Working-class actors can always extend their range

High costs keep the less affluent out of drama schools and careers, but surely acting is about transcending background, not being confined by it?

As somebody from a working-class background, I have considerable sympathy for those who feel they are excluded by the private-school dominance that seems to permeate society even more thoroughly than in my youth ("The loneliness of the working-class actor", New Review, last week). Unsurprisingly, students from working-class backgrounds are not applying to drama school when the cost is so high and the earnings from acting are so precarious. However, are they really excluded, by their background, from the parts that are available? Surely the clue is in the job title, or do we only expect actors to play themselves today? Perhaps some of them need to develop a broader portfolio.
Andrew Ruff
Bedford

Continue reading...