60 votes

This is the segment from On The Media regarding what 60 votes means in the Senate. Context, people. It's all about context.

Krugman is right on

Do the right thing.

Pass this bill!

Little Jimmy's Guide to Self-Producing: So Far

Playwright James Comtois has been blogging about self-producing. It's not just conjecture and cursing (which is mostly what you'll find right here at On Theatre and Politics!); it's a real how-to guide with entertaining anecdotes, and good advice.

Here are links to the posts so far. It's incredibly generous of him, and I certainly hope you'll read these posts, share them with others, and discuss.

Part 1: An Introduction

Part 2: Getting Started

Part 3: Landing the first show

Part 4: Moving Forward, Some Words of Caution

Part 5: Fundraising

Representative Reality

From here, linked to originally here.

"So in reality, what's the population balance? Counting the new Republican Senator Scott Brown from Massachusetts, the 41 Republicans in the Senate come from states representing just over 36.5 percent of the total US population. The 59 others (Democratic plus 2 Independent) represent just under 63.5 percent. (Taking 2009 state populations from here. If you count up the totals and split a state's population when it has a spit delegation, you end up with about 112.3 million Republican, 194.7 million Democratic + Indep. Before Brown's election, it was about 198 million Democratic + Ind, 109 million Republican.)

Let's round the figures to 63/37 and apply them to the health care debate. Senators representing 63 percent of the public vote for the bill; those representing 37 percent vote against it. The bill fails."

Oh Man This Is Great

The Brick continues to be awesomesauce. They have just announced the theme for their upcoming Summer Festival.

Remember that previous titles include:

The Hell Festival
The $ellout Festival
Film Festival: A Theater Festival
The Pretentious Festival (where I performed "An Interview with the Author")
and
The Antidepressant Festival (which debuted "Glee Club")

What's next? (Drumroll please)

The Too Soon Festival

TOO SOON?!

A Poem for Today

“The Dreadful Has Already Happened”

by Mark Strand

The relatives are leaning over, staring expectantly.

They moisten their lips with their tongues. I can feel

them urging me on. I hold the baby in the air.

Heaps of broken bottles glitter in the sun.

A small band is playing old fashioned marches.

My mother is keeping time by stamping her foot.

My father is kissing a woman who keeps waving

to somebody else. There are palm trees.

The hills are spotted with orange flamboyants and tall

billowy clouds move behind them. “Go on, Boy,”

I hear somebody say, “Go on.”

I keep wondering if it will rain.

The sky darkens. There is thunder.

“Break his legs,” says one of my aunts,

“Now give him a kiss.” I do what I’m told.

The trees bend in the bleak tropical wind.

The baby did not scream, but I remember that sigh

when I reached inside for his tiny lungs and shook them

out in the air for the flies. The relatives cheered.

It was about that time I gave up.

Now, when I answer the phone, his lips

are in the receiver; when I sleep, his hair is gathered

around a familiar face on the pillow; wherever I search

I find his feet. He is what is left of my life.

Did you know

That the fact the the Democrats merely have a 58 seat majority makes them politically unpopular, utterly defeated and foolish?

No, no. You read that right.

Brown wins in MA

Because, you know, trying to give people Health Care can really get you in trouble.

Amazing how straight up idiotic human beings can be.

Re: Optimistically High

Garrett Eisler asks a good question in this post. Playgoer, as always, writes like a true journalist.

"According to the study, the average playwright earns $25,000 to $39,000 annually, with about 62 percent of playwrights making less than $40,000 and nearly a third pulling in less than $25,000.

Hm. Don't those numbers seem optimistically high?"

Well, if I read the study correctly, that includes income that's not related to theatre. Furthermore, playwrights surveyed said that 50% of their income, on average, is not theatre-related. And what IS theatre-related includes things that are not specifically writing (21% said Teaching for example). They reported 15% of their income from royalties, for example. That means something like $6,000.00 on average.

I wasn't surveyed, but there are peers of mine who were so I feel like I can speak to this myself, un-anonymously. My non-theatre related job is being an Assistant Director at a non-profit and I earn, in that job alone, well over the average noted above annually. How much have I earned from writing over the last five years? Maybe $3000? If you include non-theatre gigs? If you included only playwriting... I dunno. Half of that? Less?

I'm far from a mid-career writer...I'm still fumbling my way out of obscurity. But if you included my non-theatre related income in this survey, I'm a top earner.

Drink the Kool-Aid

Have you seen these totally evil and weird pro-high fructose corn syrup ads? That basically say "Stop being such a concerned parent and drink the goddamn Kool-Aid." Like literally.

And there's also this really great response to it. Because the workers have seized the means of production!

Vision Quest Opening Party tomorrow

At 7pm tomorrow at Observatory (off the Union Street R or Carrol Street stop in Brooklyn) is the opening of the group show that Pam has curated. Free wine, great pieces, it should be fantastic. Definitely come and check it out. I'll be there.

It's called Vision Quest. Details are here.

Outrageous Fortune Chapter 2

Today I had planned on blogging extensively about the second chapter of Outrageous Fortune. I'll be a bit behind, unfortunately. There is just a ton of ground to cover in this chapter, and I haven't really digested it properly. Either I'll write a full post later tonight or tomorrow.

In short: theaters use the products playwrights create to write grants and pay salaries. Some of the most successful playwrights in the country earn less than $40,000 a year in this system, from a hodgepodge of sources, half of those sources unrelated to theatre.

That is, fundamentally, f*cked.

UPDATE.

Okay. So here's a bit more detail.

The second chapter is titled The Lives & Livelihoods of Playwrights

It's packed. The subjects range from the prevalence of MFA programs; to gender and racial representation; to the nuts and bolts of income as a playwright; to What Playwrights Want (hint: its productions). I'm not going to even sort of attempt to summarize it.

I will make a few observations.

First, a big takeaway from the chapter is how the theatrical farm system focuses on young and new playwrights, not just new plays. This means that there's a sort of donut hole for mid-career playwrights. As long as you're new, or new-ish, or seen as fresh, there are grants and programs that want to train you and make use of you. After that, it's sort of "Good luck. Not famous? Considered teaching?"

Second, the chapter becomes absolutely weirdly flummoxed and apologetic whenever it discovers evidence that non-white writers are getting produced and even receiving decent commissions. I found it mystifying. The lady doth protest too much. It could be that dedicated efforts towards making stages more diverse are having a positive effect. That's good, right? What am I missing?

Third, the term "emerging" should be taken out and shot. Of course. No one likes it and no one wants to use it. The best observation was that the term emerging serves a purpose for more than grant-writing...it establishes the writer as a sort of unformed trainee in the midst of professionals who are here to help. If you are emerging, you are not yet a butterfly.

Fourth, playwrights are paid less than administrative assistants. Whoever is doing the budgeting is totally fucking up.

