Recently it was posited that “TV companies with shrinking audiences want to give their viewers something they already know about, but I honestly believe they underestimate the public. People will happily adopt something new if it’s properly produced”. This is absolutely correct, with the stumbling point of ‘economics’ and ‘business sense’ in its way to fruition in what’s sometimes called “the real world“¹

Part of the problem of TV/Movie/Book Production is that there’s a sort of Bourgeois mind set of those responsible for the selection of styles/content that ‘what the Proletariat of Viewers want/need to watch is “more of the same”’ so we get that. If you haven’t seen so much Pride & Prejudice that you’re ready to punch the next person wearing a bonnet, or vicar in a quaint round hat [illustration; below, right], then that’s fine.

However, when the concept of “new” and/or “different” is suggested to anyone with the power to sign a cheque, the terror begins to form in their soul. Those words mean “change” which leads to “brave” which then arrives at “risk”. When trying to make money, “risk” is never a good word. “Safe” is something one wants to use when describing results, as it’s a business that produces TV programmes, films, and books.

Suggest “Horror/Suspense” and the gamble implied may as well have “Lottery Win” and “Roulette” attached to it, and don’t bother to sit down in the lobby when dropping off your proposal; just leave it on the desk and there’s the door. In the UK especially, this genre² is viewed with disdain, mostly due to the arguably crap production quality of the films made by Hammer Films and Amicus Productions. There is also a heavy association with the “slasher film” in North America that does no good for the stories of Edgar Allan Poe, Arthur Conan Doyle, and the un-known authors of the Pahlavi Persian work Hazar Afsan (literally translated as “Thousand Tales”); all of those being creators of works under the umbrella term of ‘horror fiction’.

Pardon me whilst I step around that particular Hobby Horse of Horror of mine, briefly adding only that I was among those who confused “horror” with “blood & gore” (akin to mixing-up ‘sensually stimulating’ with ‘pornography’).

So… where was I?

Ah yes: ‘new’ v ‘guaranteed’.

The question of whether or not something ‘new’ is desired isn’t principally an artistic one, it’s one primarily of economics. When a theatre company’s Artistic Director selects scripts to be staged during a season, they’ve got to balance the shows which are probably not going to draw the walk-up crowds (Chinese folk tales of the 11^th Dynasty adapted to reduce the call for shadow puppets, for instance) and the shows that will attract people wandering by the venue (heart-warming tale of Christmas in a small town where citizens rally around to aide the local who’s always been helpful to them over the years, say). As altruistic as one can be about these things, no matter how well performed and clearly interpreted a show might be, no matter how well-placed the adverts are, no matter the glowing quality of the reviews, people will not automatically show-up to watch great theatre that’s out of the ordinary. Yes, more people will attend if it’s incredible than if it’s not, but you won’t have as much of a block-buster as if you’ve got a well-known title on the marquee.

The same holds true for TV, movies, and books. Agatha Christie, Charles Dickens, and Star Wars³ sell due to ‘brand recognition’ no matter how high the quality of the output might be. As good as all three are, their brilliance is shown through the aspect of their works being both well-crafted as well as popular. That ‘double-whammie’ is what sets them apart, not solely their quality. Fawlty Towers is another, although not really something on the same literary or budgetary level as the others.

There is also the category of things which are inspired in their creation, but either aren’t ‘popular’, bits aren’t too well done technically, and are the object of fanatical devotion by a small group of people; creations with a ‘cult following’. Examples of the ‘genius, if only we could sort out what it means’ material are The Prisoner [title card; below, left], early Doctor Who, and Space: 1999. We recently watched the full set of The Prisoner, as we’d not seen all of it, and certainly not anywhere close to being in order. There’s a plethora of moments to ‘spot the painted backdrop’, ‘spot the wires pulling things along’, and ‘spot the “background actor” having their voice dubbed-in’. Computer Generated Animation and so on were a long way in the future. That said, it was written with skill (frequently by McGoohan himself), and the acting/editing/photography/music were all perfectly suited for each other so its whole is a thing of beauty. At the time of its original presentation, the shows were sufficiently confusing to viewers that the second batch of episodes were cancelled in favour of one Finalé to wrap things up (with warning of only two or three weeks). This, sadly, proves the contention that ‘people mostly want something they already know.

So… how much do you want – no, ‘need’ is better – to make that painting, write that story, stage that play, or film that script? That’s the question. Money isn’t supposed to be part of it, you see.

Which is bollocks.

