Crystal Carson

What is “Auditioning By Heart” ?

Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:41:54 -0700

Auditioning By Heart has been so successful on Fridays that we are adding another class! Yes, another day to study Audition Technique to make auditions like acting, when acting is like Life!

More than anything, Auditioning By Heart is about empathy for our fellow man. To love what it is to be human so much that you are willing to make yourself vulnerable to a new life and circumstances, as if that life were your own.

As you know, my approach to auditioning is a practical one, “You do, what you do.” That is why it is so important to practice “doing” what you want to be doing. --Working truthfully and authentically at every “opportunity to play”.

Auditioning By Heart actors participate in every class, being put on tape in a faux casting office, afterward the tape is watched and discussed by Sara Widzer and/or myself. Sara is a wonderful director, who also currently teaches at the Lee Strasberg institute, the Performing Arts Workshops (script writer and teacher), The Young Actors Studio, the Leo Baeck Temple, and she is also a member of the Director/Playwright Unit at the Actors Studio, not to mention, the on ice acting coach for Los Angeles Ice Theatre! Eventually, the Wednesday class will be taught by Sara the majority of the time.

The participants in Auditioning By Heart realize that the role belongs to them from the moment the sides given to them; there is nothing to prove, nothing to win - except as the character inside the story. As a result, auditions become like acting, when acting is like life!

Auditioning By Heart is a state of mind. To participate, you must agree to experience auditioning as a time to communicate rather than a time to book a job. These actors own the fact that they have nothing to demonstrate or to validate about themselves to the casting director, they have only to get what they want as the character, by being fully self-expressed to the other character. Acting is a conversation where something personal and important is at stake and only through communication can those needs be met. As an actor, you must be willing to communicate outside of what has been written for you. Humans express themselves thru words, gestures, facial aspects, and body language, so all of these means are all called upon in the audition. They are the golden moments, and they are generated uniquely by you.

The times of thinking between subjects (ie units or beats) are the greatest opportunity to live...without a life line, as it were, because those “in-between moments” are completely up to you. We make a point of distinguishing how important transitions are. This is where your ability to do your job, if you have prepared, will be most evident. Yet, so many of us when auditioning, get as quickly as we can from the last line of the previous thought, to the first line of the next subject, and completely miss our best chance at playing, living, inventing, experiencing, choosing...all the things that make a person alive (and primarily for what an actor gets hired.) Auditioning By Heart technique grants permission to "think from inside the story" and "generate the line" rather than just saying it because the sides say so. Now the transitions are filled by your history work, your imagination, your creativity, and all of the ideas that explode from that.

It is sad to watch a talented actor simply become a "line deliverer" at an audition out of...fear. Fear caused by the failure to realize the need to grant himself permission to take time and think in every transition...(you can not think and discover without the permission of time.) Secondly, the fear that comes from the failure to properly prepare. If you don't do your homework, and experience some significant moments in the character's history, feel the relationship and make the objective personal...granting permission will not be enough, for it will only be permission to fill the transitions with not much more than "generalized searching" until you choose to say the first line of the next subject. That is not living in truth.

Students of Auditioning By Heart are given the tools to easily gain mastery of their minds and imaginations. In order to create the world of the story in a synergistic way that truly resonates inside their mind and body. Your imagination is created by a muscle in the brain that needs to be strengthened by active use. Actors are taught to exercise their “imagination muscle” in a productive way to give history to their characters, and to dynamically experience the three points in history which most strongly lead to the conversations given to them by the writer. Only then is the written word truly “the tip of the iceberg”.

It is a proven fact that Focus goes where Interest lies. By creating imagined experiences, the mind strengthens it’s ability to focus on the circumstances of a script. This protects you from breaking concentration and stepping outside of the story and into the casting office. This also keeps your thoughts in integrity with what is coming out of your mouth...your mind recognizes what you are saying as truth (to a good degree) and so does not trigger your body’s natural and automatic “lying response” - increased sweat out-put, elevated heart-beat, raised stomach acid levels, shallow breathing, fuzzy thinking / loss of focus, etc... This alone allows a better audition experience.

Auditioning By Heart homework creates a strong foundation which allows students of to go into any casting office with a truthful and solid “place to stand,” ready to communicate. They feel a sense of ownership of the life they are “living,” that allows them to be fully present in each moment, listening and reacting, playing, and experiencing the ride, instead of manipulating the lines to “sound right”.

Auditioning By Heart rids actors of any need “to perform.” The fear and dread that come from worrying about forgetting lines or missing a pre-planned moment are gone and replaced by excitement to experience and share your new life; to take it on and go after what is desired with your whole heart from inside this story. It is with joy that you choose to step inside and take the ride, personally affected by each moment and affecting others through truthful communication. That is Auditioning By Heart.

