random musing

why do playwrights and screenwriters have such a tendency to churn out stories about or including out of work actors? every time you turn around there's another piece about the young starlet who's trying to get ahead or the dancer who's shoes are beaten to putty from practicing and still can't get into Swan Lake. I don't appreciate it. Fact is, there are a lot of out-of-work actors and dancers and theatre folk out there, and hiring actors to play in stories about them is flat-out mockery. "ha-ha, i got a job playing one of my peers who's been unemployed for years."

Typically the plight of the out of work actor is not so dire as that of the family under the bridge, but it is very frustrating to see your friends and old classmates getting gigs on Broadway or with Cirque, or even seeing a show you built go to Broadway and get rave reviews, and know that you're even getting passed up for summer stock. When all your education comes to nowt, and your experience and skill and charming personality and good contacts boil down to so much manure, the last thing you want to see is the little go-getter who just couldn't make it the first two tries finally get her big break when the hard-nosed audition coordinator sees her true potential. It doesn't work like that, it never has. With the economy in a rut and interest in live theater at its lowest since the Restoration, nobody is willing to take risks like that.

In any case, out of work actors keep the restaurant and hospitality industry running. If it weren't for them people would starve. So i don't feel too bad for them, as a cornerstone of our society. We should envy the cunning artificers who charm customers into over tipping, and they should thank their 200-level acting coaches who got them that far. In the meantime, i'm going to steer clear of any movie who's blurb begins "two out-of-work actors take a vacation" or any similar masturbatory premise. Where's the challenge in playing yourself?