Thousands of actors come to Los Angeles every year to pursue the crazy dream that is becoming a famous actor. With hundreds of thousands of people living here attempting to be actors, only a few thousand of those actually get work and have a successful career in acting (Man). Since it seems that getting struck by lightening is more probable than actually becoming a famous actress, why do so many of us still go after that dream? When more often than not people give you a giant eye roll after hearing your profession of choice, why do we still take our goal of becoming an actor seriously? I refer to “we” as the collective group of artists I have come to know since I moved to Los Angeles two years ago. When so many people look at acting as a meaningless, vain, and an impractical profession, what combats all of that negativity and causes it to be a passion that many of us live for, and would love to spend doing our whole lives? It is important to explore the reasons why acting is a valid career. It is more than just showing up and saying lines. Rather, it requires hard work, dedication, and good moral judgment.
So many people view acting as either a worthless career or an unachievable career. I find it hard to believe that a mass amount of people would devote themselves to or dream about doing something with their lives that was actually so meaningless. Impractical- I can understand. Since the odds are not good for being able to make a living off of acting, it is not a safe bet for anyone who is hung up on being financially stable at all times. It would definitely be a more reliable source of income to trade in acting for being a teacher or a lawyer. But for me acting is worth that risk. Why? Because when it comes to acting there is more than meets the eye. It is not just instant gratification for an audience or cheap entertainment that has no impact on the world. Granted those two categories are alive and well, but as a whole that has no affect on my love for the art form.
It is remarkable that actors have gone from being the social equivalent of prostitutes and beggars in Ancient Roman times, to the likes of Jared Leto or Lupita Nyongo making life-changing speeches at the Academy Awards (Trumball). In Leto’s speech he said, “For the 36 mil people who have lost the battle to AIDS, and to those of you out there who have ever felt injustice because of who you are or who you love, tonight I stand here in front of the world, with you and for you.” (Jared) This just goes to show that the entertainment industry and the way actors advocate for certain causes can have an affect on society. Speeches like these really reflect the cultural progress we are making as a country. Even fifty years ago Lupita’s speech when accepting her Oscar would have been unimaginable. Now with her words, “When I look down at this golden statue, may it remind me and every little child that no matter where you’re from your dreams are valid.” (John) She has become an inspiration to millions of people. Not only that, but now we have an all black cast winning for “Movie Of The Year”. Not only does acting help to hold up a mirror to the ugly parts of society, but also to all the good progress and change that is being made. It inspires change and thought on the part of the audience, as well as making the audience feel like their demographic and issues they care about are being represented and validated in the limelight.
Audiences go to watch performances in the theater, movies, etc. for a variety of reasons. Some of which include: to enjoy an emotional experience, to learn something, to provoke thought and change in themselves, to be entertained, to get lost, not think about their troubles, and enjoy a cathartic release. Each audience member walks away with a slightly different experience. That is the magic. Depending on what that specific person is going through in their life and their specific point of view on the world, that piece of art they just watched is going to affect them differently. That is why artists and actors have to have a clear vision of what they want to present and then relinquish control and realize that everyone is going to come away with a different experience and opinion.
Many times watching actors go through emotional life experiences can be therapeutic for an audience member. Granted if the acting is not particularly engaging or compelling, a very powerful message or scene can be lost on the audience. This is why actors have the responsibility to train and rehearse until they feel their performance is at a level that will reach the audience. But I digress, I feel that at least once in everyone’s life, something bad has happened or unpleasant emotions have been present and the person affected has just wanted to escape and stop thinking about their own issues. To do this they have gone to a movie to distract themselves. People use movies as an escape to focus on the story and the struggle the characters are going through. Sometimes this helps to put their own problems into perspective. Especially for people that have trouble letting out or expressing emotions, it can be healthy to watch a movie and feel empathetic towards the characters. It is a “safe” way for some people to feel stronger emotions than they would usually be comfortable feeling in normal every day life on their own. This idea of catharsis comes from the Greek word katharsis meaning “purification” or “cleansing” It is the purification and purgation of emotions—especially pity and fear—through art or any extreme change in emotion that results in renewal and restoration.” It was originally used when Aristotle wanted to describe the effects of his tragedies on the audience members (Olsen). A theory behind catharsis is that by allowing people to release emotion vicariously through characters, it relieves the build up of emotion that people hold in on a day-to-day basis that would otherwise continue to raise tension levels.
In this way, instead of immediately viewing acting as a meaningless profession filled with vanity, it is easier to see why actors find joy in bringing this release to the audience. Instead of just wanting to be in the spotlight, it is about affecting people and sharing a story that will make them think. Art, that matters, has something to say. Art, that matters, makes an audience leave thinking about something, affected and maybe even changed. Actors want to be a part of this art that matters. Without actors there would be no way to facilitate some of the most moving and amazing stories.
