where does it say that someone in the audience saw it???
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/4/04
For whoever made that crack about the financial district- professionalism doesn't mean wearing a tie to work. It means doing your job as well as you can and taking pride in it. A stage actor's job is to deliver a performance to the audience. Therefore, behavior such as this, which is meant to get an actor to break character, is unprofessional. It interferes with the ability of the person onstage to do his or her job as it's meant to be done. Simple as that.
Does this mean that mooners in the wings are horrible people or don't deserve to be hired? No, of course not. I realize that this stuff is done in fun. But you still can't say it's within the bounds of professional behavior, and if I were an actor I'd rather work with people who had fun with acting, not with interfering with it.
Also, isn't it funny how very seriously some people are taking the "humorlessness" of others? Methinks the pranksters doth protest too much.
It's funny, but that TOTALY sucks. Poor girl, I admire her for keeping a straight face.
"oh poo, everyone does stupid things when you're on a cast- if that article didn't get printed then no one here would know about it so i don't see a problem with it."
What? Generally, people only have problems with things they know about. I can't complain about something I had no idea happened...
Another vote for HILARIOUS!! (almost as funny as Shosh falling off the stage, i still can't get over that one. best mental picture of MY LIFE!!)
Stand-by Joined: 12/31/69
"Another vote for HILARIOUS!! (almost as funny as Shosh falling off the stage, i still can't get over that one. best mental picture of MY LIFE!!)"
That puts it all in perspective.
Someone commented about Kendra full frontal flashing everyone in Denver and I'm not sure if we're talking of the same instances, but she did so in the performance I saw in LA as well. At the end of Popular she's singing while kneeling on the bed and she quickly just yanks her dress up and flashes her lower half at the audience. Nothing vulgar or obscene, just a very cute and fast little "Fwoosh" that was very Glinda-ish in mannerisms. I thought it was quite hilarious.
I could be interpreting it wrong but this discussion seems at least in part to be about what is considered professional, is this not down to the circumstance and situation of the job? For example, every morning my house mates gets dressed for work and wears a suit and tie and works in a very quite office, I on the other hand I am sat at my desk wearing jeans and a hoodie and listening to bww raido at full blast, does this make me any less professional? no, becasue in my place of work this is the accpeted dress code and behaviour and I know were the limits lie. I am guessing the 2 individuals involved in this prank also know where the limits are and would not have done it if others involved would have viewed it as un-professional
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/4/04
Yeah, but if your music was interfering with someone's ability to work, would you play it anyway? Professionalism isn't all about dress codes.
Someone mooned me from the wings once and it completely broke my conscentration. It was my birthday and two of my fellow cast members got in position off stage bent over and hiked up there dresses and had Happy Birthday __________! written across their behinds. It was a serious moment and I was having to stiffle my laughter. I thought I was going to have to leave the stage without finishing the scene. I thought it was funny at the time and whenever I talk to those actors we laugh about it but I would never want something like that to be done to me again. If it breaks my conscentration, I am the one that ends up looking bad, not the people playing in the wings.
"Yeah, but if your music was interfering with someone's ability to work, would you play it anyway? Professionalism isn't all about dress codes."
This was just an example to try to illustrate my point that we dont know what was acceptable on this particular performance, people in differet situations, no matter how similar cant call some one else un-professional just becasue it is not the done thing were they are. Only the people involved in the actual situations know what the limits of professionalism are so it does not matter if we argue the toss here or not the fact is none of us were there (Im assuming since no one has piped up with facts about complaints, acceptance or any reaction for that matter) so who are we to say if these individuls were pushing the boundaries?
Understudy Joined: 12/31/69
I love moral relativism. There is no real right or wrong, everything depends on the circumstance. Sure, this type of behavior could sometimes be inappropriate - even dangerous - but this time none of those negative possibilities came to fruition, so it must be just fine.
The problem with relativistic perspective is that it can only be evaluated after the fact. If the 'mooners' were able to see into the future and know that there were going to be no negative results of their action, then drop trou and go for it. However, I highly doubt that was the case.
Reality was they were immature, unthinking and irresponsible - to their fellow cast members and the paying audience. The fact that some people find it funny doesn't change that fact. The fact that Eden didn't 'break' or the audience didn't see doesn't change that fact.
Are things really that black and white in some thing as un-important as this? Culture is what makes us and with culture many things will become morally relative.
Understudy Joined: 12/31/69
Actually, Lizzie, I think it is the unimportance that makes it easier to categorize in black-and-white terms. The choice made took risks ranging from the realtively mild (Eden might break) to the potentially dangerous (distractions leading to injury) - so leaving it open to the grey area of interpreatation is where all this discussion has come from.
If the simple parameter of respect and appropriateness were in place and acknowledged, then the incident wouldn't have occurred and neither would the resultant disagreement here.
You know, I think perhaps people are interpreting my response as some sort of condemnation, and that's really not the case. I accept that what happened really isn't that big a deal - and that situations like this occur all the time. I think I've been talking more about the ideal that should be reached for.
My reaction has been based on what I perceived as people perfectly willing to dismiss the parameters of professionalism, as if they didn't really need to exist. Some of the thoughts presented here (especially along the lines of it's just WICKED, so who cares?) are sad to me.
I guess I just hold on to the hope that respect for the art form itself won't completely go right out the window.
And before anyone jumps all over that - NO, I don't think this one little incident is a sign of the apocolypse - it's just a springboard into a discussion about what your feelings and thoughts are about the world of theatrical performance.
I disagree with how easy it is to make the distinction, in this case both sides of the discussion have come up with valid arguments for their case, and I have to admit both have swayed me so it really cant be that easy to those of us that dont see it as *that* important, I think perhaps this, combined with personal experience is why I cant bring myself to believe that thre was any real cause for concern
Edit: I really must check for typos before posting
Updated On: 9/23/05 at 10:45 AM
Understudy Joined: 12/31/69
The 'cause of concern' for me boils down to this - at some point, these actors made a choice to do this. Now, either they didn't think about the potential consequences at all, which I really would have no patience with, or they considered it and decided that, as you say, it's just not that big a deal and wouldn't hurt anything. But that's where I see the break in opinion occuring. There really WERE potential repurcussions that fall squarely into the 'con' column - but obviously not enough to sway their decision.
I keep thinking about the audience. The number "For Good" is arguably the emotional peak of the show (for those that accept that it has one) - and the potential for there to be a break right at that moment is unsettling to me. When an entire theatre of people has paid so much for the experience, to have it (potentially) affected by such a selfish act falls pretty heavily into the inappropriate category for me.
I just don't think it's too much to ask that for the time frame of the performance, those involved require of themselves and each other to be focussed on the task at hand. That's kind of what being a professional is about, to me.
"I keep thinking about the audience"
It is this argument that sways me your way, I do have to admit that if I were in an audience for a performance that was disrupted and had paid all that money I perhaps would not be so easy going, I just believe that this was done in good fun and the perpeptartors must have known what type of performer Eden was and and knew that it would not occur. I just hope I am not giving credit were it is not due
Understudy Joined: 12/31/69
yes this is true. Maria eberline commentedon a post about it on her message board. She said if was only one person who mooned her and there were two accomplices. (not sure what an accoplice would do for a mooning)
Maria Eberline's comment
And also, just to add... Maria said that it was during Wicked Witch of the East song and not For Good.
Man, this thread keeps popping up way more than the ass cheeks did.
I'm glad we made it to 4 pages, at least.
Videos