Auditor UGA Pet Peeves

[John Kelleher]

The February UGA's were my first TPS auditions ever.  I auditioned on the second day of the auditions, and was lucky enough to get the last slot before lunch... and it happened, the auditions were running about 15 - 20 minutes late (ooh, fun, getting to audition for 40+, *hungry*, auditors who are now having a difficult time finding a comfortable position in their seat)

I didn't know what I was getting into with these auditions, but I knew I was well prepared... both monologue and song... and that is what I had to present.   After conferring with the accompanist,  I got their attention with my introduction, and proceeded with my *VERY* serious monologue... then went into my *VERY* humorous song.  The auditors were actually laughing the whole way through the song.  I thanked the auditors, and thanked the *MARVELOUS* accompanist for his work.

(Side note:THANK YOU TPS FOR GETTING INCREDIBLE ACCOMPANISTS -- I just performed an audition in which the accompanist, well, for lack of a better term, pretty much sucked -- but that is another story...)

No longer a UGA "virgin", I say I would definitely be back... received 8 calls/offers thus far...

Regarding this string of postings, I have some definite opinions about some of the more "catty" and "peevish" comments made by the auditors.  We won't go into those things!  

Sulo's listing - Great advice!  Thank you.

Bottom Line:  I think most directors go into these auditons looking for all to succeed who perform for them.  Some directors will look to surround themselves with greatness... sometimes that makes it much easier for them to do their job, or rather not have to work...  Some directors will see that "something" in a not so prepared audition and take on that "unpolished, ragged performer" and make it their job to make them"shine".   Remember these auditors need the actors to make their vision come to life.   If they come into these auditions to "pick the performer apart"... not sure I would be interested in working for them.

John Kelleher

[Betsy Schwartz]

Unfortunately, I found that many and dare I say most of the actors from Seattle at the audition shouldn't have sung when they did, tried all kinds of gimmicks that were not necessary to show the actors true talent, and a very large number of actors ran over time which from the auditors point of view is not only disrespectful but shows the actor is unprepared.

I'm intrigued to know what you're referring to when you talk about "gimmicks that were not necessary to show the actors true talent". Particularly since your post seems to suggest that the actors you witnessed at the NY auditions were by in large not employing these said gimmicks.

[J. Michael Salas]

My apologies if it wasn't clear, but when I made reference to actors from other city's, I was talking about actors who's resumes clearly showed experience from other city's that were auditioning at UGA, not being an auditor in another city.

As far as "gimmicks" are concered, this word was used to say that some people will very obviously try to do something out of character with what there monologue is to draw attention when really all that was needed for these actors was to just trust their work and with confidence, perform. Again, I must apologize for not being direct but to protect any actors who auditioned and my own integrity I cannot disclose what I viewed to be a "gimmick" at the last UGA. Here is a short list of what could very easily be viewed as a "gimmick" if an actor intentionally uses these devices in there audition. This is taken from the master list offered from Karen at the start.

- Distracting (noisy, ill - fitting, overly flashy) shoes and attire
- silly noises
- skirts that are too short: heels that are too high.
- please do not writhe on the floor touching yourself
 
just an example of the types of "gimmicks" that I witnessed.

[M. Elizabeth Eller]

Having auditioned twice for TPS and then getting to sit in and watch some of this last round, I would like to echo what Stewart said and really empasize that the auditors want to be on the actors team so much. One of the things that I noticed is that many actors that had resumes from other city's (like New York), were much more refined, confident and outright prepared. I learned that when an actor first comes out onto that stage, the auditor wants nothing more than for that actor to have an amazing audition. Unfortunately, I found that many and dare I say most of the actors from Seattle at the audition shouldn't have sung when they did, tried all kinds of gimmicks that were not necessary to show the actors true talent, and a very large number of actors ran over time which from the auditors point of view is not only disrespectful but shows the actor is unprepared. This list, whatever tone it may be presented in is a huge gift that I think the actors in this area should take as a ... we see these things all the time, and we want you to succeed list.

I was also an auditor this year, and I did not find these things to be true.  People from all over made silly mistakes, people from all over occasionally made poor choices.  Before going any further, I have to admit that my hackles are a bit raised at the idea of announcing a sweeping statement that puts out-of-towners over Seattle area actors.

That being said, I think the things we should have learned from this thread thus far is that words can be interpreted may different ways, and when talking about actors using "gimmicks", perhaps some thought should be put into the negative connotations with that word.  I certainly wouldn't infer that the majority of the actors were trying to take a short cut with a gimmick, rather than playing the honesty of the scene - in fact, I wouldn't presume to infer that ANY of them were, as I don't know what made them make the choices that they did.

I'm going back to lurking now, as this whole thread is making me feel a little queasy.

[J. Michael Salas]

Please Karen, could you give us the reason or purpose for posting the "pet peeves" list?

[Karen Lane]

Hello,
Happy to repsond.

Well - obviously I didn't ask the question of auditors or post it for my own edification nor to create a brou ha ha. I was sincerely under the impression, given the individual questions I receive on a regular basis, that folks wanted this information.

I still think you do. Upon reflection, I honestly believe this is a case in which you should blame the MESSENGER not the MESSAGE. Yeah, I mean me. I do believe that the sheer quantity was off-putting as well as my lack of 'framing' the info in the presentation of it.

I will either not do it again or take a much stronger editorial approach or consider presenting the information in person to those who specifically show up at an announced gathering because they pre-select themselves as wanting the information.

If it is truly not useful in any format - I won't ask the question again!
Sincerely,
Karen

[Keith Dahlgren]

Hey, the info's useful...if only to start a discussion.  No lurking! Dive in!  If feeling 'oogy' or 'queasy' makes you express yourself in a discussion, hooray!  The more we talk, the more we can learn.  Stop lurking and tell us how you feel!

