thus follow your lead.

Possibly the producer would like to post a reply and we can all weigh up the facts. Not that i'm not going to audition...don't act, can't sing, no talent.

The industry in Perth is what we make it, it isn't good enough to say that's the way it is. If it's not good enough then lets change it and this forum is an excellent means for that to happen.

And please no more pseudonyms. If you've got something to say, stand up and say it. If not then just mumble it to yourself.

Cheers

Dave Ryding

[%sig%]

Well, I have read all of this with interest, considering that I have worked with Pat under Omnibus productions and a close friend who has very negative opinions on Pat...

While I think that is fantastic to be get paid for doing something that you love, when I was doing Omnibus shows (and boy, at the height of it, weren't they churned out?) and I had the time of my life. I loved doing the show and always felt so special performing on stage at Freo Town Hall. The full houses that we performed to didn't make me think of the cash registers ringing and the supposed dollar signs in the partners eyes, but instead, being able to do soemthing that I am hoepfully good at infront of so many people.

I was always told at North Lake Childrens theatre by the wonderful Clyde Selby (sorry, that sounded name droppy, but it wasn't intended in that way) that the greatest sound an actor can hear is applause, and the greatest thing they can see is a standing ovation. And I think you will all agree that this is the case... This isn't to say that when people are making heaps of money they shouldn't get paid (or as was in the case with Music Theatre Company & Sound of music in 95, get reimbursed for travelling expenses).

But I am not one here to glorify Pat Barton. I do know of one specific instance where Pat didn't treat his volunteering staff very well. Ignoring all the time and effort that they had put in to the show in the past and wrongly accusing them of something petty...

I think the main reason that people would be inclined to do the show is because they love the show, or because they love acting. Their aint many tehatre companies (that perform at bigger venues) that are around any more offering a show... But meh, Ultimately people the decision is yours.

IMHO anyone willing to put on shows in WA with a WA cast is ok by me... (But i don't agree with sweat shops hehehe) *hides his nike shoes*

*James abstains from the vote*


James

(apologies for any bad typing, but I'm at my sisters and on one of those evil comptuers where the keyboard is split in two to make you use the correct fingers when you type... Boy do I need to learn ;) )

And an insult for the hell of it because I like the button...

Thou droning dismal-dreaming minnow!

Well said James... I travel half the world performing every year AND getting paid for my performances... but being paid in Perth is something I still wait for... however... it doesn't prevent me from wanting to perform here in Perth... the stage is a 'master' for actors and performers of all types... and performing on it is pretty addictive...

The time where we have to work without pay won't always be there... programmes are being put into place to make certain that the Perth theatre scene can begin to help itself a little more and we can perhaps earn a living out of it... albeit a meagre living for now... hopefully it won't always be this way...

I really don't want to go on about Pat Barton anymore because I can't possibly confirm or negate the things being said here... but perhaps there is a much better way to help the theatre scene here in Perth in other ways than the boycott of My Fair Lady...

Any suggestions?

Ciao everyone...

BTW I love that button too...


Thou dissembling dizzy-eyed malt-worm!

Amanda... I told James a few minutes ago that I really cannot confirm or negate the things mentioned here about Pat Barton... I think we are probably going to have to all have our own opinions on this matter... but I was wondering if there is another way we can help the industry here in Perth to grow and become what we would like it to be... instead of boycotting My Fair Lady?

Any suggestions? Aside from the ones already mentioned...

I for one am willing to help in anyway I can, to make this theatre world of ours a better place to be...

I am happy that you were able to play the role of Mme Thenadier... especially since it was a lifelong dream of yours... you are an amazing actress and you can capture an audience with your performance... I don't doubt that we will see more of you on bigger and greater stages in the years to come... and the experience you had, playing a role MADE for you, will have made you that much stronger and better as an actress...

If Les Mis happened for that reason alone (not discounting the other great performances of the show - including the incredible talent of Marius... whomever he was on closing night)... then I am grateful to Pat Barton for allowing us to see you in this role... the opportunity may not have happened otherwise...

Hope to see you in heaps more shows Amanda...

ciao

sonja

p.s. Man I love this button...

Thou pox-marked onion-eyed dewberry!

Defamation
"The Publication of a statement about a person that tends to lower his reputation in the opinion of right-thinking members of the company or to make them shun or avoid him. Defamation is usually in words, a distinction is made between defamation in permanent form LIBEL, and defamation not in words SLANDER.
The basis of tort is injury to reputation, so it must be proved that the statement was communicated to someone other than the person defamed. It is not necessary to prove that the defendent intended torefer to the plantiff. The test is whether reasonable people would think the statement referred to him.
ALL those involved in the publication of a defamatory statement, such as printers, publishers, broadcasters etc,are liable and every repitition of a defamatory statement is a fresh publication , giving rise to a new cause of action."