The next 500 years

Fri, 30 Jan 2009 17:25:19 -0800

Life everywhere seem to be in a state of flux and uncertainty. I think this is because no one knows how all the changes happening in our financial markets and in our government will play out. I’m trying to get a handle on what this means for our industry. After all, we are tied together with so much that goes on outside of our studios and sound stages. Let me share a bit of what I am learning about change. (The historian in me is about to come out.)

Every 500 years or so, there is a reordering of the way humanity sees things; a reordering of the authorities and institutions that guide our common life.

I could take you back to one of the oldest records of history, the Old Testament, and show this 500 year pattern from the beginning of recorded time, but in an effort to be brief, let’s instead start in the Christian era. Any historian can tell you of the cataclysmic changes the Christian faith brought to the world. Christianity became the new authority, spiritual and otherwise.

In the year 500 AD, Rome was finally conquered by the barbarians and the Christian Church of the East came into power. In its declining years the Roman Empire had both internal and external problems. It was being destroyed from within because of immorality, sin, corrupt leaders and the materialist desires of the church. It was also being threatened by enemies and invaders from without. Those peoples who threatened the Roman Empire from without were called barbarians. (Consider the United States, what kind of INTERNAL problems do we have? What kind of EXTERNAL threats do we face? Which of these problems are the most serious?)

The Barbarians were not a single people or an organized army and but many different migrating tribes and many hordes of wild warriors ruled by different kings. These peoples moved into the Roman Empire, conquer it where necessary, and settled there with their families.

In the year 1000 AD, the Church of the East and the West broke off fellowship (called the great schism) and, with the Moslem ascendancy in Constantinople, the Pope became the central authority politically and spiritually in Europe.

In 1500, a great event (brought about in many ways by the printing press), the Reformation was born. Martin Luther and others began publishing the Bible in the common language of the people and the Bible became the number one authority for the Church. Everyone could interpret the scriptures personally which led to its own challenges and the further fragmentation of the Church.

Approximately 500 years later in 2009, following the advent of psychology, the theory of evolution, quantum physics, with these ideas driven by a new force of communication (the internet), we can see that authority has basically become centered on the individual (what we like and don’t like.)

No longer do we follow a teaching, a law, the Bible or even a political leader. We follow our own heart. We are our ultimate authority for what is right or wrong. We live in a time where there is little or no broadly agreed upon objective truth and every decision is primarily driven by our feelings.

Without the underpinnings of a common truth, a common story, a common reality, our sense of authority crumbles.

Some of that is good, but some of that is not so good. The challenge with having us (our feelings and likes) as the ultimate authority means that we too are subject to the fall of humanity, because our feelings, our tastes can be self-serving, sinful and wrong. Like theories, beliefs, dogma, interpretations and perceptions, we humans are also fallible. The human ability to deny this is amazing (when was the last time someone actually told you what they felt was wrong?).

What should those of us in living in this society do to address this lack of an objective authority? Or put another way, “Where is God in all of this?”

When you can answer that last question, you will be handed a tool for your own decision making. No longer will someone from outside of you tell you what to do or be. Each individual, as a member of a faith community, will be responsible for personal prayer, listening, spiritual study, reasoned thinking and consulting with the “Holy Spirit” within themselves to follow God.

It is a big responsibility. It was so much easier the old way of “the Bible tells me so…” It is much harder to come to the place where “it seemed good to “the Holy Spirit” within me…”

To me, it is not a worthwhile question to debate the existence or non existence of God, because one way or another, the spiritual

Actors who are willing to take on and truthfully “live life inside any circumstance” by discovering what drove “me” to make these choices, why am I here today talking with this other person, dying to win this objective. These are the actors who help all of society to tap into their “Universal selves”, the part of us that knows we are all connected (thru “energy” or “spirit”), we are all human, we are all One. “Love thy neighbor as you would thy self,” because we are merely extensions of each other - our atoms mixing and mingling with no beginning, no edges, no end.

Whatever name you want to give God, Life energy, The Light, Buddha, That is the authority we are called to follow and obey. Each one of us.

It STRIKES me that...

Tue, 13 Jan 2009 12:05:38 -0800

Producer Bob Fraser had a very well thought out take on the up-coming Vote to authorize SAG to call for a Strike. It is a wise and comprehensive look at the necessity of smart and strong negotiations on behalf of actors. Having served on the AFTRA board for several years myself, I can verify much of what Bob has to say. Read it to be informed. With his permission I am re-printing it here:

I became a union member more than 40 years ago (Actors
Equity) and since then have become a member of all the
actor's unions as well as Writers Guild, Directors Guild
and Producers Guild.

