tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-67312425432544914912024-03-05T06:41:41.298-05:0099 SeatsRants, ravings, rage and righteous thoughts about a life in theatre from a formerly anonymous playwright99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.comBlogger478125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-22709245317194306582010-06-30T12:29:00.003-04:002010-06-30T12:54:17.702-04:00Occupational HazardSo I've been dieting and exercising for the last about 10 months. I've never been much of a physical exertion person, not a sports-playing guy or avid hiker or whatnot. I was an inside kid in a family that was largely made up of inside kids. We read a lot. I write a lot. These are generally sedentary activities. As I slouched through my thirties, it got...well, bad. And last year, I had one of those check-ups where the doctors and nurses give you stern, stern looks about your behavior. Not fun.<br /><br />So I joined a gym, cleaned up my act, started eating better. All good things, right? Yep. I've lost some weight, I'm feeling fit and connected to my body. All very good. Except...well...I'm a morning writer. And mornings are my only time to get to the gym. I haven't perfected my cloning techniques yet so...I've had to choose. Be healthy. Or write more.<br /><br />The scales been tipping to the Be Healthy side of late, but now that I want to get more writing done this summer...something's got to give. Why does it seem like you have to choose between being healthy and being a writer? I think, on some level, I stopped going to therapy because it was working too well. I was getting sane and that was getting in the way of the work. That can't be good.<br /><br />So now I'm trying alternating: one day of gym, one day of writing. Let's see how long this lasts.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com43tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-47374118719977317302010-06-22T10:44:00.002-04:002010-06-22T13:00:57.197-04:00Where Ya Been?<object height="385" width="480"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6aB6WY7My0Q&hl=en_US&fs=1&"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6aB6WY7My0Q&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="385" width="480"></embed></object><br /><br />To quote <a href="http://homepages.theonion.com/PersonalPages/jAnchower/">one of the great philosophers of our time</a>, it's been a while since I rapped at ya. What gives?<br /><br />Not to put too fine a point on it, but...a lot. Well, technically, it has something to do with the limits of time and space and my ability to juggle multiple obligations in limited waking hours. Or some such thing. Or maybe, just maybe...I'm a lazy bastard. You make the call.<br /><br />Okay, "lazy bastard" isn't exactly accurate. I do have a full-time, non-theatre-related day job that I regularly actually show up for and often do work at to the satisfaction of my superiors. <a href="http://parabasis.typepad.com/blog/99seats/">I have been a busy little bee</a> over at <a href="http://parabasis.typepad.com/">Parabasis</a>, blogging about TV shows and YouTube videos and the like, and every so often talking about the theatre. I've been seeing a lot of theatre, and doing theatre-y stuff. Plus, <a href="http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=174815&id=509258174&l=6709addf5f">I did go away for a while, and that was pretty sweet</a>. So it's not like I've been a lump or a hermit, exactly. But I haven't shown up here. And I haven't done a lot of new writing lately. I've been trying to figure out why.<br /><br />Well, I kind of know why, though. I'm at a bit of a loss. A few weeks back, a couple of friends of mine asked me about my playwriting and got a bit of an earful from me on the subject (sorry, Clare and Ethan!). See, I've been at this game a while and I'm lucky to be kind of prolific, so I have a whole stack of plays. I'll go out on a limb and say that most of them are pretty good, some are very good, but almost all of them need a bit more work. Generally, though, it's either a full re-working (of older plays that have structural flaws) or the kind of work that happens in a rehearsal room for an extended period of time. Not necessarily a full rehearsal period, but a good workshopping or something. Though a full production probably wouldn't hurt, either. They're well on their way to being better plays, but are near the limits of what I can do, just scribbling away at them.<br /><br />Plays are weird, sometimes mercurial beasties. Beautiful mansions, made of cards, holding lightning in bottles, built on sand. Like Amish barns, they really need a community to raise them. I've tried working on plays at this stage, on my own, or even with a writers' group, and it often comes to no good. As a writer, you can only hear so much of the play on the page, in your head. Writing in a vacuum, for actors in your head, you push too hard or pull back too much and find yourself pulling out the strand that made the whole thing go and it crashes down on your head. Or you know there's a problem, you know there's something out of whack in there, some crack in the basement wall, some fitting that doesn't quite fit and rattles when the wind blows, something somewhere that's off, but you can't find it on your own. You need a sharp-eyed director or actor to come in with a level, check all the corners and the shelves and show you where you need an extra screw or two.<br /><br />Okay. That's one metaphor tortured. But you get the picture.<br /><br />I submitted one of these plays to a developmental opportunity this spring and got rejected (there's been a lot of that this spring). Luckily, I knew the folks involved pretty well and did something I almost never do: I asked why I got rejected. As playwrights, we get trained to just take rejection, rub some dirt on it and walk it off. We don't question or probe...for fear of the dread answer: your play sucked. No one wants to hear that. But this time...I had to know. Was the play a worthless mess? Did my cover letter suck? Why would this play, a play that I rather liked, get rejected for this opportunity, one I thought it was really suited for? I asked and got a good, smart, quick answer: it was too done. For this opportunity, this play was <span style="font-style: italic;">too</span> finished. In the opinion of this company, it just needs to be in rehearsal. Which was nice to hear. Except that no one wanted to put it into rehearsal. So...now what?<br /><br />I've been lucky and worked hard and have had five readings of four different plays in the last 12 months or so. Largely, though, these have been readings I've put together with the help of directors and friends. Believe me, I'm not complaining. But it is a bit of work, finding actors, juggling schedules, especially for a non-paying reading which takes fairly low priority (as it should), managing rehearsal space, doing all of that, in addition to trying to rewrite, so it's a useful experience, and hustle up an audience, and all of it. <a href="http://rvcbard.blogspot.com/2010/06/crossroads-making-progress-and-thoughts.html">Others are doing more and I salute them.</a> I kicked around the idea of self-producing, but, ultimately, it may not be the right thing for me right now, for a lot of reasons.<br /><br />So where does that leave me? With a bunch of plays that don't seem to have homes. So the next thinking was start some new plays, just write for writing's sake, and who cares about the end result. Hence <a href="http://99seats.blogspot.com/2010/02/my-new-play-project-2010.html">the New Play Project</a> here. Which was cool and all. But got derailed to prep for readings. And when I went to go back...my heart wasn't in it. It's hard for me to start a new play right now because I can't stop thinking about what happens when it's done. I write a play, I work on it for three months, six months, whatever, get that first draft done and feel good about it. Feel great. I do a reading, get some actors together, put it up in front of an audience. And that goes great. Great, grand, beautiful. And then...what? Chances are, it's going on the pile, with all the other plays to wait for an opportunity to come along.<br /><br />The readings I've had have been well-attended and have, as far as I could tell, gone well. People coming like the work. People involved like working on it. It seems like a good time is had by all. And at the end of it, I have a whole raft of notes and ideas, rewrites and changes to make, to think about. Again, all good. But then what comes next? I've had official type people come from theatres to these readings and give very good, very kind and often very smart notes. And, even when they don't mean to, the implication is always: if you just made these changes, we'll like your script more. At the end of the day, that's what you're aiming for: someone to like your script enough to produce it. And that just didn't seem to be happening.<br /><br />I've stood in this crossroads for a few months now. On one hand, I have a few very good, pretty "marketable" plays that need some work. On the other hand, I could be writing new plays that are better, striking while the iron is hot. Do I set aside the old plays and throw myself into something new or keep working at the old stuff to get it perfect and let the new work lay fallow for a while? I couldn't decide. So I did neither.<br /><br />Add to that my own rising frustration with the entrenched ways and issues of theatre that seemed to actually get worse and more intractable every season, as you can see from perusing the archives<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span> <a href="http://parabasis.typepad.com/blog/theater/">here</a>, and you get someone who kind of wants to break up with theatre, but can't figure out if it's the right thing to do. Isaac and I have a joke about theatre being like the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manic_Pixie_Dream_Girl">Manic Pixie Dream Girl</a> of indie film fame and how we're both trying to get over her with varying degrees of success. I'm (obviously) still wallowing in the self-pity party part of it all.