Finalists and judges letting their hair down…

The final of the annual Speech Prize for Actors took place on Friday 11 April this year at the Concert Artistes’ Association headquarters on Bedford Street.
The CAA are our new sponsors of this competition, in association with our staunch supporters John and Julia Dewhurst.

Barbara Alden has sponsored a new ‘song prize’ for unaccompanied singing in a programme.

Marilyn Cutts writes:

Building on my experiences judging this competition last year, I asked two diverse panels of judges to join me to reflect the range of participants better. Sadly, only one member of the two panels was under 30, but we made up for that deficiency in other ways, particularly in our perspectives. While all but one had worked as actors, our portfolio of skills included teaching, directing for both TV and stage, and being an agent, so our collective understanding of what might be expected of acting colleagues was also tempered by what the business currently requires. Next year, we may be able to persuade a casting director to come on board.

We were keen to accurately reflect the stated aim of the competition, “to encourage the communication of English words, with clarity, understanding and imagination”, with the caveat that ‘English words’ are not restricted solely to British English, or indeed what might once have been referred to as Received Pronunciation. That would restrict the extraordinary wealth of literature in English, from poetry and prose originating across the globe. Consequently, we had a treasure house of regional accents from Britain and beyond, illuminating extracts from newspapers, TV reports, Vox Pops, even pieces written by the candidates themselves, as well as the usual plays, poems and essays. I found it helpful to imagine the submissions as extracts on ‘Words and Music’, a favourite Radio 3 programme-if they worked in that purely auditory context, then I was happy.

In some notes prepared for teachers after last year’s competition, I had asked that teachers allow actors to show us what they could do best, rather than use the competition as a training exercise. I believe that bore fruit, with all this year’s intake far more confident in their delivery. I had also asked for a more imaginative approach to content. Having sat at auditions where the umpteenth rendition of ‘Losing my Mind’ is threatening to do just that to the panel, I had suggested fewer programmes about ‘Love’. There were a few, but they tended to take an interesting slant on the topic, which was refreshing. But what a joy it was to see programmes entitled ‘The five senses through a neurodiverse lens’, ‘Unexpected Violence’ and ‘Cider’! This really opened up the performers’ playing possibilities in exciting and unexpected ways.

Having been present for both rounds, so heard the comments of the two different panels, and the focus of both was the same. There was a standout contribution from one performer, Emre Gozlugol, who went on to become the overall winner. When I passed the final results back to the preliminary panel, they greeted it with delight.

Deciding between second and third prize was very hard, and personally, I was disappointed that a candidate I had favoured was not in the final running. However, we arrived at our decisions democratically, with a majority decision deciding the outcome. What was difficult, and something we all agreed on, was how to weigh potential against achievement. In this competition, second-year students compete against third years (rarely first years), and the difference is usually pretty clear. That extra layer of polish and assurance only comes with time and experience, and one tries to arrive at some sort of accommodation when deciding the final outcome.

All participants in the finals round are invited to sit in and watch one another’s programmes. This ensures a larger audience (especially useful if the extracts are comedic), but more importantly, it enables candidates to learn from one another. They can see for themselves where they may have fallen short, or where their particular strengths lie when compared with their peers. What was particularly heartening was the great ‘Whoop’ that went up when the winner was announced; how generous all the candidates were with one another, and what a relief that they agreed with us!

Finalists and judges letting their hair down…

The winner, Emre Gozlugol, in performance

Our winners from left: Sophie, Matthew, Grace & Emre

The results were as follows:

First Prize: – Emre Gozlugol £1,000
Second Prize: – Matthew Ralph £600
Third Prize: – Grace Dalgarno £400
Unaccompanied Song Prize: – Sophie Banning £100