Well James thats a bit uninformed of you

And further more is nothing but hearsay. You yourself were not the volunteer with the complaint you have stated it was another party so in fairness that comment holds no wieght legally at all.

You are refering to Omnibus.
For all who do not know Omnibus was the company of Gloria Underwood, Brian Underwood, Tanya Martin (Underwood), Mike Oshay and Pat Barton.
Iff (if and only if) Pat Barton treated a volunteer unfairly then it was not he in isolatiion it wasin fact OMNIBUS the company which has 4 other persons involved that you failed to neglect. One can safely assume you are refering to an incident where a somewhat distrort woman threw a glass of wine in Pats face.

James that incident was many years ago and given your age and your current relationship to the woman involved perhaps your view has been somewhat distorted.

It should also be remembered that Omnibus did indeed give you many opportunities in theatre , at the time, that you were not being offered elsewhere.

To continue, with some other statements made on this site, I would also like to point out that Pat Barton is currwently still in England (His native country) with his frail(90plus) mother. Mr Barton wished to retain the name Music Spectrum but, he was NOT the main decision maker in Music Spectrum. A quichk search of company records will show anyone who cares to get the facts, Jane Pyke and Glade Pyke were also running Music Spectrum so once again saying that Pat Barton had anything but a subbordinate role to the husband and wife team is absurd.

As to Mr Bartons wealth, he lives in a one bedroom, dark morbid little, townhouse which has certainly had no renovation nor extension. Furthermore it is not possible to extend , there is absolutely no yard what so ever. Mr Barton does not own a motor vehicle of any sort.

But most importantly Mr Barton is not in the country and did not set up On Stage Productions and has not been holding meetings at the Regal (PS the regal apparently cost $30,000 so who ever thought Pat got it free is dreaming. I am sure you can look at the Regal Books so look at the facts before you comment LES)has signed no documents etc etc

So in effect some of you have been attacking a company without any basis other than you did not get the roles you wanted previously, something Pat has never and will never have any say in as he is not a director.

Or because you accepted that it was amature theatre (that you would not be paid )and then you complain about what you agreed to So infact a contract you were party to and yet attempted to rescind

Were you paid in JC, Mack and Mabel, Little shop of Horrors etc etc etc
Is your real complaint about how much work you were required to do becasue from all accounts Most of the Les Mis principles had swings so they did half the work and any time wasting re rehearsals was the fault of Jane Pyke the director and NOT surely Pat Barton the ticket seller. It is usual practice for Mr Barton to not be involved in any part of rehersals or schedules etc etc so it is beyond me how anyone can comment.

As for swet shop comments as petty and as inappropriate as they are my my dont we all wear Nikki, addidas etc etc .

I would hasten to add that this is a new company where the intention is to do the very best by way of assisting cast members to ease the out of pocket expences of the cast where ever it is possible. The female Producer involved (who is basically using her house to finance this show)would be quite dismayed if she were to read the comments that have been made about her company as would the very reputable Mr Justin Friend(MD) and Ms Marg Kinneen(director)

I stongly suggest that people seek out facts before they defame anyone or anything. A quick call to the producer will clarify any questions you may have and that is exactly what I have done and suggest those of you with a "bee in your bonnet" do the same. And base all future comments on FACT and not on distorted prima donnarish innuendo

WATCH YOUR THOUGHTS THEY BECOME WORDS WATCH YOUR WORDS THEY BECOME ACTIONS. WATCH YOUR ACTIONS THEY BECOME HABITS WATCH YOUR HABITS THEY BECOME CHARACTER WATCH YOUR CHARACTER IT BECOMES YOUR DESTINY

watch your typing it becomes caps lock :-)

Oh dear please read my Defamation advice before commenting further. Mr Barton has not EVER had a collapsed business but has had fallings out with others in the company over some of the issues you mention.

Mr Bartons primary objective is based around having been an actor/singer himself for many years , and not as you suggest as a $$$$man. You may not really be aware of this due to your age and inexperience.

Mind you he does sell tickets and without the ticket sales people such as yourself would have been playing to an empty house my dear.Yes...even in Les Mis. Tickets rarely sell themselves and if Mr Barton is guilty of anything at all it is of doing his job and treying to get in an audience, of course to cover costs but also for the benefit of the actors. People just dont have $200,000 sitting around they tend to be using their homes and should the show fail then thats exactly what they have risked and whayt they will loose.