<br /><br />I know a lot of this is self-pity and a reaction to a couple of stinging rejections this spring. But it's also a dilemma that I can't seem to find any help or advice with. When I've mentioned it to people lately, I generally get some nice comforting words, or a pat on the shoulder and encouragement. All very lovely and much appreciated. But this is a bit of an existential dilemma for me, this particular trough. Sure, it's shot through with doubt and confidence issues, but mainly it's a "What the hell do I do now?" kind of thing. I can write new plays. I can dedicate myself to rewriting one play until it's perfect. I can junk the whole endeavor and get an MBA. Or I can stand here at the crossroads of all of these things and watch people who know what they want pass me by. That's the least fun, least productive, least useful option. But it's the one I feel stuck in.<br /><br />I keep hoping for some kind of jolt to the system, some definitive sign pointing somewhere. Something to show me a path out of this thicket. But not much is coming along. Or I'm ignoring it. Something. I've gotten involved in some film projects, started trying my hand at some TV writing to see if there's a way to more fulfillment, both career-wise and artistically, that way. We'll see.<br /><br />And I've thought a lot about this blog. Since I've been writing over at Parabasis, that's been my main focus for a while. This place, which I associated with theatre and with my own playwriting mainly, has languished, since neither of those have exactly been on the front burner of late. But maybe it's time for a comeback?<br /><br />I don't feel any more inspired or excited about theatre right now. Don't get me wrong. I've seen some terrific plays and a lot of awesome people are working their asses off out there. I just don't know how I fit in at this party right now. But I miss making plays. I miss rehearsing and writing and telling stories for the stage. I want to find my way back.<br /><br />So. Okay. I think I'll be coming back here and writing more about writing, about my plays, about where my mind is at. Really try to use this place, this blog, to keep me on track and focus on the simple things: waking up, writing down words and images, and seeing where they take me. I'll leave the pop culture, politics, theatre rants and ravings to Parabasis. 99 Seats will be about the writing.<br /><br />I chose the video clip* at the top because...well, Dinosaur, Jr is awesome. And it's a fun song. Of course, it comes from an album that gives this post its title. But the title of the song too is appropriate: Start choppin'. I know I'm in the tall grass, in the brambles, in the weeds, and I can't find a path out. So...maybe I make one? Just start choppin'.<br /><br />*In case you couldn't see it, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Phf4xvI9fpE&feature=related">here's another version of the same song</a>.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com26tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-48857130484146491102010-05-21T12:06:00.003-04:002010-05-21T12:10:21.189-04:00Today In IronyDr. Rand Paul, gubernatorial candidate in Kentucky <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100521/ap_on_bi_ge/us_rand_paul">said this today</a>:<br /><blockquote>"What I don't like from the president's administration is this sort of, 'I'll put my boot heel on the throat of BP,'" Paul said in an <a id="KonaLink2" target="undefined" class="kLink" style="" href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100521/ap_on_bi_ge/us_rand_paul#"><span style="color: rgb(54, 99, 136) ! important; font-family: arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif; font-weight: 400; font-size: 13px; position: static;color:#366388;" ><span class="kLink" style="color: rgb(54, 99, 136) ! important; font-family: arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif; font-weight: 400; font-size: 13px; position: static;">interview </span><span class="kLink" style="color: rgb(54, 99, 136) ! important; font-family: arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif; font-weight: 400; font-size: 13px; position: static;">with </span><span class="kLink" style="color: rgb(54, 99, 136) ! important; font-family: arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif; font-weight: 400; font-size: 13px; position: static;">ABC's</span></span></a> "Good Morning America." "I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business."</blockquote>Yes, <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_05/023903.php">this</a> <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/05/rand_paul_in_2002_i_may_not_li.html">Dr. Rand Paul</a>, who said <a href="http://gawker.com/5543215/rachel-maddow-vs-the-senate-candidate-who-thinks-businesses-have-the-right-to-exclude-blacks">this</a>, is saying something sounds un-American.<br /><br />Uh-huh.<br /><br />It's like Stephen Colbert is running for office.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com23tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-6437764400515090002010-05-11T19:58:00.002-04:002010-05-11T20:03:30.621-04:00I Have Been Remiss......for not highlighting two pieces of very, very excellent writing out here on the interwebs. They're both by theatre guys, but neither is about theatre, in particular. Both of them made my day when I read them so you should read them. <a href="http://procrastinet.com/archives/000647.html">One is by my old Youngblood producing partner, R.J. Tolan</a>. <a href="http://www.seanrants.com/201004/taking-a-personal-day/">The other by more recent vintage friend Sean Williams</a>. Enjoy them both.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com29tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-84552885675207241792010-05-05T19:43:00.003-04:002010-05-05T23:29:24.077-04:00Submission Admissions (Again)Augh. Uff. Blech.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.playbill.com/news/article/139213-Eugene-ONeill-Theater-Center-Wins-2010-Tony-Award-for-Regional-Theatre">So, the Tony voters have awarded the 2010 Regional Theatre Award to the O'Neill Center</a>. Honestly, the first person I thought would complain about that was <a href="http://theatreideas.blogspot.com/index.html">Scott</a>, since it's a bit of a stretch, I would say, to call the O'Neill a "regional" theatre. (Though, <a href="http://99seats.blogspot.com/2010/05/summers-eve-of-day.html">as previously noted</a>, I'm ready to kick Connecticut out of the tri-state area.) But <a href="http://www.clydefitchreport.com/2010/05/why-i-voted-to-give-a-tony-to-the-oneill-theater-center-and-why-i-almost-didnt/">he got beat out of the gate</a> by the often-acidic Leonard Jacobs of <a href="http://www.clydefitchreport.com/">the Clyde Fitch Report</a>. I generally steer clear of Leonard. We play fairly nice, but don't really get along all that well and the internet is big enough for both of us. I try to give him a wide berth. This, though, is the kind of thing that pisses me off and I just can't let it slide.<br /><br />Leonard is a member of the American Theatre Critics Association, the group that votes on and recommends an organization to the Broadway League and the American Theatre Wing for the Regional Theatre Tony Award*, and begins his piece thus:<br /><p></p><blockquote><p><a href="http://www.clydefitchreport.com/2010/05/why-i-voted-to-give-a-tony-to-the-oneill-theater-center-and-why-i-almost-didnt/">For this year, it was announced that the Tony for Regional Theater will go to the Eugene O’Neill Theater Center in Waterford, Conn. And I was one of those who voted for it (we rank them, it was my top choice).</a></p> <p><a href="http://www.clydefitchreport.com/2010/05/why-i-voted-to-give-a-tony-to-the-oneill-theater-center-and-why-i-almost-didnt/">I want to tell you why I voted for it.</a></p> <p><a href="http://www.clydefitchreport.com/2010/05/why-i-voted-to-give-a-tony-to-the-oneill-theater-center-and-why-i-almost-didnt/">I also want to tell you why I almost didn’t.</a></p></blockquote><p></p>He starts off with the good, listing a very long and impressive list of plays developed and presented at the O'Neill Center over the last 46 years, a list that includes Christopher Durang, Israel Horovitz, August Wilson, Adam Rapp, Wendy Wasserstein, David Henry Hwang, Jason Grote and other luminaries. Several writers on the list have been there multiple times, building a relationship with the center over time. (I've heard from several writers who have been developed there that there's basically a standing invitation to come back, once you've been invited.) He notes the equally long and lustrous history of music-theatre development there and the Center's other good works and gives it a hearty huzzah.<br /><br />Then he gives it, and all of the writers he just mentioned the finger. He says:<br /><blockquote><a href="http://www.clydefitchreport.com/2010/05/why-i-voted-to-give-a-tony-to-the-oneill-theater-center-and-why-i-almost-didnt/">But I had one very good reason for not voting for the O’Neill: It is an open secret the National Playwrights’ Conference is much less of an “open submission” opportunity for American dramatists as the O’Neill may like theater professionals to believe. </a></blockquote>Um. Leonard? What does that mean, exactly? <a href="http://99seats.blogspot.com/2009/09/outrage.html">We've heard this before</a>. A few months ago, Rolando Teco, both of <a href="http://www.extracriticum.com/extra_criticum/">Extra Criticum</a> and a staff member at the Dramatists Guild, <a href="http://www.extracriticum.com/extra_criticum/2009/09/the-oneill-center-acheives-new-heights-of-chutzpah.html">leveled the exact same charges</a>:<br /><blockquote>It is an open secret in the theatre world that of the dozen or so slots available each Summer to new plays at the O'Neill, all but 2 or 3 are pre-determined in backroom deal-making worthy of Tammany Hall. </blockquote>Back then, the hubbub was a bit more about the charging of a submission fee, but the charge is still there, it's still kind of silly and it's, most importantly, wholly and completely unsubstantiated. Neither Rolando or Leonard presents a single actual case of a project circumventing the system or gaming the system or anything. They simply assert that it's an open secret. They don't even have an anonymously sourced quote or a testimonial from a playwright. It's not even hearsay.