Scot is an Idiot.

[jester]

and furthermore... I've seen plenty of chinese Elvis's. There is no excuses now.

[Stephon]

"Legitimate" theater is, essentially, stage plays. It's a vile term, but concise, and immediately understood by those in the acting profession. Personally, I disgree with the idea that musicals would not fall under the umbrella of "legitimate" theater, but I suppose that is neither here nor there.

As I've often had to say to you before, go back and actually read what I wrote:

- I never implied that a good magic show requires an assistant, lovely or otherwise. However, many magicians use what they refer to as a "lovely assistant." She, therefore, must be lovely.

-Nor did I say that a stage illusionist would fit the definition of "legitimate" theater. I said that the notice in question was typical of what you would find in "legitimate" theater audition notices.

-Yes, I do know how stuck up the term "legitimate" theater sounds; that is why I wrote "so called 'legitimate' theater". I used both "so called" and put the word in quotations. That is, at worst, redundant, but hardly stuck up.

-I wasn't responding to a non-issue, I was responding to your over-reaction to a non-issue. But hey, Good Try!

-You had better zip up your pants Jester, your insecurity is showing. I never, in this post or any other, judged your value based on whether or not you'd "[trod] the boards". I said that you are ignorant of the environment in which that type of casting notice is common. You have acknowledged that ignorance. There's no shame in ignorance; it's just being uninformed--no reason to take it as an insult. (Now if I'd called you stupid. . .)

And it is ignorance, same as if someone who was unfamiliar with street performance complained that it's rude to ask for money during and after the show. And then they got on a public forum and complained about it. Repeatedly. Self-rightously. Refusing to back down, even when their ignorance is pointed out to them. Repeatedly.

Finally, how is this guy putting up a request for a woman with specific qualities any different that a festival that says it wants stilt walkers, balloon twisters, and street mimes for a family event? What about all of those multi-pierced, heavily tattood, scrotum jugglers? Don't they have just as much right to work the festival as the others? NO! Because they don't fit the f*cking bill, do they?

[jester]

wow!

Originally posted by Stephon

Finally, how is this guy putting up a request for a woman with specific qualities any different that a festival that says it wants stilt walkers, balloon twisters, and street mimes for a family event? What about all of those multi-pierced, heavily tattood, scrotum jugglers? Don't they have just as much right to work the festival as the others? NO! Because they don't fit the f*cking bill, do they?

Passionate Stephon. Very passionate. However a petite 27 year old can be as lovely and able as a petite 23 year old. My argument against ageism still stands firm. I think a 40 year old stilt walker is just as tall as a 19 year old one.

I think the difference between heavily tatooed scrotum jugglers and balloon twisters is somewhat more marked that what I'm talking about here.

Heavily tattooed scrotum jugglers have usually chosen the way they modified their bodies, unlike so many hungry young actresses and models and singers who are coaxed or persuaded into having their breasts enlarged by figure facists.

I love the crescendo of anger climaxing in your use of the "f" word.

It clearly isn't a non issue is it? You can't say this is a "non issue" and then write the above paragraph.

Stephon, aesthetics were one of the prime concerns of the third reich as they sought to purify the master race. I will go so far as to say that Hollywood and other bodies that cast for "light entertainment" are frequently facistic in their obsession with aesthetic values, imposing their limited over sanitised tastes on society.

You are entitled to disagree with me, but please try to argue in a more sensible and civilised way. Lacing an argument with implied insult is fun for me, both to give and recieve, but you clearly get quite apopleptic when I play on your own terms.

[Evan Young]

Re: wow!

Originally posted by jester
Passionate Stephon. Very passionate. However a petite 27 year old can be as lovely and able as a petite 23 year old. My argument against ageism still stands firm. I think a 40 year old stilt walker is just as tall as a 19 year old one.

One of the factors to consider in an onstage relationship is the relationship. Lots of physical factors can affect this relationship, including size, race, voice quality, costume, posture, and age. In fact, age can play a major role in an onstage relationship. It can make the difference between whether the premise of the relationship is believable to the audience or not.
Now, of course you could allways change the premise for the right person, but this guy is established with his show (so he says). It's very possible that changing too much of the show would be a bad decision in terms of what his clients are expecting from him. What if he's a cruise ship magician, those people want you to stay exactley the same for every single show for as long as you work for them unless they tell you otherwise. What if he just really likes the show the way it is and doesn't want to change it; that sounds fair to me.

Now, it's also known to me that you don't have to be in that age range to play in that age range, and I think other people know that as well. Most american movies and TV shows cast adults who look young to play high school students to avoid the additional restricions of child labor laws. I spent two years playing a character who was 7-8 years younger than I am, and a lot of people were convinced while I was on stage. BUT, The casting people had to be carefull though with who they paired me with for that show because if I appeared to be the same age or older as the other actor the premise of the on-stage relationship wouldn't be believable. A 27 year old playing younger solo on stage might be convincing, but if they were paired with a 24 year old who is suposed to be older it might not be convincing.

So, did you take all these factors into consideration before jumping on this guys post? or did you just assume he was trying to hire a youngster for controle reasons?