Theatre is a very risky business and shows do fail . How about those that think there is a fortune to be made, join together form a company and put their own homes, or would it be their parents homes, at risk and put on a show


Again , as I have stated in my reply to James, The producer is a female and you are assuming that she will not show her books. I am willing to suggest the books will be open and that you my dear will be eating humble pie. Why not ring the producer and speek to her after all you do know exactly who she is. I am sure she will be only too happy to speak to you and put you mind at ease with regards some of the astatements you have erroneously made. The perhaps you can post some more comments based on the conversation you have with the producer and her books. Just something you might consider doing, that is of course if this site is at all interested in the truth.

Thanks for ur reply but i just want to classify something that you said...

> Well James thats a bit uninformed of you
>
> And further more is nothing but hearsay. You yourself were
> not the volunteer with the complaint you have stated it was
> another party so in fairness that comment holds no wieght
> legally at all.


I was there, and heard of some of the stuff that went on, but I did getr more information into what went on later, when I became close friends with 'this woman'. Also, I was just mentioning that I have had great experiences with Omnibus, and I have no problems with pat, but he does tend to have a see-saw of a reputation. In the shows I was in with him (which, with him as producer was only really a couple) he made every effort to accomodate me and help me have a good time.

> You are refering to Omnibus.
> For all who do not know Omnibus was the company of Gloria
> Underwood, Brian Underwood, Tanya Martin (Underwood), Mike
> Oshay and Pat Barton.
> Iff (if and only if) Pat Barton treated a volunteer unfairly
> then it was not he in isolatiion it wasin fact OMNIBUS the
> company which has 4 other persons involved that you failed to
> neglect. One can safely assume you are refering to an
> incident where a somewhat distrort woman threw a glass of
> wine in Pats face.
>
> James that incident was many years ago and given your age and
> your current relationship to the woman involved perhaps your
> view has been somewhat distorted.

Perhaps, but i never maintained that that was 'my view'. I was merely pointing out the fact of the controversial reputation that Pat appears to have. From what I have heard there wasn't any of the other partners involved, and it was a direct question at the distrort woman... But I am not one hear to nail the last nail in Pat's coffin. If you reread my post 90% of it was talking about my good experiences with Omnibus and pat, and only 10% pointed this other thing out... It was not my intention for it to sound very negative or whatever. I am simply putting my opinion across like everyone else.

As for my view being distorted, I don't believe that there is anything to distort. I enjkoyed my times at Omnibus, and Pat was very good to me when I was sick during a couple opf the shows. I am my own person adn don't let others influence my views just because of my relationships with them. If this was the case I would be mentally insane because some people I know have some very weird, let alone contradictory to my beliefs, ideas about things...

> It should also be remembered that Omnibus did indeed give you
> many opportunities in theatre , at the time, that you were
> not being offered elsewhere.

Here here. If you read like the third last sentance it said that any company willing to put on WA shows with WA casts is ok by me. I did not post to continue on in the Down with Music Spectrum campaign. I came to give my view of my times with Pat. I enjoyed all the shows I did with them, and liked everyone who was involved in Omnibus. These people helped me develop in ways I would have never imagined.

> I stongly suggest that people seek out facts before they
> defame anyone or anything. A quick call to the producer will
> clarify any questions you may have and that is exactly what I
> have done and suggest those of you with a "bee in your
> bonnet" do the same. And base all future comments on FACT and
> not on distorted prima donnarish innuendo

Agreed. Slander/libel is serious and facts should be straight first. Maybe next time before getting on at me for three or four sentances in my post, may I request that you read the rest of my post and please atleast acknowledge me on the fact that I said I enjoyed my times at Omnibus and I love it when WA shows are cast with WA people.

Thanks

James

> watch your typing it becomes caps lock :-)

Good to have a laugh in the middlde of all this :)

james

Sorry James My post was not directed at you as such but more attached to your post rather than Amandas. That was an error on my part was expedient for me at the hour of the morning I found myself addressing the issue. Yes I did note that you had POSITIVE things to say about Pat and Omnibus and hope that others also noted such ciomments as you have obviously done more shows with him than some others and are there for perhaps more qualified to have an honest opinion about such matters.
Once again my apologies for attaching all my comments to your post in future I shall indeed endevour to be less lazy

Please note that I have contacted the above phone number and the mobile phone number should read 0407 089977

I've enjoyed reading most of the content of this exchange apart from the condescending jibes between people I don't know.

I have heard some scathing comments about the group who mounted the Les Mis production from cast members I've known and trusted for a long time and who remain bitter about the experience to this day although it's not in their usual nature.

Thanks for your honesty Amanda. First hand experience is far more informative than hearsay and conjecture.

I look forward to Mr Barton's rebuttal on his return from the UK.

Exploit:

n. & v. - n. a bold or daring feat. v.tr. 1. make use of (a resource etc.); derived benefit from. 2. usu. derog. utilise or take advantage of (esp. a person) for one's own ends.