It’s possible to have both, but it is nowhere close to being as easy as doing something similar to something already being done. Let’s face it, even opting for ‘the familiar’ isn’t a walk in the park. It’s a lot of bloody hard work to produce a TV show/movie/book/play.

Meanwhile the “different” is reduced to the creative territory peopled by those who can best take a risk: those of us who have nothing left to lose.

What’s your passion? What is the thing which you must do to calm the desire in your soul? What must be accomplished in order to fulfil your creative potential?

Now… what are you going to do in order to get the thing done?

Answers on a postcard, please.

1. something one avoids experiencing through a combination of prescription medicine, copious amounts of alcohol, and a small Cuban girl named “Juanita” [BACK]
2. oddly referred to as ‘genre fiction’; no idea how that actually identifies which genre being discussed, yet it does [BACK]
3. the original trilogy, not that rubbish of “Episodes 1 – 3″! Eugh! [BACK]

Yes, more material which seems like a post, but is really a form which has been filled in. Sorry about that. I promise to do that one ab0ut my final day in London this week, really. It’s been a rough period in the past while, so ‘creativity’ was at a low ebb as a result.

This particular survey / meme is a bit of a difficult one for me, as the acting career was officially retired from a little over a year ago when I put my on-camera union membership on ‘withdrawn’ status. In theory one could return to the stage or screen at the drop of a hat, but as one is a character actor, which is something that both stage and screen doesn’t really know what to do with, the chances of a hat being dropped in my direction are pretty damned slim. Were someone to offer me something worthwhile, and for money, then it would be very much considered, but as there’s no shortage of people willing to audition for all of those roles even before anyone thinks of me and my limited skill-set, this guarantees the telephone won’t be ringing in quite some time. Perhaps in a couple of decades when I can play the ‘colourful grandfather who has twenty lines of witty comment’. In the meantime, I’m open, but expecting nothing.

Bogey (v. sepia)

The real reason I’ve bothered to fill this in is because I was tagged in a post by someone whose writing and acting I think the world of, and would never have expected to have included me in a list of ‘people you want to know more about the acting career of’. Stunning, really. Honoured and stunned, that’s me.

Are you an actor? Once you’ve been tagged, fill this out. At the end, tag 25 more actors including me. If I tagged you, it’s because I want to know more about you.

