What amazes me is that the Republican argument against this bill is being given any weight whatsoever. Obama came to them, met with them, made changes to the bill to accommodate them, and in the end, they voted unanimously against it...even as Americans lose jobs on a massive scale. Their reason? Too much spending, too little in tax cuts.
Did no one send the GOP the memo that eight years of Bush policies and tax cuts have produced exactly nothing for the economy?
About Me
- Freeman
- Matthew Freeman is a Brooklyn based playwright with a BFA from Emerson College. His plays include THE DEATH OF KING ARTHUR, REASONS FOR MOVING, THE GREAT ESCAPE, THE AMERICANS, THE WHITE SWALLOW, AN INTERVIEW WITH THE AUTHOR, THE MOST WONDERFUL LOVE, WHEN IS A CLOCK, GLEE CLUB, THAT OLD SOFT SHOE and BRANDYWINE DISTILLERY FIRE. He served as Assistant Producer and Senior Writer for the live webcast from Times Square on New Year's Eve 2010-2012. As a freelance writer, he has contributed to Gamespy, Premiere, Complex Magazine, Maxim Online, and MTV Magazine. His plays have been published by Playscripts, Inc., New York Theatre Experience, and Samuel French.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Snowing today
Hope you're warm, NYC-ers.
If you're from the Midwest, I assume you feel nothing for us.
If you're from the West Coast... snow looks like this:
Be careful of it.
If you're from the Midwest, I assume you feel nothing for us.
If you're from the West Coast... snow looks like this:
Be careful of it.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Is it just me...
...or is the GOP currently responding to Obama's efforts at bipartisanship with a foolhardy attempt to garner favor with the 10 remaining guys in Alabama who don't support him?
Nice work, you poor bastards.
Nice work, you poor bastards.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Some Advice from Adam Szymkowicz
For playwrights starting out. Unlike what I often offer, this is all good, practical advice.
Tony Simotes is the new Artistic Director for Shakespeare & Company
Congratulations to Tony Simotes.
Many an Emerson College graduate from my era felt keenly affected by the comings and goings at Shakespeare & Company in Lenox, MA. Tony worked at Emerson briefly and directed me in The Resistible Rise of Arturo Ui (I was Givola) and Richard III. Two of the best experiences I had in college. He's a dynamic character, a kick ass fight director, and basically took no bullshit from us. Loved it.
For those inclined to know such things, in Richard III, Matthew Trumbull and I played the murderers, and we had the pleasure of killing one David DelGrosso, playing Clarence.
Many an Emerson College graduate from my era felt keenly affected by the comings and goings at Shakespeare & Company in Lenox, MA. Tony worked at Emerson briefly and directed me in The Resistible Rise of Arturo Ui (I was Givola) and Richard III. Two of the best experiences I had in college. He's a dynamic character, a kick ass fight director, and basically took no bullshit from us. Loved it.
For those inclined to know such things, in Richard III, Matthew Trumbull and I played the murderers, and we had the pleasure of killing one David DelGrosso, playing Clarence.
Official Joke Thread
Michael Jackson's Thriller on stage?
Let's just get the jokes out of our collective system now, shall we?
Let's just get the jokes out of our collective system now, shall we?
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Would you please...
...on this Monday morning, share a haiku with me? A haiku that speaks to the state of the American theater?
Friday, January 23, 2009
I direct your attention to...
The Universal Robots blog.
I plan on actually seeing the play this time around. Mac is a terrific writer.
I plan on actually seeing the play this time around. Mac is a terrific writer.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Nine Plays by Horton Foote
About the flu epidemic of 1918 or somesuch.
I tell you, I can't wait to sit through 15 hours of Horton Foote. I assume they will be passing out warm milk and blankets.
ZING!
I tell you, I can't wait to sit through 15 hours of Horton Foote. I assume they will be passing out warm milk and blankets.
ZING!
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Schadenfraude
Last night, while enjoying some bubbly, we changed the channel and caught a few minutes of Fox News. We were curious what it was like in the No Spin Zone.
1) Geraldine Ferraro was being interviewed. She appeared to be talking to Shepherd Smith from a dark room with about 5 guys all looking at dark monitors. She looked lonely, shunned. She complained about the security, and said she was "moved." Hi-larious.
2) They had some chirpy blonde interview Dana Delaney at a ball. (I assume more popular stars saw no reason to talk to Fox.) Delaney pointedly said she was supporting a woman's right to choose tonight. The interviewer was not fired... on camera.
3) Instead of an American Flag, they kept cutting to a gigantic plateful of crow.
1) Geraldine Ferraro was being interviewed. She appeared to be talking to Shepherd Smith from a dark room with about 5 guys all looking at dark monitors. She looked lonely, shunned. She complained about the security, and said she was "moved." Hi-larious.
2) They had some chirpy blonde interview Dana Delaney at a ball. (I assume more popular stars saw no reason to talk to Fox.) Delaney pointedly said she was supporting a woman's right to choose tonight. The interviewer was not fired... on camera.
3) Instead of an American Flag, they kept cutting to a gigantic plateful of crow.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Friday, January 16, 2009
Romeo and Juliet
Okay, so I was watching Saturday Night Live a week or so ago with Pammy and they had, as a musical guest, the apparently inert gas known as Taylor Swift. She is your standard fare pop waif with non-existent pipes and three chords at her disposal.
She sang a song that's been bugging me since I heard it. It's awful, generic pop (not a shock) but it bothers me on a different level, sort of like the misuse of the word "ironic" in that song ironically called Ironic.
The song is about a girl who likes a boy. Uh huh. And she calls him Romeo and he calls her Juliet. According to Google, the song is called Love Story. The end of the song is this young couple deciding to get married.
Harmless pop dreck. Except, of course, the use of Romeo and Juliet. Who, you know, die tragically. DIE. That's the meaning of their f*cking literary existence. It's not called The Happy Story of Romeo and Juliet. These kids wind up poisoned and stabbed because of miserable hatred. It's a story about intolerance, not love.
Calling someone your Romeo might as well be calling him the guy who bought your ticket to cross the River Styx.
Just for the f#cking record.
Going back into my cave now.
She sang a song that's been bugging me since I heard it. It's awful, generic pop (not a shock) but it bothers me on a different level, sort of like the misuse of the word "ironic" in that song ironically called Ironic.
The song is about a girl who likes a boy. Uh huh. And she calls him Romeo and he calls her Juliet. According to Google, the song is called Love Story. The end of the song is this young couple deciding to get married.
Harmless pop dreck. Except, of course, the use of Romeo and Juliet. Who, you know, die tragically. DIE. That's the meaning of their f*cking literary existence. It's not called The Happy Story of Romeo and Juliet. These kids wind up poisoned and stabbed because of miserable hatred. It's a story about intolerance, not love.
Calling someone your Romeo might as well be calling him the guy who bought your ticket to cross the River Styx.
Just for the f#cking record.
Going back into my cave now.
The Times write up about Galactica...
Is absurd.
It's bizarrely dismissive. Luckily, there are plenty of shows without big ideas for Mike Hale to enjoy.
It's bizarrely dismissive. Luckily, there are plenty of shows without big ideas for Mike Hale to enjoy.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
For the record
Yesterday I wrote a basically silly post about George Hunka's comment about 99seats "Joy" blog. The theatrosphere got a little angry about the whole thing. Frankly, I think the two of them (George Hunka and 99seats) are talking about entirely different things.
99seats was basically saying "Hey, let's remember that this is awesome and we do it because we love it."
George is talking about something else: that joy can be used to deadening effect, to avoid hard truths and devolve critical faculties. (I know I'm being reductive here.)
Now... I think if you remove George's point from 99seats blog posting entirely (they really have NO relationship to one another) then there's some truth in that. Broadway productions like Mamma Mia, for example, offer little to no artistic merit, say nothing of value, cost a pretty penny. The trick of productions like these is to almost force people to surrender to the idea that the whole thing is fun, and as long as it's fun, it has merit. They feel a sort of joy as they clap their hands and stand up and sway, but in doing so, lose the battle for critical thought.
George and I don't agree on much, but I do think that there are ways in which popular entertainment and popular theater use the idea of joy, a simulacrum of joy, to condition audiences. You are enjoying this, so it's good and you should have more of it. (When you do heroin, after all, you're having a very good time. So I'm told.) Even if Ryan Seacrest, American Idol and Mamma Mia! are soul deadening exercises in mediocracy, they use this sort of chipper, cackling "joy" to bludgeon us into a stupor. Then, when we're faced with something that requires more of us, or doesn't offer these simple pleasures, we don't know how to respond. Our ability to dig deeper can be eroded.
That doesn't mean that real joy doesn't exist and that it can't be found all over the place. And that, as 99seats notes, we shouldn't look for those moments of joy in our own lives that come organically from truly wonderful things.
Maybe I'm being too generous or misinterpreting... but that's how I see it.
99seats was basically saying "Hey, let's remember that this is awesome and we do it because we love it."
George is talking about something else: that joy can be used to deadening effect, to avoid hard truths and devolve critical faculties. (I know I'm being reductive here.)
Now... I think if you remove George's point from 99seats blog posting entirely (they really have NO relationship to one another) then there's some truth in that. Broadway productions like Mamma Mia, for example, offer little to no artistic merit, say nothing of value, cost a pretty penny. The trick of productions like these is to almost force people to surrender to the idea that the whole thing is fun, and as long as it's fun, it has merit. They feel a sort of joy as they clap their hands and stand up and sway, but in doing so, lose the battle for critical thought.
