Why I'm Glad I Have a Day Job

This is what a theatre looks like.

I wrote a guest post over at Always the Planner a few months ago where I talked about some ways to get closer to your dream job.  You should go check it out if you haven't already.

The last bit of advice that I suggested in that post was to make sure to remember that you've got bills to pay.  My point was that if you've got steady income from a day job, it may be best to continue working in that position until you develop stronger footing in whatever your passion may be.

I'm pretty glad that I've taken my own advice.  Here's why.

Today, I start rehearsing for a play at one of the most reputable regional theatres in my area.  I will be working as the understudy for the male lead.  Because of this, I will not have to attend all rehearsals, but I will have to learn all of his lines (obviously), attend certain/most rehearsals, and be on call for all performances (it's the sort of thing where you'd like to go on stage, but you'd really rather whatever it would take for you to go on stage didn't happen [e.g., the lead actor would likely have been seriously injured and physically could not perform]).*

My rehearsal today is just over eight hours (including the meal break).  Even as an understudy, I'll probably spend close to a hundred hours total in rehearsal, and that's not counting the performance times where I'll need to be ready to go even though I will probably (knock on wood) not have to.

In exchange for my time, I have a contract with the theatre which states that they will pay me $250.  If my hundred hour figure above is accurate, that's $2.50 an hour I'll be taking home, pre-tax (which is about as good as the money I make over at Fiverr).

If the above sounds like I'm complaining, I assure you that I am not.  I'm chalking this whole experience up as a win.

First off, in my experience, the networking that comes with being in shows leads to more shows.  Second, I'm pretty excited to even be getting the opportunity to do anything with this show because I've never worked with this theatre company before.  I hope that my involvement will open the door for me with them in the future.

I love what goes into being an actor.  I have gladly done it for free, and I'll almost certainly do it for free again.

While one day, I hope working in theatre is all I do, I'm just glad having my day job affords me the opportunity to pursue what I love, even if it's on the side right now.

We've all got to take steps.  Here's another one for me.

*A buddy of mine is having a bachelor's party weekend while the show is going on that I can't go to; that's the only part that I'm complaining about.  Feel bad for me.

Photo by Andypiper.

The Arts Can Help the Economy?

In a recent article at the Denver Post, it was revealed that nonprofit theatres (read: not commercial for profit theatres on Broadway) contributed 1.9 billion dollars to the national economy in 2010.

The article states:

"The $1.9 billion impact estimate, based on surveys of 171 member companies and analysis of tax records filed by 1,636 more, accounts only for salaries, benefits and payments for goods and services. The actual impact is much greater, the theater group says, when you take into account dining, parking, babysitters, hotels and more. "

The study also asserts that, generally speaking, communities in which theatres pop up are communities that are then revitalized by the presence of that theatre, which further encourages the growth of local economies.  One researcher is calling this the "arts ripple effect."

So, not only is the theatre good in qualitative ways (enrichment of mind and soul), but it's also good for America (and Canada [and...the world!]) in down and dirty monetarily quantifiable ways.  Good to know.

Money and a New American Musical

As it has become something of a pop-cultural punchline, I imagine some of you have heard that somebody thought that it would be a good idea to have a Spider-Man musical on Broadway.  These people are named Julie Taymor,* Bono, and The Edge (yes, the latter two are of U2 fame).  This musical's development has intrigued me for the last couple of years, and I wanted to share a couple of thoughts.

What you may not have heard is just how much of a disaster the whole thing has turned out to be, particularly in regards to its (former) director and writer Julie Taymor.  Basically, it boils down to this: the show cost twice as much as any other Broadway show in history to mount (around $75 million), it started receiving horrible reviews, the producers told Julie Taymor to fix it, Taymor refused, Taymor was fired, and huge swatches of the musical were re-written.

Now, Taymor has brought suit against the producers claiming that she was only paid $125,000 five years ago for her work on the show.  She also alleges that she should be paid royalties for performances that continue to take place as she estimates that around 25% of the show as it stands now came directly from her ideas and input.  Considering how much the show cost to put on, this is a very low amount for the head writer/director to make.  Still, it's very surprising to me that whatever contract that she had didn't stipulate, you know, that she should be paid for her work.

From an outsider's perspective, one could argue that Taymor ran the production into the ground, and that, while she should be compensated for whatever work she did prior to her departure, it is odd to pay her for a production that was substantially changed after she left the show.  Still, if it's true that 25% of the show came from her artistic vision (though, one wonders just how such a percentage can be substantiated), one would think that her intellectual property ought to be worth something.

