The Triple Threat Debate
I just received an e-mail from the Southeastern Theatre Conference asking some questions for an upcoming publication asking the age-old question of the “triple threat” (or as I prefer “flexible actor”). Below are the questions they asked and my responses. It’s an interesting question…
1) Does your curriculum emphasize equal training in the areas of acting, singing and dancing? Directing, acting and research? Set, lighting and costume design? Acting for theatre, film and television?
Our students are encouraged to pursue training in areas of acting, singing and dancing, but they are not required for the degree. Our program specializes in laying a strong groundwork in training for the theatre based on the students chosen area of study. Regardless of their area o study, students are introduced to as many of the aspects of the business of theatre (or “Show Business”, if you prefer) throughout their career in our program as possible. Making oneself as marketable as possible is highly emphasized.
2) Does your perception of a working actor include being able to audition for musical theatre work?
In order to eat, actors need to audition for anything and everything that comes their way! That involves being as flexible an actor as possible. I prefer the label “flexible actor” as opposed to “triple threat.”
3) Do you believe designers need equal training in multiple areas of design to be competitive in professional theatre?
In my limited experience with the technical end of theatre, it has been my observation that for a technician, being highly trained in one area of study is a stronger choice. However, that theory does not give technicians the pass to “float” through classes that are not geared toward their area of study (at least at the undergraduate level)! Being competent to pick up the slack (if needed) to help out another area will make them incredibly valuable!
4) Do you think having skills in multiple areas makes theatre people more employable?
If the person is going into educational theatre, yes. If they plan on pursuing a professional career, especially early on in that career, they tend to be “pigeonholed” very quickly. Therefore, if an actor is trying to make themselves marketable by announcing that they have technical skills, too, they should be prepared to become an indentured servant for nearly every theatre they work for. Not that there’s anything wrong with that if the actor understands this at the outset of their career. Without this understanding, their career might seem stalled and not very fulfilling for a long time.
5) Do you think having skills in multiple areas could ever work against you in getting a job in professional theater?
From an actor’s perspective, it has led me to being cast in some smaller roles (especially early on in my career) so I could also be utilized to help build the set in my “spare time”. As an example of my answer to question 4, I had to move to another state to break out of this pattern of work!
6) Do you believe those who achieve triple threat status are more successful in theatre?
Only if the role calls for it. “Triple threats” are almost viewed as side show attractions. Producers and directors seem to think they are a rarity and if they find one, they will keep that person at the forefront of their mind when casting time comes around again…but only if the role (or the show) calls for it.
7) Does a student who is a specialist in one area ever have an advantage over a “triple threat” graduate?
The highly devoted, motivated and ambitious “specialist” will almost always be more successful. This is a wide generality, but university programs tend to pour lots of praise on their “triple threats” in the hopes of keeping them in the program. They tend to get all the “good” roles while the “specialists” take more of a backseat and have to work a little harder through the program. This harder work will serve them much better in their career than the praise a “triple threat” gets. Again, that’s a generality. My main point is that hard work and the idea that there are never any guarantees of work should be taught early and often!
8) Do you think students now must be able to perform for stage, film and television to succeed?
Definitely. Without question. I repeat my answer to question 2: In order to eat, actors need to audition for anything and everything that comes their way! As an actor who is also maintaining a professional career in addition to my duties for the university, I can say without a doubt, there are many more auditions for Film/TV/Industrial/Voiceover work than any other type of work. This obviously becomes less and less true the larger the market in which you live. One skill that is not taught (at least not in Theatre Programs—as opposed to Actor Training Programs) is the ability to read from a teleprompter or cue cards. This skill is invaluable for an actor. If they do not receive this training as part of their undergraduate curriculum, students should be encouraged to seek it out individually! There is amazing money to be made as a spokesperson or host of a television program. This can help pay the bills while outside theatre work is saught!