Ben Sorgiovanni

Ok I'm not quite a lawyer, but with only a handful of units to go I'm not completely ignorant of defamation (and neither, I presume, are most people - the definition, as you quoted in your posting, is rather similar to the common-sense view). You did, however, simplify the definition of defamation in a couple of relevant details: (first, to cover my own ass: this is NOT legal advice, NOT an opinion on any legal matter, certainly NOT an opinion on any specific comments posted anywhere on this board...):
- firstly, truth is still a defence to both defamation and slander - if it is true, and you can prove it (on the balance of probabilities, you don't need to prove it beyond reasonable doubt) then you have nothing to fear. Reasonable comment on certain issues, when expressed as comment, is also a defence (hence poor reviews of plays aren't defamation).
- secondly, you are right to state that anyone involved in the publication of such views are liable to defamation. Now, it is far from certain that the operator of a message board is involved in the 'publication' of the comments posted - some message boards have been sued, not sure of any in Australia which have succeeded (maybe one of the practicing lawyers who visit this site - I know at least 3 - could advise Grant on this), but it is common practice on the net to give a disclaimer - 'The views expressed are the individuals...etc...etc'

The point I'm making is that defamation threats can (and often are) all too easily used to scare people away from making well-deserved criticisms, when no liability actually exists (anyone else here see the McLibel documentary?). It is however, not a bad idea for the website to get itself a suitable disclaimer if it is going to contain controversial arguments such as the one preceding this.

Cheers,
Craig Edwards
(PS does anyone know how to 'reclaim' a registered name on this website, once you have forgotten the password. The reason why I am posting my name as Craig 'K' Edwards is because I registered 'Craig Edwards' and then promptly lost my password. Now the website won't let me post as 'Craig Edwards' without asking me to log in first. Yes I am incompetent, but does anyone have any (preferably constructive, but mildly sarcastic will be tolerated) suggestions?)

Sorry for continuing this overly long topic, but I am SO sick of hearing this excuse that I felt like doing something excruciatingly violent to my computer monitor. Given that I can't afford a new monitor, I'm replying to the post instead. Michael said:

> People just dont have $200,000 sitting around they tend to be
> using their homes and should the show fail then thats exactly
> what they have risked and whayt they will loose.
>
> Theatre is a very risky business and shows do fail . How
> about those that think there is a fortune to be made, join
> together form a company and put their own homes, or would it
> be their parents homes, at risk and put on a show
>
No, people don't just have $200,000 sitting around to put into shows. They also don't just have $200,000 sitting around to put into buying a corner deli, or opening an cafe or ANY OTHER BUSINESS! Yes, theatre IS a very risky business - so are most small businesses. 80% of small business ventures end in bankruptcy! It doesn't justify exploitation. Yes, I guess if the local corner deli was to start taking advantage of people's naivety, they'd probably convince a few naive people willing to work for free ('You'll get valuable experience...', 'I'm thinking of paying people in the future...', 'You'll make contacts this way...'). What's more, you'd probably have a huge increase in the number of corner deli's around. And it would still be exploitation just the same.

And yes, people can wax lyrical about the joys of performing, and how said it is that people just think about getting paid etc etc...(picture the smallest violin in the world just here). The fact is, hardly anyone on this site is not prepared to perform for free. Frankly I've only ever been paid to act a handful of times in my life, I don't ever expect to give up my day-job, and I imaging I am fairly typical in that regard to most people who post on this site. Performing for free in a cooperative effort (whether for share of profits, of for a community organisation that will reinvest the money in further projects) is very different to performing for free for the sake of lining someone's pocket. And even if we are not naive enough to do so, that doesn't mean that just because it is our choice to perform or not, therefore it doesn't affect us - anymore than allowing retail stores to use free labour 'wouldn't affect' retail workers because it would be 'their choice' whether to work or not. Anyway, if someone is truly putting something on just for the love of theatre, and doesn't want the whole complicated issue of having to practice even minimal business ethics, there is no reason why they shouldn't guarantee that the money isn't going back into theatre rather than their own pocket by running it through an appropriately incorporated theatre company.

Many people, Michael, have formed theatre companies, taken risks and put on shows. Just look at the What's On section of this website. Some of those have spent the extra money (oohh...around $300 and 15 minutes these days) to register a company and put a rule in the constitution guaranteeing that its profit will go back into future shows. Maybe you could ask GRADS, Playlovers, Stirling Players, KADS, etc how they did it - I'm sure they'd help you out. Many more have decided to make a bit of money themselves, paying their performers a share of the profits like any ethical co-operative scheme. Check the Blue Room and Rechabites Hall lists, there's a stack of them. And with regards to the latter, you can't even use the 'But we give people a chance to get noticed' excuse - a very good proportion of Blue Room/Rechabites/co-op shows get reviewed in the West Australian and other newspapers, maybe because having paid performers (even when it is just a share of very small profits) actually gives a production credibility?