George and I don't agree on much, but I do think that there are ways in which popular entertainment and popular theater use the idea of joy, a simulacrum of joy, to condition audiences. You are enjoying this, so it's good and you should have more of it. (When you do heroin, after all, you're having a very good time. So I'm told.) Even if Ryan Seacrest, American Idol and Mamma Mia! are soul deadening exercises in mediocracy, they use this sort of chipper, cackling "joy" to bludgeon us into a stupor. Then, when we're faced with something that requires more of us, or doesn't offer these simple pleasures, we don't know how to respond. Our ability to dig deeper can be eroded.
That doesn't mean that real joy doesn't exist and that it can't be found all over the place. And that, as 99seats notes, we shouldn't look for those moments of joy in our own lives that come organically from truly wonderful things.
Maybe I'm being too generous or misinterpreting... but that's how I see it.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Hunka versus Joy!
George Hunka gets up all in the face of Joy and calls it stuff that would make a Marine blush.
He takes Joy's lunch money and then tells Joy that if Joy tells Joy's Mom, he'll just kick Joy's ass.
He trips Joy in front of everyone in the cafeteria and Joy is totally humiliated.
He say "Hey Joy!" and Joy says "Yeah?" and he says "You're a jerk, Joy. A complete knee-biter."
Joy comes up to Hunka and says "Why can't we be friends?" and Hunka says, "Friends with you, Joy? Don't make me laugh."
When Joy tries to sleep at night, he fears dreams of Hunka, cackling.
Years ago, Joy was hanging out with all his awesome friends, just being cool and stuff. Hunka ruined all that. Joy never hangs out with anyone awesome anymore, and it's all Hunka's fault.
Joy put on this new shirt that he thought looked totally great, and Hunka made fun of it for, like, weeks.
Hunka kicked Joy's pet fish. Imagine kicking a fish. That's f*cking cold. (Joy really loved that fish, too.)
Hunka put Joy in a scorpion deathlock. If you know anything about wrestling, you know that really hurts.
Joy avoids Hunka's gaze, like a low status monkey.
Hunka likes to make Joy flinch for fun.
Hunka posted this YouTube video of Joy's ex-girlfriend getting high and telling everyone what a lousy lover Joy is. It might be the worst thing that ever happened to Joy. He practically had to move because of it.
Quoth Hunka: "It is a joy that leads to the continuation and valorization of ignorance rather than knowledge."
Zing!
Note: Apologizes to all involved. I am in a silly mood.
He takes Joy's lunch money and then tells Joy that if Joy tells Joy's Mom, he'll just kick Joy's ass.
He trips Joy in front of everyone in the cafeteria and Joy is totally humiliated.
He say "Hey Joy!" and Joy says "Yeah?" and he says "You're a jerk, Joy. A complete knee-biter."
Joy comes up to Hunka and says "Why can't we be friends?" and Hunka says, "Friends with you, Joy? Don't make me laugh."
When Joy tries to sleep at night, he fears dreams of Hunka, cackling.
Years ago, Joy was hanging out with all his awesome friends, just being cool and stuff. Hunka ruined all that. Joy never hangs out with anyone awesome anymore, and it's all Hunka's fault.
Joy put on this new shirt that he thought looked totally great, and Hunka made fun of it for, like, weeks.
Hunka kicked Joy's pet fish. Imagine kicking a fish. That's f*cking cold. (Joy really loved that fish, too.)
Hunka put Joy in a scorpion deathlock. If you know anything about wrestling, you know that really hurts.
Joy avoids Hunka's gaze, like a low status monkey.
Hunka likes to make Joy flinch for fun.
Hunka posted this YouTube video of Joy's ex-girlfriend getting high and telling everyone what a lousy lover Joy is. It might be the worst thing that ever happened to Joy. He practically had to move because of it.
Quoth Hunka: "It is a joy that leads to the continuation and valorization of ignorance rather than knowledge."
Zing!
Note: Apologizes to all involved. I am in a silly mood.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Amato Opera to close
...although it sounds like it's closing on its own terms, and not being forced out by real estate chicanery.
The end of the Bush Era
Now, I know it's obvious that as progressives, we're going to treat Obama like evangelicals treat protestants. But no matter. Things are still looking up.
It's a time for reflection. The last eight years were humiliating, brutal, painful. Bush did terrible things, and our society was complicit in those things. Obama becomes president of a country at war and in the mist of an economic paradigm shift (to put it diplomatically).
But you know what? From 2000 - 2008, I cannot tell you nothing good happened to me personally. In fact, quite the opposite. My entire writing career to date spans the Bush years. I met my girlfriend over the Kerry-Bush debates.
Today, I feel like hearing about good things. So let me ask you this: What is one really fantastic thing that happened to you while Bush was in office? I'm just curious. Did you get married? Did you get a play published? Did you get a great review? Did you move into the world's best apartment? Did you get a new cat? Did you lose your virginity?
What happened besides the end of the world, in your world?
It's a time for reflection. The last eight years were humiliating, brutal, painful. Bush did terrible things, and our society was complicit in those things. Obama becomes president of a country at war and in the mist of an economic paradigm shift (to put it diplomatically).
But you know what? From 2000 - 2008, I cannot tell you nothing good happened to me personally. In fact, quite the opposite. My entire writing career to date spans the Bush years. I met my girlfriend over the Kerry-Bush debates.
Today, I feel like hearing about good things. So let me ask you this: What is one really fantastic thing that happened to you while Bush was in office? I'm just curious. Did you get married? Did you get a play published? Did you get a great review? Did you move into the world's best apartment? Did you get a new cat? Did you lose your virginity?
What happened besides the end of the world, in your world?
Monday, January 12, 2009
Friday, January 09, 2009
Laura Axelrod on Debt
I'm certain this blog post will speak to a lot of playwrights, aspiring or otherwise.
This isn't to demonize those who are affluent, but I've often wondered how much success in theater is tied to the ability to simply afford it. Sure, there's a talent factor and a connections/education factor (I'm looking at YOU Brown University MFA graduates!); but it's a perverse hardship on many writers who come from modest means to afford living in expensive cities, self-produce, have memberships to various organizations, afford mailing costs, etc.
You have to spend money to make money in almost all industries: but those industries often offer some rate of return for hard work. Even if a playwright goes into debt and does become a success, very few of us will be able to pay down the accrued debt without some other source of income. If you're going into debt for law school, the expectation is you're about to become a lawyer, after all.
This isn't to demonize those who are affluent, but I've often wondered how much success in theater is tied to the ability to simply afford it. Sure, there's a talent factor and a connections/education factor (I'm looking at YOU Brown University MFA graduates!); but it's a perverse hardship on many writers who come from modest means to afford living in expensive cities, self-produce, have memberships to various organizations, afford mailing costs, etc.
You have to spend money to make money in almost all industries: but those industries often offer some rate of return for hard work. Even if a playwright goes into debt and does become a success, very few of us will be able to pay down the accrued debt without some other source of income. If you're going into debt for law school, the expectation is you're about to become a lawyer, after all.
99 seats on Magic Theatre
I'm entirely in favor of speaking with our wallets and contributing to the Magic Theatre. I think that there are far more corrupt industries that are handed billions of tax payer dollars in order to protect them from failure. But... 99 seats has some food for thought I think is really worthwhile. He's holding them to account for their own management and that's fair game. I hope that if they are able to avoid closure, they learn from it.
When I first heard that they were $300,000 in the hole, I was shocked. The financial crisis had hit a lot of places in a lot of different ways, but it seemed like a lot of money to suddenly go missing. Way too much money. I was actually very gratified to read that article, because then it makes sense. Plus I was glad to find that there were consequences for someone. Like the bankers and the bailout, too often with arts organizations, they have these shortfalls and whatnot and do these fundraising pushes, but the people at the top keep their jobs. That doesn't make any sense at all. If we expect the CEO of Lehman Brothers to step down, we should expect the CEO of a theatre to step down. We should expect the board to step down. Their whole job, legally, is to check the numbers and make sure everything is kosher. And clearly, they didn't.
The funny thing about compromise and bipartisanship...
...is that everyone gets something they don't want, and they have to live with it.
Even though the jobless rate just rose again, and the economy is in full-blown disaster mode, it looks like the stimulus package (which is clearly being designed to get support from both sides) is going to get heat from fellow Democrats, too.
I'm not saying that to be a good Senator is to fall in line with the President, but for the love of God, be real. The Senate passed the Wall Street Bailout faster than it appears they intend to pass stimulus for the average American citizen.
Hopefully this is all just bluster (Obama hasn't even been sworn in yet, after all) and when it comes down to brass tacks, they'll get it done. Nonetheless, the Democratic leadership in the House and Senate appears addicted to shooting itself in the foot.
Even though the jobless rate just rose again, and the economy is in full-blown disaster mode, it looks like the stimulus package (which is clearly being designed to get support from both sides) is going to get heat from fellow Democrats, too.
I'm not saying that to be a good Senator is to fall in line with the President, but for the love of God, be real. The Senate passed the Wall Street Bailout faster than it appears they intend to pass stimulus for the average American citizen.
Hopefully this is all just bluster (Obama hasn't even been sworn in yet, after all) and when it comes down to brass tacks, they'll get it done. Nonetheless, the Democratic leadership in the House and Senate appears addicted to shooting itself in the foot.
Thursday, January 08, 2009
NYSCA Budget proposed to be cut by $7 million!
We need to send a POWERFUL MESSAGE to Albany before January 13 describing the impact of the Governor's proposed cut of $7 million to the NYSCA 08-09 budget.
Your legislators need to know there will be significant economic losses to the state and to our communities....and it may well include major JOB losses.
Remember, we only have 5 days to make our voices heard in Albany, so do it now. Because on January 13, many of you will travel to Albany to meet with your legislators and we want this message to be there when you arrive.
Click here to send an email to your legislator.