To top the whole thing off, Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark** has been making buku bucks since it opened (pulling in as much as $1.6 million gross a week, which is HUGE by Broadway standards), but any optimism that the production could have in making that money is hindered by the fact that it costs well over a million dollars a week to put the show on (salaries and elaborate special effects are expensive, it turns out), which leaves the producers somewhat cash-strapped.

I guess what makes this interesting to me is that, for better or worse, Julie Taymor really had a vision for the show.  She wanted to create something new and exciting.  She invested several years of her life in putting it together, and, even so, this well-regarded and brilliant director still managed to created something that people thought was ridiculous and awful.  As an example, after seeing one of the preview performances, the main critic for the New York Times wrote in his review, "I’m not kidding. The sheer ineptitude of this show, inspired by the Spider-Man comic books, loses its shock value early. After 15 or 20 minutes, the central question you keep asking yourself is likely to change from 'How can $65 million look so cheap?' to 'How long before I’m out of here?'"***

Look, I appreciate that Broadway is about making money.  In America, success is inextricably linked to how much money can be made.  That's fair enough.  The producers needed to put out a saleable product, and Taymor wasn't as interested in making money as she was in staying true to her vision. That is also fair enough.

But it continues to fascinate me that somebody so talented could spend so much money and be in cahoots with two of the biggest rock stars in the world, and still put out something that people seemed to only like for its camp value.  Having more money is not always the answer when it comes to creating great art, it seems.

While the motivational rallying cry for many nowadays is "Go big or go home," Julie Taymor is one of the few who got to "Go big and go home."  I'm curious what she'll come up with next.

*Julie Taymor is, perhaps, most famous for her work on the Broadway version of The Lion King.
**This is maybe the worst name for anything I've ever seen.  How exactly does one turn off the dark?  Is it the same as turning on a light?
***At the time he saw it, the production had "only" cost $65 million.

Professional Goals: A Theatre Update

I got word back a few days ago that I had received an understudy part at a local (though very well-regarded regional) theatre.  While I was, admittedly, hoping to get an onstage role, I'm pretty happy to be able to get my foot in the door with this company since I think they do great work.

As a side perk, this is a straight play (as opposed to a musical).  While I love doing musicals,* my resume is fairly lacking in terms of non-singing roles, so I hope that I will be a more attractive candidate in future auditions due to this part.  There's also the small matter of the fact that I'll be getting paid for my involvement, and it's just gee-golly-gee-whiz-super-whiz-bang-terrific to get paid for doing something that you love.

I'm glad to back making money from a side-hustle that I love doing.  Here's hoping this is a good next step towards making theatre a full-time hustle.

*If you're interested, you can see/hear me singing here in a production of Godspell a few years back.**
**That's right, it's on Myspace, AND I totes misspelled/used a wrong word in the description.  Want to fight about it?

Opportunites Can Be Made Indirectly

Tonight, I have an audition with a local theatre company that I've been trying to get my foot in the door with for years.  They do excellent work, and pay their non-union actors (read: me) pretty well.

However, I didn't get this opportunity directly through any thing I did.  When I responded to the listing via email (as they requested), I didn't get a response from them.  I figured they had a lot of other people respond, so I didn't take it personally.

So how did I end up with an audition tonight?

Several years ago, I made friends with another actor.  He and I have worked together on at least one other play since then, and we think well of each other.  About a week ago, this actor was having a conversation with the stage manager for the theatre in question, and she stated that she was looking for more character actors to audition for the show.  My buddy recommended me, and the next day, she called me to set up an audition time.

Remember, I didn't get a call when I submitted my headshot and resume online; I got a call when a friend put in a good word for me.

Now, obviously, just getting an audition does not an acting job make, but the more opportunities that I have to be seen, the more opportunities I have to get jobs, and the closer I can get to, perhaps, working in the theatre on a more full-time basis.

I might get a foot in the door over there yet.

5 Ways to Save on Theatre Tickets

Live theatre is generally a pricy enterprise for those who want to see it.  Happily, one of the perks of getting a master's degree in drama is that I can go to the theatre and justify the cost to myself under the auspices of "professional development." Still, if there's a way for me to save money when going to see a play or a musical, it's always a good idea.  To try to mitigate the costs, here are a couple of ways that I've used to save money on ticket prices.*

1)  Usher - Do you own a white, collared shirt and black slacks? Congratulations! You're qualified to be an usher! Many theatres offer free admission to people who own the above clothes and are willing to volunteer their time by arriving 30-45 minutes prior to showtime in order to help audience members find their seats. Go to just about any theatre's website for more information on how to get involved in this way.

2)  Friends - Are you friends with somebody who's in a play?  If so, that person likely has some "comps" (complimentary tickets).  If you ask your buddy real sweet and nice-like, he or she just might hook you up to let you see the show for free.