Karen, I So Much appreciate your posting these comments, as well as all the general info posting you make.  The idea of these Message Boards is to stimulate discussion...and you have done so.  I have myself had two discussions outside these Boards regarding auditions and what goes into both performing and auditing them. Useful ones.  And I'll bet (from the amount of hits this discussion has had) I'm not the only one.

This is a valuable way of gathering a huge diverse community of theatre artists into a single place to explore their art, including some of the uncomfortable parts. I have seen several posts with varying degrees of opinion...what's the reason we create Art anyway, if not to stimulate our reason and our emotions?

Don't hold back!  More pet peeves!

(Now, I have to go research someone to take new headshots of me...I'm guilty of the 'Old Headshots' auditor pet peeve.  I'm so ashamed...)

[Theatre Puget Sound]

Keith - we'll be scheduling another Headshot Day soon so you may want to wait just a tad and save some money!
Karen

[Keith Dahlgren]

Yeah, I thought about it the last time, but I was too busy.  Taking my picture is a real job...I'm about the most unphotographable human on the planet.  The camera despises me. (No offense, Ken.)

I just reread the discussion that flared up in January about Art and Commerce (the Isherwood article), and again I say, this forum is highly commendable (I would say it rocks, but I'm too stodgy for that).

What can we do to increase auditor attendance...that seemed to be a pet peeve of some of the auditioners.  Were they mostly AEA auditors, or non-?

Discuss.

[Karen Lane]

Keith,
The disappointment and visibility of non-attending auditors largely centers around Intiman and the Rep. Both institutions registered and intended to be present. Without going in to detail that is non of my business to share - both organizations ran in to unforseen (honest - to god people) unavoidable emergencies that week. Intiman was able come over for a few sessions but the Rep was not able to do so.

Even Scott Nath asked me if this was a trend and pending problem to which I promptly responded directly: Absolutely NOT. Both organizations value the UGA and attend religiously.

I tried to communicate the circumstances the week of the audition to actors. I tried to communicate that both Intiman and Rep were sincerely concerned about their inability to be present in February and both are more than willing to accept requests for an audition.

What people also need to pay attendtion to in the 'registered auditor' chart on-line:
1. Each Auditor is asked to tell us which sessions they plan to attend. It is divided by day obviously and by AM/PM. I think perhaps some may have not interpreted or noticed the checkmarks as most auditors are not present for each and every session - particularly the smaller companies who must juggle day jobs to attend and auditors specifically interested in the singing sections only.
2. The attendance 'checkmarks' are updated to reflect ACTUAL attendance after they suffer through my tedious insistance on taking roll (or is it role?) call.
3. There are always a certan # of no-shows. Attrition is expected.
Karen

PS - What can we do to increase auditor attendance?
Some of you do these things already - so thank you -
1. Let companies local and beyond know that you are participating in the UGA and if they'd like an opporutunity to see you and many of your peers - PLEASE attend!
2. Those of you who do work out of town - recommend the UGA. We actually send invitations out to companies across the west and mid-west but nothing beats an endorsement from an actor they may currently be working with or have a relationship with.
3. Beyond the UGA's: I'd like TPS to be the one-stop shop for out of town auditions. I can create an extremely reasonable package that would include space as well as administrative scheduling - reducing the headache and concern of the visiting company. Spread the Word!

[Maria Glanz]

Wow! I love it when I don't read for a few days and then find a BIG discussion going on!

I have a few Bravos! to shout out. Mark Jared, I don't think we've met yet (I'm so sorry if we have and I've forgotten - I plead motherhood), but I think you are awesome. Thank you for your post and your emphasis on mutual respect and your story of the young woman who did Juliet. Great story.

And Bravo to those who have left the lurking world and felt compelled to post and Bravo to Karen for posting in the first place. It's sad if it's made people feel oogy (great word), but boy - it's not really an easy job we've chosen, us actors. I think it's great to get feedback like this. And great to know there are auditors watching who want us to be good. And great to be inspired to create the WORST audition piece ever (my own favorite fantasy) - it's all good.

I've worked in theatre my whole life, in all sorts of roles, and I have found one thing to be true for pretty much everyone I've ever worked with - one audition is not usually the life-changer. It's about lots of auditions, lots of shows, lots of experiences and connections and so on. Do your best and trust.

Which is lately my motto for life itself.

Better stop before I get more philosophical.

[Joseph E Boling]

Maria, I love it when you are philosophical.

Going back to the comments about monologues being the worst way to see if an actor can collaborate, why can't we let some actors play scenes? Both or all three would combine their time slots and do what they can with each other for the auditors to watch. I for one would enjoy seeing the synergy.

I will be out of town for the summer 2006 UGAs, and will be leaving before the next winter ones, so you all won't have to hear me calling "Time, thank you" any more.

[Drew Bruns]

oooh, its my first ever post...

Just one thought about the auditioning process...in the VERY brief theatre training I have had I was told that a good auditioner can react to the circumstances of the monologue (environment, a non-verbal character) in order to show 'listening' or 'reactionary' skills, does this ease anybody's mind about monologuing?

[Keith Dahlgren]

Maria, Philosophy is the sister to Art.

Phil and Art.  The Muse kids.

Anyway, the life of the theatre artist is harsh, with all the baring we have to do (pun intended, Maria.) Let's keep the dialogue going.

Okay, I'm going to have a wee dram o' Scotch and go to bed.

[Dorothy Lemoult]

Okay, it *would* take Joe , the absolute theatre person to bring up that idea of scenes !
That is such a good idea !
And it involves actors having a community. It involves an actor to seek out a scene partner they feel is someone who supports their best work while they can support theirs.
It's a sort of out there idea that is really great!
Thanks Joe !!!