Fifth, I really wish this book did not rely so heavily on anonymous quotes. It is, in fact, full of them. To the teeth. There are no attributions. (There is a list at the end of the book, and you can play guessing games with it if you like.) I don't get it. In the New York Times, they try not to source anonymously, and if they do, they now insist on giving a reason ("speaking with the condition of anonymity because they did not want to put the President in a difficult position"). I would have preferred that. That's not really chapter specific so much as an issue with the style of the book itself.

Onwards and upwards.

Outrageous Fortune Chapter One

Okay. First read this so you get what's up and then you can bother to read my response to Chapter One of Outrageous Fortune.

Some disconnected and quickly written thoughts...

The first chapter is entitled Dialogue in the Dark: Playwrights and Theatres. It is stark and familiar. It describes a landscape of not-for-profit theaters that operate on a tremendous scale (two produce on Broadway); that have replaced commercial producers as the arbiters of new work; and the playwrights who find themselves somewhere in this complex system of developers and decision-makers.

I suspect everyone who reads this will find in it confirmation of an existing view, as this chapter presents a full breadth of well-worn arguments. It acknowledges that artistic directors both believe new work is in abundance and also that it is scarce. It quotes the Richard Nelson speech that decries the ascension of a belief that playwrights are in need of outside "help;" but it also acknowledges that playwrights seem to write increasingly unfinished plays. It talks about how great (if erratic) Joseph Papp was. It's good, balanced journalism in that way.

It's a picture of, I'm afraid, a community of artists that have utterly unremarkable frustrations and concerns. Some playwrights believe that those who are making decisions about quality have the wrong measuring stick; some artistic directors fear that playwrights self-indulgent or impatient. Money, profit - we are afraid at how they corrupt the decision making process. In the same breath, we wonder if the not-for-profit model has divorced producers from their passions and might not be preferable. We want producers to be wild, passionate entrepreneurs; not-for-profits to run like there's no such thing as paying the bills; and everyone to embrace the plays we think are really good. We want to be bold. We want the pure of heart leaders of our well-funded institutions to say "Damn the ticket sales, damn the grant writers, damn the Board, damn it all, I love this play and we're going to do it even if it means I lose my job!"

And we want everyone (as we'll see in later chapters) to get paid for this.

Of course we do.

There isn't an industry or collective in a capitalist society that doesn't, at times, feel like it's hard to make decisions, that money wins over integrity, that makes compromises for the sake of survival, etc. etc.

I know that I am asked or expected to be appalled by this. I'm not. Frankly, even if the entire American public decided that it loved plays and couldn't get enough of them and reallocated its family budgets to cut out TV entirely and just see new plays; we'd still have quibbles about whose plays are being produced and how often.

Look at the film industry. It's massively popular, tremendously rich, and has delivery models that are far more extensive than ours. We still hear about little independent films that barely get their due or never move past the development stage. We hear about how hard it is for guys like Terry Gilliam, or even Martin Scorsese, to get funding for their movies.

That is not to dismiss the complaints and concerns entirely presented here. The gap between playwrights and artistic directors/producers/board members on an institutional level does seem to be widening. And, of course, there's a bit of natural paranoia created by all the barriers. I'm just not surprised.

One thing that struck me in particular was the expression of frustration that there aren't companies that coalesce around a playwright anymore. I don't see that, personally. Maybe that's true on the scale of regional theaters 'filling slots'...but on the Off-Off scale, I see it all the time.

I have been working with a single theater company (more or less) in New York City since about 2004. Just over six years of productions. Do we produce on the scale of Manhattan Theater Club? No. Have I gotten reviews and publications and all that other nice stuff? Yes. Do I still work, and work hard, in an unrelated field to make ends meet? Yes, yes I do. Still, when I read chapters about the nomadic lives of playwrights now, I felt a bit happy to know that's not my position.

In fact, lots of playwright driven theaters exists Off-Off Broadway. Electric Pear (Ashlin Halfnight); The Brick (all artist driven); Nosedive (James Comtois); InVerse (Kirk Wood Bromley); Blue Coyote (me, David Johnston, David Foley and others); Gideon (Mac Rogers), Flux (Gus produces his own plays, certainly). I could go on. This is common in Off-Off Broadway.

So...what does that leave me with? Mixed emotions. There's a part of me that feels very real revulsion at being painted a picture of a world of new plays that is inhospitable. There's a bit of poison in it, and I can't place exactly where. Maybe it's simply the sense that this chapter is more dedicated to airing frustrations that presenting solutions. It is, of course, just one chapter.

There's another part that thinks we need to have this discussion and I'm very happy to see it presented in a professional, forthright manner. If the picture ain't pretty, that's what we're here to learn.

Onwards and upwards.

Will be writing about chapter 2 tomorrow.

James Comtois on Self-Producing

An introduction! Can't wait to read it all.

Freeman's kneejerk response to Outrageous Fortune

Just started reading Outrageous Fortune. Tons will be written out this. I'll have a formal response soon. My very first, entirely instinctual response, is "And...?"

There's lots to think about here, and I don't want to belittle the very important work that's been done here...but it's not like when I got into theatre I thought "Now here's a place with lots of ways to make a living!" Is anyone actually surprised that the market affects decision making, or that it's nearly impossible to make a living writing plays or that it's hard to get people to do challenging work?

Also, so far, the book is really about a world I don't live in. Off Off Broadway, for all its lack of funding and eye-rolling, is where I've spent my career. You know where to find theaters that are dedicated to certain playwrights, do oddball work, aren't slaves to corporate thinking and go pretty quickly from the page to the stage? Off-Off Broadway. Off-Loop. The problems that they have at the Guthrie and the Public are pretty much problems I don't contend with. I aspire to the problems described in Outrageous Fortune so far. Sad, maybe? Who can say?

There's a truly American prayer: "Please, Lord, grant me the problems of more successful people."

Okay, take that for what it's worth. Just getting into the book. More to come.

Vision Quest

The group show that Pam has curated opens January 16th, 7pm - 10pm. Come by! I'll be there helping out. There's free wine, and the pieces are spectacular. Plus, if you haven't been to Proteus Gowanus, or Observatory, you're in for a treat.

Here are the details.

I still do not Tweet

But Pam does and you should, if you are a twitterer, follow her tweets.

Self-Produce!

Here's an embarrassing admission: I've never self-produced. Not really. I've certainly been a part of the team that puts a production together, but for the last few years, my plays have been produced by others, and they put in the work to acquire a space, get insurance, rent rehearsal space, etc. etc. I basically know how it's done, but I'm not going to pretend to be an authority.

So here's the thing: I think if you're a playwright with access to a small budget, you really should know how to navigate "self-production." Even just a weekend of performances of your play on its feet.

So...I'd like to invite anyone who does self-produce in the city to either comment or send me an e-mail at mattfr - at - gmail.com and give us a how-to guide. Tell us what a playwright needs, where he or she should go, where the affordable spaces are in your experience, etc, etc. I'll post whatever is sent to me that's thorough, and of course, comment away.

Imagine you just showed up in NYC, you've got a play burning a hole in your pocket, and you're will and able to save for one weekend of performances. This is bare minimum. Get your feet wet stuff. What would you tell yourself.

