<p>Please jump into this thread and enlighten me. What’s the difference in acting skill sets for stage plays and MT? In my experience college teachers of MT are acting teachers that didn’t study MT, they studied acting. So I thought that what they taught was interchangable acting. Now I’m confused. Why is it hard to go from MT to Drama if you are dedicated enough to learn singing, dancing and acting as an undergraduate? I always assumed it was just the lack of acting expertise due to time divided.</p>
<p>In intensive acting programs, there is a generally (and yes, this is a generalization) a much greater curricular focus than in MT programs on:</p>
<p>1.classical text work
2.spoken voice production and speech (dialects, etc.)
3. acting scenework from the seminal playwrights (American and non-American drama)
4. the realistic physical life of the character</p>
<p>The realistic (or fantastical) portrayal of the human condition through spoken word and physical life alone across various types of complex dramatic literature involves intensive study of the above areas.</p>
<p>I know many will rush to defend the acting excellence of MT programs, but I promise I have no bias - just many years of watching the career journeys of colleagues, students and patients from elite institutions in both realms (Michigan, CCM, CMU, Juilliard, Yale MFA, NYU, etc.) There are certainly MT programs that are acting-driven in which the MT’s explore the above areas quite extensively! In addition, there are musical theatre performers who are innately gifted with “just living” as is often the focus in acting programs - aka realistically portraying many aspects of the human condition - and have very little of the above training, at least formally.</p>
<p>MT is innately an art form of heightened portrayal b/c we’re engaging in the non-realistic acts of singing and dancing to express our most important ideas. In musicals, we sing and dance because words no longer suffice. Music moves us viscerally - in plays, the actors do not have this tool. I am NOT saying musicals are easier - but they are often different. </p>
<p>If there were more hours in the day, I’m sure all MT programs would love to have more courses focusing on the above, but the reality is that MT students need many hours of dance, musicianship, song performance classes, private voice lessons, etc. The necessary skills for the other 2 parts of the MT triumvirate often mean there simply isn’t time for MT’s to take acting course work that is as extensive as non-MT’s experience. So you’re right, checkbook, time and training focus is a lot of the issue. But non-MT’s from rigorous acting programs often graduate far ahead of their MT peers in the skills necessary to tackle a role in a heavy American drama, Shakespeare, or Greek play, and those with MFA’s are even further ahead. We talk a lot on CC about the Playbill bios of those in musicals and what it reveals about their training; the Playbills of most Bway and off Bway plays have more than one MFA acting grad. Of course, the MT’s generally graduate with skill sets that far surpass their non-MT peers in singing, acting through song, and dance! </p>
<p>Something many MT’s who do want to grow their acting skills beyond the time limits of their intensive MT curricula do is take a semester or summer abroad a RADA, BADA, NIDA (in Australia), the Moscow Art Theatre, etc., or do a similar American acting intensive. Most of the junior class at Ithaca (actors and MT’s), for example, studies in London in the spring, and this is built into their curriculum!</p>
<p>Before anyone shoots at me 
- the above is actually a factual dissection of curricula more than anything, from the horses’ mouths (including faculty). Lining curricula up side-by-side usually reveals the focus or balance of each program.</p>
<p>Hope this helps! BTW, this topic is a GREAT conversation to have with a group of mutually respectful and highly-trained and experienced non-MT and MT or crossover actors (my term, meaning those who do both equally well) - they will talk passionately for hours!</p>
<p>One more important thought - NO ONE graduates from undergrad, or grad school, as a “fully formed” performer. That growth process continues throughout each person’s career - so with EACH step of the training process, the performer should be focusing on “what do I want my focus to be for the next X number of years”? Performers are lifelong learners, and paths veer in the most unexpected ways. The college training decision feels life or death, I know - like it’s dictating one’s entire life - but it’s really just directing you toward the NEXT step in your career path. You can always get more of whatever training you feel you need!</p>
<p>^^CoachC, I think this about my favorite post of all time here on CC. We who are so caught up in this audition season need to remember that truly, this is not a life-or-death process! Excellent training in all three MT disciplines is available at pretty much every stage of life and no matter where or whether we (or our kids) end up going to college. </p>
<p>One of D’s favorite acting teachers encourages his students NOT to go to college for theatre but rather for any other field of study, for that very reason. He points out that it’s pretty hard to find a literature or science professor down the street in most towns while GREAT performing arts instruction is pretty readily available in most medium to large cities.</p>
<p>Great topic, and fantastic post by CoachC! </p>
<p>The straight acting component was a major factor in D’s top picks of schools, as she felt (based on summer experiences and detailed discussions with friends in top MT programs) that very few of the most reputable MT options offered the quality of acting training she wanted. It was also her feeling that strong dance and voice training are more affordably and widely accessible outside of college than is world-class acting training (and as tracyvp says world-class lit and science instruction).</p>
<p>“One of D’s favorite acting teachers encourages his students NOT to go to college for theatre but rather for any other field of study, for that very reason. He points out that it’s pretty hard to find a literature or science professor down the street in most towns while GREAT performing arts instruction is pretty readily available in most medium to large cities.”</p>
<p>I personally take the opposite approach. I’m a creative writing minor who would rather major in theatre than the other way around–because I learn so much more about character and plot, style, etc. from acting than I would as a writing major.</p>
<p>Thank you for your response Coach C. I was hoping that you would comment. You have been helpful in helping me to understand why my d remains so hard on herself when she is doing well in her acting classes. It’s as though the more she learns the less satisfied she is and the more critical of her own performances and those of others.
I must travel for a week but when I return I look forward to revisiting this informative thread.</p>
<p>“It’s as though the more she learns the less satisfied she is and the more critical of her own performances and those of others.” This is very typical… the more you know the more able you are to critique what you are seeing others do and what you are experiencing yourself. This is not a negative as long as it doe not cause the performer to lock up and get stuck… although, sometimes even that can be a wonderful learning experience as the student discovers how to work past this. </p>
<p>Have a great week traveling! :)</p>
<p>thecheckbook – this is a great comment – “It’s as though the more she learns the less satisfied she is and the more critical of her own performances and those of others.” I think this a great comment and shows your D is truly engaged in the process. Acting is such a different art form than say painting or even singing or dancing where lots don’t seem to understand how involved it is and how long a road it is to get there. In a conversation with an acting coach, my daughter was explaining her frustration about the vision she had in her head as to how she wanted to execute a particular role and the fact she did not have yet the skills/tools to do it. The response she got back was interesting. She told her that having the ability to conceptualize what the “correct” performance looked like is a huge part of the battle and that many fail because they can’t “see” how far they still have to go. </p>
<p>By the way, I love your board name.</p>