<br /><br />Now Leonard doesn't exactly blame the O'Neill's A.D., Wendy Goldberg. Not exactly.<br /><blockquote><a href="http://www.clydefitchreport.com/2010/05/why-i-voted-to-give-a-tony-to-the-oneill-theater-center-and-why-i-almost-didnt/">I’m not suggesting that the conference’s current artistic director, Wendy C. Goldberg, isn’t stellar — she has made some wise, cunning, provocative, fruitful, even masterful choices since coming on board. But no one I know in the American theater believes that the submission process is truly blind, truly fair or truly not stacked against you if you are a true unknown. I can’t tell you how many emails I’ve read and posts I come across on platforms such as the dramaturgy.net listserv that have decried the way in which plays and playwrights for the O’Neill are currently being chosen. Sure, you can say that the program is Goldberg’s now and she has a right to workshop and develop who and what she pleases. I am simply saying that someone with Goldberg’s platform has a moral — yes, I said a moral — duty here as well.</a></blockquote>She has every right to pick the season she pleases...but she has a moral duty to...what? Pick some other plays? To pick plays that she doesn't like or doesn't think are worthy of development or attention because the writers are unknown? Pick a play that Leonard liked (apparently when he first posted this piece he neglected to mention that he was a reader for the O'Neill. We'll come back to that.)? I'm really not sure what "moral duty" Wendy is being accused of shirking here. And Leonard doesn't expand or elaborate. He doesn't offer any alternative way for Wendy to fulfill her moral duty. He simply, again without evidence, asserts that she's failing it.<br /><br />Leonard lays on the rousing finish:<br /><blockquote><a href="http://www.clydefitchreport.com/2010/05/why-i-voted-to-give-a-tony-to-the-oneill-theater-center-and-why-i-almost-didnt/">Let this well-earned Tony serve as a clarion call to Goldberg — to O’Neill Executive Director Preston Whiteway, too, to anyone who esteems the O’Neill as much I do. It is imperative that the O’Neill get back to discovering more of the undiscovered. Which means it should work with fewer of those “usual suspects.” The very future of the American theater remains at stake.</a></blockquote>Pretty stirring stuff. So...obviously, their 2010 season, selected before all of this is jam-packed with big names, TV writers and projects that are already slated for major productions next year, right?<br /><blockquote><a href="http://www.theoneill.org/news/041910.pdf">CREATION by Kathryn Walat<br />THE DREAM OF THE BURNING BOY by David West Read<br />FOLLOW ME TO NELLIE’S by Dominique Morisseau<br />CLOSE UP SPACE by Molly Smith Metzler<br />THE BURDEN OF NOT HAVING A TAIL by Carrie Barrett<br />A DEVIL AT NOON by Anne Washburn<br />COMES A FAERY by James McLindon</a></blockquote>I'm not saying to toot my own horn or to knock any of these people...but I know two names on that list: Kate Walat and Anne Washburn. Maybe Leonard knows more. Or maybe you do. If anyone reading this has a tale to tell me about any of these plays or playwrights, feel free to e-mail it to me, <span style="font-style: italic;">not for attribution or acknowledgment</span>. I'll simply post a correction, not even name the play. As long as you have a credible story that this playwright didn't go through the open submission process or has been favored by the O'Neill before, I'll recant. Please. Bring it on.<br /><br />And, if you're reading this, and you happen to be one of these playwrights, please, please, PLEASE send me your story, again, not for attribution if you don't want it to be. If you know that you got in because of some deal with O'Neill and 'fess up to it, just to me (and I can keep a secret), again, I'll recant. But if you didn't, if you paid your $35, printed out your script, slapped a stamp on it and mailed it out in hope, let us know.<br /><br />Back to Leonard: which of these plays was selected, not by open submission, but by a backroom deal? Which of these plays is evidence of a moral failing?<br /><br />This pisses me off. It really, really does. In part because I've worked the other side of the ledger and I know how hard submission processes are on staff and how hard they work and how hard it can be to find plays you love. I also know that for most artistic staffs, you want to do as many plays as possible, but there just isn't enough space or time, there's never enough space or time. To then have people throw your choices back in your face and <span style="font-style: italic;">on literally the basis of nothing but gossip</span> say that your choices are somehow tainted...that's a moral failing.<br /><br />It's also a moral failing to treat these playwrights this way. These writers worked on their submission, worked on their plays and their mission statements and, if Wendy Goldberg is to be believed...<br /><blockquote><a href="http://www.theoneill.org/news/041910.pdf">All of the work came through our Open Submissions process – a process<br />that this organization takes very seriously. It is always a joy to bring the next generation of theatrical storytellers to our campus to help these artists shape and hone their work for production.</a></blockquote>If you're going to call her a liar, call her a liar. And then back it up with something. Something that doesn't sound like the bitching of a sore loser or hurt ego.<br /><br />See, Leonard participated in this process, as he noted. And read scripts that were stripped of their names. So it was a blind submission process, which implies that it's fair, and that the staff at the O'Neill has done some work to insure its fairness. Oh, Leonard apparently (as he implies) knew at least some of the authors, though. Good for him. But none of the plays he read were selected. I'm sorry to make the leap here, but it sounds like he's saying these other plays weren't as good and got through because they're by "usual suspects." So, again, Leonard, did you read these plays? Are they bad plays? Are they not worthy of development?<br /><br />I've been a part of selection processes before, both as a reader and as a staff member. I know when a process is fair and open and when it's not. I'm assuming Leonard would, too. He seems like a bright fellow. If you're saying that, from the inside, the O'Neill selection process doesn't seem fair, say it. Don't imply or dance around it. You were a part of it. For several years, you say. You would know. Were you a part of this year's? Have you been a part of one since Wendy came on six years ago? If you have, speak up. If not...then what's this all based on?<br /><br />The other thing that pisses me off about this is that it's so small and petty and gossipy. All of this talk of open secrets is bullshit. It's an open secret that some open admission policies aren't the only way a season gets selected. That's true. But that doesn't mean that the open submission process isn't part of it, or that a play submitted over the transom has no shot of being included. There's never any guarantee, is there? If there is a real dereliction of duty here, if you're saying that no one of any importance ever reads any of the open submissions and all of the plays that are selected circumvented that, say it. Say it plainly and back it up with something. Otherwise, it's just a smear and it's low.<br /><br />Leonard says:<br /><blockquote><a href="http://www.clydefitchreport.com/2010/05/why-i-voted-to-give-a-tony-to-the-oneill-theater-center-and-why-i-almost-didnt/">One of the illnesses plaguing the American theater is the unwillingness of playwrights to articulate their frustration in public, especially within earshot of the powerful organizations that can make, enhance or break a career.</a></blockquote>I'm articulating it, Leonard. But my frustration isn't with getting passed over for opportunities or feeling mistreated. It's part of the game. My frustration is with this kind of behavior. It's not journalism. It's not criticism. It's gossip-mongering and scandal-making. It's self-important, self-aggrandizing hackery. It should be beneath you.<br /><br />*When I originally posted this, I wrote that Leonard is a Tony voter. That was inaccurate. I edited the post to reflect Leonard's correct affiliations and their relationship to the Regional Theater Tony Award.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com26tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-10281830850626224812010-05-05T17:38:00.002-04:002010-05-05T17:45:45.765-04:00Summer's Eve* of the DayAnd, of course, it's <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2010/05/05/joe-lieberman-bill-would-strip-suspects-citizenship/">Joe Lieberman</a>.<br /><p></p><blockquote><p>Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) thinks he’s found a work-around on the whole Miranda rights debate for <span style="font-weight: bold;">U.S. citizens accused of terrorism</span>: <span style="font-weight: bold;">Strip their citizenship</span> and ship them to Guantanamo.</p> <p>Lieberman plans to introduce a bill that would amend a decades-old law aimed at yanking citizenship from U.S. citizens who fight for a foreign military.</p></blockquote><p></p><p>Please note the bolded sections.