Several intersections interests and concerns led to this topic. At the local level, we are a new course, experimenting with new forms of actor training. The students, understandably, are concerned with the economic viability of their choice of academic study post-graduation. At the same time, we do not offer traditional “actor training” in the conservatory model. This means that the value of the kind of individual artistic development that we are offering is not always transparent to the students. Furthermore, by offering introductions to such a wide range of artistic practices, we need to be clear with ourselves and our students exactly what our course can and cannot offer. Competing understanding of which “industry” we are preparing them for often pinpoints the site of competing hopes, expectations, and frustrations.
At the same time, in the wake of COVID and creative energy released by the BLM protest, the “industry” itself has been undergoing critical and long overdue self-critical introspection about everything from labor issues, casting and representation, funding and institutional structures. Long-standing industry practices are rapidly change, from casting formats to the length of the rehearsal week and tech rehearsals, are all being re-examined for their imbrication with racist, sexist, ableist, and other oppressive structures of power.
Given both the evolving nature of our course as it learns to disambiguate itself from other acting courses and the fast-changing nature of industry standards, the need to learn from our students about not only their understanding of “industry,” but their hopes and expectations for how they might transform it in the future.