Please forward this message to everyone you know...and don't know. If our message goes viral again, we will have huge numbers.
The last time we emailed legislators, you sent 14,300 emails to the Governor and your legislators. This time let's make it 20,000 emails. Numbers matter. Everyone pays attention when enough people speak out.
Send a message today. http://capwiz.com/artsusa/ny/state/main/?state=NY
Your legislators need to know there will be significant economic losses to the state and to our communities....and it may well include major JOB losses.
Remember, we only have 5 days to make our voices heard in Albany, so do it now. Because on January 13, many of you will travel to Albany to meet with your legislators and we want this message to be there when you arrive.
Click here to send an email to your legislator.
Please forward this message to everyone you know...and don't know. If our message goes viral again, we will have huge numbers.
The last time we emailed legislators, you sent 14,300 emails to the Governor and your legislators. This time let's make it 20,000 emails. Numbers matter. Everyone pays attention when enough people speak out.
Send a message today. http://capwiz.com/artsusa/ny/
| ______________________________ |
| Facts you need to know... 2008-09 Budget (current fiscal year ending March 31) The Governor proposes an additional $7 million cut to the current local assistance (grants) budget. This will eliminate almost all NYSCA funds that have not yet been awarded from the OCTOBER and DECEMBER cycles
|
"Discussable, poignant nonsense"
Last night, I saw Kirk Wood Bromley's "untitled" play at the Access Gallery space. I can't think of a production more apt to the recent discussion on this blog about "meaning." (At one point in the script, an actor exclaims: "There's nothing left to do but make discussable, poignant nonsense!") The play is chaotic, it moves in and out of forms, its language is a flurry of puns, wordplay and substitutions. There are songs, a dedicated band of kick-ass actors, some inventive uses of the space that made me clap with glee, and a second half that is so pervasively perverse that I couldn't help but start to laugh.
It's also massive (they announced the show at 1 hour and 50 minutes, but I think it ran longer); untethered and almost too much. At times, it seems like a parody of itself, and at other times it's just an avalanche of awesome.
It might not be everyone's cup of tea. In fact, I'm sure it's the opposite. But it's definitely worth a look and it's free. Free, I tell you.
So go and see it.
It's also massive (they announced the show at 1 hour and 50 minutes, but I think it ran longer); untethered and almost too much. At times, it seems like a parody of itself, and at other times it's just an avalanche of awesome.
It might not be everyone's cup of tea. In fact, I'm sure it's the opposite. But it's definitely worth a look and it's free. Free, I tell you.
So go and see it.
Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Have you donated to the Magic Theatre yet?
If not, go right now and give them even a small online donation. They need to raise $110,000 by Friday or, according to their website, shut down permanently.
From their website:
From their website:
Magic Theatre Must Raise $110,000 By Friday:
Help us support our Magic by raising $350,000!
How are we doing?
Each seat = $5,000 raised
Help us fill these seats!
Please donate now to save this treasure of American Theatre
San Francisco's nationally acclaimed new plays theatre, MAGIC THEATRE, has raised $240,000 since its initial appeal seven days ago. With the funds raised, we began rehearsals for our next production—Tough Titty by Oni Faida Lampley—slated for previews beginning January 24th. Our staff, furloughed for two weeks, is back at work with pay. In order to continue the 43rd season beyond Tough Titty and stay open, MAGIC must raise a total of $350,000 by January 9, 2009. The funds will allow us to retain staff, continue the season, and remain responsible to our creditors.
In a world where more and more theaters are eliminating the challenging and risky work of mounting new plays altogether, please help us fulfill our commitment to new work. We're $110,000 short of our goal. You can make a difference. Please donate now.
Our core value of risk over commercial gain makes MAGIC a challenging endeavor in any economy, and going forward, MAGIC is committed to a new model of financial stability for a new world—without compromising our mission. Today however, MAGIC's accumulated debt of $600,000, combined with sharp declines in earned and contributed revenue due to the global economy, place us in imminent peril of shutting our doors in March.
For 42 years, San Francisco 's MAGIC THEATRE has been central to the cultural life of the Bay Area and beyond, giving life to some of the most important, diverse, and powerful voices of contemporary American artists, including four Pulitzer Prize winners. From its humble beginnings in a Berkeley bar, MAGIC has emerged as one of the crown jewels of American Theatre. For those of you who have sent us money, large amounts and small, we are grateful. If you have waited, please donate now.
In an attempt to close the gap between MAGIC's expenses and revenue lost as a result of the recession, the Board, in concert with the staff, raised additional funds and cut the $2 million budget by over $300,000. The closing of MAGIC THEATRE would be a great loss for artists and audiences here and across the country. The second largest theatre in San Francisco , MAGIC employs 200 artists annually and touches the lives of tens of thousands of people. We need to keep our artists and our work on the stage!
Artistically, MAGIC is thriving, building upon its rich legacy under the artistic direction of Loretta Greco, who joined the theatre last spring. The critical success of the first two productions of this season demonstrate the rigor to which MAGIC adheres in each aspect of new play production—and the hoped for excitement, awe, and wonder that come from watching great art play out for audiences.
We need your help to raise $110,000 by January 9, 2009. Please help us keep our doors open by making a donation today of $15.00 or more.
Please give whatever you can to save MAGIC THEATRE. No amount is too small or too large. Each of you can make a difference.
Tuesday, January 06, 2009
On "Meaning"
UPDATE: Good thoughts on the post below from Isaac and the mysterious, and astute, 99seats.
I'll note, as a sidebar, that the true intention of Isaac's a original post to was to ask how we can facilitate discussion about issues like this. How did I respond? Ironically, one might say.
Isaac posts a question about discussing the meaning of our work here. Good topic for a January day, I think. Here's a bit of the post.
I'm reluctant to answer those questions. I've made a joke of the "subject matter" of my work ("They're all about my parents getting divorced!") as a way to deflect this. Which is not to say I don't have plays that feature divorce, or the loss of a spouse, or marriage. I don't, though, actually write about divorce. If I did, I would write frustratingly dull memoirs, or self-help books, or entries in a diary.
I can't speak for all writers or artists (and I know directors approach work differently) but I've come to enjoy and embrace writing without an agenda. I've said in the past that I like work that asks questions as opposed to gives answers. I suppose that's not entirely true either. Asking a question is a sort of rhetorical approach, a lawyer-ly one, to meaning. Instead of appearing didactic, we shape a pointed question. The result is the same: A play about friendship, or marriage, or divorce, or communism, or Hamlet.
My favorite artwork, though, is not about a subject. It's evocative.
Here is my favorite poem by Charles Simic:
Country Fair
for Hayden Carruth
If you didn't see the six-legged dog,
It doesn't matter.
We did, and he mostly lay in the corner.
As for the extra legs,
One got used to them quickly
And thought of other things.
Like, what a cold, dark night
To be out at the fair.
Then the keeper threw a stick
And the dog went after it
On four legs, the other two flapping behind,
Which made one girl shriek with laughter.
She was drunk and so was the man
Who kept kissing her neck.
The dog got the stick and looked back at us.
And that was the whole show.
What is the subject of this poem? I would argue that we lessen the entire experience by having that discussion. We miss the point. The poem is a painting.
Here is a piece of work that Pam recently posted on her blog, Phantasmaphile:
It's called "Heartland", and it's by Mike Cockrill.
I love this piece. What is it about? What is it's meaning?
Certainly, there is a long tradition of theater that is about argument, reason, presenting a subject (Brecht, Arthur Miller, Ibsen) but there's no hidden agenda with those artists. They express their meaning plainly. They don't leave their message up to chance.
There are other pleasures in theater, and in any medium, than the successful transmission of message or meaning. There are deeper pleasures to be found in almost all plays than those that come from a better understanding of the writer himself or herself. Meaning is, in many ways, a red herring. People who watch work and don't understand the meaning immediately feel they are being insulted; those who feel challenged by "hidden meaning" become obsessed with the detective work. What's missed is can be (and this is not true in all cases) the original intention of the artist himself or herself. If the goal was create something musical, chilling, grotesque, shimmering, or even green or blue or red; that goal is bulldozed, ignored or overlooked if "meaning" is the Alpha and Omega of the theatrical interpreter, or experiencer.
Recently, during the second reading of my piece In The Great Expanse of Space there is nothing to see but More, More, More, I was asked by one of the actresses a simple question: why did I choose to use cancer as a motif? I was instantly defensive, apologetic, and eventually gave the answer to the question. The answer was pedestrian.
The play, though, is about an hour and a half full of language. It's frustrating, maybe still unsuccessful, and it features loops and repetitions and themes and odd juxtapositions. Still, though, it's called "The Cancer Play" by plenty of my colleagues and peers. I am not trying to say anything about cancer. The play is "meaningless;" but that doesn't mean it's purposeless. I don't listen to jazz music and wonder what it means. I don't look at Jackson Pollock paintings and mine them for their subject (unless you call their subject 'other art').
I say this not to defend the piece (my problems with it are entirely my own fault) but to show that when we look beyond the work itself, in search of hidden and presumably precious meanings, we can easily miss the obvious pleasures the pieces offer. If we think about Endgame as a meditation of death; we miss how funny it is. If we think of Hamlet as an exploration of the human mind; we forget that it's a fantastic story. If we treat Arthur Miller like a man who was discussing the American Dream; we forget that he told stories about fathers and sons. The play itself is not a blanket wrapped around its core truth. The play, itself, is the thing.
A writer may have a meaning. He or she may not. But meaning is not purpose, it's not validity, and it's not value. The wonderful thing about theater is that it is so many things; an argument, a poem, a happening, a tale, a joke. In my view, meaning is least of my worries as a writer. As an audience member, the less I concern myself with meaning, the more I experience of the better, richer pleasures of any novel, or poem, or painting, or play.