In other words I have been a union guy since Pluto was
a puppy.

The reason I support unions is simple: It's the best way
to negotiate with employers for good working conditions,
fair compensation, and pension and health benefits. And
for employers it's helpful to know that the people you
are hiring have some sort of professional standing.

Having been both an employer of actors and an actor myself
- I have an unprejudiced viewpoint about the relationship
between the two groups. I still tend to favor the union's
side in most issues.

The current atmosphere is fraught with dangers for both
sides.

From the employers standpoint, there are forces at work
that are making it more and more difficult to make a
profit. A business that doesn't make a profit will not
stay in business for long. (Don't hold out hope that
Congress will ever be giving show biz any bailouts.)
These forces include bad management, poor choices over
a period of years, and the ever shrinking interest the
audience has in their products. (Remind you of Detroit?)

However, despite what the AMPTP says, these things cannot
be fixed by taking from actors - and, frankly, that's what
they're trying to do. They are dying on the vine and their
solution is to pick away at things like residuals, new
media, and benefits that have been hard won by our unions
over many decades.

So far, they've been pretty successful. The WGA, DGA and
AFTRA contracts represent roll-backs and more stalling
tactics, regarding our participation in new media.

To make matters worse, the majors are now in the process
of forming non-union divisions. In fact it seems a good
bet that they'd like to see the unions go away entirely.

There are those who insist that a strike at this point is
a bad idea because the economy is in trouble - or that we
would not have the support of the other unions, or that
the new media is not 'proven' and therefore it makes no
sense to negotiate for something that does not yet exist.

First, the economy is in trouble because we trusted the
same sort of executives who now run the major show biz
companies. These types have proven themselves to be poor
managers and worse.

They have all been paying themselves huge salaries and
gigantic bonuses while running their companies into the
ground. Following them down this path is simply a way to
guarantee that things will only get worse.

Second, if the other unions do not support Screen Actors
Guild, they are fair weather friends at best - and tools
of the AMPTP at worst.

Third, and most important, this 'not a proven business'
argument has been the company tactic several times in the
past. First it was video tapes - the companies ended up
making hundreds of millions and we got pennies. Then it
was DVDs - they made billions and we got less than pennies.

Now it's the internet ...

Don't fall for this clearly fallacious 'reason.' They just
want to keep more of the money for themselves. This would
be fine with me if they were making a profit - but they're
not.

Frankly, they waste tons of money on things that are mostly
unnecessary to the putting on of the show (the product). To
be blunt - I'd really like to see them try to put on a show
without actors.

Bottom line: They need us.

Truth be told, we don't need them. In fact, the internet is
our savior, should we decide to make our own products and
sell them directly to the audience.

We COULD do that.

Musicians are already traveling down that path. An example;
Prince is putting out 3 albums this year - without so much as
a scintilla of participation by a major record label.

For the major film companies and networks, the handwriting
on the wall is highly readable. I think they're scared. After
all, one of their hits gets about 25 million viewers and there
are videos on YouTube that are approaching a billion viewers.

Do the math.

So, as to whether there will be a strike or not - I don't know.

But this much I do know; acting is a business or it's a hobby.
And if we are weak at this point in history, I think it very
likely that the unions will fade away, residuals will become
a memory, and we'll have very little choice but to make our
own stuff - if we expect to ever make decent incomes as actors.

Of course, these are just my opinions (though mostly based on
facts) and you are urged to think this through on your own.

Even if you are not a member of SAG yet, you still have a big
stake in the outcome. It's important to your acting business
to form an opinion on the matters that will affect you - sooner
or later.

Now just to prove that no good deed goes unpunished, I am also going to include a “back and forth” correspondence between Mr. Fraser and Boston SAG member, Emma Goodman. This next bit is rather long, but it sure handles a lot of the arguments that you might hear, so it is well worth the read:

