But now I am in a pickle because I love all my liberal arts classes and am actually planning to triple-major (Arts, French, International Studies) but the arts education there is lacking and I don’t feel like I’m learning anything new or being challenged. So what should I do? I am thinking of just finishing up early with the non-arts degrees and then pursuing intensive vocational arts training at the graduate level, but I think my chances at getting into a good MFA program would be poor if I only minored in art and never had the opportunity to really develop my work as an undergrad. How important is an MFA to becoming a working artist?

It seems as if you are suggesting artists just chill out on getting any sort of arts training in university and focus on the other liberal arts stuff. But what do you do if you went the liberal arts route but now you aren’t being challenged artistically or taught foundational art skills? I mean, I am pretty much the epitome of this article (broad, well-rounded education) and yet I’m wondering if I should have just gone the art school route at this point. Is there a way to combine the best of both worlds?

Thanks for the response. I am sorry to hear that the BFA program is not what you expected. There is alot to consider before deciding to switch degrees. What year in the program are you? How much would it cost in extra classes to switch degrees?

If you are looking to teach, maybe an MFA program is initially not the best place to go as many programs do not teach you how to teach. Check in the M.A. program in Educational Theater. There are programs at NYU, Boston and Arizona and Texas. These places will teach you how to become a good teacher and open your eyes to how theater can be used outside of just performing professionally. After an MA program, if you want to still get an MFA you can do so.

Thank you
-Anthony

Do you think there will be a point in your career that you might be doing something you do not want to do? My guess is yes because, like actors, there could be years before a theater artist gets a job that pays the bills.

Anyone who has been in the arts long enough has been told, “If you have a back up plan your never going to succeed at what you really want to do.” As I mention in the post Artistic Diversification I think that comment is a lie. That comment usually referrs to the “back up plan” that is a full time job with a six figure income. I can work in a part-time job that I enjoy, that pays better than working as a barista at Starbucks or a waiter at a restaurant, and still pursue acting, theater, etc. Because its a marathon and therefore if one works in a different field for a couple of months or a year it does not mean that they will never work as an artist.

The idea of a starving artist, along with the “back up” quote, are lies that cause an artist to “sacrifice” for their art when really they are using what little money they have to pay into a system that tells artists they need to spend money on x,y, and z to “make it”.

I know that I am an intelegent person and I know that I am well rounded, and I think I can be those things and that those things can be enhanced through a conservatory program. I know I’ll succeed at something in life, and for right now I’m convinced its stage management.

To the group:
I understand what your saying, and what Kushner is getting at…and I am riding the fence
on agreement and disagreement. I think he’s right in saying that school’s are teaching a vocation and skill set, thinking that leads to financial and artistic success, like any other career. I agree that has created a generation of frustrated and unemployed artists, many of whom end up doing something else anyhow. While I agree being a fully educated artist with an understanding of more than your craft is KEY, don’t agree that abolishing art degree programs is the answer. They key is not confusing vocation with occupation.

Here’s the problem, as I see it in abolishing the programs, regardless of their success rate. In earlier eras there were guilds, mentoring apprenticeships, and arts patrons to train/fund young artists in their vocation. Now there is no other training ground (albeit sometimes inferior) other then academia. I am not saying that degrees in art aren’t sometimes overrated (no one knows that better than Dennis or I, having been ejected from a reputable MFA NJ program), but in a society stressing higher education and employers/agents/colleges wanting some sort of “guarantee” rather than actually cultivating people’s creativity and talent, what choice do you have?

I think changing the programs, as some of these educators have suggested, “from within” is an excellent idea….but the reality is MOST of the teachers out there in academia are PART of the dazed and confused generation of over-educated artists. They THEMSELVES are a by-product of the lost dream…many going into academia because they weren’t qualified to do anything else after their art failed to support them. NOT ALL, but MANY. I don’t fault them….but that’s the reality. So the pendulum is swinging the OTHER way now… rather than programs based on ideas and creativity, they are teaching SKILLS, thinking, “Well at least it’s tangible and gradable,” albeit subjective.

I am half a generation older than Dennis, and although my experience at graduate school ended similarly prematurely, I came into the program for slightly different reasons. I had earned a BFA 20 years ago, (not 2 years ago), and had a career. I went to an undergraduate college that did NOT allow art majors to avoid general studies or “big picture” thinking, (rather than an art institute or conservatory), and I left there with not only skills, but an education that prepared me to make the jump from easel to the corporate world, much the way Kushner is suggesting. But I still NEEDED that degree to get that job. I worked 15 years as an “applied artist” in the “other world” that was supposed to support my artistry. So great…I landed a good job, became a senior designer, got an AVP title and a nearly six-figure salary. In the end I was STILL seeking art outside my work week day, and the balance wasn’t where I had hoped it would be.