That's why I hesitate to discuss it. It's not because I think people should decide for themselves what the work is about. It's because there are much better things to talk about.
I'll note, as a sidebar, that the true intention of Isaac's a original post to was to ask how we can facilitate discussion about issues like this. How did I respond? Ironically, one might say.
___
Isaac posts a question about discussing the meaning of our work here. Good topic for a January day, I think. Here's a bit of the post.
Why are we so reluctant to discuss the meaning of our work?Often, I'm asked not only what a play is about, but why I chose to write it, how the subject matter relates to my personal experiences, and what I was trying to achieve by writing a play with a particular subject matter, or with a particular shape.
I'm reluctant to answer those questions. I've made a joke of the "subject matter" of my work ("They're all about my parents getting divorced!") as a way to deflect this. Which is not to say I don't have plays that feature divorce, or the loss of a spouse, or marriage. I don't, though, actually write about divorce. If I did, I would write frustratingly dull memoirs, or self-help books, or entries in a diary.
I can't speak for all writers or artists (and I know directors approach work differently) but I've come to enjoy and embrace writing without an agenda. I've said in the past that I like work that asks questions as opposed to gives answers. I suppose that's not entirely true either. Asking a question is a sort of rhetorical approach, a lawyer-ly one, to meaning. Instead of appearing didactic, we shape a pointed question. The result is the same: A play about friendship, or marriage, or divorce, or communism, or Hamlet.
My favorite artwork, though, is not about a subject. It's evocative.
Here is my favorite poem by Charles Simic:
Country Fair
for Hayden Carruth
If you didn't see the six-legged dog,
It doesn't matter.
We did, and he mostly lay in the corner.
As for the extra legs,
One got used to them quickly
And thought of other things.
Like, what a cold, dark night
To be out at the fair.
Then the keeper threw a stick
And the dog went after it
On four legs, the other two flapping behind,
Which made one girl shriek with laughter.
She was drunk and so was the man
Who kept kissing her neck.
The dog got the stick and looked back at us.
And that was the whole show.
What is the subject of this poem? I would argue that we lessen the entire experience by having that discussion. We miss the point. The poem is a painting.
Here is a piece of work that Pam recently posted on her blog, Phantasmaphile:
It's called "Heartland", and it's by Mike Cockrill.I love this piece. What is it about? What is it's meaning?
Certainly, there is a long tradition of theater that is about argument, reason, presenting a subject (Brecht, Arthur Miller, Ibsen) but there's no hidden agenda with those artists. They express their meaning plainly. They don't leave their message up to chance.
There are other pleasures in theater, and in any medium, than the successful transmission of message or meaning. There are deeper pleasures to be found in almost all plays than those that come from a better understanding of the writer himself or herself. Meaning is, in many ways, a red herring. People who watch work and don't understand the meaning immediately feel they are being insulted; those who feel challenged by "hidden meaning" become obsessed with the detective work. What's missed is can be (and this is not true in all cases) the original intention of the artist himself or herself. If the goal was create something musical, chilling, grotesque, shimmering, or even green or blue or red; that goal is bulldozed, ignored or overlooked if "meaning" is the Alpha and Omega of the theatrical interpreter, or experiencer.
Recently, during the second reading of my piece In The Great Expanse of Space there is nothing to see but More, More, More, I was asked by one of the actresses a simple question: why did I choose to use cancer as a motif? I was instantly defensive, apologetic, and eventually gave the answer to the question. The answer was pedestrian.
The play, though, is about an hour and a half full of language. It's frustrating, maybe still unsuccessful, and it features loops and repetitions and themes and odd juxtapositions. Still, though, it's called "The Cancer Play" by plenty of my colleagues and peers. I am not trying to say anything about cancer. The play is "meaningless;" but that doesn't mean it's purposeless. I don't listen to jazz music and wonder what it means. I don't look at Jackson Pollock paintings and mine them for their subject (unless you call their subject 'other art').
I say this not to defend the piece (my problems with it are entirely my own fault) but to show that when we look beyond the work itself, in search of hidden and presumably precious meanings, we can easily miss the obvious pleasures the pieces offer. If we think about Endgame as a meditation of death; we miss how funny it is. If we think of Hamlet as an exploration of the human mind; we forget that it's a fantastic story. If we treat Arthur Miller like a man who was discussing the American Dream; we forget that he told stories about fathers and sons. The play itself is not a blanket wrapped around its core truth. The play, itself, is the thing.
A writer may have a meaning. He or she may not. But meaning is not purpose, it's not validity, and it's not value. The wonderful thing about theater is that it is so many things; an argument, a poem, a happening, a tale, a joke. In my view, meaning is least of my worries as a writer. As an audience member, the less I concern myself with meaning, the more I experience of the better, richer pleasures of any novel, or poem, or painting, or play.
That's why I hesitate to discuss it. It's not because I think people should decide for themselves what the work is about. It's because there are much better things to talk about.
new untitled play by Kirk Wood Bromley
Opening tomorrow at the Access Theater Gallery Space is a new show by Kirk Wood Bromley. It's untitled. It's also FREE and therefore perfect for this economy.
costumes by Karen Flood
properties by Jane Stein
lights by Jeff Nash
stage management by Bettina Warshaw
assistant stage management by Shawn Laine
words and direction by Kirk Wood Bromley
____
Your beautiful presence is most humbly requested at Inverse Theater's new show being presented in association with The Access Theater*!
it has no title
it is at the Access Theater Loft Space (380 Broadway, 4th floor, Manhattan)
it is at 8 pm, Wed - Sat, January 7, 8, 9, and 10, 2008
it is FREE!!!
it has original songs and words and actions
it is about...
having body parts removed unsuccessfully
mooseknuckling your wanderlust
chicken tit
remembering (incorrectly) your first time
growing up under a 3 foot roof
feeling retarded
poems that encourage regrettable diddling
severe traumatic brain injuries
road trips thru the oysterbeds of yore
carving a hole in your father's heart and fucking it
...among other things that will challenge your ability to know and trust yourself.
We look greatly forward to entertaining you in the theater on these magical evenings of incredible togetherness and personal transformation!
reservations not required. first come first saved.
the actors are:
Anna Elwood, Anni Bruno, Annie Scott, Lora Chio, Michael O'Brien, Darius Stone, Joe Pindelski, Christopher Yeatts, Robert Laine, Timothy McCown Reynolds, Sarah Malinda Engelke, Vanessa Vivezza, Rachel Tiemann, Josh Hartung, Shawn Laine
music by John Gideoncostumes by Karen Flood
properties by Jane Stein
lights by Jeff Nash
stage management by Bettina Warshaw
assistant stage management by Shawn Laine
words and direction by Kirk Wood Bromley
Monday, January 05, 2009
A little more about how I'm related to Lizzie Borden
This is the gravestone of Edmond Freeman. (Born 1590 in England and died in 1682 in Sandwich, MA.) He was one of the nine founders of the town of Sandwich, and the Assistant to the Governor from 1640-1647, according to the gravestone.Reading a bit more about this, I located this interview with William Pavao.
LBVML: I understand that you are related to the Bordens. What is your relation to them and was this one of the reasons you became so interested in the case?
Actually, I did not know I was a blood relative of the Bordens until this year!! I happened to be researching Lizzie's genealogy when I noticed her 4th great grandparents were Christopher Gifford and Deborah Perry. I immediately recognized these names.
My 8th great grandmother, Peace Perry (married John Mumford) was the daughter of Edward Perry and Mary Freeman. Peace had a sister Deborah who married Christopher Gifford. I immediately began doing extensive research to confirm this and the relationship is documented.What a coincidence!! Some things are just meant to be.
Therefore, both Lizzie and I are direct descendants of Edward Perry and his wife, Mary Freeman. They are Lizzie's 5th great-grandparents and my 9th great-grandparents. This makes Lizzie and I 6th cousins four times removed!!!Edward Perry came from England as a boy. His family settled in Sandwich, MA. He was a leading Quaker at a time when the Quaker faith was not allowed in Massachusetts Bay Colony. He suffered much persecution for his religious convictions. Some other direct descendants of Edward Perry and Mary Freeman include Oliver Hazard Perry (hero of the Battle of Lake Erie during the War of 1812) and his brother, Commodore Matthew Perry (who opened trade between the United States and Japan).Mary Freeman was the daughter of Edmund Freeman. He was the founder of the town of Sandwich, MA.
I have read that Edmund Freeman was the first white settler on Cape Cod. He also was the Deputy Governor of Plymouth Colony under Governor William Bradford. His grave along with that of his second wife, Elizabeth are today sites of great importance in Sandwich. I am glad to be able to discuss these ancestors of the Bordens because they add richness and new depth to the Borden's genealogy. We have heard much about the Borden family background, but nothing about this significant branch of the family.
Obama's Stimulus Plan - Massive Tax Cuts?
Obama's proposal to help bolster the failing economy seems to come with massive tax cuts. On the surface, this seems like bad news. Bush's tax cuts were one of the many revolting misdeeds of his presidency; hearing about Obama's makes some wonder if the new boss is the same as the old boss.
I'm not some expert on tax policy. The thinking inside the Beltway seems to be that taxes are a more acceptable way to use federal dollars than direct spending on good programs. So far, that hasn't seemed to have worked out. Not all "tax cuts" are the same, though, and reading over the article, it appears as if the Obama plan is designed to overcome Republican opposition (tax cuts are like Republican catnip). It also appears that the plan leans more towards incentives for job creation and tax credits to lower-to-middle income families. Obama did promise a "net tax cut" on the middle class, so we shouldn't be shocked.