What is the Idiot's Guide to Self-Production in New York City?

An interview with Richard Lovejoy for A BRIEF HISTORY OF MURDER

Richard Lovejoy, author of A Brief History of Murder, answers for his crimes below. The show runs January 14th - 31st at the Brick Theater in Williamsburg. He's been on a tear lately. Definitely looking forward to this one.

Freeman: You describe A Brief History of Murder as two independent yet interlocking plays. Not just a two-act play? What gives?

Lovejoy: Victims and Detectives are each several act plays in their own right. Putting them together we create some sort of ten act monstrosity (as opposed to two five act monstrosities!) They are also designed to work on their own, and there are subtle differences to the mechanics of how each one functions. Basically, if they were one massive play, the structural variations between the two would likely not work. Chronologically they both take place over roughly the same time period, and if the scenes were all jammed together it just wouldn't be as strong (or compelling) as presenting the two sides separately. Victims is sprawling. It has over twenty characters, all of them with complicated stuff going on in their lives both on the surface and underneath. Audiences will sort of just be dropped in the middle. In Detectives we mainly follow the private investigator and her allies on the police force as they try and figure out what the hell is going on. It ends being the more tightly focused play, and audiences have more of an opportunity to follow a protagonist (if they're into that sort of thing.)


Freeman: How would you say this new play compares/contrasts with your last hit show Adventure Quest?

Lovejoy: I'd say they are both similar in the sense that they play with and warp traditional structure, but they do so in wildly divergent ways. Adventure Quest was fun because it was based on a game. When the Hero gets stuck, the narrative screeches to a halt. If he doesn't know how to solve the puzzle he can't advance the plot. In Brief History Of Murder, when the detectives get stuck the narrative is still moving forward. So the way the structure gets warped and played with comes from a totally different direction (several, actually!) Basically, where Adventure Quest was more about reduction, limitation of actions, and enforcement of rules; Brief History is more about possibilities expanding, options increasing in both number and complexity, and rules blatantly getting broken (or contradicted by other rules.)

Freeman: There is gore. What is it about gore and fighting on stage that you think appeals to audiences?

Lovejoy: I think that varies on the person. Theater, film, TV, books, and really most art form can be a "safe" way to explore dark things. Some people love gore because it lets them exercise violent impulses they might have (see also Grand Theft Auto), some people are attracted to the thrilling nature of it, and some people are repulsed and confused as to why anyone would want to put themselves through seeing something like that (incidentally, those are probably the people truly repressing their demons.) I imagine - and hope - that we'll make a couple audience members nauseous. There is some wonderfully sick stuff happening. Though it isn't just about the gore. The gore is just one of many, many elements.

Freeman: Tell the readers why they should see A BRIEF HISTORY OF MURDER. Sell it!

Lovejoy: These two plays are a collaboration of approximately forty or fifty artists. There is a STAGGERING amount of talent from all sorts of places that has gone into creating A Brief History Of Murder. We have original music composition, scoring through most of both plays, choreography, multiple fights, gore, artsy photographic design, extra written content (the program - like all Sneaky Snake programs - is way more detailed and elaborate than it needs to be), twenty actors (in addition to several surprise voice over performances), uniquely created costume and set pieces, special FX make-up, multiple languages spoken onstage, and a complicated and involved story. In short - this thing is a BEAST. Also, there is a special ticket package (https://www.ovationtix.com/trs/store/122/pk/35215) that lets you see both shows for $25 (that's a full $11 off the second play. Or $5.50 off of both, pending on how your brain works.)

George Lucas on The Daily Show

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
George Lucas
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

The Flanneled One! Hero!

Why sometimes I cry

Last night I had a few beers with my pal Kyle and we began to talk about music from the 90s and all that jazz.

It occurred to me that the movie The Matrix is 10 years old. Almost 11. Panic.

Listened to Matthew Sweet on the subway. That helped.

Make It Happen Now!

Hey everyone. Downtown Theater mainstay and wonderful actress Kate Sandberg has undergone a change in focus and shared some information with me about her upcoming endeavors. I offered to share that information with you guys! Honestly, if there's someone out there who is qualified to be of specific assistance to people in the world of Indie Theatre, it's Kate. She's been in the trenches, she knows the ropes, and she's razor sharp.

Read Kate's message below!

____

Happy New Year! This is the time of year when a lot of us (myself included) grab hold of the momentum of the new year and ride it like a pony to some far off goal in the sunset. (Metaphorically, of course.) And about six weeks from now that pony starts getting fat, tired, and strangely heads off in the opposite direction.

To keep your New Year's pony on track (again, metaphorically) I'm offering a new workshop this month on turning your New Year's Resolutions into Results.

Because how many times have we all made New Year’s resolutions that just don’t work?

By formally setting goals and focusing on the benefits, you increase the likelihood that you’ll reach them and make 2010 the best year of your life! This is goal-setting for creative people, not boring read-it-in-a-book type stuff.

After just three hours of my seminar, you will:
• identify goals you haven’t considered before
• learn how to prioritize your goals
• define “success” and learn how to measure it
• identify obstacles and make a plan to get around them
• develop partnerships to help you keep on track
• come away with the know-how and handouts to keep setting goals

A $75 investment gets you:
• 3 hours of instruction
• a workbook to use on your own at home
• a one-to-one follow-up phone session with me, Kate Sandberg, Professional Coach
• 3 group accountability calls to keep you on track

It’s the best (tax-deductible) investment you will make in yourself this year.

The Make It Happen Now! workshop on January 16th from 2–5 at Ripley Grier Studios has limited seats. To sign up, go to www.katesandberg.com

There are discounts for union members, and a two-for-one discount, too, where you and a friend can come for just $125. (Put the extra savings towards a pony!)

Happy New Year!

Kate Sandberg

www.katesandberg.com

You should read

This great post over at Holtham's joint.

My two-cents: Self produce. Do it. Why not? But don't give up on getting your plays in the hands of any many directors and producers as possible. A lot of the most successful people out there submit constantly. So, whatever the hypothetical conversation may be that's currently catnip for all us bloggers... do the work. Write good plays, submit them everywhere, meet people you like, and work with them.

As for the pursuit of "good plays" and "good playwrights" all I can say is...

God knows. There's no alchemical formula to making a good play, no check-list, no truly well-made play, no ideal. There's also no way to be developed to perfection. Plays are likely just as often ruined by development as helped. There's no way to tell.

One must use one's own judgment, as the artist, as the person with the most stake in the outcome. If you, as a writer, allow people with almost no personal stake in your success, who are not speaking with your voice, to guide what you present on stage...I'd say that's a mistake. But, of course, I'm generalizing desperately. We all are. Maybe you do a reading, and someone's Mom says the perfect thing to you over drinks. Maybe you do a reading and your favorite living writer shows up, and says something to you that is totally off-the-mark.

The only constant in your career is you. Everyone will be as helpful and helpless and destructive as, well, all people are.