Yes theatre IS a risky business. But it is your choice to make it a business, rather than a shared project or even a hobby. Good on you for doing so, professional theatre is something we need more of in this city. But if it is a business, then business ethics apply, just like any other business.

Okay, I've vented most of my anger now. Time to take a breath before I turn blue.
Craig

Hiyas, again, - now I'm NOT suggesting that this post applies to Pat, Music Spectrum etc - don't know them, can't comment.

But IN GENERAL, here's an interesting question (while we are on the topic of legal rights). I know there are a few practicing lawyers who participate in this site - maybe you could answer this:

We have a minimum award wage in this state. Now, I'm pretty sure that anyone running a business who employees people at a wage lower than the relevant award (or the minimum if there is no award) is committing an offence. A serious offence. Now, surely if someone is making significant amounts of money of theatre productions, they are running a business. Actually, without a constitutional provision in their company preventing the profits from going into their product, I'm almost certain that legally, they are running a business. Now if that is true, that would mean that many dodgy operators could be prosecuted - even without a complaint from the people working for them. And it wouldn't even require someone to personally bring an action - the relevant government commission would do that, if a complaint was made (by anyone). The only doubt I have is whether theatre falls under any legislative or otherwise legal exception to general employment laws.

Can anyone indicate the accuracy or wild inaccuracy of this estimate (in gentle terms, please),

Thanks,
Craig

Hi Craig

Thanks for the feedback on the site.

Craig K Edwards wrote:
> It is
> however, not a bad idea for the website to get itself a
> suitable disclaimer if it is going to contain controversial
> arguments such as the one preceding this.

There is a disclaimer available under the About menu:

http://www.theatre.asn.au/disclaimer.php3

I've had a couple of unofficial opinions from well informed visitors that it covers most bases. If anyone would care to improve on it, please feel free to let me know.

> (PS does anyone know how to 'reclaim' a registered name on
> this website, once you have forgotten the password. The
> reason why I am posting my name as Craig 'K' Edwards is
> because I registered 'Craig Edwards' and then promptly lost
> my password. Now the website won't let me post as 'Craig
> Edwards' without asking me to log in first. Yes I am
> incompetent, but does anyone have any (preferably
> constructive, but mildly sarcastic will be tolerated)
> suggestions?)

You should be able to have the site email you a fresh password to the email address you used when you registered. If that doesn't work, do feel free to contact me via email.

And yes, to all those people waiting for me to respond to poll problems and such, this means i may actually have a few hours coming up to work on a bit of site maintenance!

:-)

Cheers
Grant

P.S. One of my favourite posts related to the current thread?

http://www.theatre.asn.au/read.php?f=21&i=198&t=81

It's a long one and takes a while to load but get informed, people! Don't allow these abuses to occur again. What i really want to know is, is "Carol" really Carole and is she lining up for another seal fur coat?

[%sig%]

Hi Craig

IANAL

Craig K Edwards wrote:
> We have a minimum award wage in this state. Now, I'm pretty
> sure that anyone running a business who employees people at a
> wage lower than the relevant award (or the minimum if there
> is no award) is committing an offence.

Work experience?

I don't think your case will stand. However, while it may not be illegal you'll find that past debate on this site has pointed to some clear examples of government policy and policy statements from peak volunteer organisations that would exclude companies operating in the manner described from participating in formal volunteer programs:

http://www.volqld.org.au/programs2.html

Cheers
Grant

*IANAL - I am not a lawyer

[%sig%]

Michael - the vast majority of information I received (information about house extensions included) was from Pat's own daughter and board member of Music Spectrum. I can only assume that what she told me, without any malice, was true. Information about not getting rights for the show did come from hearsay, I admit, but since the distributor for the show knew nothing about th production, I can only assume these comments were based in some truth. I don't think I'm the first to use the sweat shop analogy either in relation to Omnibus on this site - but tell me, please, where do you see the differences? Please also see my first post where I said that double casting of Les Miz, and any other unpleasantries associated with that, bear no relation to this argument. I agree - much of that was driven by Jane Pike, and had nothing to do with Pat. I also have no objections to Pat personally - I just think his financial arrangements with his companies stink and are painfully unethical. Using the excuse that it is 'theatre' is no excuse for exploitation (see Craig's very intelligent post on this topic). By the way my age and inexperience? Yes I'm young - 23 - but have been involved in Perth theatre for 10 years now, and had been in 20-30 shows prior to being in Les Miz. I don't think I quite fall into the novice category you seem to think I do. And since you seem involved in the production, can you please list here, on the site, exactly what the financial arrangements are for My Fair Lady? Who is getting paid, how much, and are ALL profits going back into future productions?