So I came to my MFA experience looking to change careers and become trained as a scenic designer…wanting that skill-based training….KNOWING that the school was about skills, but thinking OF COURSE in an arts program my creativity would follow along because it would be integrated into the process. I couldn’t have been more wrong. Success was determined by deadlines, shop hours and drafting. So be it.

In the end, I got 5 semesters of on-the-job skill training, more credits than the degree required, and $50,000 in student loans. I did NOT get a degree, I did NOT get a sense of who I was as an artist, nor the conceptual power I thought would be integrated into the education. But I got EXACTLY what I went there for…. on-the-job, slave, skill training, a portfolio, and a chance to change my career.

Is that the FULL experience an MFA should be? Probably not.
Is that what I hoped would be an entrance into the theatre world? Definitely not.

But if I had thought back and remembered my first years after undergrad, I would have remembered that a degree isn’t a golden elevator to anywhere, the least of all artistic success, but a key to opening a door of opportunity to show your own potential. I put too much stock in the fact that an MFA was going to be magic wand to success.

Sadly, despite it NOT being the complete experience I had hoped, academia is still one of the few tangible avenues left in the world to be trained as an artist. I took the only route available to a 41yo graphic designer who wants to be scenic designer, same as I did 23 years ago when an 18yo fine artist who went and pursued a BFA in graphic design.

Academia isn’t the end all, but it is the beginning…and if you go into it with your eyes open, you can come out the other side having gained something useful to pursue the arts.
The mistake is being blinded by “the dream.”

Ultimately, for me, being an artist IS a vocation, not just an occupation. It’s an outlook, an approach, a way of living your life, and the secret is FINDING the art in whatever you do…rather than just in the performance or painting.

Dennis, what you are seeing here is the result of so-called college “training,” which encourages young people to close their eyes tightly and chant “I am special! I AM special!” while ignoring reality. The reality is 86% unemployment, and 50% of Actors Equity not having any Equity-sanctioned work during any given year.

In actor training, an actor is asked what his character wants, and how they are going to try to get it. But there is a third part to that equation that is often ignored, and that is “how do you know when you’ve gotten it?” The same is true of what passes for “career planning” in most theatre departments — students come out of it knowing what they want to do (“make it”), how they’re going to do it (work as a bartender and audition), but rarely are they asked how they know when they’ve reached their goal — i.e., what does it mean to “make it”? Does it mean: do a single show on Broadway? Does it mean make 100% of their money acting? 90%? 80%? 50%? Does it mean “become rich and famous in theatre/TV/film?” Just what is the bar? Not the dream, not the maximum success — what is the minimum success that will allow you to keep going year after year? And what type of things do you want to do? Anything? Only “good work”? Whaty does that mean? Will you appear in schlock? Will you compromise your morals? Will you allow yourself to be exploited as a means to an end? And how long will you allow yourself to struggle until you decide it is time to seek another route?

Dennis is proposing a very real route — one that allows you to spend as little time as possible putting food on the table and a roof over your head. Malcolm Gladwell, in his latest book “Outliers,” proposes the rule of 10,000 — that it takes 10,000 hours of practice to become truly excellent at anything in life. So the fewest number of hours you have to spend working a day job, the more hours you have available to get that 10,000 under your belt.

Now, I[ll go one step further: why New York when there are places all over this country dying for theatre? I know, I know — its your “dream.” Which says to me that you care less about the work itself than on using the work for some other goal: prestige, fame, fortune. Me? I’m interested in working with people who care about the art form, not their own self-promotion. That’s my “dream.”

I think you might be misunderstanding my comment. I am not recommending anyone comprise their dreams. I am using my experience to share the fact that their will be many days when a flexible job, that pays well, will be very helpful for an actor. Many flexible jobs that pay well (business, graphic design, etc.) require skills. So while one is pursuing their theater degree, why not also gain other skills that will help you pay for your actor’s life. I know many actors who are so busying working their day job to pay for their headshots, classes, workshops, etc. that they don’t have a lot of time to audition. Or they are working in a super flexible job that does not pay well and they can’t afford all the headshots, classes, and workshops they are being told they need to take to stay ahead.

Your hypothetical is actually true. I was in an acting program in which they told me I was not cut out to be an actor and was asked to leave. I am not giving up acting, but I also need to pay the bills and glad I had computer skills to pay for loans from the school that kicked me out. Again, I am not saying don’t try. What I am saying is to diversify and have as many different skills, in as many different fields, as possible. So when there are down times in acting, you have other skills that still let you do things you love.