I once took a class with a teacher that told us all that Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf is too long. Shakespeare wrote anti-feminist and anti-Semitic works . I can barely stand Shaw. I know people who think Arthur Miller blows. Tony Kushner has been rewriting his plays in front of the audience for years now. Neil Simon is dated. Half the world doesn't know what the hell to make of Beckett.

These are the best of the best. The classics. The giants. And even they have their valid detractors and their flaws. If you want to be one of them, you have to live with criticism. You can't serve the whims of artistic directors and the graduates of this or that university or what-have-you.

It's a shame that there's such a divide between the decision makers and the good work they seek. But it's out there. It can be found. And it is being found. And it will be. Sure, there's a lot of garbage, and there are writers who are exceptional that never get their due. It's a shame, but there it is. No cure for it. Everyone get their helmets on, take a deep breath, and run towards the battlefield.

Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus

Pam and I saw this last night. Certainly not light on ideas, and certainly not without its moments of visual flair, it's far from the best from director Terry Gilliam. The symbols weren't abundantly clear to me (not that I demand obviousness, but I don't love scratching my head at the climax either) and the theme was muddled. Was this a film about storytelling? About imagination? A tragedy about making bargains with the Devil? There's a furious pace to the performances and the movie itself, and somehow, it all left me a bit cold.

To be clear: this is still head and shoulders above most movies you'll see. It's Terry Gilliam, and even his misfires are worth engaging with. For example: Tideland is nearly unwatchable. It's grotesque and ugly. It's impossible not to respect the sheer force of will it takes to get a movie like that made. But it doesn't mean I would ever watch it again.

Parnassus is infinitely more accessible and entertaining. It's just messy, rushed. There's fun stuff all over it, but I couldn't help but feel there was a better film lurking underneath.

It's nowhere near as off-tone as Brothers Grimm. Closer, maybe, to Baron Munchausen, which looks cool and has grand designs, but has a sort of unsatisfying finish.

So...worth checking out just because it's Gilliam, and has Heath Ledger's final performance (yes I do think he was a phenomenal performer) and there's not much out there that's like it. But it's not the return to form I'd hoped for.

Looking back on 2009

I'm not terribly good at ten best lists and round-ups. Unless they're silly. I'm just not terribly ordered or organized in my thinking. 2009, though, was a solid and seed sowing year for me, and it gives me great expectations for 2010 and beyond.

During my year...

When is a Clock was published this year. Hooray for that.

Glee Club was produced as a part of the Antidepressant Festival. It was extremely well-received. There are plans in the works to see that play again soon, for a longer run, along with another of my previously produced works. Details as they become available.

Exposition was also produced this year. I'm particularly proud of it, and hope to see it revived. The cast was awesome. Plus, it was my first collaboration with Michael Gardner at the Brick. First of many I hope.

In the great expanse of space there is nothing to see but More, More, More received readings at Blue Coyote Theater Group and the Brick Theater. Both times viewed with general suspicion.

Bluebeard was completed and received a reading at the Access.

I presented a series of successful Playwrights in Conversation podcasts with nytheatre.com.

Was interviewed and linked to and generally not treated like a total asshole by Time Out.

I was the writer for the 5th Annual New York Innovative Theater Awards, which led to the opportunity to be the Senior Writer for the webcast from Times Square on New Year's Eve.

Plus, some of my nearest and dearest had some great things happen. My brother Dan graduated, my brother Jeff went off to college, I got to spend more time with my family than I usually do, and my Mother and Father both retired (happily!). Pam's space in Gowanus is getting really popular and her blog has really taken off. Plus, she's curating her own shows now - a new one in just a few weeks.

All in all, not a bad year.

Happy New Year everyone.

What's next?

99seats unmasked

The blogger known as 99seats reveals his true identity in this post. Click Rorschach above.

James Comtois Top 10 of 2009

James gives us his personal 10 best. Chiming in at #4 is Glee Club. To quote:

"Glee Club was the feel-good tragedy of the year."

Thanks Jimmy!

Five Years

Yesterday was the five year anniversary of me writing in this space.

Happy Anniversary, blog!

Happy Anniversary Matt.

...did you just say something, blog?

Yes! I've awoken! As was foretold!

Oh dear.

New Year's Eve

Webcast Thing

Hey everyone -

I'm the Senior Writer / Assistant Producer on the webcast from New Year's Eve at Times Square this year. Yes, very weird. I'm posting a stream of the live feed here, mostly so my Mom can find it. But, of course, check it out. http://timessquarenyc.org/

Blogroll addition

The essential writings of downtown darling Trav SD are now easily accessible in the blogroll.

Thanks to the Guardian's "Noises Off"...

...for naming On Theatre and Politics one of the top 5 theatre blogs of 2009. Chris Wilkinson, we love you right back.

See what I did there? That's the royal "We." Because the Guardian is from...

...explaining it really kills the whole joke, huh?

"Zion! Here me! We are still here!"

Yes, I am sort of quoting Matrix Reloaded.

It is still 2009. Can you believe it?

I've got my head in the sand working on this (I will be posting a stream of it in this space for those who like to enjoy New Year's Eve with a bottle of something and a computer screen).

I have mulled a top 10 of the decade list or a top 10 of 2009 list and I am, frankly, flummoxed. I have no idea how one goes about making assessments like those. I mean, the last Star Wars movie came out this decade, and no one even brings that shit up because they decided they were annoyed by the whole enterprise. Screw that attitude - that's significant to my life. So what are you going to do? Assume your own taste is universal? That would be crazy talk.

Anyway... I will probably write a bit of a personal recap of 2009 (first Samuel French publication by yours truly this year!) and what have you. Until I get around to that, I will say that I hope everyone has been enjoying December with its various ways to celebrate. And I'll say I'm excited that my brother Danny got a new job. And that my Mom and Stepfather came to visit - twas a fine time.

And I hope my Dad likes the Blu-Ray Player.

Because my Dad, who is a tremendous guy in most ways, has a big flat screen 1080p TV and friggin' rabbit ears on it.

It's a crime. That's all I'm saying.

nytheatre.com's Most Popular Podcasts in 2009

Nytheatre.com has announced the most downloaded nytheatrecasts of 2009. My interview with Adam Szymkowicz tops the list, and my interview with James Comtois comes in at number five.

Not a bad bit of interviewin'.
1. Playwrights In Conversation: Matt Freeman and Adam Szymkowicz (#282)
2. Metropolitan Playhouse Spring Season (#276) (features Alex Roe)
3. Balancing Acts--Surviving and Thriving in Theater (#278) (features Robin Rothstein, Melanie Armer, Craig Pospisil, and David Hilder)
4. Plays and Playwrights 2009: Author Roundtable (#287) (features Colette Freedman and Nick Mwaluko)
5. Playwrights In Conversation: Matt Freeman and James Comtois (#289)
6. FRIGID New York Festival Preview (#273) (features artists from six festival productions)
7. Pan Asian Rep's New Works 2009 (#277) (features Tisa Chang and Ron Nakahara)
8. Indie Theater NOW! 2009 Holiday Season Preview (#316) (features artists from four holiday productions)
9. Playwrights In Conversation: Crystal Skillman and Daniel Talbott (#299)
10. Waterwell's Newest Drop: #9 (#290) (features Tom Ridgely and Kevin Townley)

I would like to also remind you that I conducted two other interviews this past year, and both of the interview subjects were awesome! You should check them out.