I'd prefer, and I think many of us would prefer, to see a plan that boldly lays out how the government is going to use its money to fund important new projects and initiatives, not just give backdoor incentives and tax relief. It's gotten us nowhere. Taxes as an engine of economic growth, from this layman's perspective, seem weak. They seem like a political football, more than a real solution. Which is why I'm relatively sure this is a measure taken to placate conservative opposition.
The Democratic Doctrine of Preemptive Surrender, though, continues to give me pause. If the Republicans won't vote for our ideal plan, let them actively vote against it. If they want to filibuster, let them stand up there and waste everyone's time. When did the threat of argument become a substitute for the argument itself?
I'm not some expert on tax policy. The thinking inside the Beltway seems to be that taxes are a more acceptable way to use federal dollars than direct spending on good programs. So far, that hasn't seemed to have worked out. Not all "tax cuts" are the same, though, and reading over the article, it appears as if the Obama plan is designed to overcome Republican opposition (tax cuts are like Republican catnip). It also appears that the plan leans more towards incentives for job creation and tax credits to lower-to-middle income families. Obama did promise a "net tax cut" on the middle class, so we shouldn't be shocked.
I'd prefer, and I think many of us would prefer, to see a plan that boldly lays out how the government is going to use its money to fund important new projects and initiatives, not just give backdoor incentives and tax relief. It's gotten us nowhere. Taxes as an engine of economic growth, from this layman's perspective, seem weak. They seem like a political football, more than a real solution. Which is why I'm relatively sure this is a measure taken to placate conservative opposition.
The Democratic Doctrine of Preemptive Surrender, though, continues to give me pause. If the Republicans won't vote for our ideal plan, let them actively vote against it. If they want to filibuster, let them stand up there and waste everyone's time. When did the threat of argument become a substitute for the argument itself?
Sunday, January 04, 2009
Looking back on 2008
Following are the first sentences from the first posts of each month in 2008. Just for fun and such.
January
I'm just back from New Orleans, visiting friends.February
The Arts. MIA.March
I finally saw August: Osage County.April
Had a full weekend of rehearsals, after we recorded the podcast. May
The agony of the food snob on Slate. June
I got to see Colorful World on its closing night. July
Love to you both! Congratulations!August
I've been working, for a year or so now, on a play adaptation of Bluebeard.September
John McCain chooses a right-wing, barely known Governor as his running mate and it appears to all sane human beings he did so because this Governor is a woman.October
As this week is a busy week, and there is so much in the News that is Fuck-It-All worthy, I am sticking my head in the sand.November
We often say this is the biggest election in our lifetimes.December
...and we're back. Well, back-ish.
Four years of blogging here
My first post on this blog was January 2nd, 2005. Four years (and two days) ago.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Farewell to 2008
2008 was the year that the United States elected our first African-American President.
I think that's worth a toast or two.
Happy New Year everyone!
I think that's worth a toast or two.
Happy New Year everyone!
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
New Sarah Ruhl Essays at Device
Read her torrent of rhetorical questions about hatred, chimpanzees, initials, scariness, "rhapsodic states of pure emotion" and other subjects...here.
Monday, December 29, 2008
Gran Torino Reaction
Saw Clint Eastwood's new film Gran Torino last night. I can't understand, at all, the generally positive reviews this film has received. It's not just a misfire, it's a mess. It's cliche, largely acted with almost comic ineptitude, and it's message is mystifying.
My friend Matt, who saw it with me, noted, also, that if Eastwood's character said the n-word as often as he says gook in this movie, it would be considered impossible to release in major markets. Somehow, there are racial epithets we've come to find comic, and others we accurately think of as racial slurs. Gran Torino says that some kinds of racism (the kinds that are married to squinty charming grumpiness) are more acceptable than other kinds. Eastwood's old war veteran with a heart of gold is about as realistic as life as a prostitute in Pretty Woman.
It's also remarkably tone deaf compared to the better, more nuanced conversations about race that are taking place in the popular culture these days. It's portrayals of poverty, immigration, gang violence, prejudice...they're naive, simplistic, childish. If this is Dirty Harry updated, maybe the lesson here is that Dirty Harry belongs to the 1970s.
My friend Matt, who saw it with me, noted, also, that if Eastwood's character said the n-word as often as he says gook in this movie, it would be considered impossible to release in major markets. Somehow, there are racial epithets we've come to find comic, and others we accurately think of as racial slurs. Gran Torino says that some kinds of racism (the kinds that are married to squinty charming grumpiness) are more acceptable than other kinds. Eastwood's old war veteran with a heart of gold is about as realistic as life as a prostitute in Pretty Woman.
It's also remarkably tone deaf compared to the better, more nuanced conversations about race that are taking place in the popular culture these days. It's portrayals of poverty, immigration, gang violence, prejudice...they're naive, simplistic, childish. If this is Dirty Harry updated, maybe the lesson here is that Dirty Harry belongs to the 1970s.
Butz in the Seats!
When I read about the hoopla about Norbert Leo Butz being thrust on-stage with the occasional script in hand or prompt, I think...
Slow news week!
This guy had no time to rehearse (especially by Russian Standards TM!) and he's working hard. It isn't a favor, it's his job, and it's not always an easy job. Tremendous pressure on the guy. Better him than me.
Bravo, Norbert Leo Butz! You have balls the size of Neptune!
That is all.
Slow news week!
This guy had no time to rehearse (especially by Russian Standards TM!) and he's working hard. It isn't a favor, it's his job, and it's not always an easy job. Tremendous pressure on the guy. Better him than me.
Bravo, Norbert Leo Butz! You have balls the size of Neptune!
That is all.
While I'm on the topic of "The Wrestler"
Darren Aronofsky has suggested publicly that he thinks professional wrestlers should be in the Screen Actor's Guild. Hey, SAG members...what do you think of that?
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Happy Holidays!
The year comes to a close for this blog. 2008 was a pretty good year for me: I wrote a couple of well-received shorts (The White Swallow, Brown Group, Last Words and Carbon Footprint); When is a Clock had a nice run mid-year and garnered lots of response; and I've got another publication on the way. I also completed, besides the shorter plays, the current draft of Bluebeard, and had two staged readings of In The Great Expanse of Space there is nothing to see but More, More, More. Worked with a grand mix of wonderfully talented people all year, too.
Not too bad, all told.
I'm looking forward to 2009. I feel like things are moving in the right direction.
Until then, I've got all sorts of Christmas-esque stuff to think about and take care of. My Mom's coming to visit. Trying to make sure everyone gets gifts. Also, I'm trying to make sure I actually take time off while I'm taking time off. Harder than it looks, it seems.
I hope all of you are enjoying the holiday season. I'll be back to blogging next week or so.
If you want to share any of your favorite moments (blogosphere or otherwise) of 2008 here...I'd be happy to read them in the comments. Otherwise, onwards and upwards!
Not too bad, all told.
I'm looking forward to 2009. I feel like things are moving in the right direction.
Until then, I've got all sorts of Christmas-esque stuff to think about and take care of. My Mom's coming to visit. Trying to make sure everyone gets gifts. Also, I'm trying to make sure I actually take time off while I'm taking time off. Harder than it looks, it seems.
I hope all of you are enjoying the holiday season. I'll be back to blogging next week or so.
If you want to share any of your favorite moments (blogosphere or otherwise) of 2008 here...I'd be happy to read them in the comments. Otherwise, onwards and upwards!
"The Wrestler" Response
I went to see The Wrestler this weekend. Instead of critiquing the ins and outs of the plot (which is serviceable, if cliche)... I think I'll begin my response to it with a few names:
"Ravishing" Rick Rude
The Big Bossman
"Mr Perfect" Curt Hennig
Eddie Guerrero
Chris Benoit
Owen Hart
Yokozuna
Davey Boy Smith (of The British Bulldogs)
Miss Elizabeth (Randy "Macho Man" Savage's valet)
Bam Bam Bigelow
Junkyard Dog
Andre the Giant
Flyin' Brian Pillman
That's a list of wrestlers who have achieved some public notoriety, or have wrestled for the WWE at some point. If you were a kid growing up in the 80s, chances are you've heard of some or all of these wrestlers.
All of the people listed above are dead. And all of them died before they reached 50 years old.
This isn't even a very big list. There are lots of lesser known wrestlers who have died at a young age that you've never heard of. There are also tons of wrestlers you've probably heard of who simply have fallen apart from drug abuse. If there was an epidemic like this of young deaths in baseball, or football, or even among Broadway dancers... we'd all be calling our Congressperson.
Let me tell you another story.
Bret Hart, for years, was my favorite wrestler. His character began as a part of a tag team, and his whole gimmick (besides wearing the outfit of his favorite hockey team, the Calgary "Hitmen"), was being an exceptionally good "wrestler." He wasn't the biggest guy, he wasn't the most impressive looking. He was charismatic, "over" with the fans, but he was the sort of guy that Vince McMahon would never put the belt on. Not in an era of guys like Hulk Hogan and The Ultimate Warrior.
Then, one day, Bret Hart won the belt. It was in 1992 at a "house" show (not televised). One morning he just showed up on Wrestling Superstars as champion. I can tell you I was not only thoroughly shocked, but thrilled. I always like Hart, and it was nice to see someone like him being given a chance to be the face of the company.
As an in-ring performer, Hart was brilliant. He was, maybe, the Robert DeNiro of pro-wrestling. The matches all played out with a sense of real competition and realism. You never felt like Hart was simply an entertainer (like Hulk Hogan or the Rock); you felt like he was really wrestling. He was a great actor. You always knew it was a show, but he was good at making you believe in it. That was his job, just like the job of any actor.