</p><p>Basically, what <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/05/joeidiocy/56228/">TNC</a>, <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_05/023652.php">Steve Benen</a>, and even goddamn <a href="http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/05/yglesias-award-nominee.html">Andrew Sullivan</a> said. This is a disgusting, wrong and thoroughly actually un-American thing to even consider.</p><p>Thanks again, Connecticut. <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100505/ap_on_go_co/us_times_square_gun">You're the gift that keeps on giving</a>.</p><p><br /></p><p>*Um. Just in case, <a href="http://lmgtfy.com/?q=summer%27s+eve">you didn't know</a>.<br /></p>99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com27tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-89389796840307518442010-05-05T17:34:00.001-04:002010-05-05T17:36:15.472-04:00Go, Phoenix!*<p><a class="" title="" target="" href="http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=Ao839JFo2TvxEvlmwnqQDyq8vLYF?slug=ap-suns-immigration">I guess I'm pulling for the Suns</a> in <a class="" title="" target="" href="http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/playoffs;_ylt=AuAG.hvao6avtpV373vXtY6LvLYF">the NBA Playoffs now</a>. At least someone in Arizona is doing something right. Here's "frostback" Steve Nash's awesome quote:</p> <blockquote> <p>“I think it’s fantastic,” Nash said after Tuesday’s practice. “I think the law is very misguided. I think it’s, unfortunately, to the detriment of our society and our civil liberties. I think it’s very important for us to stand up for things we believe in. As a team and as an organization, we have a lot of love and support for all of our fans. The league is very multicultural. We have players from all over the world, and our Latino community here is very strong and important to us.”</p> </blockquote> <p>Pretty classy fellas. Right on. And it reminds me of <a class="" title="" target="" href="http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/2702.html">this golden oldie</a> from <a class="" title="" target="" href="http://www.sadlyno.com/">Sadly, No!</a> Remember Michelle Malkin? Remember when she was relevant? Ah, those were the days...</p><p><br /></p><p>*<a href="http://parabasis.typepad.com/blog/2010/05/go-phoenix.html">cross-posted</a><br /></p>99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com30tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-28107078542195014702010-05-03T14:59:00.001-04:002010-05-03T15:01:25.173-04:00Quote of the Day<a href="http://gawker.com/5529322/racist-harvard-law-email-the-cat-fight-that-turned-into-a-national-scandal?skyline=true&s=i">Gawker</a> edition:<br /><blockquote>The main lesson here: Don't be racist. But if you really, really are—and really, really need to voice your racist thoughts—don't write them in an email to a devious friend who may later sabotage you. Simply find the nearest well and shout your racist thoughts into them; get it out of your system, and continue on with your bigoted life.</blockquote>99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com24tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-1439851081880385742010-04-26T23:11:00.003-04:002010-04-26T23:28:39.852-04:00Joining Forces<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKNu8aZt9wT3exUxefLceUks2GtJCt6-HmMR37i8vM9XhkShYMijmS94QzaF4GJ9bglyeuHzEdpuGvj-ogFprC-t78X080KL5r-22qp3jUzucSm8M6MvHq-Ogp737lK0koFaEw7UrYS_U/s1600/Wonder+Twins+Powers+Activate.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 320px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKNu8aZt9wT3exUxefLceUks2GtJCt6-HmMR37i8vM9XhkShYMijmS94QzaF4GJ9bglyeuHzEdpuGvj-ogFprC-t78X080KL5r-22qp3jUzucSm8M6MvHq-Ogp737lK0koFaEw7UrYS_U/s320/Wonder+Twins+Powers+Activate.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5464650496456163826" border="0" /></a><br /><a href="http://parabasis.typepad.com/blog/2010/04/chchchchchanges-part-one.html">Isaac's not the only one making changes these days</a>. Or, more precisely, he's not doing it alone.<br /><br />You may have noticed things have been a bit quiet here at 99 Seats Central of late. I've been doing some thinking about this blog, about theatre and blogging in general and trying to decide what my next move is. Because, to be honest with y'all, I'm kind of tired of talking about theatre. I know I've only been kicking it for a couple of years and a lot of cats have been at it a lot longer than I have, but there's kind of only so much you can say. I've said it before, but it bears saying again: doing is way better than talking. I've got some things cooking on various fires, with announcements soon to come, in the doing column. And so, maybe it's time for less talking. About theatre anyway.<br /><br />'Cause, in case you didn't notice, I got stuff to say about other stuff. About other forms of dramatic writing, about <a href="http://99seats.blogspot.com/2010/04/single-most-important-question-of-all.html">other important matters of great importance</a>. But at maybe less of a clip. At the same time, Isaac has been expanding the focus of <a href="http://parabasis.typepad.com/blog/">Parabasis</a> to involve some <a href="http://parabasis.typepad.com/blog/2010/04/about-an-author-anne-moore.html">other super</a>-<a href="http://parabasis.typepad.com/blog/2010/04/about-an-author-ben-owen.html">interesting writers</a>. He approached me about joining forces. I thought about it for a while...and decided to jump in.<br /><br />Isaac's a friend, a colleague and an all-around good guy. We tend to see eye-t0-eye on a lot of things and even the things we don't, we're able to talk to each other reasonably and with respect. I dig on that.<br /><br />So...this isn't the end of 99 Seats or anything. Just...a new stage. Come visit me over at Isaac's.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com24tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-17490305974080224902010-04-23T12:42:00.002-04:002010-04-23T12:46:06.293-04:00Happy Birthday, Will<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loDMRzPiCic">This</a> should make you feel young again.<br /><br /><object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/loDMRzPiCic&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/loDMRzPiCic&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object><br /><br />No matter our differences, or the outbursts of snark, we're all Friends of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shakespeare">Will</a>.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com26tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-70994255615995137122010-04-21T17:06:00.002-04:002010-04-21T17:09:11.571-04:00Quote of the DayThe always awesome <a href="http://www.endofscene.com/end-of-scene.asp?title=Weddings+and+organic+food+stores&nid=834">Ken Lin</a>, <a href="http://aszym.blogspot.com/2010/04/i-interview-playwrights-part-151.html">as interviewed by Adam Szymkowicz</a>:<br /><blockquote>Theater really reminds me of an organic food store that just closed in my neighborhood. When I first moved here, I thought, "Wow, there's an organic food store here. This is a great neighborhood." But I never shopped there because everything was so expensive. They are liquidating now and everything is 50% off and I went to buy some things. I went to a counter with all these boxes that were covered in dust and when all was said and done, I still thought that it was too expensive. I think theater is similar. Who wouldn't want a theater to open up in their neighborhood? But, can a community afford to sustain these theaters under the current models? The answer is clearly -- no. Too often, we are in the business of catering to wealthy people, while leaving everyone else sitting in front of the tvs with their microwave dinners. What are we left with? Over-priced, dusty boxes of well-intentioned food. If I could change one thing to change this system, I'd do it, but I don't know what that one thing is. </blockquote>And also, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/fashion/weddings/18SAWYER.html?ref=weddings">congrats, Ken</a>!99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-90266170855990861912010-04-21T16:38:00.002-04:002010-04-21T17:02:39.332-04:00Through The Looking-GlassThis is where we are now. Republican candidate says <a href="http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/04/nv-sen-candidate-sue-lowden-r-barter-with-your-doctor.php">off-hand</a> <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_04/023308.php">dumb thing</a>. Republican candidate actually <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/tv/w/002666/index.html">repeats</a> <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_04/023434.php">dumb thing</a>. Today, Republican candidate goes <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_04/023448.php">even further</a> and <a href="http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/senate-republicans/sue-lowden-triples-down-doctors-support-barter-for-health-care/">continues to repeat dumb thing</a>.<br /><br />This is the <a href="http://www.pollster.com/polls/nv/10-nv-sen-reppr.php">leading</a> <a href="http://www.pollster.com/polls/nv/10-nv-sen-ge-lvr.php">Republican candidate to replace Harry Reid</a>. And I'll bet you a chicken that she will continue to be. Because <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_04/023435.php">this</a> <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_04/023441.php">is</a> <a href="http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2010/04/postcards-from-home-i-think-id-rather-stay-then-please">what</a> <a href="http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/04/the-back-bench-right-wing-gopers-you-dont-knowbut-should.php?ref=fpblg">we're</a> <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/4/21/859092/-Oklahoma-Lawmakers-At-It-Again">dealing</a> <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_04/023443.php">with</a>.<br /><br />I'd like to think that we're coming to the bottom of the barrel of crazy. But somehow...I doubt it.<br /><br />It's going to be a long year.