Mac Rogers "Viral"

Scott Reynolds "The Odyssey"

Avatar

Saw that Avatar movie. Guess what? It's rad. No, it's not brain surgery. Yes, it has moments of dialogue that fall into the "functional" category. Yes, the story is a lot like Dances With Wolves or whatever. But once I figured out that I was watching a family action-adventure fantasy movie; something almost old-fashioned in the way it tells the story, I got on board and had a great time.

One thing I've got to say about James Cameron: part of his success in a genre often associated with boys and toys is his insistence on strong female characters. Terminator 1 and 2. Aliens. The Abyss. Titanic. Strong female characters abound. Avatar is no different. It's heroine is extremely well-realized, and the mythology of Pandora is matriarchal. If I had a daughter and took her to this, I would feel pretty confident that she was seeing something she could relate to.

It's also just plain pretty. The 3D is great, but a lot of this movie would look good on a DVD player. Not only because things look "real" or what-have-you. The special effects are employed to make the world seem gorgeous. Bioluminescent. Lush.

It's not James Cameron's best movie. It's not the best movie I've seen this year. I don't really think it's as rewatchable as Star Trek, for example. But it's a new story, which is refreshing all by itself, and its made with amazing care and skill.

In short: recommended.

Diversity and such

I don't agree with Scott's provocative idea because I prefer choice over chance. If we stop trusting people to make real decisions, we give up on their ability to make good choices and grapple with complexity.

Also, I detect in the larger diversity discussion a lack of specificity. Gender diversity and racial diversity and class diversity are different issues and have to be addressed entirely differently. Just because a group shares "under-represented" status doesn't mean they are under-represented in exactly the same way or for exactly the same historical/economic/cultural reasons. Isaac seems focused on racial diversity; Scott on cultural or geographic diversity, for example.

I am a supporter of affirmative action. I believe that you cannot confront a cultural history of racism without a systemic approach.

But, I also am deeply ambivalent about how race and ethnicity, even for those with good intentions, can be oversimplified and quantified superficially. Example: my sister is adopted. She is Korean. She was adopted before I was born, when she was only a few months old. She has no memory of Korea, never knew her Korean mother, and does not speak Korean. She has been a member of my family longer than I have, even if we don't share the same DNA. Culturally... is she Korean? No. Does she self-identify as Korean-American? Not in the way some people do, certainly.

So where does she fit in these calls for diversity? Does she represent a racial group? Is her group Adopted Children? Or women? Or women who grew up in Pennsylvania? Her life is simply not reducible that way. She's my sister, my older sister, and she comes from the same background that I do. Are we supposed to be grouped differently? Separately? I would certainly find that troubling. I'd protest anyone who would group her according to their own assessments of how she looked - even if they felt it was to her benefit.

Affirmative action is not about numbers: it's about acknowledging that racism was/is a part of our system, and that only a systematic approach can correct that on a large scale. Let's just remember that all discussions of "diversity" are about individuals and not about counting colors.

In short, before we talk about promoting diversity, I think we should know what we mean by that extremely loaded word. Do we want to see more representation from non-MFA playwrights Off-Off Broadway? Do we want to reduce the impact that affluence has on artistic merit? Do we want to see more Asian-Americans employed in literary departments? If so, why?

Once we identify something specific, a lack we can show, we can actually propose counter-methods. Otherwise, it's just so much posturing.

On Phantasmaphile...

If you don't read Pam's blog, you should. Today she posted this painting, which is so awesome, that I had to post it here and link to it.

It's called "Because of Toast" by Joe Sorren.

How to support me

If you read this blog, like what's in it, and find yourself generally supportive of me as a person and artist, there is something you can do to support me directly: purchase one of my plays. I don't want to become a shill over here, but the plays are neither expensive nor difficult to purchase, and they're pretty good too.

One of the great things about the current state of technology is that a writer like me, working as hard as I can to build a career and be an active member of the community, can connect directly with not only friends, family and peers, but a wider audience of like-minded individuals. I hope that you appreciate my thoughts (such as they are) and my contributions. I hope you don't mind that I ask you to directly support my career in this way, but I feel that now, more than ever, the creators of content and their audiences are linked.

Any purchase of my work isn't a few bucks that you send into the ether: I will feel and appreciate the value you place on supporting me and the plays I write.

The Death of King Arthur, a play of mine written in 2001, is published by Playscripts, Inc. It's discounted at $5.99 for a single book right now. Here's where to purchase it.

When is a Clock is published by Samuel French. It can be purchased directly from the publisher here, or order at Amazon.com. You can also find it at the Drama Book Shop in NYC (among other places).

Thanks!

Michael and David are the Nook

Check out this video with David Pogue that features my good friends Michael Colby Jones and David DelGrosso.

Really great stuff guys!

Good press for me and my ladyfriend

Pam's space Observatory just got a great write up in BoingBoing!

And I am working as a writer on this interesting project: The New Year's Eve live blog and webcast.

What a great post

...this post is.

Support small theater this year

As with the past few years in this space, I'd like to take a Holiday moment to remind you how important it is to support small theaters. The economics just aren't in favor of the long-term survival of any small and vital theater company without the direct financial support of its fans and patrons. Buying tickets only goes so far. Talking about theaters on blogs and websites and reading reviews only goes so far. If you believe in the type of theater that we discuss in this space, if you want to see more and better theater produced, the best thing you can do is give.

It doesn't matter how much you give. $10. $25. $50. $100. Giving has never been easier - press a button on your computer screen. Many of the theaters I love best aren't awash in corporate sponsorships and grants: they're the labors of love of hungry, outlandish, dedicated people. Every charitable donation is put immediately to use. You won't find your donation wasted, not by artists who are, by their nature, thrifty and inventive.

Giving is a habit. Get into that habit. This year, I'd like to make one more request: ask someone else you know to give, too. If you have a friend that came with you to a show you both liked, you might mention to that friend that you just donated $50 to the theater that produced it. Ask them to join you.

Here's a few suggestions from me. I'm sure (I hope!) other bloggers will create their own lists.

BLUE COYOTE THEATER GROUP - Where I have hung my theatrical hat for several years now. This is the creative force behind this year's production of Glee Club (so if you liked that, you should support them!) and they also produced Effie Jean in Tahiti this year, a musical by David Johnston. If you want to support me as an artist, there are two major ways to do it. Buy one of my plays, and donate to Blue Coyote Theater Group.

Give online here!

THE BRICK - C'mon. It's the Brick. A hub of activity in the Off-Off Broadway world. I had two productions at the Brick this year: Glee Club and Exposition so I personally know what fun there is to be had over there. They're in the midst of Fight Fest. They work their asses off, generate tons of intriguing, off-the-wall work.

Give online here!