Craig - yay, law boy. You can come and defend me in my slander defense, any time.

Sonja - Please return to my very first post on this woeful topic. I never said it would *help* the Perth industry by not auditioning for My Fair Lady. What it would *prevent*, was any more damage inflicted upon its weak and bleeding body by other producers who think they can operate in a similar fashion. Don't encourage them. Don't audition for this production - there are many, many others (all of them, James, all of them WA shows with WA casts - that wasn't an Omnibus initiative) to audition for. If you want to do great musical shows at good venues? Playlovers just finished JC Superstar at Subi Theatre Centre - all of the profits from which will be going into Arcadia and its production of Matchgirls later in the year.

I rest my case, and bow out until someone says something else that gets my dander up.

[%sig%]

> Don't audition for this
> production - there are many, many others (all of them, James,
> all of them WA shows with WA casts - that wasn't an Omnibus
> initiative) to audition for. If you want to do great musical
> shows at good venues?

Sorry to keep this going, but I'm in melbourne and I aint adjusted to teh time difference so I am spending countless hours participating in this exciting topic...

My comment was in realtion to the fact that of late all the big shows have tended to be eastern states cast, with one or two West aussies. Just annoys me in that way. I don't think it is an Omnibus initiative, just meant that its good that they did do that, and it wasn't another production in a big top with an eastern states cast (despite one or two people).

I am fully aware of all the other companies out there, and just did a show at KADS (which was a drive believe me). Just aint done anything because all the shows tend to either have auditions when I have assignments due in, or their performances are during exam period!

Hey maybe we can start a new topic on that , lets get more shows scheduled around my uni hours ;)

catchyas

James the errant clapper-clawed pigeon-egg!

And very nicely said too Sir
(I certainly know who to contact for my next brief)
Hence Mr Packer, and so many others like him, are indeed very wealthy people and more power to the people who make money, oh and also risk the forclosure.

However I think the real issue hear is little more than a matter inuendo. Has anyone spoken to the producer? Does anyone know anything about the company set up? Are we to assume that it has not been set up like GRADS, Playlovers, Stirling Players, KADS etc!
Because as we all know to assume is to make an ass of u and me.

And thats all my comments are about. One must check the information before one begins to make accusations. Not only to protect oneself from legalities of defamation but also to prevent oneself looking foolish if/when allegations are proved false.

Hmmm it would appear that my retort was substantially shorter than yours however :-)

Nicely put and from what I saw the disclaimer is in place as you suggest
Simplified is refering to truth as a defence. What is the definition of truth and whos truth
Better put isjustification, Fair Comment absolute privilege and qualified privilage. These are defences against defamation.
Best of luck with your continued studies

Rest assured I am not financially connected to this or any other show currently being proposed in Australia

Hear Hear... a fine posting Michael... you mentioned personal things I did not know if Pat would want told... but since they are now told... I hope that people will stop this assault on Pat and indeed "My Fair Lady"...

For everyone else who may still be concerned about this matter... might I say that the good thing about living in Australia and being FREE AGENTS is that we can indeed make our own decisions BASED on our own findings... don't make decisions based on ANYONE else's findings... you will surely end up being disappointed many times over...

To boycott a marvellous production such as MY FAIR LADY would be a complete shame... especially since those running it have NEVER been given a good Aussie "fair go"... wether things were 'found' out about Pat is rather irrelevant DESPITE the source... and since we live in a land where our rights are meant to be exactly that... OURS... if all this information wasn't found on public record or heard from Pat's own mouth... I suggest it be ignored and allowed to die a very public death...

A note however... I think James may have been misunderstood about his posting... at least I didn't receive the message you received out of James' posting...

Some good stuff coming out of this forum tho'... if nothing else it's quite cathartic...

Ciao fellow performers... hope you all find a stage to show us your stuff in the near future...

sonja

As one who is in no way involved with any of this production, present or past, I have to say that this topic has been very interesting to follow. Once again thanks to ITA for providing an excellent forum for us to follow these issues, and after reading the opinions, facts, and deviations of the facts, to be able to make our own decisions.

I belong to an incorporated not-for-profit theatre company. This whole debate has only served to re-inforce my desire for us to continue to operate in this manner.

However, it has been good to hear the people singÂ…

Tina Jack

This question more than likely has a logical answer to it, but how do we all know that Pat IS involved with this company? His name does not appear to be printed anywhere on the auditon notice nor on the link to Onstage Productions.

