In another thread on this forum, there was a discussion about which schools produce 'tippy-top' performers, and what it means to be a top-tier school or performer. This got me thinking about a podcast that I like called 'Three on the Aisle' from American Theatre Magazine. In one episode, the hosts interview Holly Twyford, a well-regarded actor in D.C. and what it means to be a regional actor (especially such a celebrated one), and why regional theatre may be more valuable (maybe not financially though) to a performer than NY theatre is. Here's the link:
Also, onstageblog has an article on the same subject:
Obviously, being a Broadway actor is one pinnacle of this profession, but there are 'rock stars' in every profession (we've all heard of Dr. Oz, but my cardiologist is good at his job and enjoys it without having notoriety). Yes, it's financially more rewarding to be in a big theatre market, but if my kids can really enjoy their creative work, who am I to judge whether they do their thing in one of the most expensive cities in the country, or a regional theatre scene, or even while also juggling three other jobs in this gig economy?
What do you think?