Hi Bob,
I am a member from the Boston branch of SAG. This past week in Boston, a non-SAG sponsored gathering was held in which people, including some of
our Boston leadership – people who have talked to Doug Allen and the negotiating team about the feeling of what is going on in the negotiating room -
gathered to talk about the impending strike and give our membership a little more insight into the goings on of our SAG board of directors.
The meeting was casual - saying things how they are and disregarding propaganda from both sides of the fight ... instead letting members draw their
own conclusions.
The following is a good summary of what was discussed:
First off, the overview of the possible outcomes to this strike situation are the
following:
The meeting happens next week, a decision is made not to have a strike call, the contract on the table is accepted and everything but the new media
clause falls into place. SAG accepts the new media clause as is, giving us a contract to work with, and we stop losing $1.2 million/week.
The meeting happens next week, the strike call still goes out, and we don’t get a call to strike from our membership. The current negotiating committee
is replaced, and the contract on the table is accepted and everything but the new media clause falls into place. SAG accepts the new media clause as is,
giving us a contract to work with, and we stop losing $1.2 million/week.
The meeting happens next week, the strike call still goes out, and we get a call from the membership to strike. We then strike (if the members call to
strike - it would be a little ridiculous for the leadership to then not strike, so we won’t even consider that as an option). An indeterminate amount of time
goes by and the AMPTP doesn’t give in, so SAG does. The contract on the table is accepted and everything but the new media clause falls into place.

SAG accepts the new media clause as is, giving us a contract to work with.
The meeting happens next week, the strike call still goes out, and we get a call from the membership to strike. We then strike. The AMPTP gives in, and
we get a new contract giving us the new media clause that SAG is currently fighting for. The producers then, in deciding to go between SAG and AFTRA
see that AFTRA’s contract favors them in new media, so logically become signatory for AFTRA, and SAG loses lots of jobs until we can renegotiate.
The new media clause of the contract that the SAG board wants us to fight for is: For any film that is budgeted at less than $15,000 per minute that does
not use a covered performer, which includes almost all union talent in AFTRA, SAG, and AEA as well as several other categories of performer who have
not joined unions, the production company can use non-union talent without residuals. ALL OTHER NEW CONTENT FOR NEW MEDIA WILL BE COVERED
UNDER THE EXISTING CONTRACT. Also, what is known as a “Sunset Clause” has been put in place. This means that the next time negotiating of this con-
tract happens, the slate about new media is wiped clean and the contract is built from scratch. AKA, if the AMPTP is making lots of money on this new
media, we WILL change the contract.
*note: it seems that there was confusion as to what “new media” means.