Because of how moving some performances can be, the argument that really gets to me is the “Anyone can do it, it’s only about looks and luck” argument. While I do understand there are certain celebrities who happened to be at the right place, at the right time, with the right make up on, and look right for the perfect role, I do not agree that anyone can be a successful actor and that it is not about skill. People like Meryl Streep and Johnny Depp did not become people like Meryl Streep and Johnny Depp by simply having the “right look”. They have something magnetic and deep about them. They put in their utmost effort with every role they receive and truly embody their characters. They have one hundred percent commitment and throw themselves completely into the project, allowing themselves to be completely vulnerable, taking huge risks and being willing to fail. Only these risks yield the hugest rewards with outstanding performances and moving stories reaching giant audiences. Sure, anyone can be girl #3 and say one line. A monkey could do that. And sometimes does actually do that. But not everyone can go into an audition, bear their soul, use all of their training, risk completely messing up, and then book the role of a lifetime based on nothing more than their skill.
It irks me beyond belief when people take what I want to do with my life and act like it is not much to aspire to and/or anyone could do it without even trying. No one ever says that to an accountant or a doctor. Why are those professions considered so much more valuable than an art form? They are just valuable in different ways. No one says that to an Olympic ice skater. Skating on ice and telling a physical story to music while using amazing technique, is also an art form. Then why don’t people comment that anyone could do it? Probably because of the intense athletic ability and coordination it takes. Well, I would argue that this same level of ability is needed in an emotional and technical way in the acting world. A remark made by Antonin Artaud, “Actors are the athletes of the heart”, has stuck with me throughout the years of my acting training. Not everyone is as in touch with his or her emotions and ready to bear their soul to an audience such as a trained actor is. Acting is valuable in a cultural and emotional way rather than a physical or monetary way.
Famous actors also most times use their fame as a platform for activism for a particular cause they care a lot about. That in itself is amazing. When an actor’s art form has gained such a following that they are able to use that to raise awareness and money for foundations that are actively helping and seeking change for our generation. It is a win, win situation. Just look at Sandra Bullock. The amount of money and time she has put into charity work is almost unmatched by any other celebrity and yet she is one of the most successful actresses in Hollywood. Granted, there are a lot of useless reality television stars or outrageously irresponsible celebrities in the headlines every day, but that is just because this is the one profession where all those mistakes are made publicly. If any other career had people’s every move broadcast for all the world to see, I am sure there would be just the same proportion of people with their lives together and ones making huge mistakes.
Even after choosing this controversial career, there are hard choices to make throughout the entire thing. Because this is one of the only career paths that does not move in a linear, A plus B equals C, format, there are many ways in, and many ways to progress. For example, when working at a corporate job, it is a common expression to start at the bottom and then climb the “ladder” of the company. When it comes to the entertainment industry this does not necessarily apply. People can skip right to the top if they are “discovered” or know the right people. There are many stories of “casting couch” experiences where stars have gotten parts by being sexually exploited during the audition process. If in one of these situations, it then becomes a moral dilemma for many actors. Do I comply with these degrading requests and possibly get the big break my career needs, or do I stick to my morals and walk out? You would think the answer would be easy, but when placed in the situation many an actor have caved under the pressure and done sexual favors for casting directors in order to “get the part”. In fact, among many other celebrities, Gwyneth Paltrow, admitted about her sleazy casting experience, ““When I was just starting out, someone suggested that we finish a meeting in the bedroom. I left. I was pretty shocked. I could see how someone who didn’t know better might worry, ‘My career will be ruined if I don’t give this guy a blow job!’ (Torgovnick). It has happened to the best of them, and yet it is rarely publicly spoken about.
The moral dilemmas do not stop there. They pop up throughout every actor’s career. Most actors in Hollywood have been asked some of the following: Are you willing to do partial nudity for this scene? Are you willing to do full nudity? Are you willing to use heavy profanity? Are you willing to portray a homosexual? Are you willing to do a same sex love scene? Are you willing to commit acts of violence? Are you willing to portray substance abuse? Are you willing to be in a rape scene?
While these questions might sound alarming to a non-actor, it kind of comes with the territory of signing up to be a part of the entertainment industry. As far as how to reply to these propositions- now that is the golden question.
Many actors would look at these situations and assert that they do not line up with their personal moral code. But then the question comes, what is the job of the actor, and where do you draw the line? The job of the actor is to portray a character in that character’s world, honestly. When acting, it is not a representation of the actor themselves, but rather, as the embodiment of that character. When stepping into a character’s shoes to portray them honestly, it is important not to judge the morals of that character. If an actor stands in judgment of their character then it will show in their performance. The more an actor empathizes with the emotions and motivations of that character, the more realistic and touching the performance will be. That being said, an actor cannot completely remove his or her own emotions and morals from a situation. So where is the line drawn of what an actor should push themselves to do and what they should turn down doing? Is that line the same for every actor?