3)  Local Discount Ticket Brokers - In New York, you can buy cheaper tickets the day of the show (or sometimes a few days ahead) from the TKTS booth in Times Square (or one of the other two booths they operate).  The catch is that you need to go in person and wait in line for the tickets.  The logic behind selling half-price tickets is one of simple economics:  it's better for the theatre to make some money (by selling at a discount the day of the performance) as opposed to no money (empty, unsold seats equal lost earnings).  Here in San Diego, there's a local organization called Arts Tix which sells discounted tickets as well.  I'm pretty sure that there are others in other cities as well, I'm just not familiar with them by name.  Readers, do you know of any local discount ticket purveyors?

4)  Online Discount Sites - Goldstar.com immediately springs to mind.  You are able to purchase discounted tickets here online, and it sells tickets to events in multiple cities (Atlanta, San Francisco, Las Vegas, and others).  I have also seen tickets sold on Groupon, but these deals are much more sporadic, and therefore, harder to plan.

5)  Take Advantage of Available Discounts - One of my favorite discounts that I've been getting lately is due to my age.  Theatre is often seen as being kind of old-fashioned, and so theatres are desperate to get young people in the audience.  As such, one of the major theatres in San Diego, The Old Globe, offers $20 tickets to people who are under 30 years old.**  Other discount opportunities include cheaper tickets for students, seniors, and groups.

Anybody else take advantage of other theatre discounts?  Let me know in the comments.

*This comment is not meant to imply that I don't think theatres are worthy places to pay full-price. Particularly in a bad economy, arts organizations, such as theatres, struggle to pay their bills. Personally, I think that if you *can* afford to pay full-price to go to the theatre (especially for newer/smaller/more adventurous theatres), it's not a bad investment.
**As I'm currently 29, I'm going to ride this discount for all it's worth until I turn 30 in May.

Edit 09/19/2011:  This post was featured in the 327th Carnival of Personal Finance at Mrs. Nespy's World

Amadeus and Economics - Are You Salieri or Mozart?

Last week, I had the opportunity to go see the play Amadeus at the Old Globe Theatre here in San Diego. Many of you are undoubtedly more familiar with the movie version from 1984 which starred F. Murray Abraham as composer Antonio Salieri and Tom Hulce as Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Nevertheless, it was originally a play, and its original Broadway cast featured Ian Mckellen (Gandalf!) as Salieri and Tim Curry as Mozart.*

For those of you who may be unfamiliar with the work, Amadeus (fictionally) dramatizes the relationship that composers Salieri and Mozart had. The work dwells quite a bit on Salieri’s jealousy towards Mozart, so much so that Salieri starts out the play by suggesting that he had a hand in the untimely death of Mozart. Much of the dramatic tension focuses on Salieri’s systematic dismantling of Mozart’s opportunities towards composing work and Mozart’s subsequent inability to take care of himself or his family. At the end of the play, Salieri, in comparing his own middling music with Mozart's genius, declares himself the “patron saint of mediocrity,” and this pronouncement seems to play out in the real world as Salieri is largely forgotten while Mozart is certainly within the first few classical composers nearly any person can name.

This leads me to my personal finance point. Salieri is shown in the play spending much time coming up with ways to destroy Mozart, but he is never shown composing music. Contrariwise, Mozart is frequently shown scribbling away in efforts to write his next piece of music which he hopes will provide him with economic stability.

My point is that every dollar that you or I spend is a dollar that cannot be spent somewhere else. This is the basis of much financial writing, such as the Latte Factor (if I buy a coffee drink every day, that’s three bucks that I can’t save for retirement or other life goals).

Similarly, each hour we receive on earth is a gift, and each hour we spend on one task is an hour that we cannot spend on something else. For example, I have stated that one of my goals is to write and submit a play to a playwrighting contest by the end of the year. However, if I spend my hours away from work watching television and not doing any writing, then I’m not achieving my goal because I am choosing to spend my time in a way other than one that is personally fulfilling.

Had Salieri spent more time writing music, and less time hating on poor old Mozart, perhaps he could have been better remembered by posterity.** Instead, if Salieri is remembered at all, it is generally as a fictionalized character in a play.

Each and every hour of our lives is precious, and once these hours are spent, they are gone forever. One key difference between the economics of time and money is that while money can be saved, hours cannot be.

So, how are you spending your time? Are you a Salieri who complains while others forge pathways to their dreams? Or are you a Mozart, who takes what you’ve been given, and uses it in a mighty way?

*What a cast! What a production it must have been! I wish I could have seen it.
**While one might argue that propensity towards a skill is more important than just spending a lot of time on that skill, I’d argue that even all the propensity in the world won’t pay off without putting a butt in a chair and starting to work.