New media is simply any content made solely for the express purpose of airing online, on phones, etc. New Media does NOT include any tv program, industrial, commercial or movie already made under a SAG contract and then moved to the internet. The portion of the contract that talks about these is not under debate. The new media that is in debate in this contract constitutes 2% of revenue for SAG contracts, and the AMPTP is willing to let us look at their financing books to see for ourselves what they are making off of it.
Now to me and other people I’ve talked to, it seems silly that we are fighting solely over this small amount of new media. As mentioned in the meeting, it
seems that some members of the SAG National Board seem to have ulterior motives.
There has been a large debate over whether or not SAG and AFTRA should merge. Phase One of the merge of the two unions started about 30 years
ago when SAG and AFTRA started going to the table during negotiations together so that both contracts could be the same. This was the first step to-
wards a merging of the unions to decrease competition and put everyone on the same footing in terms of who gets work. When SAG and AFTRA went to
the table separately this past year, it highly decreased the bargaining power of each union. If one union gets a contract while the other does not (as what
happened), then the producers can use their membership even if the other union doesn’t have a contract. Also, it essentially set the unions back towards making the merger. If our contracts turn out differently, it will pit one union directly against the other in trying to get work at different wages with the
AMPTP. Some people on the board do not want the merger to happen, and therefore are working towards breaking up the two unions. Getting a different
contract than AFTRA would be setting the merge back the huge step that had been taken those 30 years ago, not to mention creating competition between
the two unions.
One other explanation: Some people might ask – how do AFTRA and SAG compete on contracts? Isn’t who works on what already figured out? Well, in
terms of film and television, the answer is - mostly. However, those of you out there who may have worked on pilot tv shows lately may notice that they
are all under AFTRA contracts.
In fact, ABC and Warner Bros. (traditionally SAG) have announced that all new programming will be under an AFTRA contract because of the strike threat. Also, all new media, since it is mostly shot in digital, can be under the jurisdiction of either SAG or AFTRA – making the insistence of SAG to get more on new media than AFTRA that much more... strange... of a choice.
Given what the facts are, I sincerely hope that people will vote “no” if there is a strike vote.
The only leverage SAG has as a union right now is motion pictures and existing SAG TV shows. I would not want to see our union lose lots of money
during a strike, just to come back and accept the same contract on the table we could have had without losing the money. This career is a business. Let’s all try not to make bad business decisions.
Sincerely,
Emma Goodman
=======================
NOTE: I replied to Emma’s email thus:
Dear Emma,
I will be sending along your ‘take’ on the situation in the next newsletter.
However, you make a couple of points that I’d like you to think about.
“Also, what is known as a “Sunset Clause” has been put in place. This means that the next time negotiating of this contract happens, the slate about new
media is wiped clean and the contract is built from scratch. AKA, if the AMPTP is making lots of money on this new media, we WILL change the contract.”
This is precisely the same argument that was used on the writers in the 1988 strike regarding residuals on video tapes (and soon to be DVDs). At that time the companies said they didn’t have any idea if there was a real business there. The reality is, however, that no ‘fixing’ of that contract ever happened.
The companies have made literally billions off of video and DVDs and the amount allocated to writers (and actors) has not changed one iota in 20 years. In fact, when the writers went out again last year, one of the elements that they wanted changed was this percentage. Due to the amount of pressure brought to bear on them – from other unions, the companies, and dissident members attacking the board and it’s negotiating team – this did not happen.
This idea that they cannot make a deal because they don’t know whether there’s a real business there does not hold water. We are asking for a percentage of profits – if there are no profits then our percentage would be nothing. What we’re asking for is some formula for compensation and they
are simply saying “no.”
And their reasoning is entirely ludicrous on the face of it.
It also happens to be the basis of an argument that the companies are increasingly making, that they cannot stay in business without rolling back residuals – residuals are compensation that many actors, writers and others live on. The companies have been public about this intent for more than a year. They want to do away with residual payments altogether.
Make no mistake, when unions are set against each other it is not a function of leadership in the unions – it’s a function of the companies using their vast
resources to cause the rift. Most of the companies now switching to AFTRA contracts, are doing so because AFTRA agreed (long ago) to a lower day rate.
On a large production this can add up to thousands a day. It is in the companies’ best interest to use the lower rate and has nothing to do with the threat
of a SAG strike.
Those opposed to a merger of the unions have been at the business of causing this disagreement for as long as I can remember. (And I’ve been at this for half a century.)
