I just gotta ask this...

 

Why is that everyone working on a show feels that they are at the bottom of the totem pole (with the possible exception of the director)? Actors (we've all heard the complaint that they're treated like cattle), stage crew, lights, sound, house manager, music director, set construction, you name it... we're always complaining that "we don't get no respect!" There's a sociology term paper in this somewhere!

 

Sorry, couldn't resist...

not sure that made sense. maybe a little to corn ball but hey you asked!

 

I kind of thought I was making a funny when I raised the question, but it looks like this is a bigger issue than I thought. Having worked virtually every job a show can require (and some that were made up on the spot), I learned long ago that every job is important and treat it accordingly.

Nichelle,

No, I'm not a trained director, but I've been doing it for 17 years (on the job training, anyone?). I am a trained sound tech, made my living at it for a number of years, but never asked for a dime from a CT. Today, I'm employed as webmaster and computer programmer (yep, trained at that, too). I donate my expertise when asked to my local CT. Why? Because they need me. I've never made any money doing community theater (25 years and counting); it usually costs me money.

 

I'm sorry you think you should be paid more, but if it's the money that's important to you, why work for community theater in the first place? There ain't no money there. At least ask for more money and if the offer isn't good enough, tell 'em "no".

 

I think we all know that there is more to choreography than stringing a bunch of steps together, just as there is more to acting than learning your lines and not bumping into the furniture. As to the pay issue, well, nobody makes a living doing community theater.

 

You know the biggest payoff I ever got out of a community theater? Being asked to direct another show.

 

I'm sorry, but there are countless positions within the theatre that take up time inside and outside rehearsal ... many that take hours more time than the three you listed ... lighting and set design and construction (you're forgetting that they have to research and draw everything up to scale before they can even begin to do their work onstage), and costumers (it's not just about dressing up in pretty clothes ... they have research on styles and colors, drawings, fittings, etc.) just to name a few.  When was the last time you heard an audience member say how wonderful the lights looked or how well the costumes fit?

 

I, like some (but not all) am trained in this profession.  If I could have made a living off of it where I was living, I wouldn't have returned to school to "make a living". 

 

A community theatre is just that ... community!  And a community theatre that takes the best interest in producing quality theatre (rather than just dressing up and playing make-believe) is going to succeed.

 

Okay ... that's off my chest.  Sorry if I stepped on anyone's toes.  I don't mean to.  No one should be overlooked for their efforts is all I'm saying.

While I agree with you that those positions you cited do indeed take a lot of time if pursued as thoroughly as they should be, I take exception to your statement that they take "hours more time than the three you listed".  As a long-time director (30+ years), I find myself a little hot under the collar that the assumption by many is that the director merely shows up at the auditions, casts the show, then sits back and directs without any prep work (though I have worked with a few that have done just that!).  I did a rough estimate just lately, and found that for every hour of time that I put in at a rehearsal, I have already put in 3 hours of prep, study, script analysis, blocking, character work, light and scenic planning, costume research, period research, and so on.  Though I don't actually design all of the tech areas I mentioned (though I usually create an overall design concept), I feel it's necessary to be prepared in those areas too, so that communication with the actual designers is facilitated, allowing for a unified creative picture.

 

I agree that no-one should be overlooked for their efforts, but I have often (maybe even usually) found that the director IS overlooked. Think about it honestly.....how many times have YOU (as a member of the cast or crew) ever walked up to a director after his/her  show has opened and said "thank you so much for your time and efforts"?  Yet the director is blasted if he/she neglects to thank every actor and "techie" (a term I use with great affection.  I have been a "techie" many times).  Maybe it's different in your theatres....I hope so.

 

Luckily, many of us that direct gain all the satisfaction we need from being able to watch the finished product and seeing how much the audiences are enjoying and appreciating the shows.   

 

Remember, if the show is good, the actors are given credit.  If the show bombs, the director gets the blame!

 

Have you hugged your director today?

I've never made any money doing community theater (25 yars and counting); it usually costs me money.