Hart had a rather public falling out with Vince McMahon in 1997, live during a pay per view (the now infamous "Montreal Incident"), which permanently broke the contract between the real world and pro wrestling that the two should never meet. Hart later moved on to WCW. During a match with then star Bill Goldberg (a flash in the pan, stiff, green wrestler who has since retired) Hart was kicked in the head and given a severe concussion. He will never wrestle again, because of this legitimate injury.
Hart's brother, Owen, was killed during a mishap with a ring entrance, again during a live televised event. This was years before Hart quit. It was a wrestling tragedy for the Hart family, and wrestling fans across the world. Owen Hart, for his part, was as good as his brother. I was in the crowd when Bret and Owen wrestled at Wrestlemania X: the best live match I've ever seen.
A protege of Owen and Bret Hart was Chris Benoit. Benoit, when Hart retired, took his place as the wrestler I followed most closely and cheered for the loudest. Benoit had started off training with the Harts, then moved to Japan, and wrestled all over the world, from ECW to WCW, before finally making it to the WWF in 2000. He was considered the best wrestler in the world by most "smart fans," but also not flashy, funny, or even particularly handsome. Still, he was totally beloved, his matches were always the best on any show, and the storyline that he was playing out, throughout his life, was similar to Bret Hart's: the best 'wrestler' in the world, in a world of showmen. As if to drive their connection home...when Bret Hart wrestled a "tribute match" to his brother Owen... he chose Benoit as his opponent.
Benoit fashioned his wrestling style after The Dynamite Kid, who was one of the British Bulldogs in the 1980s (the British Bulldogs were Canadian, and they feuded with the Hart Foundation in the wrestling storylines.) Dynamite Kid was small, tough, and impressive: his finisher was a sick looking flying headbutt from the top rope. He'd often walk off with nosebleed he clearly gave himself.
The Dynamite Kid is permanently in a wheelchair to this day. (He didn't die at 39 like his former tag team partner Davey Boy Smith, though.)
I was in the crowd at Madison Square Garden when Chris Benoit wrestled in the main event at Wrestlemania XX. He was wrestling in a three-way matched which also included Triple H (Vince McMahon's real-life son in law) and wrestling legend Shawn Michaels. Lots of fans, including myself, knew that the three-way had been put together because the company didn't think Benoit could sell PPV buys on his own. They were probably right.
But I will say this: when Benoit locked Triple H into his finishing hold, and the entire place went insane with happiness when he won, it wasn't because he won a "match." It was because the industry had finally acknowledged his excellence, his hard work, publically. The fact that his friend, and a person with a similar story, Eddie Guerrero, had won the "other" World Title (don't ask) on the same show meant that the two of them had reached the top of the business at the same time. When they hugged in the ring that night, everyone knew why: because of years of hard work inside a tough business. Fans were cheering professional accomplishment, because they knew just what it meant to these guys to win.
Eddie Guerrero died of heart failure in November 2005, just over a year after that moment.
Chris Benoit infamously went mad, killed his wife, his children, and himself in June 2007.
I say all this in order to express why I liked The Wrestler so much: it understands the world that it's occupying. Wrestling is full of real life professionals, striving to succeed, in an unhealthy place. They get killed, permanently injured, they work hard, and are treated like second-class citizens for the most part. The parallel the film draws between wrestlers and strippers is remarkably apt. Frankly, if it gets people to acknowledge the problems that exist in this bizarre industry, I'd be a very happy guy.
Wrestling is fake. So is "The Wire." So is "Star Trek." So is "The Little Mermaid." But...wrestling embarrasses people. They find it juvenille, silly, stupid, violent; something that kids care about. All the while, it's a multi-million dollar industry, with massive television presence and its a major part of the popular culture, whether we like it or not. It's also controlled almost entirely by a single family (barely in competition with the smaller independent promoters) and is entirely without union protection. Professional wrestlers are dealt with like independent contractors, who have to protect themselves from being crippled, whose careers are held together by a thread, and who have an excellent chance of dying young. It's notable, if you look at the credits of this film, that Ring of Honor (a real promotion) is all over this picture, but there's not a hint of help from the WWE. This isn't a story they want to see told. They're a monopoly, simply put, they've bought all their competitors, and wrestlers are at their mercy. Randy "The Ram" might be a bit of an exaggeration in places, but in some ways, it doesn't go far enough. His story is nowhere near as bad as Chris Benoits, for example. If anything, the real thing is no where near as heartwarming as The Wrestler is.
If there's something else that stands out to me about the film, outside the response I have as an actual fan of the product, it's that The Wrestler is one of the best movies about acting I've ever seen.
"Ravishing" Rick Rude
The Big Bossman
"Mr Perfect" Curt Hennig
Eddie Guerrero
Chris Benoit
Owen Hart
Yokozuna
Davey Boy Smith (of The British Bulldogs)
Miss Elizabeth (Randy "Macho Man" Savage's valet)
Bam Bam Bigelow
Junkyard Dog
Andre the Giant
Flyin' Brian Pillman
That's a list of wrestlers who have achieved some public notoriety, or have wrestled for the WWE at some point. If you were a kid growing up in the 80s, chances are you've heard of some or all of these wrestlers.
All of the people listed above are dead. And all of them died before they reached 50 years old.
This isn't even a very big list. There are lots of lesser known wrestlers who have died at a young age that you've never heard of. There are also tons of wrestlers you've probably heard of who simply have fallen apart from drug abuse. If there was an epidemic like this of young deaths in baseball, or football, or even among Broadway dancers... we'd all be calling our Congressperson.
Let me tell you another story.
Bret Hart, for years, was my favorite wrestler. His character began as a part of a tag team, and his whole gimmick (besides wearing the outfit of his favorite hockey team, the Calgary "Hitmen"), was being an exceptionally good "wrestler." He wasn't the biggest guy, he wasn't the most impressive looking. He was charismatic, "over" with the fans, but he was the sort of guy that Vince McMahon would never put the belt on. Not in an era of guys like Hulk Hogan and The Ultimate Warrior.
Then, one day, Bret Hart won the belt. It was in 1992 at a "house" show (not televised). One morning he just showed up on Wrestling Superstars as champion. I can tell you I was not only thoroughly shocked, but thrilled. I always like Hart, and it was nice to see someone like him being given a chance to be the face of the company.
As an in-ring performer, Hart was brilliant. He was, maybe, the Robert DeNiro of pro-wrestling. The matches all played out with a sense of real competition and realism. You never felt like Hart was simply an entertainer (like Hulk Hogan or the Rock); you felt like he was really wrestling. He was a great actor. You always knew it was a show, but he was good at making you believe in it. That was his job, just like the job of any actor.
Hart had a rather public falling out with Vince McMahon in 1997, live during a pay per view (the now infamous "Montreal Incident"), which permanently broke the contract between the real world and pro wrestling that the two should never meet. Hart later moved on to WCW. During a match with then star Bill Goldberg (a flash in the pan, stiff, green wrestler who has since retired) Hart was kicked in the head and given a severe concussion. He will never wrestle again, because of this legitimate injury.
Hart's brother, Owen, was killed during a mishap with a ring entrance, again during a live televised event. This was years before Hart quit. It was a wrestling tragedy for the Hart family, and wrestling fans across the world. Owen Hart, for his part, was as good as his brother. I was in the crowd when Bret and Owen wrestled at Wrestlemania X: the best live match I've ever seen.
A protege of Owen and Bret Hart was Chris Benoit. Benoit, when Hart retired, took his place as the wrestler I followed most closely and cheered for the loudest. Benoit had started off training with the Harts, then moved to Japan, and wrestled all over the world, from ECW to WCW, before finally making it to the WWF in 2000. He was considered the best wrestler in the world by most "smart fans," but also not flashy, funny, or even particularly handsome. Still, he was totally beloved, his matches were always the best on any show, and the storyline that he was playing out, throughout his life, was similar to Bret Hart's: the best 'wrestler' in the world, in a world of showmen. As if to drive their connection home...when Bret Hart wrestled a "tribute match" to his brother Owen... he chose Benoit as his opponent.
Benoit fashioned his wrestling style after The Dynamite Kid, who was one of the British Bulldogs in the 1980s (the British Bulldogs were Canadian, and they feuded with the Hart Foundation in the wrestling storylines.) Dynamite Kid was small, tough, and impressive: his finisher was a sick looking flying headbutt from the top rope. He'd often walk off with nosebleed he clearly gave himself.
The Dynamite Kid is permanently in a wheelchair to this day. (He didn't die at 39 like his former tag team partner Davey Boy Smith, though.)
I was in the crowd at Madison Square Garden when Chris Benoit wrestled in the main event at Wrestlemania XX. He was wrestling in a three-way matched which also included Triple H (Vince McMahon's real-life son in law) and wrestling legend Shawn Michaels. Lots of fans, including myself, knew that the three-way had been put together because the company didn't think Benoit could sell PPV buys on his own. They were probably right.
But I will say this: when Benoit locked Triple H into his finishing hold, and the entire place went insane with happiness when he won, it wasn't because he won a "match." It was because the industry had finally acknowledged his excellence, his hard work, publically. The fact that his friend, and a person with a similar story, Eddie Guerrero, had won the "other" World Title (don't ask) on the same show meant that the two of them had reached the top of the business at the same time. When they hugged in the ring that night, everyone knew why: because of years of hard work inside a tough business. Fans were cheering professional accomplishment, because they knew just what it meant to these guys to win.
Eddie Guerrero died of heart failure in November 2005, just over a year after that moment.
Chris Benoit infamously went mad, killed his wife, his children, and himself in June 2007.