“Now to me and other people I’ve talked to, it seems silly that we are fighting
solely over this small amount of new media. As mentioned in the meeting, it
seems that some members of the SAG National Board seem to have ulterior
motives. There has been a large debate over whether or not SAG and AFTRA
should merge. Phase One of the merge of the two unions started about 30
years ago when SAG and AFTRA started going to the table during negotiations together so that both contracts could be the same. This was the first
step towards a merging of the unions to decrease competition and put every-
one on the same footing in terms of who gets work.”
First, what are the ‘ulterior motives’ of these members of the board? Do they want to put people out of work as a way of proving their power? Are they intent on seeing suffering? This is a totally specious argument, since it’s simply stated that they have an ulterior motive but no explanation of this mysterious motive is ever put forth.
Second, all of the performing unions should merge – AEA, AFTRA, SAG, AGMA, etc. (As in Great Britain.)
But, obviously, this would be against the interests of the companies who employ entertainers, so the companies make it a practice to hire union members
who will be sympathetic to their point of view – and then send those members out to spread dissent and dissatisfaction. Those are the people with an
ulterior motive. They want to stay employed and damn the rest of us. Scabs is a word that’s been used in the past.
That is the primary reason we have a situation where the leadership of SAG is being attacked from within – and members who are buying into the idea that
it’s the leadership’s fault that things are the way they are. This has been the company tactic since unions first came to be in the entertainment industry.
Union members who buy into these arguments are being gulled.
“One other explanation: some people might ask - how do AFTRA and SAG compete on contracts - isn’t who works on what already figured out? Well, in terms of Film and Television, the answer is - mostly. However, those of you out there who may have worked on pilot tv shows lately may notice that they are all under AFTRA contracts. In fact, ABC and Warner Bros. (traditionally SAG) have announced that all new programming will be under an AFTRA contract because of the strike threat. Also, all new media, since it is mostly shot in digital, can be under the jurisdiction of either SAG or AFTRA - making the insistance of SAG to get more on new media than AFTRA that much
more... strange... of a choice.”
This is the most egregious argument being foisted off on actors. The fact of the matter is that the companies are busy (right now) building non-union divisions and producing more and more product non-union. Their intent is clear.
They want to destroy the unions. Period. They will do whatever is necessary to accomplish this long term business goal. They will play the unions against
each other, cause ‘turf wars’ between the members of the unions, and in the long run they will win, unless ...
... we stick together and make it impossible for them to go forward – by using the only power we have ... denial of services.
This is the underlying reality: We either fight their attempts to roll back our compensation, our retirement and health benefits, our residuals, and yes
– our participation in ‘new media’ – or we will all suffer the clearly odious consequences.
So, while I agree that you are informed, I think the question is: Who informed you?
In solidarity and respect,
Bob Fraser
=======================
Emma Responded:
Dear Bob,
A response, if I may.
A distinct difference between the writers’ contracts of 1988 and the one on the table is that the AMPTP has agreed to allow our union to go into their books and see how much money they have made off of the “new media” over the next few years.
I do agree with you that not making money off of any jobs is not wanted, and I’d even add that having the production companies able to work with non-
union talent teaches them how to use non-union talent, which increases their ability and likelihood of using them in the future.
However, because of the nature of internet usage, not its potential, but how it is used currently, most of the projects that would fall under the requirements
to fall into this clause of the contract are more like the thousands of people
already on the internet getting together with a bunch of buddies, videotaping
themselves and hoping for fame and stardom. It is a lot more risky of an endeavour to produce things with sub-standard equipment and non-union actors. I don’t know the statistics but I can guess that less than 1 in a 1000 will ever make any money. Again, this is speculation on my behalf, and nobody knows how it will be in the next three years, but that is how it is now.
In three years, that is what the sunset clause is for, hoping of course that corruptness doesn’t take place and the AMPTP doesn’t go back on their word.
But if that’s really what we’re worried about - then why make a contract at all?
As for residuals for other sources of media other than these new contracts which wouldn’t involve union actors or residuals, those aren’t even on the
table for debate.
In your bid for a strike and in your response to me below, you continue to attack the producers themselves. I would like to make the argument solely
to you, that yes, it stinks to have to play with another player, but it’s much better than not playing at all.
Even if everyone in the union were to make our own movies, new production companies would pop up and we would want to make contracts with them.

