Are Clowns Actors?

by Randy Christensen

Recently I posed this question to a group of masterful clowns with numerous years of experience. Each shared various viewpoints on the topic, “Are clowns actors?” My thanks to Roly Bain, Bruce “Charlie” Johnson, Arthur Pedlar, Janet Tucker and Marc Sundberg for their input on this topic.

Three of the contributors stated that in the purest simplest consideration of the question “Yes, clowns are actors.” “People put on a costume, ...a wig, ...makeup, act out skits as another character....” “Any competent actor can play the role of clown if he is given the script....” Bruce Johnson states:

“Good actors talk about drawing upon the appropriate portion of their own personality to be able to portray a character. That is what clowns do, draw upon the appropriate parts of their personality to portray their clown character. ...Also, a clown is presenting a play. They have a script of sorts. What they do isn’t reality, it is an act. They may have done a routine hundreds, or even thousands, of times but they create the illusion that it is happening for the first time."

Bruce notes numerous examples throughout history where the clown played various other roles, besides the comedic character he is known for. Grimaldi, Red Skelton, Frank “Slivers” Oakley, and numerous others performed as a clown in theatrical settings, and also performed other roles.

On the other hand, (and the hands are connected), Marc Sundberg notes that personal friends of Stan Laurel state that he was the same prankster in private that he was in film. Charlie Chaplin would often entertain his guests at dinner parties with the same bits shown in his movies. When Leon McBride and Earl Chaney were asked, “What was Otto Griebling like when not in the circus ring?” The answer given was, “The same as he was in the circus ring.” In great clowns there seems to be a blending of the personal life, feelings, emotions, motivations and character with the clown character.

Goethe stated, “Before you can do something, you must BE something.” Though Arthur states, “any competent actor can play the role of clown...” he continues on with this thought, “whereas a born clown will probably have to learn acting skills if he is to convey the thought behind his skills and get his message to his audience.”

In this quote Arthur implies that there is a difference between a person acting the role of clown, and one who is a “born clown”. I am of the opinion that both exist: Clowns who act, and then clowns who are “real.” The “true clown” is the one who expresses their true self..and are true to self... in their clowning. They most likely are using performance techniques and skills, yet are not having to work up the motivation, the logic, the reactions, and the character. It’s a natural flow. Not plastic. Not artificial. The clown does not have to stop and think, “Well, what should I do now if I’m really going to appear to be a real clown to these children.” No. It’s a natural flow.

I propose that many who clown begin as the person acting the role of clown. (Yes, clowns are actors.) But, as they continue to grow in their clowning, their responses, thoughts, and reasoning begins to be more internally individually unique. The clown begins to be not just the outward dressing, but the expression and portrayal of the inward self. (So at that point, no, the clown may not merely be an actor.)

"There is a depth of character that is directly proportional to the effort exacted to be the best clown that person can possibly be. And this depth of character is a growing process where character and skills improve and finally the person and the character of the clown blend together. Clown character is developed from the inside out.... The clown starts out as a person applying the costume...but if the person studies...and grows in their character...the time will come when the clown character is a reflection of the true personality or character of that person." (Janet)

Roly shares,

"Of course, actors make characters plausible...but good clowns and certainly great clowns don’t have to worry about being plausible - they are simply and wonderfully themselves.... Actors cannot learn the inspired lunacy or wonder of clowns - actors can perform as clowns and there are some actors who are themselves good clowns, but I don’t think that actors are clowns or clowns actors. I wouldn’t dream of calling myself an actor, and Equity (the actors’ union) wouldn’t allow it!"

Clowning in the end isn’t about technique, although performance techniques help performance. Clowning exists in the relationship between the clown and his audience, between the clown and each individual in the audience...I don’t think an actor and his audience have the same relationship and possibilities.

Bruce states,

"Dramatic acting is often done while ignoring the audience. In comedy, the audience is a part...Good clowns make good actors, but not all good actors make good clowns. There is an element that is missing...it may be the heart of the clown that they fail to find..."

Whether one believes that clowns are actors, or clowns are a performance breed of their own, he must agree with each of the contributors that the key to developing character depth and performance excellence is through experience; spending time with an audience. Becoming “natural” in his character.

"These are the clowns you remember - those who touch your heart with their antics and love - those who go beyond “acting out” to perpetuating the true art of clowning - those whose clown heart shines through whether in makeup or not.” (Janet)

So, are clowns actors? They certainly use performance techniques. Is there a correct or incorrect answer to this question? Does it have to be one or the other? There are so many views and traditions in clowning. Each clown has a unique viewpoint. Roly probably sums up the quandary in this:

"Are clowns actors? Here lies an impossible question because how on earth do you define either? I think clowns are by their very nature and essence indefinable..."