Perhaps we should be police?

And why wait for Pat to return from England to reply... why not here from the people who issued the audition notice? THEN things could get interesting...

Cheers
Alan Gill

"It's bad luck to be superstitious"

To whom it may concern,

My name is Brooke Howden, I am a casting Director in Melbourne working with Faith Martin on P.J Hogans feature film, 'PETER PAN'.

I am hoping I can advertise on this website for 11, 12, 13 year old girls, appropriate to audition for the role of 'WENDY' over the next 2 weeks.

My mobile number is 0401 814 933,
Email: brookestarlane@hotmail.com.au

Hoping to from you soon.

Warmest Regards,

Brooke Howden.

To whom it may concern,

My name is Brooke Howden, I am a casting Director in Melbourne working with Faith Martin on P.J Hogans feature film, 'PETER PAN'.

I am hoping I can advertise on this website for 11, 12, 13 year old girls, appropriate to audition for the role of 'WENDY' over the next 2 weeks.

My mobile number is 0401 814 933,
Email: brookestarlane@hotmail.com.au

Hoping to from you soon.

Warmest Regards,

Brooke Howden.

Hi Brooke,

Of course you may! This webpage is a free and open forum for everybody's benefit. A couple of things though:

You've added your message to the bottom of a long discussion about an upcoming Perth production, and it may not reach its audience. Your best move would be to click on your preferred forum (probably BILLBOARD BULLETINS, as this is for attention-grabbing notices), click on "New Topic", then repost your message. These messages gradually get pushed down the list as newer messages are posted.

The other (more permanent) way to get noticed is to add your details to the AUDITIONS section of the webpage. To do that, you need to go to "What's On" and choose "Add Event". However, so that nobody can alter your event's details, everyone needs an individual password before "adding an event". You'll have to follow the instructions on the "Add Event" page in order to obtain that.

I should point out that our free and open webpage has fallen prey to some hoax postings in the past (not that I'm accusing you), so the more information you can give people, the less likely you'll be dismissed. (I might just take this opportunity to direct people to the very nice photo of Brooke on the Mullinars Casting Consultants webpage.)

Finally, this webpage was set up by the Independent Theatre Association of WA, and we encourage it to be a national forum. I honestly don't know how many Victorian hits we get (beyond "a few") so I don't know how much luck you'll have, but please don't let that put you off. I hope you get swamped with enquiries, which will further prove how popular our webpage is!

Happy hunting,
Jarrod Buttery,
President, ITA

Oh my God!!! I didnt realise any one could be such a bitch!!! Pat gave you the opportunity to play one of the lead roles in LES MIS!!!! You new you wern't getting paid- we all did!!! We got to perform one of the greatest shows of all time and your complaining....
What if the show was a failure Amanda??? Does that mean it would be ok for the producer to come to the cast for the expences>????
It was a success, and if the show proffits good for Pat- we get the exposure...

I say we need more people like Pat around... He gives performers the opportunity to perform at places like the Regal, and in shows like LES MIS... All of the cast, except for pre madonnas like Amanda had a ball in les mis.... I know it was one of the best and most well organised shows that ive been in...

Be greatfull you got to perform in Les Mis Amanda.... you sure as hell wouldnt have got a chance in the proffessional show- or any other professionl show for that matter.

Your career on stage isnt looking to positive Amanda... no one will want to hire you or have you on board with a horrible attitude like yours!!!!
By the way...
You said you new about pat from one of his rellies from a previous show..... so why, if you new Pat was the producer, did you audition for Les Mis????

I heard you comment that you no longer use les mis on your C.V. Well thats ok..... because we dont want you in our cast.

As this thread is three months dead (at least) the motive behind your post is somewhat of a quandary, Not-so-quiet-observer.

As opposed to harping on a now-finalised issue (and it is encouraging to note that the protagonists of the earier spat have very sensibly chosen to ignore this post of yours), let us all learn from the prior mistakes, misgivings and misrepresentations and move onwards.

Whatever show/s Pat chooses to produce in the future will attract people to the audition/s - regardless of the past experiences of those who have trod this rocky road before. So we are all best served to tread carefully (as we all would with ANY audition) and test the water first.

If you are happy (and it would seem to be the case) to work with Pat, more power to your elbow. Others obviously differ; let them.