I'm sorry you think you should be paid more,

At least ask for more money and if the offer isn't good enough, tell 'em "no".

As to the pay issue, well, nobody makes a living doing community theater.

 However everyone thinks they should be paid more in every job on the planet. It is part of life. I happen to think my day job needs to pay me more! I do CT for the love of my art not the love of $$. If I wanted to make it rich I would have studied something else.

I would think as a dancer you would get something in return for your hard work... new students for your classes or help with dance concerts... not to mention the chance to plug you dance classes to a captive crowd.

We are all over worked and under paid.  And a good number of us in get no adulation from the crowd for a job well done and when there is money to pay folks the Director,Music Director and the choregrapher are on the top of the list. SM most of the time on the bottom. Every group is different.

Just my 2 cents if it even makes sense

This is probably a different (although related topic) but, there is a grey area that has come up with some positions.  I think Chris (or maybe Mike) mentioned in another forum that they hire musicians or a music director because the skills required are not something that any volunteer can do, which I would imagine is the case for other CTs as well. And I'm submitting that one could apply the same logic to choreographers and possibly other positions. And diva mentioned that there are people in production jobs that by choice don't do (or perhaps don't have the knowledge to do) the "homework" aspects of the job, but I've seen that occur in all production areas (from costumes, to choreography, to directing) - it happens and yes, even when professionals are hired. But when hiring a professional a certain level should be expected (even if they've accepted the job for less than their average pay), so there's an option of not hiring them again. Non-pros (those who don't make a living in the area of production in which they are working) that are paid are in a strange realm of being a volunteer but at the same time not being a volunteer- and emotions, egos, length of time spent as a volunteer come into play.  I don't claim to have answers but the issues are interesting to me.  I do think that leveling the playing field in stipends would help whether the pay is $0, or more.

 

And every group is different and I'm sorry if I lumped them together, but in my experience (which has included CTs in different parts of the U.S.) there has in every case been a large difference in pay for directors versus choreographers and I do question why.  It's possible that the CTs represented here are different from the theatres I've come in contact with.  But I guess I've seen a similar scale posted in the forums here and (perhaps too quickly) concluded that it's the same in most places. I do apologize if I've come to the wrong conclusion and/or excluded other staff who are also low on the pay scale. And, I apologize that this thread has gotten so off-topic.

Get over yourselves- all of you.

 

Eliminating pay won't cure the main problem here- that everyone THINKS he has the most important job or logs the most hours.

 

Pay enables theaters to attract talented people that do make some significant, unique sacrifice.  How much they pay and to whom is a considered judgment that can reasonably vary show to show.  But there is nothing wrong with pay as a concept.  Don't hate the game; hate the players.

 

Eventually I learned that if you want to earn a living in the arts you have to work for an arts business, not as an artist.  I started my own business.  Eighteen years later we are doing ok.  And guess what I like best about it?  Doing business in a way that cares more about people getting the artistic effects that want in a budget they can afford--rather than just working for the dollar.  I know it sounds funny, but I like saving people money while getting kick-ass effects.  I'm old enough now that I know I won't get rich.  I'm old enough to know that satisfaction with something done really well is worth more than money.  When you love something enough, you pay yourself in 'love' by doing it.  After all why would anyone want to do art poorly?  Give it your best and consider that your pay (and be greatful that you get the chance and can afford to take it!).

 

Now having really burned out my hands on doing big artwork for sets (mostly by myself), I do fine arts (oil painting).  I charge for it--and donate all proceeds to charity.  And again I've got that 'love' feeling.  If someone enjoys my artwork enough to hang it, wow!, right?  I'm not da Vinci, but my art hangs in a cathedral in Phoenix, in a senator's office in Washington, in an important judge's livingroom, and in my daughter's house.  Sure I don't get paid (after donating it, I don't), but my reward is elsewhere--and my charity benefits lots of abused kids.  Who wins? Me, kids, and whoever likes the art.  And my kids learn that its OK to be an individual--even fun.