Anyone else think making acting majors do tech in university theatre programs is

Question:I was a university theatre department head and theatre program director for 28 years, and I never liked the way the tech director insisted that actors had to do tech, but did not require techies to attend rehearsals. The actors then had to put in twice as much time on a show as did techies. I solved this problem by creating a company class in which everyone worked tech until the set was finished and props gathered, then rehearsals began. But this was a general theatre major, not an acting major. I think theatre programs which require acting majors to do more than act are bogus. What say you?

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: I was a university theatre department head and theatre program director for 28 years, and I never liked the way the tech director insisted that actors had to do tech, but did not require techies to attend rehearsals. The actors then had to put in twice as much time on a show as did techies. I solved this problem by creating a company class in which everyone worked tech until the set was finished and props gathered, then rehearsals began. But this was a general theatre major, not an acting major. I think theatre programs which require acting majors to do more than act are bogus. What say you?

As both an experienced actor and an experienced tech, I would agree with the basic thrust of your argument. While I agree that everyone involved in the production of a Show needs to have a working knowledge of the nuts and bolts, and given that creativity expresses itself in different ways, to REQUIRE actors to build sets (lights, costumes, etc.) is patently ludicrous. If actors wanted to build sets(lights, costumes, etc.), they would not act, and vice versa. Quite a number of us do both, with no long-standing ill effects.

"Builds Character", I hear the detractors reply. What a steaming load, quoth I.

The job of an actor is to be visible. The job of a tech is to be invisible. Both require a finesse. The follow-spot"er" shares the applause with the follow-spot"ese". It is a symbiotic relationship. Bad spot= really pissed off actor= bad Show. Nobody wins.

If a student is an "acting" as opposed to a "theatre" Major, it is (or at least it should be) presupposed that that student has a working knowledge of Theatre. Let that student focus on Acting the Show and let a Technical Theatre Major focus on
Building and Running the Show.

I think this established "tradition" is merely a way for the TD to get free labor. Actors should WANT to build and tech, not be REQUIRED to do so. If an actor chooses to be apart from the technical aspect of the Show, so be it. All I can say to said actor is: You do not know Theatre.

Require actors to learn tech? Require techs to learn acting?
Bullsh*t.

The Show is all that matters.

at the college I am at now, the tech people are encouraged to act, but everyone is REQUIRED to do tech hours (no matter if you are a techie or an actor). For myself, personally, I am a Stage Manager--I think it makes me a better Stage Manager, if I have acted/run lights/sound, etc...because then I know what is required of a Stage Manager from those perspectives. I think this is true for all "roles" in the theater. An actor is better at being an actor, if he understands and appreciates the props people, set crew, stage managers, etc. Everyone should have basic knowledge in other areas of theater, makes people more appreciative, knowledgeable and a better team. I do agree though, people in tech do tend to get spoiled...which I think is lame as well.

Where I live there is a college theater program. The students who are on scholarship are required to do tech and set construction. They submit a time sheet and they are paid every two weeks whatever they earned of their scholarship money. They don't require acting majors to do tech work or vice versa. The incentive is they get college credit if they do.

I am an actor and I do think that actors should have to do a little tech. Actors should understand and respect what eveyone on a project does.

You would be amazed at how few actors understand what it is to be a technician. I have heard of an actress on tour thinking how clever it is that each theatre they visited had the same set in it (not realising that the technicians arrived before them to set everything up!). Have you looked in dressing rooms after a show and seen costumes left in sweaty piles on the floor, expecting the dressers to pick them up and get them laundered and hung back up? How broken props are not mentioned and everything is magically expected to be fixed for the next show? As much as we backstage need to try to understand the workings of an actor, actors need a basic understanding of what we do. Of course thankfully there are numerous lovely actors (both famous and not famous) who appreciate the production as a whole, but there are some who think that the world revolves around them. We are all working towards the same aim - putting on the best work we can. Learning a little about others work can be no bad thing. If learned at the beginning of a career, then hopefully it will remain with them. In the UK, some smaller acting companies expect the actors to help out. A show I did at Christmas, there was no one to look after the costumes, so actors had to fix their own costumes when they needed new buttons etc.
In training, I think that all technicians should be made to attend some rehearsals.

Although I do understand where you are coming from, I would never have had the appreciation for the techies that I have now if, as an actor, I hadn't been required to do techie work. Plus, it is nice to have some other skill to fall back on, in smaller theatres (such as community theatres) people tend to have multiple roles within the theatre. I think the requirement should only be for one year, though. My school required acting majors to do some form of tech/crew work the entire four years, and it was beginning to get tiring when I was doing such extensive acting by the second year. My appreciation for the backstage crew/tech by the second year was already honed anyway.

What exactly do you mean by "tech" and "techies"?
Please explain because I don't get it.