I say all this in order to express why I liked The Wrestler so much: it understands the world that it's occupying. Wrestling is full of real life professionals, striving to succeed, in an unhealthy place. They get killed, permanently injured, they work hard, and are treated like second-class citizens for the most part. The parallel the film draws between wrestlers and strippers is remarkably apt. Frankly, if it gets people to acknowledge the problems that exist in this bizarre industry, I'd be a very happy guy.
Wrestling is fake. So is "The Wire." So is "Star Trek." So is "The Little Mermaid." But...wrestling embarrasses people. They find it juvenille, silly, stupid, violent; something that kids care about. All the while, it's a multi-million dollar industry, with massive television presence and its a major part of the popular culture, whether we like it or not. It's also controlled almost entirely by a single family (barely in competition with the smaller independent promoters) and is entirely without union protection. Professional wrestlers are dealt with like independent contractors, who have to protect themselves from being crippled, whose careers are held together by a thread, and who have an excellent chance of dying young. It's notable, if you look at the credits of this film, that Ring of Honor (a real promotion) is all over this picture, but there's not a hint of help from the WWE. This isn't a story they want to see told. They're a monopoly, simply put, they've bought all their competitors, and wrestlers are at their mercy. Randy "The Ram" might be a bit of an exaggeration in places, but in some ways, it doesn't go far enough. His story is nowhere near as bad as Chris Benoits, for example. If anything, the real thing is no where near as heartwarming as The Wrestler is.
If there's something else that stands out to me about the film, outside the response I have as an actual fan of the product, it's that The Wrestler is one of the best movies about acting I've ever seen.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Thoughts about Rick Warren
Obama's choice of Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration has sparked a lot of controversy, and rightly so. Warren comes from a religious tradition and culture that has some pretty bizarre views about the right to life and gay rights. In fact, he's remarkably off-base about those things. There are, though, ways in which he has broken with right-wing orthodoxy and promoted a more complex relationship with politics than "the left is always wrong." That's important. He's a doorway into a less divided America, and I think Obama knows that.
I think that the Times They Are A-Changin' when it comes to the voice of gay activism in this country. After Proposition-8, I think the world woke up to the last great civil rights battle in America... the battle for same-sex couples to not only have the same rights as others, but to be protected from hate.
Growing up Episcopalian, and working every day in the Episcopal Church (I work in an office that serves the Episcopal Church's finances, etc), I've seen just how terrifying that "out" gay people are to certain sectors of the population. But I've also seen just how fruitless their efforts really are. A handful of Episcopal Dioceses have broken from the great American Episcopal Church, primarily because of Gene Robinson. But the number of true believers in this cause is far smaller than the news coverage would show: compared to the number of self-identified Episcopalians, the number of now "Anglicans" is tiny. In fact, aging is a far greater threat to the Episcopal Church's future existence than is bigotry.
I see a similar problem of perspective here. Warren is a popular and populist priest, but he's there to support Obama. And Obama has publically stated his support for gay rights. Isn't it a larger concession of Warren's to attend, than it is for Obama to invite him? Could it not be considered a coup for gay activists that Warren is publically supporting a candidate that publically supports them?
What this is about, in the short term, is fear. We're afraid that this shows that Obama isn't as committed to the rights of same sex couples as he's said in the past. I don't think that's the case. I think he is, by publically stating his own support for same-sex couples, and then bringing Rick Warren to the table, winning the argument. If anything, Warren is conceding to Obama here, not the other way around.
Obama's message seems to be "Stop fighting the culture war and start having a cultural conversation." If we do this, in the long term, we may see the change we want. If we don't, we'll wind up propping up the dying far-right, just because we want someone to fight.
I think that the Times They Are A-Changin' when it comes to the voice of gay activism in this country. After Proposition-8, I think the world woke up to the last great civil rights battle in America... the battle for same-sex couples to not only have the same rights as others, but to be protected from hate.
Growing up Episcopalian, and working every day in the Episcopal Church (I work in an office that serves the Episcopal Church's finances, etc), I've seen just how terrifying that "out" gay people are to certain sectors of the population. But I've also seen just how fruitless their efforts really are. A handful of Episcopal Dioceses have broken from the great American Episcopal Church, primarily because of Gene Robinson. But the number of true believers in this cause is far smaller than the news coverage would show: compared to the number of self-identified Episcopalians, the number of now "Anglicans" is tiny. In fact, aging is a far greater threat to the Episcopal Church's future existence than is bigotry.
I see a similar problem of perspective here. Warren is a popular and populist priest, but he's there to support Obama. And Obama has publically stated his support for gay rights. Isn't it a larger concession of Warren's to attend, than it is for Obama to invite him? Could it not be considered a coup for gay activists that Warren is publically supporting a candidate that publically supports them?
What this is about, in the short term, is fear. We're afraid that this shows that Obama isn't as committed to the rights of same sex couples as he's said in the past. I don't think that's the case. I think he is, by publically stating his own support for same-sex couples, and then bringing Rick Warren to the table, winning the argument. If anything, Warren is conceding to Obama here, not the other way around.
Obama's message seems to be "Stop fighting the culture war and start having a cultural conversation." If we do this, in the long term, we may see the change we want. If we don't, we'll wind up propping up the dying far-right, just because we want someone to fight.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
On the other hand...
I would rather be shot in the d*ck than see The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Very excited to see...
Aronofsky's The Wrestler as I am an unabashed lifelong actual pro wrestling fan.
Tis the Season
Once again, it's time for giving. Before the end of the year, it's a perfect time to give a little something to your favorite small theater companies. As we're all focused on the state of regional theaters and the relative health of corporate donations... we shouldn't forget that the fortunes of smaller companies are unchanged.
Small companies fight for every opportunity, and make good use of every little bit of support, encouragement, and help. Just giving $25 to a theater company sends them a message that their work matters. And you can bet that a small donation (or a large donation) will be put to immediate use.
As I've been doing over the past few years, I'm going to suggest a few places that I'd love to see get a few of those gifts. (I encourage my fellow bloggers to do the same!) If you're reading this blog, chances are you work in the very world I'm describing. Giving a gift like this is a gift to your own community, a vote of confidence in the continuing health of small theater. For less money than you spend on after-show beer, you can make an easy, online gift to any one of these companies, or all of them, and it will make a world of difference.
Here are a list of incomplete suggestions. I'm sure I'll leave some companies out. This is just to get you thinking. In the end, everyone needs help, and appreciates your support.
You can give to them online here. I highly encourage you to do so. It's also, if this matters, the closest thing to supporting my own career, directly.
Nosedive Productions - the home of fellow blogger James Comtois. They've had a great year, producing Colorful World, Speed Demons, and Blood Brothers: The Master of Horror. A great team, inventive, and always producing a badass mix of pop culture and theatrical fun.
You can give to them online here.
The Brick Theater - C'mon. It's the BRICK! Give them money, or else.
Folding Chair Classical Theater Company - a company I became aware of this past year. I love their work - pared down, actor focused, ambitious. They did Cymbelline with 6 actors. All of it. If that's not worth a gift from you, I don't know what is.
Here's how to give to them online.
Flux Theatre Ensemble - They've had quite a year, which recently closed out with a repertory production of the full Angel Eater's Trilogy by Johnna Adams. Definitely a company I'll be keeping my eye on, and clearly a crew with their eyes on bigger and better things.
Give!
That's just a few. Who else should be getting some extra love this year?
Small companies fight for every opportunity, and make good use of every little bit of support, encouragement, and help. Just giving $25 to a theater company sends them a message that their work matters. And you can bet that a small donation (or a large donation) will be put to immediate use.
As I've been doing over the past few years, I'm going to suggest a few places that I'd love to see get a few of those gifts. (I encourage my fellow bloggers to do the same!) If you're reading this blog, chances are you work in the very world I'm describing. Giving a gift like this is a gift to your own community, a vote of confidence in the continuing health of small theater. For less money than you spend on after-show beer, you can make an easy, online gift to any one of these companies, or all of them, and it will make a world of difference.
Here are a list of incomplete suggestions. I'm sure I'll leave some companies out. This is just to get you thinking. In the end, everyone needs help, and appreciates your support.
-----
Blue Coyote Theater Group - my home for the past few years, and a fantastic smaller company that produces the work of many of your favorite playwrights. This past year, they produced my own play, When is a Clock; the presented Happy Endings; and they are currently presenting Philip Taratula's one-man show Call Me Anne. They also presented a reading of my newest play. They work their asses off; I see it every day.You can give to them online here. I highly encourage you to do so. It's also, if this matters, the closest thing to supporting my own career, directly.
Nosedive Productions - the home of fellow blogger James Comtois. They've had a great year, producing Colorful World, Speed Demons, and Blood Brothers: The Master of Horror. A great team, inventive, and always producing a badass mix of pop culture and theatrical fun.
You can give to them online here.
The Brick Theater - C'mon. It's the BRICK! Give them money, or else.
Folding Chair Classical Theater Company - a company I became aware of this past year. I love their work - pared down, actor focused, ambitious. They did Cymbelline with 6 actors. All of it. If that's not worth a gift from you, I don't know what is.
Here's how to give to them online.
Flux Theatre Ensemble - They've had quite a year, which recently closed out with a repertory production of the full Angel Eater's Trilogy by Johnna Adams. Definitely a company I'll be keeping my eye on, and clearly a crew with their eyes on bigger and better things.
Give!
-----
That's just a few. Who else should be getting some extra love this year?
Alexis Soloski on "The Big See"
Over at the Guardian Blog, Alexis Soloski writes about how to make America a nation of theatergoers. Or at least, see more plays than they do now, for fuck's sake.
UPDATE:
In service of equal time, George Hunka wrote his perspective on this same issue and comes to, unsurprisingly, a rather dire conclusion.