[ben woodling]

Hey guys i don't often post, in fact i dont think i have in a year or so...thats besides the point anyway;
I guess the reason the guy is asking for those particular requirements is because that is what he wants!?
If he wanted anyone to apply he would have said "im looking for an assistant, call me up".
But he didnt he stipulated what he wants as that will fit in with what he has in mind for the "show".
Who knows why he wants the characteristics that he asked for. This is "show business" and the audience expect an assistant to be many of the things stated. I dont disagree that a 40 year old women could look like a 20 something women but the chances are slim, and at the end of the day do you want some 40 year old women to have surgery to look/aspire to be a 20 year old women? If she wants to thats fine with me. But i do understand that if these people want to be doing these things and take specific jobs they must accept to "fit in" with what people want.
Also chances are a 20 year old is likely to be much more supple than a 40 year old, which is important for this particular job.

Stephon, aesthetics were one of the prime concerns of the third reich as they sought to purify the master race.

Huh? I dont think its quite relative to be drawing paralells, entertainment is for the ears and eyes. I dont want to watch something thats not attractive. Would you choose crappy looking props over a decent well decorated set? Would you want that for the audience?

[Magrat2005]

you're all morons, and if looks were an issue you'll all be outta a job, unlike me, cuz I look great in anything.

[jester]

Originally posted by ben woodling

Huh? I dont think its quite relative to be drawing paralells, entertainment is for the ears and eyes. I dont want to watch something thats not attractive. Would you choose crappy looking props over a decent well decorated set? Would you want that for the audience?

I don't think comparing an artist to props is really a good analogy and it's exactly the attitude that I am condemning here.

A magicians assistant is usually a lot more than just a pretty face - well certainly in the acts that Ive been involved with. The assistant has to get the timing right, be able to improvise and help with the misdirection. The magicians assistant is NOT just a prop and no employee should be treated as such.

I'm talking about ageism here folks. The attractiveness thing is really subjective.

[ben woodling]

Any proof of just the jpeg in ur avatar?

[Magrat2005]

Originally posted by ben woodling
Any proof of just the jpeg in ur avatar?

just my avatar, that is me, so use your imagination. Im gonna get a tattoo on my shoulder, if thats ok with you guys, wouldnt want to cause a bust up cuz someone dissaproving.

[Rachel Peters]

starve the thread.

sorry. I just decided to come back and edit my post out. I don't care enough.

[Magrat2005]

Rach, get used to it

these guys bicker like this all the time, its highly amuzing, so go, leave the fun

[Evan Young]

Originally posted by jester
I'm talking about ageism here folks. The attractiveness thing is really subjective.

did you read my last post? I thought I was your fav to argue with.

[jester]

Hi Evan.

As you already know I spent a few years working in a jobcentre so yes I am happy to say that I did take many factors into account before jumping on the guys post.

I agree with a lot of what you say. The fact is, in the united kingdom you have to at least interview all applicants that are suited to the job and you are not allowed to discriminate on the grounds of sex or race. Casting in showbusiness is obviously an exempt field and aesthetics are often and important part of casting. We wouldn't want Dawn French playing Lady Diana in a serious biopic now, although I'd suspend my disbelief for Jennifer Saunders.

Age discrimination is not at all illegal at the moment although they keep promising to do something about it.

I personally think that the 23yr age limit is not so much about control and I'm not saying that the advertiser is evil, but I think he is WRONG not to consider applicants over 23 years of age.

Haircolour is obviously important to him because he specified two colours. I think he is excluding redheads and rat browns (people do discriminate against redheads and gingers)

My experience of magicians is that they do rather like their control and they do believe that having a trophy girlfriend type assistant (most of the audience assume that they are a couple - that's the point) will make them look better and grander. And they are right. And I think that such a cheesy dynamic sucks in a magic show.

I'm glad to say that many people I work with do not share this hopeless attitude and you can defend it all you want Evan, but the truth is a good assistant can be made to look good. A good looking duff assistant is far harder to train for the job.

I should not judge the advertiser, but I do judge the advert and it does make him seem a bit mysoginist to most enlighted people of the naughties.

Yes there may well be good reason for the age limit - I suspect it has far more to do with levels of pay and balance of power. Which isn't necessarily about control and is not necessarily a bad thing to do. But I think the advertiser hasn't thought the advert through.

[martin ewen]

You degrade the worth of this site

Hey, the guy posted an employment opportunity, jester spewed his rightious indignation and the guys gone, taking his post (and the opportunity) with him.
Given jesters not female, not looking for work as a tranvestite teenager and not qualified to be particularily helpful, as evidenced by the example here where he, by his actions has reduced opportunity for visitors to this board, the question must be asked.
What business is it of his to insert his questionable opinions into commercial threads that don't directly concern him?
By all means splutter and bleat but do take care not to reduce the ability of this site to provide opportunity to others simply because your political soapbox of the day is triggered.
Ageism, what a pathetic farce.
Again, for the good of all, Please try to restrict your pontificating drivel to sections of these bourds where they will do the least harm.
And if for a moment you think that your original outburst was in any way justified in any sense greater than your opinionated self appointed birthright, then you are exactly the person we know and sadly tolerate.

[jester]

Martin. Thank you for your opinion. I do not agree with you. Please go and get on with that life you keep assuring me you have.

I did not remove the thread. I don't think the unregistered magician did either.