To think it's wrong that Dance and Drama students get so much help with degree costs?

[Serin]

When everyone else has to pay £9000 a year and then living costs.
If the government has money to fund some courses why not use it to fund nursing students?
www.gov.uk/dance-drama-awards

Do we have a chronic shortage of actors?

I notice the OP is singling out actors & dancers & not including musicians who often end up taking two lotsof funding (MDS awards from age 8-18 at private music schools like Cheethams followed by a Conservatoire degree (4 years)

And incidentally my conservatoire trained dh who now teaches in a DaDa funded college also uses his specialist knowledge of voice & singing to work alongside speech therapists to help rehabilitate people with speech problems/voice injuries. He has helped run training courses for speech therapists & has a colleague who runs a hospital voice clinic.

Quite a few dancers go on to become Physios, incidentally.

Also was going to say quite a few of the dance graduates I know went on to use their knowledge of the body and nutrition to train to become masseurs/occupational therapists/osteopaths/professionals in body conditioning etc. So essentially in the health industry.

And: I had a fairly pushy mum and did tons of dance as a child (I did enjoy it though) it fizzled out around age 13/14. The vast majority of kids who are still pursuing dance past this kind of age are not doing so because of pushy parents.

At age 16 many many children take what some people may perceive as frivolous college courses.

We see no issue with a non academic child doing a Level 3 btec in performing arts despite not necessarily having the talent to actually go into this as a career. But we say the team building, working with people skills are useful so let's fund this via local FE colleges or indeed the myriad of other btecs.

So what is wrong with the small number of children who by age 16/17 already have performance skills far above the level required to pass a btec being funded to study a course at a higher level. (My dd passed Level 3 dance qualifications aged 14 & drama aged 15) They can't go straight onto a degree at age (unless it's one of the 3 classical ballet ones mentioned). Rigorous auditions mean it's only a select few.

Why would the govt stop funding for nursing/midwifery/paramedics etc and yet continue with this. I know if it is stopped it isn't going to help health care students but why wasn't this cut before the health care funding? We badly need nurses and midwives and lots of other HCP.

oh AkexanderHamilton (Ds2's favourite song at the moment) - your DH sounds as if he has had EXACTLY the sort of career my ds2 would like!

Careers in both the arts and nursing are pretty low paid and people aren't going into either of them in order to grab government funds. I don't think it should be either/or, what about cutting elsewhere before turning this into nursing V DaDa. FWIW i do think nursing should be better paid/training subsidised.

I hope there are a million things he hasn't done - but just you wait.

I admittedly I didn't go to drama school in the uk, but my understanding is that DaDas are highly competitive.

The scheme costs £14m a year. It doesn't sound like very much to me. It's for students studying at expensive private colleges who might not otherwise be able to afford it.

Seems to be a completely different issue from bursaries for nursing students which, before they were abolished, cost the government £500m a year.

Exactly. The other thing to point out is that society as a whole loves going to the theatre, but the training required to get to that level costs a fortune, and the majority of actors are paid significantly less than most people imagine they are. Sure, you can say it shouldn't be something the government pays for, but if you say that, you're basically cutting the amount of theatrical entertainment available to the public significantly. It's not like it's a huge amount comparatively.

Well I'd like the govt to give me a bursary to do something I'd like. Say if they give me £1 million? Nothing really is it compared to £14 or £500 million so I think its my turn now.

GaelicSong, I know someone who had a very big role in a West End production at 16. Hadn't been to drama school, went to local dance school so you don't have to attend expensive drama schools.

Really into Line of Duty at the moment and was reading about Martin Compston who was a professional footballer and still a teenager when he auditioned for a Ken Loach film.

Dance and music might be different but I don't think actors have to attend expensive colleges.

grannytomine,, the previous generation of actors often got away with not going to drama school at all, not even at HE level

these days, it is far more difficult as agents and casting directors expect formal training before they will even consider you (or significant experience, which you won't get unless you already have the training)- basically, the industry is getting more and more impatient; they don't want to spend money teaching someone the ropes when there are others who already know them

it is still possible to attend an ordinary school and only audition for drama school after Sixth Form but:

• to have a chance to get into HE drama school you need not just raw talent but also very good auditioning skills - which is something most ordinary schools don't teach

*even if you don't do any extras, the actual process of auditioning is far more expensive than your ordinary UCAS university application: you have to pay extra audition fees and travel to the school not once but for repeated rounds of audition

this makes acting an increasingly difficult goal to achieve for poorer students

grannytomine Wed 26-Apr-17 11:52:12
"Well I'd like the govt to give me a bursary to do something I'd like. "

You can. If you're good enough at it and work hard enough at it.

We don't have a regional repertory system now which used to virtually provide a training for actors.

Very few actors are fortunate enough to have a career like Martin Compston by a piece of luck. The big theatre companies (such as the RSC) won't touch you if you've not been trained. Once upon a time, every theatre had its own rep company, you joined that and learned the trade by doing it. There's only about 3 rep companies left, it's mostly touring stuff. With musicals being the big sellers and companies not being able to afford orchestras, a lot of performers are now trained in acting, dance and are required to play at least one instrument to grade 8 level (called triple threats). There are some actors, like Martin Compston, who get a piece of luck, and work solely in TV and possibly film without training who would fail in the theatre through lacking the skills and training to sustain a performance 8 times a week, project and conserve their voices.

So, generally, yes, actors DO have to attend expensive colleges if they want to be taken seriously and have a lengthy career.

There are always rags to riches, understudy to leading lady, footballer to film star stories, of course there are.

I was at drama school when Kelly McDonald got the part in Trainspotting - everyone I know had auditioned, she was spotted screaming her head off outside a hairdressers.

That doesn't mean that the majority of actors, technicians, singers and dancers need training - and I would say especially dancers and singers as their bodies and instruments just won't last unless they have a significant amount of technique to back them up. Dancers especially need this young - hence DADA to support their training.

That doesn't mean that the majority of actors, technicians, singers and dancers don't need training

granny, do you work in the industry?

Yes, that does happen sometimes even now, but it's rare. Usually it's the ones who get a "big break" before drama school age and just keep working in the industry.

It certainly isn't usual in dance or musical theatre.

Getting a big role in the west end at 16 is unusual. (Very). That's part of the inbetween age. Most 'untrained' people in the West End will be under 14 bed under 5 foot tall (I.e children).

Using an untrained 16 year old seems incredibly risky - not least for reasons of stamina. It is hugely physically demanding to do big shows multiple times a week.

The untrained singers who have been recruited through reality TV shows haven't done a full week of shows generally. Because an untrained voice isn't up to it. You can have bags of talent, but to do 8 shows a week you need training. I'm a classically trained singer and following pregnancy and maternity leave my voice is out of shape, just like an athlete who can't train for a while.

There are always people who lad a great part through raw talent, but often in film and tv this happens because they're basically playing themselves so they're right for that part but not a lot else. They wouldn't be able to do theatre though, because it takes skill and training to use your voice like that. An untrained actor may not be heard, or could easily strain their voice and end up taking time out.

You can. If you're good enough at it and work hard enough at it. Depends what it is. If I want to be a nurse doesn't matter how hard I work they won't give me a bursary.