NOSEDIVE PRODUCTIONS - Among their productions in 2009: Infectious Opportunity and Blood Brothers. The home of fellow blogger James Comtois. Good people, working hard, making great theater. Show them you love what they do.

Give online here!

NYTE, Inc - Book publishers, reviewers, advocates. A major force in the Off-Off Broadway (or as they would prefer "Indie Theater") world. If you want to give to "Off-Off" in general, this is one way to do it.

Give online here!

FLUX THEATRE ENSEMBLE - Great group of people. Last year's productions include The Lesser Seductions of History and Pretty Theft. Plus, Gus is a friendly, astute blogger. Besides being quite an artist.

Give online here!

----

That's just a few to get you thinking. I hope you give a little (or a lot) if you're able this year.

From the "Well! Knock me over with a feather!" department

This is not some big shock, right?

Not sure what the methodology of the "survey" is/was. But I don't think anyone who's held a theater program in his or her hand in the last few years hasn't noticed that prominence of certain MFA programs. Heck, I made a rather successful joke (if I do say so myself) about the whole thing in a play about a year ago.

One has to ask why this is institutionally? Is it the playwrights themselves serving up big bowls of excellence that are far tastier and more zesty than the work of their peers with different credentials? Could it be? Or could it be that those same departments shepherd their wards into good opportunities?

Quality can't be surveyed. One person's academic navel gazing is another person's compelling theatrical experiment. I do think it's worthwhile to throw water on our faces every once in a while, and look in the mirror. If your MFA becomes a more predicative criteria for your success than, say, how people actual respond to your work in real time: that's probably a bad trend. But that doesn't follow exactly that writers with MFAs are getting opportunities they haven't earned.

Congratulations to Matthew Trumbull!

My main man Matt Trumbull was just named one of the People of the Year for 2009 at nytheatre.com. Well deserved. The "something else in between" mentioned by David Johnston was, in fact, Glee Club. And Infectious Opportunity, too. Which was produced by some other people of the year...

Ben Nelson - Tool of the Right-Wing, Asshole, Prick

Can it be that THIS guy (a "Democrat" from a state with an entire population that is smaller than the population of New York City) just killed the a public option because the Democrats refused to use a health care bill to effectively ban abortion?

If that's what just happened (we'll find out shortly) then Ben Nelson is a friggin' shame factory.

ACORN is so evil

Except when it's found to have no pattern of misconduct by an independent observer. Also, it seems that this same observer found that the damning videos that we used to make ACORN a national whipping boy...were substantially doctored.

Huh. What do you know? Two kids with a video camera are not actual journalists.

I will soon be 34

My birthday is Monday. It is a birthday I share with Tom Waits, the dear departed professional wrestler Ravishing Rick Rude, Senator Susan Collins of Maine, and the Japanese attack at Pearl Harbor.

Praise me!

How much fun is this? Too much fun.

A Streetcar Named Desire starring...Owen Lars!

Okay, so how could Ben Brantley write this breathless review of a Streetcar Named Desire, featuring Cate Blanchett, and not mention that Joel Edgerton played Owen Lars in Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith?

I am offended sir. Offended.

What "bi-partisan" means to that prick Ben Nelson

Sen. Ben Nelson is going to try to introduce an anti-abortion amendment into the Senate bill that is identical to the Stupak-Pitts amendment.

Uh-huh.

What is completely unreported in all this is that these three men are all members of the same wingnut conservative Christian cultish pro-wealth fringe group.

So I guess being bipartisan means essentially sabotaging your own party's social agenda you're all King David or some shit.

This stuff needs to be better reported as choreographed, so it doesn't take on the illusion of being a part of reasonable debate.

"Strange and Pointless"

I must frame this amazing review on Amazon.com from Deborah W. Seigman of Killeen TX. She literally threw WHEN IS A CLOCK away to protect her friends and family.

I'm sure Tom Stoppard is relieved to have been spared her fury.

Why not just say it?

The Women's Project sent out a press release billing itself as the NEA-Rejected Women's Project.

Fan-fucking-tastic.

All the Albee that's fit to print

Who's Afraid of Edward Albee?, an article by Laura Parker, calls Edward Albee an old fogey. Leonard Jacobs and George Hunka discuss the matter here and here, respectively.

Then, as George points out, there's this. Which I sort of wanted to hug.

So what is there to say? It's not news that Albee personally feels this way, and as, is stated all over the place, there's a sort of personal preference at play here that simply can't be argued with or about.

Still, I think it's noteworthy to point out that plays are more and more often written with the assumption of a director. The director as a second, independent, creative force is now a part of DNA of many new plays. Playwrights should understand why we're making certain choices as we write, or we'll find that we're unconsciously styling plays to fit the needs of others. Instead of writing down a fully formed vision, we'll reduce our impact on our own productions by leaving room for our collaborators before they've even shown up.

Year-End Approaches

Tomorrow it will be December. Year-End Wrap ups commence. People publish all those best-of lists and what have you. Best Kitchen I Saw In Brooklyn. Ten Best Horticulturalists of 2009. Top Ten Ways I Stopped Myself From Drinking Too Much in 2009. That sort of thing.

I wonder if I'll compile a list like that.

I wonder if you'll help me.

I wonder what it should ... be?

Thanksgiving is over

Stop giving thanks and get on with it.

-the Management

The arbitrary choice?

You're watching a traditional play about something like politics. A politician is meeting with a journalist off-the record. The journalist agrees to call the prominent politician a "well positioned source" and commits to anonymity otherwise. Then, slowly it becomes clear that there's more than just fund-raising shenanigans involved in this story. This political champion appears to have done some truly terrible things.

Throughout the fun little scene, the actor playing the journalist keeps clicking her pen. It's looks like a nervous gesture at first, but the longer you watch, the more you realize it seems almost like a...signal? Or even something deeper. The actor is making a point of the pen's importance in the scene perhaps. You notice, with the clicks, what is written down and what, pointedly, is not.

What you don't know is why this is actually happening. Is it because the director believes that the pen of a journalist is symbolic of something or other? Or, did the director just say... "You know what would look cool? Click the pen. I dunno. Click it after each third word that you say."

Is it possible that an arbitrary decision by the creative team and a decision with some complex thought behind it...can look exactly the same? And does it make a difference, really, to the audience member? Does how a decision is arrived at inform what we see?

Can we sense the arbitrary? Or do we just assume that everything we see onstage was put there with a rigorous sense of purpose?

Exposition closes

Our three day run of Exposition went beautifully. (Here's a nice write up.) I'm proud of the production, and the great work by the cast. Also, this was my first collaboration with Michael Gardner, who worked quietly worked miracles.

Thanks to all who attended and to the Brick. More to come.

To Lieberman someone

I believe that Lieberman should be a verb. To Lieberman someone. "He totally Liebermaned me!"

Help me define this.

Would it be cite facts that have been long discredited to defend one's position?

Or to stand next to a friend, and then do everything in your power to cause your friend to fail?

Women's Project - Call for Lab Applicants

Hey there blog reading friends and pals and people who I do not know! Got this note and I wanted to pass it along. A great opportunity for you or maybe someone you know.