The union was created to protect its membership from having to deal with the conglomerates, but they still have to deal with them. Merging all the unions
as one would be the best bet, but Membership First does not want that.
I didn’t put this particular piece in my argument to you, but perhaps that paragraph should be reworded to what it had been before:
“Now to me and other people I’ve talked to, it seems silly that we are fighting
solely over this small amount of new media. As mentioned in the meeting,
it seems that the Membership First faction of the SAG National Board seem to have ulterior motives. There has been a large debate over whether or not
SAG and AFTRA should merge. Phase One of the merge of the two unions started about 30 years ago when SAG and AFTRA started going to the table
during negotiations together so that both contracts could be the same. This was the first step towards a merging of the unions to decrease competition
and put everyone on the same footing in terms of who gets work. When SAG and AFTRA went to the table separately this past year, it highly decreased the
bargaining power of each union. If one union gets a contract while the other does not (as what happened), then the producers can use their membership
even if the other union doesn’t have a contract. Also, it essentially set the unions back towards making the merger. If our contracts turn out differently,
it will pit one union directly against the other in trying to get work at different wages with the AMPTP. The Membership First team, for reasons the people at the meeting could not come up with, does not want the merger to happen, and therefore is working towards breaking up the two unions. Getting a different contract than AFTRA would be setting the merge back the huge step that had been taken those 30 years ago, not to mention creating competition between the two unions.”
I was trying to be non-political, but the “ulterior motives” I mention is the fact that Membership First does not want to merge with AFTRA. Period. And
yes, apparently those Membership First members of the board have been the directing hand behind Doug Allen, directing him not to give in on the New
Media portion of this contract, which would make the contracts of AFTRA and SAG essentially equivalent.
By forcing the strike, as I say, the contracts would not be the same, and make merging of the two unions that much more difficult. And yes, leadership can play a large role within unions fighting. In fact, two members of Membership First on the SAG national board apparently ran for leadership based on the fact that they are names that people recognize and are now currently on the AFTRA board, trying to cause problems from within.
As for my “egregious” losing more work argument - it is absolutely true.
I don’t know how much you know about the SAG branches, but in the past two years, Boston’s branch has been booming. We had 12 movies just this
past spring, and there are a number of locations people already in the area scouting out for future productions. We are also seeing an influx of television
show pilots – all of which in the past 6 months (and we’re talking 3 or 4) are under AFTRA contracts. Whether or not some production teams are starting
to move non-union - that’s nothing that can be stopped by putting new media into a contract. But going on a strike certainly isn’t going to convince anyone that it would be better to make their production union.
Again, pointing to the commercials strike – production companies learned to go non-union, and they never went back.
I also want to ask you - if the producers are so bent on going non-union and getting rid of the unions, then why are they negotiating with us? There are
plenty of non-union actors out there. True, no names yet, but that could be solved in less time than it takes for us to go on strike. I cannot have the pessimistic attitude that all of the producers of the world are out to get the actors.
As for retirement and health benefits, the strike and the lack of the new contract for the past six months have hurt them and could hurt them way more
than having had a contract ever would. The best thing for retirement and health would be to merge unions, but since we are on the same wavelength
in terms of that, I won’t press the point.
Finally, your question “who has informed you?” ... well, I’ll answer that. You have. SAG emails have. The SAG website has. Friends have. New York pro-
paganda has. SAG pamphlets they send out have. The contract posted online has. My fellow SAG members have. My Boston area representatives have.
SAG board members have. A SAG member who has personally asked Doug Allen multiple questions - in person - for which he refuses to answer has. A
SAG branch president who has sat in really long Board meetings where Membership First people start literally screaming at each other during the meeting
has. A member of the previous SAG tv/theatrical negotiating committee has, and finally, my own opinions and conscience have. I have read every single piece of literature I have been able to find on this topic so that I could make an informed opinion.
I’m not saying that I’m absolutely right, and there are definitely points out there as to why there could be a strike. However, given how small amount of work we’re talking about, how many people would be out of jobs, how we can go back to it if it proves disastrous later, how much money we have already lost, how little leverage we have if we were to go into a strike, how the precedents with the same people who are fighting this time gave up the last time they went on a fight, and how all the momentum that has been building in
the SAG branches in getting work would be totally lost in going on a strike, I firmly believe that right now, a strike is NOT in the best interest of a majority
of SAG members across the United States.
Sincerely,
Emma
=======================
And I wrote back:
Dear Emma,
They offered to show the writers ‘the books’ too. They agreed to do it, but that never showed up in the contract. It’s not in the SAG contract now. They’ve
made this promise over and over. It has NEVER actually happened.
I don’t know if you are aware of ‘Hollywood accounting’ practices – but, according to the companies; Lord Of The Rings didn’t make any money - nor did Titanic, or The Dark Knight, or about 100 other top box office films. And to my knowledge no television series has ever shown a profit ‘on the books.’
It’s a matter of public knowledge that most profit participants have to sue to get access to the books (and the companies are CONTRACTUALLY OBLIGATED
to show profit participants all their numbers). This process can take years.
It took James Garner over two decades – and dozens of lawsuits – to get a look at Warner’s books. It turned out that despite their claims that his TV series never showed a profit, they owed him over 20 million dollars.
In other words, if anyone – in any of the unions – thinks that the companies are going to change their ways, they are not paying attention to reality.
As to this internecine in-fighting (the different ‘parties’ within the union, whatever they call themselves) that just proves my argument that there are members of our union who are intent on breaking us apart – thus depriving us of our basic ability as a union to use collective bargaining in this and all other disputes.
And again, if there’s no money to be made, what is the AMPTP’s argument against giving us a percentage of a non-existent profit?
Asserting that there’s no money in this particular market area – and then stonewalling when it comes to sharing this “non-profit” area - strikes me
as somewhat disingenuous to say the least. As to the members who repeat this argument - ‘there’s no money in it, so why fight for it?’ - they have not
learned the lessons of the past 50 years. If the company’s don’t want us to participate, it’s because they believe there is money in it and that it’s money
that they can avoid sharing.
And finally, you misconstrue my position. I’m not advocating a strike, far from it - I don’t want to see a strike any more than anyone else. I’m merely
suggesting that the absence of a strike authorization is a crippling blow to the union - had there been a strike authorization in effect last year, this whole issue would have been resolved by now - because despite what anyone might believe, the companies (the major film companies and networks) are deathly afraid of a strike AT THIS TIME. It would cripple them.
As with all other companies in this country (and entertainment companies more than most) borrowing money now is a very difficult proposition. Without
product in the pipeline (and things are very slow now, not because of possible strike, but because the companies are having problems getting funding)
then several of the majors and one or two of the networks might go belly up.
That’s why they’re scrambling to put together low budget (read ‘non-union’) divisions.
However, as you point out, the absence of stars could make things even worse - and the companies know it. So, for now, they are doing what they can to avert a strike - including spreading propaganda and dissension.
Anyway, thanks so much for your thoughtful response. In the end, each of us must make up our own mind and vote our conscience.
Have a splendid week and, as always ...
Much Success,
Bob
=======================
And Emma replied:
Dear Bob,
First of all, thank you so much for your responses to me. I know you are a very busy man, and I appreciate the time and effort you put into answering.
Your last email is definitely food for thought for me, much of it being new.
I also apologize for misconstruing your email on “Strike or No Strike”. Perhaps some of your usages of “if we are weak” made me think of some of the phrases that SAG has been putting out in their propaganda and made me misconstrue what you were saying.
For the future, here’s hoping that all corrupt politicians will be found out, all money will end up in the hands that earned it, people will keep promises they make, the unions will consolidate into one body, and that however this ends up, it is favorable for all involved.
In solidarity and hope for your success,
Emma

