To think that if a high school theater department can do three shows a year, one should be a dramatic play and there shouldn’t be two musical plays?

[YankSplaining]

20+ years ago when I was a teenager, I did theater through my school, which is an American private school. (It was a joint theater department with another private school nearby.) I follow the theater department on social media, and I saw that this year, they’re doing a fall musical, a winter dance production, and a spring musical. The fall musical is based on children’s books that my kids like, and although ideally I’d like to take them to see the show, I feel frustrated and a little angry that they’re doing two musicals.

When I started high school, it was understood that the fall play was always a dramatic one without singing roles. I have absolutely no vocal talent, but I was excited to have the chance to try out for the fall productions.

My first year of high school, I was called back for the second round of auditions for the fall play, but the part I was being considered for went to a senior (last year of high school). That was okay with me. I joined the set crew. My second year of high school, the director broke with decades of tradition and announced that we were doing a fall musical as well as a spring musical. I was disappointed, but, once again, was on set crew.

My third year of high school, we had a dramatic play again and I was cast in a supporting role. Three scenes, two costumes, chance to do an accent - great experience and fun memories. (I even started dating another cast member who’s now my husband of thirteen years. 😁)

My fourth and last year of high school, the dramatic play had a tiny cast with only five roles. As with my first year of high school, I auditioned, went through to the second round, and was not cast. Prior to that, I’d been involved in every show but one, but I just felt burned out with the whole thing. I sat out any involvement with the fall and winter shows, though I came back to do set crew for the spring musical because it was my last chance to work on a production with my friends.

I was not owed any roles, but I joined high school theater with the understanding that I got four chances to try to be in a fall play. Instead, I got three, which felt more like two and a half because the cast of the senior year fall play was so small. (The other fall plays had casts of a dozen or more.) Am I wrong to think that if a school theater department has the ability to do three productions a year, there should be one dramatic play and not two musicals? It’s a different skill set, and even if I didn’t “make the team,” I wanted the chance to try for it. The adults who ran the department while I was in high school are all still there in their same jobs, FWIW, and have a lot of experience putting on dramatic plays.

I don’t usually dwell on things from high school, but, as I said before, they’re doing two musicals this year and that’s brought all my old feelings up to the surface.

Thank you. In my experience, people who are good singers don’t have a difficult time finding performance opportunities, but acting opportunities are harder to come by even on a very amateur level.

Good point. Hadn’t thought of it that way, but now that I do, I agree.

Thanks. 🙂 I bet doing Shakespeare was fantastic. The play my freshman year was a Shakespearean comedy and I still have large parts of it memorized from all those rehearsals and performances.

I was Helena in a midsummer nights dream, I can still hear how devious I sounded reading her monologue at 16 😂

Honestly though, the theatre is a magical place hold onto your happy memories and keep seeing the shows you love, don't get bogged down about something from years ago.

But what happened 20 years ago is irrelevant because times change!

Well you'd be wrong there
Being a good singer doesn't mean you get more work
It might be easier because musicals are more widely produced because musicals sell much easier

You’re curious to know what people think about this 20 year old situation? For real?
Maybe you can find a couple of posters with bog all in their heads but I doubt it.

I didn’t say “work,” I said “performance opportunities.” I’m thinking of things like church choirs and local amateur groups.

Or maybe they can use her op as a starting point for a wider discussion about what schools focus on and opportunities for kids? It doesn't have to be just about that particular school..

I think op has raised a really good point, which I have been mulling over for a while.

I can't think of any schools near us that put on plays any more, whereas they definitely did plays when I was at school. It's just musicals now. This means there is minimal opportunity for acting full stop and no opportunity for acting on stage for those who may be brilliant actors but cannot (or don't want to) sing

And it's the same with all the local theatre schools.

My daughter enjoys the musicals but her passion is acting. She does Lamda exams, but she'd love a chance to perform in an actual play.

Ours are usually entirely musicals because it allows the dance students and musicians to join in as well as drama students.
Musicals often have many more parts and as a parent - what do you want to go and see? Something up beat like Matilda, or The Crucible? Bearing in mind it’s a school production and the acting standard isn’t going to necessarily be that high??? B

Join a theatre troupe! My DD does dram out side if school, and they do ‘plays’ but honestly? The standard there is high, but it can still be cringe to sit through 16 year olds doing ‘serious’ acting.
youre also underestimating the drama side of musicals, just. Because there’s a dance number half way through doesn’t t mean the drama parts aren’t still hard.

I genuinely don't understand why you are so invested in somewhere you left at 16.

