Talk:Community theatre/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Community theatre. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Amateur Theatre, in the UK at least, fills an important gap in what the professionals can do. We have the advantage of numbers. Professional companies are often limited by the amount of cash that is available to pay their company members so plays that have small casts and small back stage crews have come to dominate. Amateur companies, whose actors work for love rather than cash, can put up large casts. Because of this some of the older plays with their casts in the twenties and thirties get an airing. Amateur companies also have the advantage that as their actors and producers come from walks of life that are not totally wrapped up in the theatre they will bring a different view to a production that may not occur to the professionals. Throughout the UK there are top-notch amateur companies such as the People's Theatre in Newcastle upon Tyne and the Questors Theatre in Ealing, West London,(i.e. the Little Theatres) who put on a very high standard of production. Within their ranks there are numerous professional actors (many of whom are resting.)who have to hold their own against the acting talent from other professions. All of this makes the amateur theatre scene a vibrant part of the overall British Theatre set up.

If the term has distinct meanings in The US and the UK, why not create two articles? A Community theatre (U.K.) article could deal with the particulars of community theater on that side of the pond and the american perspective on the term can be an an article called Community theatre (U.S.) with a note that, "community theatre is also called amateur theatre, particularly in the U.K. where community theater has a different meaning." Cybernrd (talk) 05:07, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

An Amateur theatre article already exists. This would be an adequate place to put information about amateur theatre in the US. It seems overcomplicated having an Amateur theatre, a Community theatre (U.S.) and a community theatre (U.K.) article as well. On top of this community theatre is something practiced internationally, not just in the UK. It just seems sensible to have everything consolidated, unless there are significant fields of knowledge that anyone would like to contribute about the community theatre movement in any particular country; in which case that movement can be covered.

Does this make sense? Sebbi (talk) 15:16, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

"amateur dramatics" redirects here, but then is stated to be a different thing. What's that all about? Totnesmartin 23:06, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Looks to be a recent edit. There's a discussion on whether the two ideas should be merged. Mootinator 19:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

This shouldn't be merged with 'amateur' theatre. In the UK there is a clear distinction: community theatre has its own set of professional practices and is not the same as 'amateur' theatre.

Amateur drama suggests 'am-dram' local theatre groups: 'community drama' is certainly not that

In the UK community theatre is a branch of professional theatre which specialises in involving people from communities. It is not at all the same thing as amateur theatre.

This article contains zero references or third party sources. It is clearly biased towards an amateur performer's perspective and full of contentious statements. As a performer and theatre critic I can say clearly that it is not the case that many professional performers begin in an amateur or community context, and it is certainly not the case that the only difference in amateur and professional theatre is whether performers are paid or unpaid. I have, therefore, removed these statements. In actual fact, professional performance artists (actors, directors, writers and producers) can study for anywhere between 3 - 8 years to achieve professional skills and qualifications. They work hard to earn the right to be called professional and to be treated accordingly. The difference in the standard of work is huge. There is no comparrison between amateur and professional theatre, and every academic article, journal, encyclopedia or critical review reflects this. (Moviefreak26 (talk) 23:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC))

This is a very cranky rant, not an encyclopedia article. I have just added a small reference to the Little Theatre Movement in the US, but that should not be taken as fulfilling the requirements that this article be properly cited. Someone with knowledge and source material had better take this article in hand, possibly for a total gut and rewrite. Artemis-Arethusa (talk) 13:18, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

i agree this article fails. its mostly some jerkoff windbagging about theatre in the uk. 79.75.174.243 (talk) 21:34, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Suggest merge, delete or completely re-write. See the article on amateur theatre as well. As many people have rightly pointed out, amateur and community theatre do not deserve such windbagging and unsupported praise. Why doesn't wikipedia concentrate on real, professional theatre articles instead? (129.96.252.38 (talk) 06:56, 11 September 2008 (UTC))

Because nobody's writing about it. I suppose you (and people expressing the same opinion as you) wouldn't like the same author to write about pro theater ! But if you've got the skills required, go for it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.100.140.83 (talk) 09:23, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

What this article needs is some good old fashioned academic rigour. The article clearly states that in the US the word is used differently and there is a link to the relevant page on Amateur Theatre. If anyone is planning on a rewrite I suggest they be someone who knows their subject matter. By that I mean, having sources and being able to cite them. Personal opinion, be it positive or negative, has no place within the article. If someone would like to write a personal essay on this topic, wonderful, but don't put it on Wikipedia. Sebbi (talk) 15:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

"Amateur companies, whose actors work for love rather than cash, can put up large casts." This implies that professional actors are greedy simply because they expect to be paid for their work, and that amateur actors -- who are untrained and unskilled -- are somehow superior. No serious information source would credit this argument.

"Amateur companies also have the advantage that as their actors and producers come from walks of life that are not totally wrapped up in the theatre they will bring a different view to a production that may not occur to the professionals."

Another ridiculous argument. Amateur actors are somehow better because they haven't studied their craft? Nonsense.

Suggest this article be deleted. (129.96.112.189 (talk) 02:45, 15 September 2008 (UTC))

There seem to be at least two different subjects under this heading - UK community theater and US community theater, which are completely different and need to be separated. Community theater US and amateur theater UK would go under the same heading. And comparing professional theater and community/amateur theater is just silly. There are occasions when community theater reaches a level as high as professional theater, and those are the moments we in community theater live for, but saying that one is "better" than the other is a futile comparison. Community theater is about community first. When it combines artistic excellence AND community, it is one of the most thrilling experiences possible.Revajw (talk) 17:46, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes. I and other have raised the question of the terminology over at the amateur theatre talk page. I don't know anything about the use of the terms "community" and "amateur" theatre in the US, though. Can you explain the distinction? Then we can discuss how to divide the two articles. AndyJones (talk) 09:35, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Community theatre, in the UK and most Commonwealth countries, is locally based theatre usually organized by professionals or professionally trained directors, writers, producers and/or performers. So the subject matter may be local, but the standard of work is close to professional. It's about bringing theatre to rural communities. Amateur theatre is very, very different. It is untrained people usually putting on "classic" plays, and often very badly. I disagree that "comparing professional theater (theatre) and community/amateur theatre is just silly", I know, like most professional artists, that there is a distinction between them that reputable publications acknowledge and celebrate. (58.160.172.57 (talk) 00:55, 7 April 2009 (UTC))

Comparing profesisonal theater and community/amateur theater is silly? I think the thousands of professionals worldwide would take issue with that. (129.96.130.46 (talk) 01:08, 16 March 2009 (UTC))

The Amateur Theater Handbook by Keith Arrowsmith,(Methuen,2001) describes what we in the US call "Community" theater. So I believe that the terms are equivalent.Revajw (talk) 23:33, 27 November 2008 (UTC)