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-55749275006173081702010-04-21T09:38:00.002-04:002010-04-21T09:39:11.964-04:00The Single Most Important Question of All Time!<a href="http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/30437.html">Answer away!</a>99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-3763505406421745752010-04-20T22:12:00.002-04:002010-04-20T23:43:15.521-04:00Yes, Stop The MadnessAggh. Aggh. Aggh. Aggh. I've been feeling a bit ornery and cranky lately, which is one of the reasons I've been running silent lately. I don't think there's much to be gained from being a public nuisance. But. Well. <a href="http://theatretact.org/?p=237">This</a> kind of pisses me off. The <a href="http://99seats.blogspot.com/2010/04/famei-wanna-live-forever.html">whole thing that went on with Tom</a> a couple of weeks back has stuck in my craw for a bit and I've been wiggling it around and around to try to figure out what it bugs me about it and it's taken me until now to get a better handle on it.<br /><br />To refresh everyone's memory, Tom wrote <a href="http://theatretact.org/?p=178">this</a>. I responded <a href="http://99seats.blogspot.com/2010/04/famei-wanna-live-forever.html">thus</a>. In the comments, Tom said this (largely without edit):<br /><blockquote>In the first place, I'd like to say that many of my writings have little in common with what I actually do in my day-to-day teaching. They are things I think about, toss over in my head, muse about. I share them in my blogs partly as a way to clear my head, partly as a way to think things through, and partly as a way to make other artists think about these things. These are not necessarily things I say in class, but when I do say them, I always preface them with a caution that these are my personal opinions and observations, that they are not gospel, and they can take them or leave them. I even offer them the possibility of considering that my opinions are, as has been suggested here, the rantings of a bitter old man - I do not hide that possibility from them. What I actually do - every single day - is my best to prepare them for the careers they aspire to - <b>every facet of those careers that I can think of</b>. Obviously, you have only my word for that as well, but if you'd like to investigate it, please do. There are many Fredonia alums in NYC.<br /><br />For the record, it is absolutely and unequivocally my practice every single day in my classroom to do whatever is in my power to help my students succeed in reaching whatever goals they set for themselves. In the particular case I quoted in my TACT blog, the young man in question was in my office just yesterday where I had a 30-minute discussion with him talking about his talent, his potential for success, and what he needed to do to make his dream come true. We also talked about the scene he had just done, which was in fact pretty good. Never once did I say to him, "You're untalented and foolish and you should think about digging ditches." I made sure he understood how difficult it was, that the odds were not in his favor, and that he would have to have no small amount of pure luck, but he was bringing some good qualities to the table. Never did I express to him I thought he was being unrealistic. Frankly, that's none of my business, and he is paying me to help him succeed. You'll have to take my word that I did that as well.<br /><br />In other words, the portrait about my teaching practices being painted here have no foundation in reality to them. They are assumptions readers and commentators have made; none of them have actually seen me teach. These assertions and assumptions have been drawn from the private ramblings that go on in my head, the various things I think about and write about. I would encourage the readers of my writings to assume the opposite - that I keep my private thoughts and my classroom practices largely separate, and generally I offer my own private thoughts to my students only when pressed. You, as a reader, are actually getting to read things going on in my head that my students almost never hear (unless they are reading my blogs as well, which could be possible, but I am not aware that is happening). I teach in a pre-professional program, and that's what I train my actors for, but I make sure they understand <b>every single aspect</b> of that career, its warts as well as its rewards. I am working to change that, working to be able to offer alternatives, and working to find those kinds of students interested in a different approach to doing theatre in this country. I don't like the waste of talent I see in this country - it's not sustainable. When I have the kinds of students interested in sustainable, community-grounded theatre, I will leave the pre-professional training to others, and I will switch my practices and focus on giving those students the kind of education they want.</blockquote>And now <a href="http://theatretact.org/?p=237">this</a> from Scott. This is normally the part where I profess my respect and affection for Scott and my support, though qualified for his positions. But...I'm feeling ornery, so not this time. I think this whole line of...whatever is crap. And, before you start in (and by "you," I mean Scott) with this being about me defending NYLACHI's evil, evil ways, I think it's crap because it's an impossibly, ridiculously and utterly out of touch way of looking at the business of acting and the ways actors make money and live in places like New York. In fact, I think it shows an odd fixation with NYLACHI (and essentially Broadway) as being the way Scott and Tom measure success.<br /><br />First off, I will say this: I was wrong to imply or even state that Tom's post was or should be taken as a reflection of his teaching style or attitude. I don't know how he teaches or the way he conducts himself in front of his students and I shouldn't imply anything about that. And, yes, I do understand that a blog post can be a good way to blow off steam or give voice to the things you don't think you can say in other situations. That said, I do think it's naive to think that, if you're blogging under your own name, that your students don't know about it. Playing the "I don't know if they ever read it" card is just abdicating responsibility. So, apologies, Tom.<br /><br />But Tom's teaching isn't the actual question. The question is the attitude underneath it.<br /><br />So Scott and Tom think it's nuts for 1,000 people to line up for an open call for <a href="http://www.hairbroadway.com/tribe">Hair on Broadway</a>. It's a sign of NYC being bloated and over-run with young actors who are just wasting their talent at auditions for a limited number of roles that they're pursuing, at least in part, because of a TV-fed desire to get famous. The numbers, odds and systemic barriers to they're ever appearing on Broadway make it just ridiculous for them to try, so we need to re-think our entire system, which is based on actors dreaming of appearing on Broadway.<br /><br />Okay. Where do we start? I guess, I start with Dennis' video. Yep, that's a lot of people! And yep, Equity open calls have a lot of people there! And yep, an actor needs to take all day sometimes to go to one. I've known people who couldn't, people who had to leave, people who got screwed over by it. I'm not saying it's the fairest way of doing things, but you know, job interviews for any position rarely are. We also don't get a sense of who got seen, what the experience was like, what happened next for any of them. Did any of them get cast? How many? How many parts were they looking to fill? The full cast of Hair is 32 people. Not great odds, no, but not the worst in the world. One three minute video of a lot of people doesn't actually tell a story, other than there are a lot of people who want to be in a Broadway show. We don't even know what kind of training, if any, these folks have. We know nothing about them except they want to be in a show. We don't know if any of them are already in shows or have other arts jobs or<br /><br />My issue here, though, is with Scott and Tom's very, very narrow definition of success and waste. Not being on Broadway, not winning an Academy Award is a waste, is talent thrown away. Scott fixates narrowly on the unemployment rate for Actors Equity as the definition of success. As far as Scott's concerned, New York theatre begins at 40th St and ends at 53rd, in a way that, as a New York theatre artist (and a native New Yorker) is not what's it like here.<br /><br />This isn't the part where I say how great the talent is here. That's not what it's about. It's about the path of an artist and the path of an actor and that there are lots of ways and roads to satisfying work. From outside of NY, maybe it looks like making it to Broadway is the goal of everyone, but from here, you know what? It's not. I'm not saying the city is swimming in lucrative acting jobs, but there are other paths and options. And some of them don't involve the stage at all. And I don't see it as a waste.<br /><br />It can be a struggle and there are trade-offs and hard choices involved. And, yeah, some people wind up leaving the field. But that's going to happen, no matter what. And some do go back to small communities and form theatres. And you know what? Some get jobs in television. Some make commercials. There are a whole raft of things between not acting and being famous, a whole lot of other ways of being successful. I think that Scott and Tom get that, but instead focus entirely on the narrowest bandwidth as "successful" and want that bandwidth to stay just as narrow, but move a few spots down the dial.<br /><br />I really don't understand the whole attitude. I actually I do understand it. It's bitterness. When people say, "no one owes you a career in the arts," it's that bitterness that they're responding to. We're all familiar with the stereotypical acting teacher who couldn't make it and pushes his or her students to succeed. This feels to me like the flip side of the same coin. I'm sorry to say it, but it does.