El- a quiet and well-moderated observer

Ok, I'm not touching the original topic of this thread, which is long dead and should remain buried - I do beg forgiveness for replying to this person's message (for those who are heartily sick of these arguments), in relation to a couple of other aspects:
- firstly, well done on posting what is easily the angriest piece of writing I have ever seen. 29 exclamation marks in only 17 lines. Quite an achievement. Frankly, the skill of transmitting emotion onto paper is quite an art and you've done a fine job of portraying in a Sartre-meets-Tarantinoesque manner the quintecential essance of someone who has been holding his/her bitter breath while waiting to explode for the past four months since the original debate.
- not to mention a mastery of doublespeak. Launching into a personal attack on someone, and then criticising THEM for having a horrible attitude? Media adviser in the making, I have to say.

Unfortunately, I do have to pick you up on a couple of errors in your posting:
- firstly, Amanda is certainly not a 'pre madonna'. Whether you use the term 'madonna' in the biblical sense, or in reference to the pop-singer, I think you'll find they were both around long before Amanda's time, and whilst I'm not sure of Amanda's age, I think calling her pre-madonna is a bit of an exaggeration.
- secondly, (and assuming that you meant to say primma donna) whilst I'm sure Amanda can defend herself, I'd like to add that as someone who doesn't know Amanda particularly well (and hence can't be accused of bias), I've seen her perform a few times and would strongly dispute your comments about her acting potential. Frankly so would many people on this board. Frankly so have numerous reviews.

I note with curiousity your pseudonym - if as you say 'no-one' would want to work with the persons you criticise (and hence I assume you think 'every-one' would agree with you), why the need to hide your identity?

Personally, I wholly support the venting of anger, frustration and teenage angst (not sure which of these apply to you, but they are all important emotional phases) - and I'm sure that with as much anger as you, Quiet Observer, seem to possess, keeping it bottled up may well damage your psyche - however, for the sake of others on this board, feel free to conduct your future emotional purgings directly to my email address - azrael_59@hotmail.com

Best wishes for the continuation of what I presume to be your illustrious acting career.
Craig Edwards

Actually, El, I didn't respond because 'Quiet Observer' posted anonymously, not including an email, and therefore I didn't get it in my inbox. Gotta love people that don't have the courage of their convictions to put their name to something else like that. Bitch or not, at least I do that.

Also, a 'bitch' is a term I would attribute to someone who throws unfounded personal insults...well...like 'bitch'. This I have never done in any of the posts in this series, even when discussing Pat.

Quiet Observer:
- Please read what I originally posted far more carefully than you clearly did and /then/ get back to me.
- Post again with your email attached OR email me (mandinga@it.net.au) and thrash it out with me directly without disturbing these kind people. You will find I am not at all a bitch, I will be perfectly willing to discuss your concerns with you quietly and rationally, and hopefully clear up any wrong doing or injustice I appear to have done to you (completely unknowingly on my part).

Apologies for the disruption, punters, and thank you Craig and El for your kind support.

PS Come and see Amanda 'Chesty Bitch' Chesterton in the final three performances of 'The World Goes Round' with fellow Les Mis prima donna and renegade, Simon Holt, on keys. I understand Pat Barton is in fact coming to the show tonight so you may get even more than you bargained for coming to tonights show! 8pm 'Camelot' - Mosman Park Arts Foundation, Lochee St, Mosman Park.

[%sig%]

...Dear QO, if you MUST pick a pseudonym...! (!!!)!


I guess you got so much valued exposure in Les Mis that you now need to assume an alibi. Amanda, on the other hand, has had to resort to being cast in about six other shows since then to get the exposure she deserves...


Perhaps you oughta join us on this website more often, and keep up to date on what's already been said? There is always room to offer strong opinions, so long as you are prepared to be taken to task for them.


And thanks, Craig K, for an entertaining rebuttal. Sounded like something I might have said, so I hope there's no confusion between Craigs...you deserve all the credit.


Cheers,
crgwllms

[%sig%]

LOL!

Well......someone needs a life. And you poor thing, you STILL don't understand that this has nothing to do with being paid or not.

Tsk, tsk.



Thou pox-marked dismal-dreaming lewdster!

Can you please advise were I can locate shows that have upcoming auditions for children- 7 and 9 years old.

Thankyou

If you are looking for community theatre, then go to the home page, click on What's On, Auditions and there you will find all (or most) Audition notices for up-coming shows.I have to warn you tho' that there are not too many openings for young children.

Hi there

Was there anyone watching I Entertainment channel 10 /3/08/2003 there was one episode I watched towards the end. They were showing current auditions for a musical ??? but which one was it and what state. If anyone was watching the program with ( kidmans sister) and knows which audition it was I would really appreciate the information. I hope this reaches someone soon.

Thanks guys, keep at the craft

anthel@hotmail.com

Hey!! I like this forum!!

http://www.7icon.com/ - look at my free collection of beuty and fashion
http://www.7icon.com/
http://www.7icon.com/

go to http://www.7icon.com/

online fashion magazine for men and women

7icon.com