Andre Weil Quotes

It's not communism, it's shouldn't be that everybody gets a try no matter how good or bad they are. It's our profession and our art, so we should eventually strive to be working with the best people.

The only question we should ask is, 'Are they good?' I've met great actors, black and white, and I've met bad actors, black and white.

You go into an audition, you're either the one or you're not, and if you're not, you go home. And I kind of like that. If you're really good, and you're the best guy in the room that day, you get the job.

You hire a chief executive, pay him, and hold him accountable after a year or two. The time for so-called honorary jobs is over. What Pakistan squash needs is results, and that can only be achieved by professionals.

Good people hire people better than themselves. So A players hire A+ players. But others hire below their skills to make themselves look good. So B players hire C players. C players hire D players, etc.

For example, I wouldn't hesitate to sit somebody down if he wasn't performing, even if he was the No. 1 player in the world. I've been sat down before.

To be successful, a woman has to be much better at her job than a man.

I need to see where I am physically and practicing with NHL players is the best way to find that out.

I think I'm skilful enough, but I don't consider myself a naturally talented, gifted sports person.

Merit, however inconsiderable, should be sought for and rewarded. Methods are the master of masters.

If I'm judged against my peers, rather than anyone else we could both think of, then I reckon I deserve to make records.

Actors have no color. That's the art form.

I think my game measures up pretty well to myself.

Never hire someone who knows less than you do about what he's hired to do.

I'm tired of demographic appeal being more important than talent. I want to fight against that.

You don't need to know someone personally to be able to discern whether their work is high quality or not. The idea of a meritocracy is that it's what they do, not who they are.

It is also absolutely necessary that the examinations should be competitive, and the appointments given to those who are most successful. A mere pass examination never, in the long run, does more than exclude absolute dunces.

I think there is a sort of box-ticking mentality. Not just in the teaching profession. You hear about it in medicine and nursing. It's a lawyer-driven insistence on meeting prescribed standards rather than just being a good doctor.

The person who does that role better than anyone else is the person who should get that role, regardless of their background or heritage.

In any profession, whether it's teachers or doctors or lawyers, the more we say we're not going to evaluate those people on the merits, I think that's when the profession goes into decline.

I'd rather have a gay guy who can play than a straight guy who can't play.

Women in Washington - and in positions of power anywhere - should be subjected to the same criticisms and held to the same standards as men. That does not include the assumption that any successful woman has attained her position through flattery, feminine wiles, or her ability to provide maternal comfort to a more powerful man.

In Italy they judge you above all on your efficiency.

If I'm not happy with the quality of something I'm working on, I won't put it out. That does not mean that others won't question the quality.

Even if I wrote 'The Kay Cannon Show,' I would have to audition to play Kay Cannon. And I probably wouldn't get it.