• LAST SHOW ADDED TO YOUR RESUME:
  A Primitive Physick, playing Rev. John Wesley in an industrial video about health (he was one of the roiginal advocates of basic health and diet for the Common Man)
• LAST SHOW YOU AUDITIONED FOR:
  A Primitive Physick, playing Rev. John Wesley.
• DID YOU GET IT:
  Clearly, yes. To see photos from the gig, head here
• LAST SONG YOU USED AT AN AUDITION:
  “Yesterday”, written by Paul McCartney (although credited to both he and John Lennon); used only because I realised at the last minute that they wanted a song and it was the only one I could think of doing on the spot (and acted through the lyric as much as I possibly could)
• FAVOURITE MUSICAL(S):
  West Side Story and Guys and Dolls
• FAVOURITE PLAY(s):
  Richard III, Titus Andronicus, Rosencrantz & Guildinstern are Dead, The Overcoat, Arcadia, It’s All True, This is a Play
• FAVOURITE ROLE YOU’VE PLAYED, AND FROM WHAT SHOW?:
  Bernard Nightingale, Arcadia
• FAVOURITE ROLE OVERALL THAT I WOULD LOVE TO PLAY:
  Oh crap, just one? Well, either Saturninus in Titus Andronicus or Richard III in the play of the same name, and probably I’d love to play Mozart in Amadeus
• SUPERSTITION:
  The Scottish play is never named, no matter where I am at the time, backstage or in the middle of a field of flowers
• YOUR GOAL IN SHOW BUSINESS:
  To return, probably; although doing a bit of film in the day and then on-stage that night would be good.
• WHAT WAS YOUR VERY FIRST SHOW?:
  Either 1993’s Keep Smiling Through (WWI & WWII musical review) or a three-act Mystery-Farce called Sight Unseen I did in grade 10 where I had a walk-through playing a Native American Ghost who was one of the other characters’ real estate advisor (did I mention it was a farce?)
• HAVE YOU EVER HAD A DANCE SOLO?:
  In a production of Guys & Dolls, during the Crap Shooter’s Ballet; while not thinking much about the difficulty at the time, I saw the video a few months later and screamed “HOLY SHIT! I’m dancing!”
• HAVE YOU EVER HAD A SINGING SOLO?:
  Other than when I was in a community choir in my youth, the only time has been in the musical review Keep Smiling Through when I sang “Goodby-ee” whilst doing a sort-of soft-shoe in combat boots clearly two sizes larger than I normally wear. The old ladies seemed to like it however.
• HAVE YOU EVER BEEN THE LAST PERSON TO TAKE A BOW?:
  In actuality, no, as there’s always an ensemble bow after anyone has their own; but a couple of times I’ve been the last person to bow before that group one
• HAVE YOU BEEN TO NEW YORK?:
  No. I have been to London — see posts on that — but saw the inside of no theatre whilst there; New York would be the same, probably as there’s too many galeries and museums to see and cool places to watch the extremes in humanity.
• HAVE YOU BEEN TO LA?
  Only to switch planes at LAX in order to attend a wedding in Santa Barbara, where I met Jennifer my delightful wife; LA is full of crazy people and I would only go there to work as an actor and right after the gig would get back home to Vancouver as fast as I could
• WHAT’S THE SCARIEST PART OF AN AUDITION?
  The split-second before the door to the room opens.
• WHAT’S THE BEST PART OF AN AUDITION?
  having finished and realising that you weren’t stressed during most of it
• NAME A SHOW YOU WOULD NEVER DO AGAIN:
  Vaudeville Varietials, a song and comedic review thing I did at Burnaby’s Heritage Village in an entirely concrete room with a 6½-foot ceiling in the basement of the bank with footlights six inches from the audience’s ankles, and a playing area only four-feet deep: the people in the front row were yelled at so the people in the rear could hear us, and they also recieved waaaaaay too much acting for the same reason. Most theatres have a slanted auditorum for a reason, people…
• NAME A SHOW YOU COULD DO FOR YEARS:
  Arcadia, because there is so very much material to think about in so very many ways you would never run out of ways to approach it, even after rehearsing for four months to work out ‘the best way’. Due to the complexity of the script, there’s much to do with all that inner-head stuff.
• WHAT ARE YOU AUDITIONING FOR NEXT?
  Not. In theory, the next project has to convince that it’s right for me
• DO YOU KEEP IN TOUCH WITH PAST CAST MEMBERS?:
  Sometimes, yes, but I’m not good with it. I don’t hate any of the people in past shows, I’m just on to the new thing so quickly with my attention, that’s all.
• ON A SCALE OF 1 – 10, HOW IMPORTANT IS GETTING PAID?
  It used to be a bonus, so probably 1 or 2; these days, it would be around 8
• SOMETHING EMBARRASSING OR UNEXPECTED THAT HAPPENED TO YOU WHILE ON-STAGE?:
  Every single light in the entire place went black in the midle of a scene when I was in grade 12. Even the lights in the audience along the aisles went black, due to the brand-new lighting board in the theatre blowing its sole fuse. The old board was still there, the lighting operator swapped over cables rapidly, powered up, then ran the lighting design by memory until the end of the show.
• WHO IS THE MOST DIFFICULT PERSON (ON STAGE OR OFF) THAT YOU HAVE EVER WORKED WITH?:
  Me, every single time.
• EVER BEEN NAKED ONSTAGE?:
  Oddly no, and the time for people to want to see that is long-gone, now that I’m in my mid-40s and getting tubby.
• HAVE YOU EVER BEEN KILLED?:
  Yes, but only the once, I think: shot on stage during The District of Centuries
• BEEN DRUNK?:
  I don’t think so.
• PLAYED SOMEONE HALF YOUR AGE?:
  no, but probably could (not boasting, I read young on stage)
• PLAYED SOMEONE TWICE YOUR AGE?:
  yes, but it wasn’t designed that way originally; I broke a bone in my foot during a run and had to use a cane, so when I returned the next week I was an 80-year-old guy with a cane instead of a 30-year-old guy who danced
• CRIED?:
  I don’t think so
• FIRED A GUN?
  Yes, and hated it the second time I had a show with one.
• BEEN DRENCHED?
  No, as typically the costumes are worth more than my performance is
• BEEN IN A DREAM SEQUENCE?
  Not intentionally, but there’ve been times I’ve had to snap myself out of alternate realities to get back into the scene… does that count?
• BEEN KISSED ON STAGE?
  Yup, but not often enough. I keep teling Jennifer that “if it’s on stage, then it’s not real, honey” and plan to only have affairs in that location, whether in a play at ther time or not

How best to combine The Bard and the latest technological craze: Twitter? Easy:

Go here for synopses of each of William Shakespeare’s plays in 140 characters or less: Pandora’s Skull: All the Twittered Shakespeare Synopses.