Take a look. Very good thoughts here.It might sound patronising, if not positively undemocratic, to suggest that people who don't want to see plays should be instructed otherwise. But that's precisely what the NEA proposed after its 2004 survey Reading at Risk disclosed that fewer than half of American adults read fiction or poetry. When the study noted that 4 million fewer Americans read fiction in 2002 than in 1992 (the same number who have apparently ceased attending drama), Gioia declared a "national crisis" and established the Big Read, a programme that sponsors literature-related activities in 400 communities.
Similar arguments could be made for drama. The idea that theatre enables catharsis is rather musty. But few would deny that the immediacy of live performance encourages empathy more immediately than television or film. Unlike reading or watching TV, theatre is a communal exercise, encouraging interpersonal exchange – if only at the theatre bar. A compassionate and socially adept populace should be as welcome as an active and independent-minded one.
The NEA already sponsors some theatre outreach, but why not launch a Big See?
UPDATE:
In service of equal time, George Hunka wrote his perspective on this same issue and comes to, unsurprisingly, a rather dire conclusion.
Monday, December 15, 2008
In the Great Expanse of Space Reading on Wednesday
For those interested, we're going to have an informal, free reading of a leaner, meaner version of In the Great Expanse of Space there is nothing to see but More, More, More at the Brick Theater on December 17th, 2008 at 7:30pm.
If you'd like to come check it out, drop me a line at mattfr - at - gmail.com.
If you'd like to come check it out, drop me a line at mattfr - at - gmail.com.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Question: Getting published
I got this in my inbox, from a friend and writer. I'll leave her name off the e-mail, and leave the question for the other readers.
"I don't know if you ever take suggestions about what to write about on your blog, but if you do, I'd love to hear from you and other readers about the process (and value?) of getting your plays published. I know that the conventional wisdom is that you shouldn't even bother submitting until your play has had a "major" production, but I'm not even sure what that means anymore. Are people actually getting published based on cold submissions, or do you need an agent? What experiences have people had with different drama publishing companies? Does being published actually lead to more productions of your work?
Those are some of my questions. I haven't made much of an effort trying to get my stuff published, and I feel like I could use some mentorship in the area from other "emerging writers" or whatever we're called who are actually doing it."
Well...I can't really offer any words of wisdom. I've been published a few times, and both of the plays that were published as stand-alone editions received excellent Showcase Code productions that had very good reviews in the NY Times. I'm sure that helped. I don't see that there's any trick to it other than working hard and sending scripts out and being persistent. I DO think the reviews matter, so if you're getting produced, even in a small venue, I think it's worthwhile to invest in a press agent that shows they can bring in reviewers, or lobby your producer to do so.
I don't have an agent (still! no! agent!) so I'm not entirely sure what an agent would add to the mix. I'm sure they'd be a help, but again, no experience with that.
I don't think, though, that everything I see published over at Playscripts.com, for example, has to pass a "major production" litmus test. I'm sure (and I only have my own intuition for this) that any company that makes its living licensing productions and selling books has to think about how any particular play would be marketable. Why, for example, would Playscripts pass up an excellent play for high school students or colleges simply because it's never been produced in New York? That wouldn't be very smart, if they make a lot of their income from high schools and colleges.
Not to imply that all decisions are profit-driven: I'm sure there are editors who find a text, love it, and champion it at a publishing house.
I would also say that getting a play published is certainly valuable, it doesn't automatically mean the play will sell. It just means you're in a better position to be read by those beyond the narrow confines of your community.
Any other thoughts from other playwrights out there? Or those in the industry? Or just...you know...anyone?
"I don't know if you ever take suggestions about what to write about on your blog, but if you do, I'd love to hear from you and other readers about the process (and value?) of getting your plays published. I know that the conventional wisdom is that you shouldn't even bother submitting until your play has had a "major" production, but I'm not even sure what that means anymore. Are people actually getting published based on cold submissions, or do you need an agent? What experiences have people had with different drama publishing companies? Does being published actually lead to more productions of your work?
Those are some of my questions. I haven't made much of an effort trying to get my stuff published, and I feel like I could use some mentorship in the area from other "emerging writers" or whatever we're called who are actually doing it."
Well...I can't really offer any words of wisdom. I've been published a few times, and both of the plays that were published as stand-alone editions received excellent Showcase Code productions that had very good reviews in the NY Times. I'm sure that helped. I don't see that there's any trick to it other than working hard and sending scripts out and being persistent. I DO think the reviews matter, so if you're getting produced, even in a small venue, I think it's worthwhile to invest in a press agent that shows they can bring in reviewers, or lobby your producer to do so.
I don't have an agent (still! no! agent!) so I'm not entirely sure what an agent would add to the mix. I'm sure they'd be a help, but again, no experience with that.
I don't think, though, that everything I see published over at Playscripts.com, for example, has to pass a "major production" litmus test. I'm sure (and I only have my own intuition for this) that any company that makes its living licensing productions and selling books has to think about how any particular play would be marketable. Why, for example, would Playscripts pass up an excellent play for high school students or colleges simply because it's never been produced in New York? That wouldn't be very smart, if they make a lot of their income from high schools and colleges.
Not to imply that all decisions are profit-driven: I'm sure there are editors who find a text, love it, and champion it at a publishing house.
I would also say that getting a play published is certainly valuable, it doesn't automatically mean the play will sell. It just means you're in a better position to be read by those beyond the narrow confines of your community.
Any other thoughts from other playwrights out there? Or those in the industry? Or just...you know...anyone?
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Think about this, why don't you
David Hare was asked by George Lucas to co-direct The Phantom Menace.
Monday, December 08, 2008
Call Me Anne - Reaction
This past week, I attended a performance of CALL ME ANNE at the Access Theater. Starring Philip Taratula, it's a one-man show based on the autobiography of Anne Heche.
I highly recommend it.
First of all, Taratula is brilliantly gifted and you really should come and see him before he's whisked away to stardom of some sort. There are just so many little moments in the performance that shine, as well as the to-be-expected vigorous moments that characterized any worthwhile one-man. Sure he plays a bunch of parts flawlessly and nailed Heche perfectly...but it's the little things that Taratula does right.
For example, there's a moment when he is, as Anne Heche of course, acting for the camera, taking direction, flirting between takes, and taking a cell phone call from Ellen Degeneres, whom Heche is stringing along. It's so deftly executed that you forget...how...very... hard... it is.
The play itself, though, isn't perhaps the straight up camp tribute/send-up you'd expect. Instead, the play moves between the expected mockery of this self-important starlet, and a rather difficult portrayal of someone who clearly has mental illness, in an industry that either ignores or absorbs this as eccentricity. The post show conversation was, shall we say, spirited.
Best to let you see for yourself. Get some tickets right away.
Sunday, December 07, 2008
Saturday, December 06, 2008
Friday, December 05, 2008
Ivo van Hove on New York Theater
"I think a lot of interesting artists are living in New York, and I think that really changes their art. When you see people like Peter Sellars have to come to Europe to get their work seen, that's really a pity. I think it's also because there are no subsidies in America, so you are totally dependent on economics. Economics ruin art...It's always very difficult, that combination, I think."
Read the rest of this interview on Gothamist.
Read the rest of this interview on Gothamist.
Thursday, December 04, 2008
Great Holiday Gift - A Little Fruitcake
If you're stumped for gifts to buy this holiday season, or just want a very good read, might I suggest A Little Fruitcake: A Childhood in Holidays? It's author is David Valdes Greenwood, a former professor of mine and a fantastic playwright.
David is one of the best writers around, and his work on the front-lines of the fight for civil rights that Proposition 8 put into focus for so many. Work like David's is still revelatory to many Americans (your relatives?) and that's why his books are not only entertaining, but important. His subjects tend to be pure
Synopsis:
For one
Sample Reviews:
"The perfect stocking stuffer…in the vein of David Sedaris."—The Today Show
"A little beauty of a book…Fun, funky, and fa-la-la-liscious, A Little Fruitcake is joyous reading for a joyous season."—
"David Valdes Greenwood has spun a silver-tinsel upbringing in a small
Links:
Order from Amazon
Order from Barnes & Noble
Order from Powells
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
In the Great Expanse of Space
Completed a new, shorter, meaner draft of that oddball text today, hopefully for a reading this month. Happy about that. More details to come.
Tonight, I'm seeing CALL ME ANNE at the Access. Looks like a great show!
Tonight, I'm seeing CALL ME ANNE at the Access. Looks like a great show!
Monday, December 01, 2008
Essay Questions for Bad Poetry
Today's edition of Essay Questions for Bad Poetry (see others here, here and here) features film star and all-around man-about-town Michael Madsen. Madsen is an accomplished poet. His work has appeared in Solider of Fortune Magazine, prison newsletters, and at Shakespeare & Company retailers. The poems have that hard-boiled style one might find at the bottom of a can of Old Milwaukee after a long day of phoning in a performance of a B-Movie.
He also has a collected works published. Buy it now!
His poem, for your educational enjoyment, is entitled Bullshit.
He also has a collected works published. Buy it now!
His poem, for your educational enjoyment, is entitled Bullshit.
BULLSHIT
by Michael Madsen
Mankind's refusal to accept the result of their own folly
The Superego that thinks they know everything
about everything...
Based on theory, right?
The end of the bullshit would be welcome!
The empty eyes you see everyday on TV
and the quest for validation,
But it's validation of ignorance.
Loss of love,
Loss of reason,
Loss of Leave it to Beaver.
Major Nelson had a Jeannie, but we don't.
Question
...and we're back
Well, back-ish. Monday morning. I assume we all feel the same way.
I like to assume you think like I do, oh invisible, imaginary reader.
I like to assume you think like I do, oh invisible, imaginary reader.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