^{Women’s Project is pleased to announce the call for applications to our 2010-2012 Lab for Producers, Directors and Playwrights. The Lab is New York City based and begins in September 2010. The application deadline is January 18, 2010.}

Johnna Adams interview

Lovely interview with her over at Zack's blog.

Opening night

Exposition begins its brief appearance at the Brick (only three nights) this evening at 9pm. Be there or b squared.

"Here is where you should head this fall to warm your soul amid the diversions of that ever-great and ever-endangered American art form, musical comedy."

- New York Times, Charles Isherwood, about a different play.

Time Out's Upstaged Interview with Me!

Isn't this a nice kettle of wax? Or a ball of yarn?

Or both?

Which reminds me...buy tickets today for Exposition. Only three nights!

Exposition Tickets are available

Tickets for Exposition are now on sale. Go here for details.

Three nights only!

Thursday Nov. 19th 9pm
Friday Nov. 20th 8pm
Saturday Nov. 21st 8pm

From Exposition

A bit of text from EXPOSITION.

I woke up and it occurred to me immediately that I was covered in blood. My blood. I thought “Did I lose my dick?” Then I thought if I was going to become a hermaphrodite like one of those frogs. Then I realized “No, no. That’s not what a hermaphrodite is.” Then I thought I must be in shock. Then I went into shock.

Fan-tastic

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Sean Hannity Uses Glenn Beck's Protest Footage
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

Exposition

We're entering into crunch time for Exposition. There will be three performances, November 19th - 21st. When tickets are up for sale, I'll let you know first!

If you're interested in seeing this, make sure you get tickets in advance. Three performances and a cast of seven means seats will go fast.

Might I recommend...

That you DVR 30 Rock? That show is terrific. Tonight's episode featured some lovely Seagull jokes.

Look out!

The GOP won two gubernatorial races in states where the incumbent was weak or already deeply unpopular! Democrats are doomed, clearly.

Maine, though, just decided it prefers living in 1955.

Question

Would your work be any different if selling tickets wasn't a factor?

Let's assume that whatever you did would have a full house. The audience is not guaranteed to enjoy or understand the production, but they're guaranteed to attend.

Would your choice of production be different? Would your choices as a writer or director be different? As an actor, would you have a different relationship with the audience?

Coburn: Portrait of a Total Dick

“My mission is to frame this health care debate in terms of the fiscal ruin of this country,” said the 61-year-old Mr. Coburn, who recently railed on the Senate floor that the federal debt was “waterboarding” his five grandchildren. “I have instructed my staff to clear my schedule for every minute that bill is on the floor.”

Observatory

This young woman (who I spent a lot of personal time with) is one of the people that runs this space. You should check that space out, come to events, and generally fall in love with it. Since it is so very cool.

Blood Brothers

As annual as Saw and twice as live! Blood Brothers returns tonight!

Remember when

Fred Thompson was going to be President?

On the other hand...Box Office Numbers

I know that much of the theater going on in NYC is under a 501(c)3 banner, and that mission-driven grants and fund-raising are a bigger part of our world than are ticket sales... but ticket sales do matter. Obviously, Off-Off or Indie Theater is hard to keep track of that way: there are too many companies to expect buy-in, the record keeping can be spotty, a lot depends on the venue. Still, wouldn't it be interesting to see a website much like Box Office Mojo for Indie Theatre?

Here's why it would useful.

First of all, there's a horse racing element to this type of thing that draws interest. Period. Half of the interest people have in politics is about numbers. Same is true of baseball. People like statistics, they like to see records broken, they like to know when something is successful and why.

Beyond this, it's educational. How many seats are actually sold to any given production? How many of those seats were given away? How many Equity cards were used to get in the door? How profitable are most shows? How much did they cost? How much did the producers make?

Part of this just helps the community discuss what is fair price. They can also get a better sense of which companies are actually getting butts in the seats. It also can be an indicator of price as a part of the decision making process for theatergoers. Or, better yet, an indicator of how people are making decisions at all. If most of the highest grossing Off-Off Broadway shows are in one venue, for example, that becomes something to think about. Does a venue have fans? Does a particular playwright sell tickets? A particular actor?

It might also be (and is likely to be) sobering. I'd count that as a good. Many companies complain that their costs outpace their actual take at the door. I'd like to see that. I'd love to wake people up to the actual cost of doing business in the more intimate venues in town, and see if that sparks some discussion in the wider community.

I think really the only way to make it work feasibly is to ask venues to report their numbers, and have those venues get agreements from individual shows that are being run to report those numbers as well. Then, a website could publish the top 10 of the weekend on a Monday. Perhaps you could say the name of the show, the reported cost of the production, number of tickets sold and at what price, number of performances, the gross box office up to the current date, etc. Instead of starting with all the venues in town (hard to pull off) you'd just pick a few well-trod stages like The Access, The Brick, Under St. Marks, The Kraine, The Metropolitan Playhouse, etc. Then theaters that want to report can self-select.

So...I offer this idea up. What do you think?

Food for "The Exposition"

Here's a quote from an interview between Mark Strand and Wallace Shawn that is inspiring me as I work on "The Exposition."

MS: "Well, I think what happens at certain points in my poems is that language takes over, and I follow it. It just sounds right. And I trust the implication of what I'm saying, even though I'm not absolutely sure what it is I'm saying. I'm just willing to let it be. Because if I were absolutely sure of whatever it was that I said in my poems, if I were sure, and could verify it and check it out and feel, yes, I've said what I intended, I don't think the poem would be smarter than I am. I think the poem would be, finally, a reducible item. It's this 'beyondness,' that depth that you reach in a poem, that keeps you returning to it. And you wonder- the poem seemed so natural at the beginning - how did you get where you ended up? What happened?"

There are lots and lots

...of cool pieces of writing about criticism right now.

Also, Theatre Ideas is back.

Gus at Flux is writing about core values.

And when's the last time you read a little of George Hunka's blog?

99seats has lots to say and you should poke around over there too. Here's a good place to start.

As for me, I'm in a creative and confusing time. My last production was the short run of Glee Club at the Antidepressant Festival, which was extremely popular with those who saw it. Right now, we're looking at bringing it back soon (you'll be the first to know!) with perhaps another couple of short plays or another one-act to make it a full evening. I've written a few shorts that I liked, called That Old Soft Shoe, Snaking Charming and The Dress You Should Wear. I'm working on second drafts of them, and figuring out if any of them work alongside Glee Club.

I finished my latest draft of Bluebeard (recommended to you by Gus here) several months ago, and I've been sending it out all over the place. We'll see where it lands.

Also, I've started rehearsals for The Exposition, which is being developed collaboratively with Michael Gardner and the great cast over at the Brick. The writing I've been doing for this is fun, jagged, associative, patchwork.

The fact is, my work is chaotic right now and I feel chaotic. Glee Club and The Exposition come from entirely different places. Bluebeard, too. As are the new plays, which are essentially political or social satires. I'm not working from a unified theory, not even within the individual pieces. I'm writing a lot and from lots of different impulses. It makes it impossible to talk about effectively for me, which is why I'm not writing much about it on the blog.