<br /><br />I think CRADLE's a grand thing, I do. And necessary. But if these guys want to stop the madness...well, stop the madness. Let it go. The kids will be all right.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com16tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-62386713518573493892010-04-20T16:05:00.001-04:002010-04-20T16:07:27.975-04:00Quote of the Day<a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_04/023426.php">Steve Benen</a> edition:<br /><p></p><blockquote><p>What's the point of even having a public discourse when the leadership of a political party treats the truth like a punch-line?</p> <p>Now would be a terrific time for a real debate. Republicans could -- get this -- raise <i>legitimate</i> objections to the legislation, and raise concerns that -- believe it or not -- are entirely sensible.</p> <p>But, no. We can't have real debates because we're too busy suffering through idiotic mendacity.</p> <p>Note to Republican leaders: liars become pathological when the truth works just as well, but you actually <i>prefer</i> dishonesty.</p></blockquote><p></p>99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-37493286479601141852010-04-20T13:07:00.002-04:002010-04-20T13:38:53.866-04:00Well...When You Put It Like THAT...A lot of what we do sounds really, really bad in black and white. And in terms of things like, you know, the law. As the folks of the New York State Theater Institute <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/21/nyregion/21theater.html">apparently just found out</a>.<br /><blockquote>An obscure upstate theater group that receives far more state aid than any of New York’s world-renowned cultural institutions is rife with corruption, mismanagement, nepotism and possibly illegal conduct, according to a scathing report released on Tuesday by the state inspector general’s office.<br />(...snip...)<br />The report alleges that the artistic director, Patricia Snyder, treated the group as a personal fiefdom, routinely doling out acting roles, directing jobs, production work and other benefits to herself and her family members. Ms. Snyder steered a total of more than $700,000 in payments to her husband, her two sons, her two daughters-in-law and to herself, the report said. </blockquote>The big-ticket items? Patricia Snyder hired herself as a director and double-dipped on her pension fund through the SSDC (which the article makes sound like some fly-by-night outfit run by either the Chicago Combine or gypsies). She produced an audiobook written by her daughter-in-law, composed by her son and co-produced by her husband. There's some implied stuff about an apartment in the city supposedly for the company but used by her family...which appears to include a number of the artists involved. That's pretty much it.<br /><br />Now, I don't know these folks or the particulars of this case and there may be real actual shenanigans afoot. If not shenanigans, sketchy business practices with state money, which is, obviously, bad. But...at the same time...where's the line between nepotism and what's essentially a small family business? (Again, I'm not saying they should be enriching themselves off of the public teat or not serving their community; but the entire article treats all of this like a RICO indictment and these "jobs" making "theatre" were essentially no-show or no-work jobs that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Soprano">Tony</a> gave to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Moltisanti">Chris</a>.) Where's the line between building and becoming a part of a community and being a flim-flam artist who's soaking them for their hard-earned dough. I've heard that Diane Paulus has run into some of the same questions up at Harvard with her production of <span style="font-style: italic;">The Donkey Show</span> and when I read <a href="http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/articles/2010/03/28/theater_is_one_party_after_another_for_weiner/">the <span style="font-style: italic;">Globe</span> article</a> a few weeks ago, I had some similar reservations. Certainly there are some questionable aspects to it...but part of it is...well, it's the business of show. We marry people we work with. Sometimes we work with people so that we might...um...marry them. We raise our kids in the theatre, teaching them the trade. (Yeah. Let's put it that way.) Our work is often underfunded, undersupported and, because artists are at the shallow end of the payment pool, underpaid. So we figure out ways, sometimes sketchy ways, sometimes less than totally above-board ways, to get paid. When the hammer comes down, though, it's always on the chiseling individual who's betrayed our trust, never on the system that makes it possible...and sometimes necessary.<br /><br />But when you look at it in cold, black-and-white letters in the paper of record...yeah, it does sound more like Tony Soprano than William Shakespeare. But how do we fix it without making doing theatre an onerous thing that separates families rather than brings them together?99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-69522022460679963562010-04-14T10:41:00.001-04:002010-04-14T10:42:58.455-04:00Quote of the Day<a href="http://blog.huntingtontheatre.org/2010/04/expanding-idea-of-new-work_13.html">Lisa Timmel</a> edition:<br /><blockquote>So, why new plays? Because the world changes and perspectives shift. Because American theatre, in all its forms, thrives on the new, it always has. Our theatre history is full of the degenerate melding of forms: immigrant melodramas, minstrelsy, vaudeville and musicals all of them bubbling up into the mainstream one way or another and getting whitewashed along the way. There simply is no other way to tell the story of this country and our selves without including new work. <br /><br />Incidentally, the answer to the question “Why classic plays?” is exactly the same: Because the world changes and perspectives shift. There simply is no other way to tell the story of this country and our selves without including plays from other places and other eras.</blockquote><a href="http://parabasis.typepad.com/blog/2010/04/lisa-timmel-on-new-plays-at-the-huntingto.html">H/T</a>, as per usual.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-40417731433372616332010-04-12T10:27:00.002-04:002010-04-12T10:33:59.202-04:00Mike Huckabee's a PigI used to have some measure of respect for Mike Huckabee, I really did. He seemed like a genuinely good guy, despite being someone I disagree with completely. I actually used to think he was a real electoral threat, since he was so nice and reasonable and personable.<br /><br />Yeah. <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_04/023302.php">Not any more</a>.<br /><blockquote><p>"I think this is not about trying to create statements for people who want to change the basic fundamental definitions of family," Huckabee said. "And always we should act in the best interest of the children, not in the seeming interest of the adults." </p><p>"Children are not puppies," he continued. "This is not a time to see if we can experiment and find out, how does this work?"</p></blockquote>Even after box turtles, man on dog, the end of marriage as we know it, that's is still one of the more disgusting, wrong-headed and bigoted statements I've ever heard. In any right and reasonable country, this would end his aspirations to higher office. Someday I hope to live in a right and reasonable country.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-69131103058156943862010-04-11T22:41:00.002-04:002010-04-11T23:37:19.002-04:00Fame...I Wanna Live Forever!A friend of mine linked to <a href="http://theatretact.org/?p=178">this post</a> from Tom Loughlin at TACT today. Tom recounts an e-mail sent to him by a student in his Acting for Non-Actors class and it started him thinking about the need for fame. Some key bits:<br /> <!-- mid column --> <blockquote>The young person who wrote this email is a very nice and very engaging student. But he is not thinking rationally. He is a victim of what I have come to call the “fame factor” in theatre education. It exists not only in theatre, of course, but across the culture. Created almost entirely by the pervasiveness of mass media, young people no longer pursue success; they pursue fame as well. The writer of this email simply believes he will be famous someday and win the Academy Award, and he needs nothing but the simple fact of his belief in that idea to make it come true for him (except maybe a little more help from me with his acting, as if I could make such a difference – another illusion).</blockquote>And this:<br /><blockquote>This widespread drive to be famous is a relatively recent phenomenon in our society. Before the complete domination of mass media on our thought processes, becoming famous was not a concept held by every average person. Most people expected to lead average, normal lives such as they saw around them on a daily basis. Most people people prior to the 20th century lived and died within a 50-mile radius of where they were born. Today’s mass media, however, makes the idea of fame a possibility accessible to everyone. Every movie, television show, reality show, hit song – you name it, and people see it, see it’s famous, and want a slice of that pie. More people today can name movie stars than can name scientists or government policy makers. Because of the fact of its continued and overwhelming presence in our culture, people come to believe that fame is possible for anyone. Shows like <em>American Idol</em> in fact count on it.</blockquote>And his finale:<br /><blockquote>The sad truth is that, for all their dreaming of fame, the statistics say that most of our students will not achieve their dreams. Perhaps for 15 minutes, maybe. If we want to be honest educators, we need to start telling students the truth, and build better options for them for their theatrical futures. It can be done if we have the will, and perhaps if we are willing to re-think our own dreams of fame.