When I get acquainted with someone, it crops up rather soon what we are by profession. I’m greatly interested in why and how anybody becomes who s/he is. Therefore, I listen to the other curiously if it’s about his/her path of life: where s/he came from, has been over and is going to.
So many kinds of desires and ideas drive people only towards acting that I never get bored with perceiving the unusual among the usual and the universal in the unique.
There is an extremely great variety of actors and actresses. Some of them are highly educated and versatile, but some of them amazingly not. Some has an outstanding memory and some a horribly bad. Many began this career for the reason they were passionately fond of literature, poetry, then many because of longing for fame and glamour. Several fight against their inhibitions with acting and several keep their intemperance under control by or for it. One has a fine voice, good figure, first-rate mind or kind heart, while the other needs to get along without any of these. And the list could be extended.
The most astonishing is the duality here, too. This profession demands in any case extroversion to some extent, performers have to take their exhibitionism, however there is hardly anyone among the actors and actresses I know closely who isn’t withdrawn and reticent out of stage. Obviously they had to be disappointed with many relations they thought to be friendships.
It’s really sad that we lose a part of our friends because we have more success than they and it’s unbearable for them, while another part will be lost because they have more success and start to doubt that we keep in touch with them disinterestedly. It’s a question, of course, that if this could happen, was it really possible or worth talking about friendship.
It’s relatively easy to see the end, but its beginning is obscured, and the path between the two points is slightly faded for some and more clearly outlined to others.