by Haven Tso
The recent National Institution of Dramatic Art (NIDA) saga had sparkled the question of “Do we need to put so much resources into an acting degree for actors?” There was a recent article in Sydney Morning Herald saying that there are equally successful “NIDA rejects” or “non-NIDA graduates” in the industry, so it seems that NIDA is having too much money and time for office politics. The article even quoted Sam Worthington, who reported was not happy about his time at NIDA saying “I got wrapped in barbed wire, told, ‘You will never work … well f— them, I’m now the golden boy, aren’t I.” Whether Sam Worthington is a good actor is another question, but the legacy of NIDA, which is now in jeopardy because of all the politics going on there did make me think – do we need a degree to act?
I can’t say for other people, but for me I always refer myself as an “academic actor”. I need to understand something before I can do it. I did not go through NIDA but opted for an experimental course that UNSW and NIDA held at that time to pursue my knowledge in the profession. The course helped me to open myself to broader views of what theatre is about and to understand the possibilities brought about by this art form. This knowledge helped me to gain control over what my acting teachers called “raw talent”, making my performance not based only on instincts but also informed decisions. My further training in voice helped me to understand text much better and honed and sharpened my instincts making it possible to ask questions about the text and the characters. So for me, drama school, or in this case, and education and training of drama and theatre school did me well as an actor.
However, I do personally believe that what works for someone does not necessarily work for other people. Some people just have raw talents that they can already control. They don’t need external advice as they have already trained themselves up through their experiences. Toni Collette does not need to finish her NIDA program; despite choking on her NIDA audition, Rachel Griffiths delivered great performances in “Hilary and Jackie”, “Six Feet Under” and “Brothers and Sisters”.
Of course there are other venues where you can get your training if you want to, such as WAAPA, VCA, Actor Centre, Actor’s Pulse etc. etc. Each of them has its different approach to acting and actor training. But I think just like food, they are not for everyone. Acting is a performing art, and as I said in my previous blog, art is subjective and so this applies to what works for you to hone your skills in this art form. So the question will be – “Do I need education / training in acting?” and if so, “What kind of training best suits me?”
I personally think that dismissing the value of NIDA, no matter what state it is in now, by simply saying there are lots of actors who did not go to NIDA, is an over generalised statement that could be misleading to many. It is just like saying, “you don’t need to receive an education systematically to be an educated person and so let us stop funding schools”.
Nonetheless, I do think that no matter what approach you decide to choose you must have the right reason. I have met wannabe actors who came up to me and said they want to go to NIDA and whether I know any teachers that can guarantee them to get in. When being asked why do they want to go to NIDA they said, “because I want to be famous and NIDA can help me do that” (or something along that line). I would usually tell them “You don’t go to NIDA to become famous”. For me the only reason to pursue an acting training or even acting is because you love the art and want to be part of it. Any reasons beyond that, especially the fame one, could possibly lead to years of disappointment.
Haven Tso is an actor, writer, graphic designer and blogger.
Follow Us!