</blockquote>For good measure, he links to <a href="http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-woman-wants-to-be-singer-or-actor-or-whatever,17205/">this Onion article</a>.<br /><br />I like Tom a lot, but I disagree with just about every single part of his post. I really, really do. I think it's horrible, horrible advice for a young person, even though it comes from a good-ish place. I certainly feel Tom's frustration with the elevated expectations of young men and women, and we should certainly could do more to expand their ideas of success and possible life choices. But other than that...it's just kind of mean and bitter.<br /><br />Let's think about it this way. A student in a history seminar takes a liking to the course work, even though she's not a major and writes the professor a message saying, "I know my last paper's haven't been great, but I'm really excited by this material and the coursework and I want to be the best student I can be. And, who knows, maybe I'll wind up as President and can invite you to the inauguration! I hope so!" Do you think the professor should respond with, "Well, since no women and only 43 people have ever been President of the US, it's not a very realistic or conceivable goal. You should think about your other options right now!"? Is that going to further this student's career? Their growth? Honestly, we wouldn't even expect a teacher to say that. And <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Award#History">way more folks have won Academy Awards in acting (nearly 300) than have won the presidency</a>.<br /><br />Listen, I get that it's an unrealistic goal if this kid thinks one class is going to turn him into an award-winning actor. But, from my read and Tom's description, this is a young guy, trying it out, and trying to work hard. Why shouldn't he aim high? Say what you want about the politics or whatever about it, but it's basically the highest award an actor can win and it generally goes to a pretty accomplished or skilled actor. Yes, yes, advantages and unfairness and blah blah blah, but really, it's not just given out to anyone. <span style="font-style: italic;">And this kid is willing to do the work</span>. He's not asking for a pass or a easy ride. He's offering to come in and do extra work to feel satisfaction. Why would you want to discourage that?<br /><br />What's worse about this is making the connection between this kid, who again is looking to work harder, and the likes of the odious reality-TV "stars." When these things come up, there's always this current of, well, sneering at awards and success as the product of a selfish desire for attention. An artist should want to achieve at high level, they should push themselves to be the best they can be, and, in a lot of ways, accolades are proof of that. And they come with a pretty big stage and the opportunity to affect lives. I'm not saying that everyone has noble goals and intents, but not everyone has shallow, self-serving goals, either.<br /><br />The kid isn't thinking rationally...but what kid is? He's a college student and trying out the things that fall in his path. Today, it's Oscar-winner. Tomorrow, it may be brain surgeon. Or astronaut. But right now he is thinking, if he wants to win an Oscar, he has to work harder and hold himself to a higher standard. All of that is the first step in the right direction. And along that path...who knows? This kid may want to be a big acting star now, but if he pursues it, he may find he doesn't like it and wants to do something else, write, design, direct, or teach. He may decide that he wants to head back to his hometown and found a community theatre. Who knows where his path goes. But to start him off telling him to give up on his dreams...that's a dead end.<br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-size: x-small; font-family: times new roman;"></span></span>99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-75096161519222586082010-04-07T21:25:00.002-04:002010-04-07T21:29:48.855-04:00Who's Better Than You?<a href="http://advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=565866">This post</a> has a whole lot of truth rattling around in it. So <a href="http://advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=565866">go read it</a>.<br /><br />I have many thoughts on internships and such, but the day job was a bear today. So you have to wait until tomorrow. Sorry.<br /><br />But seriously, go <a href="http://advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=565866">check this out</a>.<br /><br /><a href="http://thepoorman.net/2010/04/06/well-all-take-turns-ill-get-mine-too/">Via</a> <a href="http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/04/06/straight-outta-comments/">via</a>.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-35817998415833186522010-04-06T10:47:00.007-04:002010-04-06T15:22:35.765-04:00Once In A Blue Moon......I disagree with <a href="http://parabasis.typepad.com/">Isaac</a>. It does actually happen. Hold onto your hats.<br /><br />Isaac highlights <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/03/business/03intern.html?pagewanted=1&ref=general&src=me">this article from the NY Times on unpaid internships in the for-profit world</a>. Scott Walters has dug in deep on the elitist aspect of unpaid internships <a href="http://theatreideas.blogspot.com/2010/02/class-geography-and-internships.html">here</a> and further <a href="http://theatretact.org/?p=169">here</a>. Like Isaac, I have no issues with Scott's take on the elitist aspect and the geographical advantage (While I was intern, I worked a full-time job, but I did have the advantage of living at home). I'm unconvinced, though, by Isaac's claims of exploitation. Or at least that most theatre internships fail to meet <a href="http://wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/TEGL/TEGL12-09acc.pdf">the six requirements of an internship, as set out by federal government</a>. Isaac lists them as such:<br /><br /><ol style="font-family: arial;"><li class="mainbody" style="font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size:100%;">The training, even though it includes actual operation of the facilities of the employer, is similar to that which would be given in a vocational school;</span></li><li class="mainbody" style="font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size:100%;">The training is for the benefit of the trainees;</span></li><li class="mainbody" style="font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size:100%;">The trainees do no displace regular employees, but work under their close observation;</span></li><li class="mainbody" style="font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size:100%;">The employer that provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the trainees and, on occasion, the employer’s operations might actually be impeded;</span></li><li class="mainbody" style="font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size:100%;">The trainees are not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the training period; and</span></li><li class="mainbody" style="font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size:100%;">The employer and the trainees understand that the trainees are not entitled to wages for the time training. (Note that as an exception to this criterion, tuition assistance and nominal stipends for students are not considered wages).</span></li></ol>He says:<br /><blockquote>The issue is that the Department of Labor does not want internships to be used to skirt minimum wage laws. We all know the nonprofit sector (or at least theatre) is rife with these programs. Yet we <em>also</em> live in a world where many theaters can barely afford the staff they do have. What is to be done?<br /><br />And what of programs that aren't illegal but are clearly exploitative? I can think of at least one festival where <em>you</em> pay <em>them</em> to build their sets as an acting apprentice. Now, that's not illegal, but it certainly feels wrong in my book.</blockquote>Internships come in all sizes and flavors, with, honestly, all kinds of names: intern, apprentice, associate, what-have-you. I've done my fair share, as well as my fair share of low-paid entry-level work. First off, it's all pretty exploitative. I have my doubts that any producing theatre organization in this country really pays minimum wage or pays any attention at all to work rules on overtime, comp time, breaks or just about anything. You show up when they ask you to show up and you leave when there's nothing left to do. And there's always something else to do. I'm not arguing it's a healthy thing; it leads to burnout, turnover and brain-drain. We would do well to reform our work practices. But that, alone, in my mind, doesn't equal exploitation.<br /><br />And, yes, a lot of theatres, including some I've worked at, certainly use interns to skirt paying for support staff. Interns are receptionists, messengers, janitors, sometimes exterminators. They are given crap work to do and told it's building them as an artist and a theatre professional.<br /><br />And it is. I'm sorry. It just is. Being an intern makes a theatre person a better theatre person. It's an integral part of an education in theatre. Which is why it should be paid (or at least funded), it should be more open and equal access, and maybe a little bit formalized. But it is very much a reciprocal thing.<br /><br />In a way, you can't have it both ways. An intern program can't be something available only to the elites, giving them an invaluable leg-up in the industry that less fortunate people can't get AND an exploitative "slavery" that benefits the institution to the detriment of the individual. It's one or the other.