It also means that I'm in a phase where the trappings of production, the role of the critic and the idea of expressing my values as an artist are just not on my mind. I'm trying to work, and I find a lot of the rest, frankly, distracting. I'm sure I'll eventually throw my hat into some debate here or there.

But for now, I'm just writing.

That's the part I like best. Making stuff up.

Filibuster

I keep hearing about the threat of filibuster. When's the last time a political party actually DID filibuster. I want to see them do it. I want to see them say "We dislike the popular public option so much, we'll stand here and read from the phone book and keep a majority from voting it in."

That's political theater I can believe in.

Words with new (no) meanings

Apparently the word "unlucky" can be applied to Sienna Miller.

Because she works in a coal mine and stuff. She can't find any clean drinking water. Her cattle died of some nameless disease. She lost everything in a fire.

Right?

"Ms. Miller has also been a little unlucky"- New York Times

The Exposition begins

Rehearsals began on Sunday for a new project called "The Exposition." Certainly interesting so far. The cast consists of Moira Stone, Anna Kull, Sean Kenin, Alexis Sottile, Jennifer Gordon Thomas, Kina Bermudez and Maggie Cino. Directed by Michael Gardner.

Our goal was to essentially start with zero. No theme, nor preplanned direction. A series of intuitions about what we do and don't want to see. We spent the day with some improvisations, some drinks, some conversation. I'm trying to force myself not to be too outcomes based and not to look at each part of the project as a method to find a "successful" outcome. I'm a bit tired of being overly concerned with what "works." I think I want to uncover what I'm up to.

It was a roomful of smart people who have a tremendous talent and know how to build an improvisation. Give them a few elements, and they'll tease out a perfect metaphor and find a functioning narrative that they can agree upon. They also know when to shake it up, change things that are falling into a rut, move the narrative around, explore.

My interest here is how we can challenge our impulse to fall into the metaphor and narrative construct without degenerating or turning into cliche "experimental" theater.

We'll see. Either way, a fine day. Onwards and upwards.

Where the Wild Things Are

How's this for a review: I spent half the movie crying.

Plays with Others

According to this interview with Kristen Palmer you should also be reading this blog.

Want to get into voiceovers?

I haven't done this in a while, but allow me to plug Shut Up and Talk! If you're an actor and you're looking to have a voice over demo reel made, or take classes, this is a great company. It's run by actors who know the business (who I know very well personally) and they understand the value of your time and money.

Give them a shot.

I apologize

My blogging lately has been weak. Light. Harmless. Linking to articles. Substantially useless. Soon, David Cote will come to beat me senseless.

I apologize.

Here is how I apologize:

1. I would like to apologize to all the people I've hurt with my lack of blogging. You know you deserve this sort of treatment, but when it actually happens you act all surprised.

2. My apologies to the ladies. To be specific: all the ladies.

3. If this were an actual apology I would be crying uncontrollably, and probably saying it into a mirror. The question is: am I?

4. Blogging, while it once gave me pleasure, has started to really hurt my back. I used to be able to blog all day. Or at least for several hours at a shot. Now I can only blog when I feel well-rested, or if there's no football game on. I apologize for becoming older.

5. To blog is to wear the fashion of guile. I am trying on a new hat: a guileless hat.

6. I apologize to you for what I am, and what I am not, and how those things intersect publicly.

7. I apologize to the Internet and the World Wide Web and whatever the difference is.

8. I apologize to Skidmore College, in whose computer lab I first saw an actual webpage (Yahoo!) and didn't really understand what the fuck it was. I still sort of don't. It's like TV that doesn't move and that I can type on. In that way, it's like a series of shorter unedited books? Basically this is bullshit, isn't it?

9. For the things I am about to do to an audience, I would like to apologize in advance. It was never my intention.

10. Blogging is like Twitter only with complete thoughts. I no longer have complete thoughts. Not even this one.

11. My humblest apologies to Leonard Jacobs, who I have disappointed. I know I have.

12. To the purveyors of the First Folio Shakespeare Acting Method, I do not apologize. In fact, stop it. Stop it. Stop it.

13. This blog apologizes on behalf of Matthew Freeman, who is a Spambot from Russia. You are now on the list. Giver to her Pleasure with the Macho You can B3come.

14. In the future, everyone will stop blogging for 15 minutes.

15. I would like to apologize to the staff. They really never signed up for all this. They, once again, have shown patience and kindness to me in a situation that was not of their making. For this, I pay them handsomely.

President Obama did not give HIMSELF the Nobel Peace Prize

So if you disagree with the choice, take it up with Norway.

President Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize

That would be like Al Gore winning it!

Oh wait!

I guess the GOP will soon come out against the Nobel Peace Prize, just like they are now anti-Olympics, anti-health care and pro-torture.

Good morning everyone.

Update: I had a few friends say "This is premature! What had he done besides win an election?"

My response:

I think it could argued it's premature, but I think living in the US bubble we have this weird sense that the world ends with domestic politics and whether or not you can get 60 votes or something.

Let's see...

He ended the Cold War/Reagan era "missile shield" that put us in a permanent state of antagonism with Russia. They are, it appears, no longer a country with which we're at war.

His administration instigated the first direct diplomatic talks with Iran in 30 years and got actual results.

One of his first acts in office was to declare that he will close Guantanamo Bay. I know it's harder than it looks to close (especially when the House Democrats vote against bringing the prisoners to US prisons) but he's absolutely admitting and trying to correct American failings there.

He used the word "torture" in front of the United Nations and not "enhanced interrogations" or whatever the fuck they're calling it now. I mean, NPR doesn't even use the word torture because its become so politically charged by the right. He's made us honest again over there.

He actually chaired the UN Security Council disarmament summit, which is a huge signal from the US after 8 years of Bush. He took leadership on non-proliferation.

He gave a speech to the Arab world that admitted American failings but also stood firm on women's rights and actually made references to the Koran that were not humiliating.

That's a few things anyway.

In short: he's changed America's posture to the world. Is he perfect? No. But I mean...c'mon. This idea that he's done nothing is totally bullshit.

The Exposition

Even though we're in a mad dash to organize it, and get it cast, I figure it's safe to say that the weekend before Thanksgiving, something with my name on it will be appearing at the Brick Theater. I'll be collaborating for the first time with Michael Gardner on a project that is, shall we say, a bit undefined. By design. If that's something a project can be.

It's currently titled The Exposition. We'll see if that's what it's called by the end.

I'll keep readers abreast of the situation as we work our way through it, commit to a cast, and figure it all out. I'll also tell you how you can see it, should you choose to do so. There will be (it appears) only three performances. So start refreshing your browser now at Ovationtix.

More soon.

This reads like an Onion article

Obama = Polanski!

The only mistake

...is tipping your hand.

Twitchers

I second this emotion. Great show. You should see it.

Apparently

Wanting to host the Olympic Games is something only Democrats want to do.

Of course.