If both actors and directors use it dishonestly, it might as well not be there— but it’s a useful tool when handled with integrity.

Let’s set the mental stage: you’re auditioning for your favorite musical. Jittery with adrenaline and excitement, you politely greet the audition monitor and receive an audition form. 

The standard questions are present. After filling in your personal information, the form asks if you are auditioning for any particular role. Of course, the role you really want is the lead, which is your absolute dream role. You write it down. But the line below that one presents a problem.

“ARE YOU WILLING TO ACCEPT ANOTHER ROLE? CIRCLE: YES/NO.”

The mind games begin.

Read more: We All Have to Get Real About the “Will You Accept Another Role?” Question on Audition Forms

You pause. This is your favorite musical. You’d love to just be a part of it. But you also know that the production dates fall on the same weekend your childhood friend is getting married. You really, really want to support her… and you also really want to play your dream role. If you land that role, it would be worth missing the wedding for. On the other hand, if you don’t manage to get the part, you would be willing to wait until the next time a local company produces the show to be in it.

You consider your answer. You know it isn’t the answer many directors want. Would it call your dedication into question? But then why would they bother asking?, you wonder, and you circle “NO.”

Who can say exactly how this anecdote ends? Maybe the production staff asked the question in earnest, and will decide to cast you in your dream role after all. Unfortunately, it’s also as likely that this question hasn’t been asked in earnest— haven’t we all heard horror stories of directors who ask this question as a sort of trap, and toss out on principle any form with that answer? How many actors feel this fear and circle “yes,” only to have their dishonesty come back to bite them once cast?

I’ve yet to meet someone who disagrees that honestly is the best policy. However, in this case, honesty can be a trap unless both parties— the actor filling out the form and the director receiving it— are willing to be honest. 

A Useful Audition Staple

This question, “Are you willing to accept another role?”, is common on audition forms in community and school theater circles. It’s always preceded by the question of which roles the actor is interested in. Some directors forgo asking both questions, arguing that an actor should audition for a show itself and not a specific role. And anyway, the director always has final say on casting, and the director’s vision may not align with the actor’s. Why give them the input at all? Some actors just don’t have a good concept of where they fit best in a production. Perhaps they don’t quite understand their type, or the types of the other actors auditioning with them. Regardless, the director’s say is king.

As a director and as an actor, I think asking both of these questions— “Are there any specific roles you want?” and “Are you willing to accept another role?”— is valuable. Despite the claim that these questions contribute to actors’ egoism (and I can understand the feeling behind this thought), it’s important to remember that directors cannot know the reasoning behind an actor’s answers to these questions. These questions are helpful for receiving more information about actors auditioning for a production. While it would be inappropriate to ask actors to justify why they noted that they wouldn’t accept another role, it is already helpful to know that they wouldn’t! Certainly, asking the question is better than not asking it and ending up with a number of actors quitting the show because they, for one reason or another, aren’t willing to play the role in which they were cast.

A lesser-thought-of benefit to asking this question is gauging an actor’s comfort with certain roles. Perhaps an actor is auditioning for an innocent character in an otherwise sexually charged show— it’s possible that actor is comfortable with playing only that character for personal reasons. Getting this information is crucial.

I would advocate that production staffs take this a step further and ask on their audition forms if there are any roles for which actors are not interested in being considered. A good blanket example of this question’s usefulness would be the show Heathers. Perhaps an actor would feel uncomfortable playing a role where her weight is commented on or made fun of— a very understandable case, in which she should be allowed to opt out of being seen for Martha or Heather Duke. Perhaps an actor would feel very uncomfortable with the thought of handling and firing prop firearms, and would want to opt out of being seen for Veronica or JD.

The bottom line is that directors can’t read an actor’s mind. Therefore, any information the audition form can provide the director about the actor and their wishes is of benefit. Asking whether an actor is willing to accept another role is advantageous. Rather than resisting this question for fear of egoism, directors stand to benefit from asking this question and more. The caveat, then, is that this question must be used with integrity.

Penalized for Honesty

As I’ve mentioned, a number of directors dislike this question on audition forms and refuse to use it. They believe it indicates an egotistical streak in the actor and excuses diva-like behavior. I think this is an incorrect and unfair assumption to leap to, but if the director truly feels this way, then certainly, they should leave this question off their audition form. 

The real problem arises when this question is put on an audition form and used as a sort of underhanded test. We’ve all heard horror stories of directors who include this question on their audition forms and then toss out any form with a “no” response on principle. I have personally heard production staff members argue in favor of doing this! This practice is misleading and manipulative. The production staff holds a position of authority over actors. In an audition room, the production staff holds all the power. It is utterly dishonest to abuse this authority and penalize an actor for truthfully expressing their feelings in response to a question you asked!

Because this question is sometimes asked deceptively, actors are forced to consider answering dishonestly. If the only way to be cast is to lie and say you’re willing to accept a role you’re not, then every actor will mark this on their form, or else they would simply not audition in the first place!

Consider the implications of an environment where an actor’s only opportunities arise if they are willing to say yes to everything, no questions asked, even if they aren’t really comfortable. This creates an unsafe and coercive culture. 

If you are directing at an institution where you do not get to dictate what is on the audition form, and are therefore powerless to remove this question, you absolutely must use it honestly and not penalize actors for telling you the truth. If you don’t want actors to say no, then you shouldn’t ask at all.

Honesty is the Policy

The dishonesty with how this question is treated creates an environment where actors and directors must both play a sort of game of chicken to deduce who is being truthful. Actors, fearing directors have included the question as a test of loyalty, are inclined to dishonestly answer yes. Directors, unsure of whether actors have answered truthfully or not, find the question is utterly useless on every form that says yes, because separating the actors who were being honest from those who answered out of fear is impossible. 

Indeed, plenty of actors lie when it comes to this question, even when the director is asking it sincerely. It’s generally understood that after casting notices are sent out, at least a few actors will quit a production. But actors are faced with a hard choice if they know they have a 50/50 shot of shooting themselves in the foot by telling the truth!

Directors are responsible for ending this standoff. As the ones with all the power in an audition, they must treat this question as the useful opportunity for gathering information that it is, and not as a personal affront. When and only when directors are known to ask this question with integrity will actors be able to answer truthfully.

Of course, some actors will continue to be dishonest, even if the question is posed in earnest. I think it’s important for directors to acknowledge this and let it go. Remember, a director cannot read an actor’s mind. There will never be any way of knowing for sure which actors quit a show because they didn’t like their role. School and community theatre is a huge time commitment, and deciding not to participate in a production is often a multifaceted decision. Assuming positive intent creates a healthier environment for us all.

Directors: Ask the valuable question in good faith. Treat the answers as honest. If anyone in the situation is going to lie, it definitely shouldn’t be you. 

Actors: Treat the question in good faith. If it wasn’t, you’ll have avoided working with a director who uses their power in unscrupulous ways. If it was, you lose nothing. You’ll be better off either way.