Audition Technique

Fri, 8 Aug 2008 22:25:56 -0700

Let’s get movin’!

Come join me for this special on-camera workshop that emphasizes the demonstration and application of techniques to hone your auditioning (and acting) skills.

New students welcome!

Class will reconvene Friday, Sept 5th, 10:15am - 1:45pm

Hello my friends and clients!

I am happy to be back in beautiful Los Angeles among you. I hope your summer has been extraordinary so far. (Mine has been filled with fairy houses!)

I felt so 21st Century, sitting on the other side of the country, coaching those of you who were so inclined using isight or Skype. It worked so well! --Even when coaching "over-the-pond," we seemed to communicate virtually in real time. How cool is that?! Those of you who didn't have the ability to coach via the internet, I hope that the acting coaches that I recommended worked out well for you. (I also hope that there is a computer up-grade in your future ;) ) The good news is, I am back and I can't wait to see you all (in person!)

Speaking of computers, as you can see I have launched a scheduling program for my website that will allow you to see what times are open for private coaching sessions and book yourself. That way you will have no problem getting a session time with me without delay. I will confirm with you in-between my private sessions with clients, but if you schedule yourself down for a time...that time is YOURS, no worries.

As August is already upon us, I wanted to remind you that my class at The Actors Network begins again in September.

Location: The Actors Network
4370 Coldwater Cyn, Blvd.  2nd Floor - Upstairs  Studio City, CA 91604

Time: Fridays, 10:15 am-1:45 pm
Price: $225 (monthly)
Spaces limited
It looks like an actor's strike will be avoided. Whether this is a good thing or not is left up to interpretation. I hope SAG finds a way to negotiate a fair deal for its actors. In any case, things are beginning to get as hot as the weather, so let's go!

Go deep within the sacred ground,
'tis there the secrets can be found.
Your acting journey begins right here.
Use your heart and have no fear.

Many acting coach blessings to each of you,

Crystal
Los Angeles Acting Coach

Los Angeles Acting Coach reading selections:

Fri, 8 Aug 2008 22:02:25 -0700

As a coach, I often get asked what acting books to read. I would like to say that no book can teach you to act, and all books on the subject are worthy in some way. I would officially like to suggest books by Constantin Stanislavski; also "Six Lessons" by Boleslavsky, "Act of Passion" by Lee Strasberg, "On Acting" by Sanford Meisner, “A Challenge For The Actor" by Uta Hagen, “Actors on Acting" (a history of remarks on acting by great actors) edited by Toby Cole and Helen Chinsy, "The Way of the Actor" by Brian Bates, and Eric Morris’ “No Acting Please.”

Also, read the expression on a silent face, read between the lines of your girlfriend’s questions and read the writing on the wall before you take action. Look, listen, love; live.

I don’t mean to be trite or glib, but sometimes I feel we need to be reminded that we are all experts in what it is to be human. The key is not to try to create life, but to live it.

I am teaching a class!

Thu, 27 Sep 2007 23:02:38 -0700

Hey, all of you actors and friends that have been asking me to teach another class...I am excited to say, I am responding! I am starting up a very small class so that I can give nearly one on one attention and make sure that each student gets it and grows and blooms into a creative,confident, playful actress / actor. I am calling it, Auditioning By Heart !

My coaching life is still doing well, as you know, but I miss having a class where I can really take the time to give actor's the skill to be a master, instead of just working 1 hour on a single audition.

I do want to be careful about who I let into the class, because I would rather have less people who are talented, good-hearted, hard working, fun people who take their craft seriously, than just get my hands on cash but have a class that doesn't grow. That is just not in me, it is not what I am about. I really want to benefit the world by creating a group of actors who bring humanity to the screen. I want to make the world a better place, and have fun doing it!

So here are the most pertinent details:
Cold Reading Audition Technique
With
CRYSTAL CARSON
‘Let’s Play Pretend’

Crystal Carson, creator of ‘The Actors mind’, will be teaching on-camera classes focussing on cold reading, audition technique and character & script analysis. Crystal will be sharing the secrets that you need to be a masterful actor that “books that job!”

On-going classes starting Friday, October 5th 2007
Location: The Actors Network
4370 Coldwater Cyn, Blvd.  2nd Floor - Upstairs  Studio City, CA 91604

Time: Fridays, 10:30am-1:30 pm
Price: $225 (monthly)
Special Introductory Price $199! (Monthly thru 2007)
Spaces limited to 10 actors only
Contact: (818) 693-6460