From my experience in the entertainment industry on both the acting side and the management side, I would say that the moral line is and should be different for every actor. That being said, I am tempted to assert that there technically should be no line because “acting is acting” and therefore our own morals do not apply when portraying an imaginary character in an imaginary world. However, in my own experience as an actor I have come to realize that this situation is not so black and white.
Working as an assistant at an acting management company in Beverly Hills I have witnessed lots of fantastic opportunities and roles being turned down due to moral issues with the content. Some of which I can understand and some of which I cannot. For example, one child turned down a role on a sitcom because of the heavy use of profanity. Because of his age it seemed much more understandable to turn down the role for this reason, especially since his mother was raising him not to speak that way. For children, the moral consideration for acting roles, in my opinion, is more important because the line between their real life and their character’s imaginary life can be more easily blurred and they might adopt some of these questionable actions in their day to day life. However, if an adult were to turn down a role because of language (which I have seen happen) I would personally feel like they are throwing away a good opportunity. The reality is, most adults use profanity every now and then, and most acting roles are portraying the reality of our society today. Film and television is a way of holding up a mirror to society and showing us the good, the bad, and the ugly. So sometimes, actors need to suck it up and show the bad and the ugly sides of society. Another line that actresses specifically need to clarify for themselves is how comfortable they are with sexuality on screen. I have had experience with an actress that is very beautiful (she is usually type cast as the “hot girl next door”) who refuses to even hold another guy’s hand when acting because she has a husband who wants her to maintain the same boundaries in acting as she does in real life for their marriage. Yet another complicated aspect of an actor or actresses life – Dealing with loved ones who draw the moral line at a different place than you do personally.
Another moral problem that any actor or actress may and probably will encounter is whether or not they agree to take a role that perpetuates a stereotype they do not agree with. In other words, does an actor who is, in day to day life, categorized and stereotyped as a nerd, bully, dumb-blonde, bitch, thug, or any number of negative connotations for minorities, etc. choose to take a role that perpetuates this stereotype for viewers. I would say the line lies between if the role has purpose and meaning or if the role is just filler. If the role is holding up a mirror to society and making a comment on why it is not true or if that role serves a greater purpose in the work to expose a bigger truth then there is a respectable reason to take the part. Whereas, if the role is just included for gratuitous violence or stereotyping just to stereotype then there is no need to be the actor that takes the part.
Taking parts and turning down parts based on moral standing is completely based on personal judgment. While everyone might not agree with an actor’s reason to turn down a role, in the end it is not really an issue because there are hundreds of other actors who would kill to have that part, and will now maybe have the opportunity to audition for it. As depressing as it may be, every actor is replaceable in that respect. Many a time actors turn down roles that would have launched their career into ultimate stardom. This was the case with Dana Delaney. She turned down the lead role in “Sex In The City” because she “didn’t want to be in a show about sex” and instead the role went to Sarah Jessica Parker. SJP is now a cultural icon and will forever be known for one of the most successful shows of all time. Delaney said she “has no regrets”, but it just goes to show that when offered a part that conflicts with morals each actor has to be absolutely certain where they draw the line because if they are not sure it may turn into a life long regret (Sewards).
Every actor has their own path, their own success story, their own struggles, and their own moral boundaries. That is what makes each actor so unique and able to bring a different life perspective to his or her work. When deciding to become an actor each person will have to face these moral questions for themselves, and put in all the hard work for amazing roles at some point in their careers. Acting is more than “just” acting. Instead of just being a “cool” way to get “famous”, it should be more commonly thought of as a respectable way of portraying and expressing stories and making a change in the world. It is an art form that deserves due respect and so much more than that.
Works Cited
“ANTONIN ARTAUD.” FinestQuotes. FinestQuotes, 2013. Web. 08 Mar. 2014.
“Jared Leto’s Acceptance Speech – Oscars 2014.” Dailymotion. IdolxMuzic, 3 Mar. 2014.
Web. 07 Mar. 2014.
John, Arit. “Lupita Nyong’o Oscar Acceptance Speech Is Everything – The Wire.” The
Wire. N.p., 2 Mar. 2014. Web. 08 Mar. 2014.
Man, Agent. “The Need-to-Know for Actors Moving to L.A.” Backstage.com. Backstage,
4 Feb. 2013. Web. 08 Mar. 2014.
Olsen, Peggy. “Catharsis In Psychology.” Education Portal. Education Portal, 2003.
Web. 06 Mar. 2014.
Sewards, Lisa. “I Could Have Been Bree or Carrie Bradshaw -but I’ve No Regrets.” Mail
Online. Associated Newspapers, 25 Aug. 2011. Web. 08 Mar. 2014.
Torgovnick, Kate. “Casting Couch.” The Frisky. The Frisky, 11 Oct. 2010. Web. 08 Mar.
2014.
Trumbull, Eric. “Introduction to Theatre — Roman Theatre.” Introduction to Theatre –
Roman Theatre. NOVA, Nov. 2007. Web. 06 Mar. 2014.
Katie's Take 