d'Arcy James said in an interview that he is not interested in returning to the role. He said he feels like it would be a step backward in his career. There's something about this phrase that I just don't like. "A step backward in [one's] career" is a phrase that I hear far too often lately as an excuse for not returning to old roles, taking on roles deemed "too similar" to old roles, or shows that one has done before.
Personally, even if this is valid advice for some other career, I feel it's foolish to keep using such an adage when actors, actresses, singers, and dancers (be it on the Great White Way or nationally) aren't even working in those professions 99.9% of the time. Yes, those are sad odds, especially during a recession, but it's true -- only 1 in 100 shows ever get up. With so much time on the bench in between roles, unless you're constantly practicing your craft, I highly doubt you'll grow as a performer career-wise, or gain any creative stimulation from showing your versatility when there are no shows in which to do so.
A role, any role, even if it's one you've done twelve times before or is similar enough to be the same role with a different name, means you survive for at the very least another six months on an Equity contract. Unless you've got a day job lined up that you can return to, or you're constantly auditioning, I highly suggest eating humble pie and taking the same or a similar role one more time if it means that a producer sees you and thinks you'd be great for a new role. You don't see Ted Neeley bitching and moaning about not getting a Jack Nicholson part after 40 years, and he's about to start another leg of one-night "shed" dates as Jesus. A part is a part is a part - take it. Appreciate it. Cherish it. It may be the only role you get for a while.
"There is no problem so big that it cannot be run away from."
~ Charles M. Schulz
Updated On: 7/21/09 at 12:30 PM