<br /><br />I'm talking from my experience, now, so I don't have the charts and figures to back me up and maybe my experience is singular, but I've also seen this at work in practice. When you're an intern, you're learning the ropes, especially in small theatres. Everyone does a lot of different things and, even though you're mostly doing menial labor, there's also the opportunity to be involved in larger efforts, to understand how a theatre functions from the ground up. It's a ground-eye (and sometimes toilet-eye) view, but it's an important one.<br /><br />Again, this is anecdote, not data, but data is sometimes...incomplete, isn't it? I did my internship at <a href="http://ensemblestudiotheatre.org/">the Ensemble Studio Theatre</a> and basically walked in off the street. Other people in my intern "class" had studied with members of the theatre or met them here or there, but there were also a few of us who'd basically picked the joint out of the phone book. My internship was spent answering phones, stuffing envelopes and serving as a house manager, precisely because I had a full-time job and could only convince my boss to let me out for one morning (the interns were supposed to do 8 hours at the theatre over the course of the week). But we were also given a workshop, a showcase and the opportunity to be involved in productions as assistant stage managers, production assistant, audition readers, god knows all what else. After my internship, I joined a writers' group at the theatre and four years later, I was on staff. Precisely because I knew how the theatre worked, I was part of the community, part of the family.<br /><br />A lot of the other people I interned followed a similar path and I've worked with several of them since. Others went to work in other theatres. Interns who worked under me as a staff person had similar trajectories. At one point, more than half of the paid full and part-time staff of the theatre were former interns. This is one of the things that often gets left out of the equation. For a lot of theatres and organizations, at least in NYC, these entry-level volunteer positions are your foot in the door.<br /><br />If we want to move away from specialists with narrow focus, internships are a key part of that path. I worked for a summer theatre with a large crew of interns and apprentices, who paid to be there, take acting classes and work in our scene lab. The students who did saw a 360 degree world of theatre, not just acting or directing or whatever their focus, but all of the parts that go into making a theatre work. Why shouldn't they? How would they build good, strong theatres if they don't?<br /><br />I don't see any of this as exploitative. Maybe I don't because, you know, I participated in it. Maybe. But I think "exploitation" is not the right word for it. A lot of internships are abusive, that's for damn sure. But then again, pretty much all theatre jobs are abusive. Our entire staffing structure is based on the idea that, for the artistic staffing jobs certainly, people would be there for free, so paying them a small amount is almost a bonus. We work insane hours, for not nearly the compensation we deserve, under ridiculous pressures. My years at E.S.T. I worked roughly the same hours as my lawyer friend. He was taking home twice what I made before taxes. It's totally and completely abusive, sure. But it doesn't stop with interns. It may start there, but it doesn't stop.<br /><br />By all means, let's try to reform the system, standardize it. Add some protections against abuse. But the intern system is the closest you get to a real apprenticeship in the theatre. Let's not lose sight of that.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-4641420654681471262010-04-06T09:57:00.001-04:002010-04-06T09:58:35.829-04:00Quote of the Day<blockquote>Get the customers who already want to love you but can't. There are vast swaths of this city, basically un-covered because they are poor and black. In those neighborhoods and suburbs you can't find the paper sold, and if you don't know about it already you won't see it marketed. "Nobody reads us there," was the refrain I always heard, which ... okay, that's a problem as has a solution: GO GET READERS THERE THEN. Sell as hard there as you do in Lincoln Park. Well, sell harder. And for God's sake, at least pretend the neighborhood ain't a foreign country when you do show up to cover it. Quit condescending and start working.</blockquote>- <a href="http://www.first-draft.com/2010/04/think-small-miss-big.html">Athenae at First Draft</a>99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-4148099792647822312010-04-06T09:43:00.002-04:002010-04-06T09:51:36.608-04:00Behold! The Dark Continent!<a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/04/out-of-africa/38525/">Via Ta-Nehisi Coates</a>, <a href="http://www.granta.com/Magazine/92/How-to-Write-about-Africa/Page-1">this piece</a> from Granta gives the lowdown on how to REALLY write about Africa:<br /><blockquote>Broad brushstrokes throughout are good. Avoid having the African characters laugh, or struggle to educate their kids, or just make do in mundane circumstances. Have them illuminate something about Europe or America in Africa. African characters should be colourful, exotic, larger than life—but empty inside, with no dialogue, no conflicts or resolutions in their stories, no depth or quirks to confuse the cause.</blockquote>Pretty sage advice.<br /><br />Snark aside, it does highlight something I'm currently wrestling with, as I continue to work on <a href="http://99seats.blogspot.com/2010/02/new-play-project-at-home-and-abroad.html">this</a>: how do you write about Africa? Do you write about it at all or just tell the story you're telling? How do you approach the complicated legacy and tangled connections we have to that place? It's one of the things I want to unravel in my work, because I want to unravel it in my life. Figuring out where to start is key. And, to be honest, the piece in Granta helps. It helps to remember that it's a large, complex, complicated place and there is no one story of Africa, no one legacy to wrestle with. I can pick at my little part of it and see where it takes me.<br /><br />Just as long as I leave out the monkey brains.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-45641357018986324932010-04-05T09:36:00.002-04:002010-04-05T09:47:26.952-04:00A Whole New Ballgame*<a href="http://playgoer.blogspot.com/2010/04/space-for-arts.html">The Playgoer brings us this awesome nugget for a Monday morning</a>:<br /><blockquote><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/arts/design/05ford.html?hp">As part of an effort to increase the impact of its giving, the </a><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/arts/design/05ford.html?hp" title="More articles about Ford Foundation">Ford Foundation</a><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/arts/design/05ford.html?hp"> is to announce a plan on Monday to dedicate $100 million to the development of arts spaces nationwide over the next decade. The plan is by far the largest commitment the foundation has ever made to the construction, maintenance and enhancement of arts facilities.<br /><br />The plan, called the Supporting Diverse Art Spaces Initiative, is one of several large financing projects that have resulted from a strategic overhaul of the foundation’s operations since its president, Luis A. Ubiñas, took over in 2008. He has moved the foundation in the direction of bundling its hundreds of millions of dollars in grants — which have traditionally varied widely in their focus — into large programs oriented toward specific issues. Other recent commitments include $80 million to bolster public programs for the unemployed and underpaid, $100 million for secondary education in seven cities and $50 million to help cities buy foreclosed properties.</a></blockquote>Yeah, that's pretty much unqualified good news. I know there's a lot of talk of the edifice complex and places that spend money on space over artists. I know because <a href="http://99seats.blogspot.com/2009/04/priorities-part-1.html">I've talked it</a>. And I believe it, to boot. But there's also a need for more space, hopefully cheaper spaces, more multi-use spaces. The quote at the end of the NY Times article sounds the right note:<br /><blockquote>Judilee Reed, executive director of LINC, said the foundation’s initiative is particularly well timed. <p>“I think people are beginning to understand that spaces for artists and art are more than just buildings, structures,” she said. “The way these spaces animate their communities and the relationships they have to their communities is ripe for development.”</p></blockquote><p></p>Right on. More like that, please.<br /><br /><br />*In honor of <a href="http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100405&content_id=9077178&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb">this</a> (we're just pretending <a href="http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/recap?gid=300404102">last night didn't happen</a>) and because "game changer" is, well, pretty <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=game+changer&sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS330US331&ie=UTF-8">over-used these days</a>.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6731242543254491491.post-9938208324403811602010-04-03T09:59:00.002-04:002010-04-03T10:07:03.044-04:00This. Is. Rich.Yeah, Rev. Raniero Cantalamessa, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/02/popes-personal-preacher-a_n_523336.html">being attacked for covering up sexual abuse by your subordinates</a>, <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/questions-pope-benedicts-role-sex-scandal/story?id=10241536">something the Church actually did</a> is totally like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion">attacking all Jews for something none of them did</a>.<br /><br />You know what's a lot like anti-Semitism? <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Pius_XII_and_the_Holocaust#Conversions_of_Jews_to_Catholicism">Anti-Semitism</a>.99http://www.blogger.com/profile/11955916620902994495noreply@blogger.com1