Note: This post first appeared here about a year ago. I hope you enjoy!
I had dinner last night with Rick Rose the Artistic Director of Barter Theatre. We talked about a range of things but early on our conversation was about actors and type casting. The discussion started around the idea that at a place like the Barter, being able to work in a variety of styles was necessary for being an actor there. We then went on to discuss how many actors who “make it” get type cast and only hired to do a small range of roles. They do them well and as time goes on they eventually are not acting per se, but rather playing themselves as whatever character their current role is. In short, the celebrity persona takes over the actor and over time the basic acting skills of inhabiting another persona atrophy.
Our discussion of celebrity actors led into a discussion of celebrity designers. I was saying how one of the things I take great pride in with my work is the ability to design in a variety of styles. I am not tied to a specific look and truly enjoy the freedom and play it allows. Rick made the point that many of the old guard designers working on Broadway have a very distinctive style and that they are hired to light the play in their style. That they are limited to that style and should they venture too far from it, run the risk of producers telling them something to the effect of “I did not hire to light it THAT way. I hired you for your style.”
I noted that my Lighting Design portfolio originally had a sampling of the range that I could do, but that recently I had narrowed the focus to show a singular aesthetic point of view with a few pieces here and there to give a feeling of range. After explaining this I said how I was getting a much more favorable response to my portfolio since doing that. Rick replied that when hiring designers, or actors for that matter, it was necessary to place them in a type in order to understand their work. In short, one needs to be cast in a type in order to get hired. Once done, one runs the risk of getting hired for that type and that type alone.
The balance is a difficult one when marketing one’s artistic work, particularly as an actor or designer. As a designer, you want to be able to work in a range of projects, but that very range as represented in a portfolio, can often be a detriment to your ability to get hired for anything. So by necessity you must cast your type and present that to potential clients; theaters, directors, producers, etc.
This is the paradox of working as a designer(or director or actor) You must artificially limit your range in order to get hired on enough projects to express that range you are capable of. It is a bit of a Catch-22.
This is one of the things I love about the Barter. Each of the actors there, while certainly having strengths in terms of types of roles or dramatic styles, can jump into any role or style at the drop of a hat. And do so willingly. As a designer it is a wonderful place to be. The range of shows they produce allow me to flex a wide range of dramatic muscles. Sometimes I am designing monochromatic shadowy plays and other times bright colorful pieces. But no two shows call for the same style or approach.
I find myself fortunate to work in a range of styles. At the same time, a glance through my portfolio might give the impression that my range is quite limited. It is true that there are certain styles I prefer over others. Yet I do not enjoy these styles to the exclusion of others. Far from it. And that is a very important distinction.
Having an aesthetic point of view is important and necessary in creating any work of art. Equally important is testing that aesthetic to ensure that it is always up to date and true to ones inner vision.