Are you a governor?

I agree with you, @OP . Only two of the three productions should be a musical.

There does seem to be a demand for 'triple threat' talent these days, but at school level I'd expect there to be one production that the non-singers can audition for.

It's a different time. Schools are dealing with tight budgets. Maybe musicals are more profitable.

There is also more widespread poor mental health. Music and dance are generally more uplifting and cheerful than dramatic plays. That could be another reason.

Or maybe the pupils had a vote. I'd rather do the Pirates of Penzance than The Tempest if I was 15.

Those are hardly the same

And around here all the local am dram groups will do plays as well as musicals - or they have dance roles and ensemble roles where singing ability doesn't have to be high

Get a teaching degree and go and teach drama and spend the many unpaid and thankless working hours organising a school production needs, or stop whining about productions you have no vested interest in.

I think it is a personal thing I was a fairly competent school actor but a horrid singer I only got really decent parts when it wasn’t a musical and I was very grateful the final performance was Pygmalion rather than My Fair Lady

I joke that one of the reasons I married DH was because he is an ex choir boy and I wanted mine to be able to sing and thankfully both can

It was always drama, musical, comedy.

i was in the orchestra for the musical. Daily multi-hour rehearsals for weeks on end for one musical a year are enough. By the end you are barely holding on. The orchestra has plenty to keep itself busy without another musical.

For us different year groups had different show seasons, lower years tended to be in the sprint/summer term and upper years in the autumn term (away from exams).

Always a musical because it included musicians and could have a larger cast. They tried a play once I seem to remember as a 3rd show one year, it was poorly attended and wasn't done again.

Not everything has to be upbeat and "fun" in an obvious way. I think it's terrible that a school would decide they're ONLY doing musicals. Ok so you include the orchestra, but then you're excluding the non musical actors. Why is that ok?

Name changed for this,

I think I probably have a little more insight into this than the average British mother, as I live in the US and I'm the mother of a daughter who was heavily involved in theatre in high school. This wasn't a private high school, it was a public magnet arts school with a well known and well regarded theatre program.

Our school did put on at least one straight play every year as well as a musical, which I think is a good thing. There were also various other performance opportunities, including student directed pieces, and one act plays/musicals.

People here keep talking about ticket sales, and I agree with the OP that this probably isn't a concern. My daughter went to a public school and there was never any issue selling out the performances.

I think there are several factors which go into the decision as to whether to produce a musical or a straight play. Most musicals involve more students than straight plays do. Straight plays often have a cast of only a handful, whereas musicals can accommodate many more with the ensemble members, and the school orchestra can be involved.

A lot of high school students want to be musical theatre performers rather than straight actors at that age. Musicals get them excited. (Not all, but the majority.)

Even actors need to have a grounding in all three disciplines (acting, singing, dancing) and musicals provide that.

Having said all that, I am glad that our school did produce straight plays and introduce students to that artform, even though as a talented actor my daughter didn't always get roles in the plays. I agree with you that serious theatre programs should feature straight plays as well as musicals, but I don't know that there's much you can do about it, especially as you are no longer connected to the school.

My daughter ended up going to one of the best theatre schools in the country for college and got her BFA in acting. She is now a working actor (which means tending bar and teaching on the side!) But even in her acting program she had to take classes in voice and movement - it's all important. Some of the plays she gets cast in now involve playing music, singing, and dancing, even if they're not "musicals", and I know she's glad she has that 'triple threat" background.

I don't know where you live, but you could look into magnet performing arts schools rather than private schools for your kids. My daughter could not have got a better education, and certainly not a better arts education, in a private school, even a prestigious one.

I think it might well be a change in audience tastes. I have been with DD to see a couple of musical/operetta performances lately. A theatre near me has a yearly festival with a variety of things on offer. The big musical this year sold out very quickly as did the one last year (went to a London theatre for it's next season). The next production is a play offered is much more serious and for me, dated and I didn't bother going as it's not to my taste at all. I wonder if we are representative of audiences generally?

A musical EXCLUDES those who can't sing but maybe amazing actors.

Our school musicals always had 'dance only' parts. And most people can carry a tune in a chorus, if not as a lead singer.

But I think that comments from PPs about how the chorus group can expand as needed in a musical, to enable wide participation, is probably it. In a Broadway musical, the chorus of sailors and the chorus of sea creatures (or whatever) will be the same performers if the groups are in different scenes - in a school production, you can have different kids in each also.

Read the title of the thread and thought this was going to be about your child currently at school.

In the kindest possible you really really really need to let this go if happened 20 plus years ago.