oh dear.

October 17, 2011 at 2:33 pm

I just tried to read this “interview” from ArtsBeat. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. It’s director/writer/actress Elaine May interviewing Ethan Coen (of the Coen Brothers) and Woody Allen to promote their new night of three one-act comedies, “Relatively Speaking.” All three (interviewer and both interviewees) have written one-acts for this special production, opening October 20th in New York at the Brooks Atkinson, and the “interview” appears to be a funny e-mail chain between them copied and pasted as it were into the New York Times. All three are trying desperately to be witty and flippant and weird (Woody Allen’s continual allusions to attractive women and/or sexuality seem creepy and wrong, considering both his age and his very public marital situation), and perhaps to make one another giggle, meanwhile the reader (me) is bored and rapidly losing respect for them and hope for myself.

I think the reason why I’m posting this is because I read it right after I saw that “Top Grossing Broadway Shows of This Week” is an actual section of ArtsBeat (and by “section,” I mean list of plays 1-10 with long, incomprehensable numbers next to them) and my general feelings and attitudes about successful theater are in a state of flux right now. Oddly enough, as I got more and more bored with the pompously self-referential May-Allen-Coen interview, I found myself looking for news about “Stickfly” on Broadway. I looked at pictures of the cast and of Lydia, and felt (simultaneously) profound worry and hope. Lydia is someone for whom I have the deepest respect and love, and her success is reaching new levels congruent to me (and a lot of us) being a student of hers. If I ever read an interview with her that turned out like this one, I think I would quit the theatre. It just makes me wonder if there’s an inevitable point–whether determined by length of career or success–where the artist becomes bigger than the work? Where the importance of the artist–how clever or charming or beautiful they can be outside of the work–overshadows the art? I certainly hope not.

By ccleary7 | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (3)

Feminist Zombie Fiends, REJOICE!

October 17, 2011 at 2:33 pm

Feminist zombie fiends REJOICE!  The Primitive Screwheads, a Bay Area horror theatre troupe is performing their parody ShEvil Dead this weekend in the San Francisco.

I am a lover of all things zombie.  I like rotting flesh and the appetite for brains.  One of my favorite pastimes is envisioning the inevitable zombie apocalypse, my weapon of choice (double-sided battle axe) and whom I would team up with (probably Simon Pringle-Wallace, he seems nimble).

Needless to say, when I read that the Screwheads created a parody of Evil Dead and Army of Darkness (utter classics), I was intrigued.  However, it is not because they are staging the story; there is already a musical adaptation.  It is due to their choice of making it an all-female cast.

Both the Evil Dead series and Army of Darkness center around one character.  Ash is a courageous, charismatic and dastardly good-looking hero.  His mission is to protect the living and annihilate the undead.  Throughout the films, the only women Ash meets are detestable zombies or damsels in distress, who then die shortly thereafter.  But the Screwheads, with their all-female cast turn Ash, the epitome of manly-manliness into a heroine.

However, here is the conundrum.  On their website, the creators refer to the female zombie-killers as “hot chicks”.  Are they empowering women, or exploiting them?  Are they using subversive marketing by luring audiences in with “hot chicks”, but then bombarding them with feminist theatre?  I don’t know.  I would have to see the show to really put in my two cents.  Personally, I think that female sexuality can be empowered by such terms, but the intent to empower needs to be there when referring to the heroine as a “hot chick”.

This story is particularly tantalizing to me after seeing The Lady Hamlet this weekend.  I want to know if the actress playing Ash is playing a man or a woman pretending to be a man, etc.  If the intent is to empower women, maybe it is more effective to go the Joss Whedon route and write a story about a female heroine instead of adapting a man’s story.  Nevertheless, I wish I could see it to evaluate their tactics or at least get sprayed with fake blood.

By cofuller | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (2)

Belly Dancers and Forty Year Old Men in Wigs

October 17, 2011 at 2:27 pm

I never truly appreciated the Paradise Rock Club until recently.  I used to feel disgruntled when I would look on their calendar and not see any of my favorite musicians.  I would think, “You’re a ROCK club, why don’t you showcase ROCK bands?”  Yet, now I am thanking them for their eclectic taste.  They host every kind of artist, from rock and roll, to hip-hop, to folk, to electronica to cover bands.  I am only now realizing the great service they are providing by being so open-minded.

This last month I have seen two concerts there.  The first was Led Zeppelin 2.  Now, Led Zeppelin is my favorite band.  I think they are (were) gods among men and I worship them for gracing the Earth with their innovative tunes.  I would do almost anything (even kill a man) for the chance to see the band play.  However, after John Bonham died in 1980, the band broke up because they could not and would not replace the drummer and Led Zeppelin never toured again.

Generally, I find cover bands embarrassing.  Typically, cover bands consist of middle-aged mega fans that can kinda sorta play the songs of whomever they are imitating.  I would always opt to spend the extra hundred dollars to see the real musical legends in concert over the wannabes.  However, that luxury is impossible when it comes to Led Zeppelin, so when I heard that Led Zeppelin 2 (arguably the best Zeppelin cover band) was coming to the Paradise, I bought a ticket.  I expected to hear my favorite songs played reasonably well by all right musicians.  BUT THERE WAS SO MUCH MORE!

I must admit that I laughed out loud when four forty-something men in wigs, chiffon, and bell-bottoms came onstage.  But then they busted out some serious talent, not only musically but also theatrically.  Notably, the fake Robert Plant had it down.  He had every gesture, every expression just right.  It was evident that these men put in a great amount of work to not only sound like the band, but to be the band.  What started out as a huge joke to me, ended up moving me.  I got to pretend I was seeing my favorite band.

Then last week, Molly and I took our underclassmen dates to a concert they wanted to see.  I would never, ever in a million years had bought myself a ticket to an electronica concert had I not been deeply persuaded by true fans.  I honestly assumed I would hate it.  “Drum machines have no soul,” I thought.  “How is it a live show if it’s through a computer?”  Yet, I was floored by the energy and the soul behind these musicians.  The first artist drummed on a shopping cart and used projection.  Beats Antique played violins and saxophones.  I was particularly excited when they brought out their belly dancer.  It was not just music, it was performance art.

In these last few weeks, this small club just down the street has revolutionized what I believe is a concert.  It can be more than rock and more than an original lineup.  Most importantly, it can be more than music.

By cofuller | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (1)

Theatre and Technology? The Dawning of a New Era…

October 17, 2011 at 11:53 am

With the recent passing of a genius, it seems only fitting that theatre artists around the world would join together to tell the story of a brilliant man who changed a generation. Off broadway, The Public Theatre has set out to produce The Agony and Ecstacy of Steve Jobs. This play, which will open today, October 17th, 2011, stars Mike Daisey as both the creator of this project and the sole performer. Daisey utilizes his wit and clever comedy to tell the story of the most important icon in the world of technology. He explores all of the information about Jobs' trips to China as well as the creation and production of the world famous iPod, iPad, and of course, the iPhone.

Though it may seem to be a surface level piece about the life and times of the late Steve Jobs, it also addresses where the human race stands at this point in time. It explores the relationship of kids, teenagers, and adults and their obsession with technology and electronic devices.

I was incredibly moved by this small article about the up and coming production because I really feel that it embraces the direction that the arts is moving in. I think it is so important to embrace where we are moving scientifically and electronically...Nobody wants to get left behind...

http://theater.nytimes.com/show/33426/The-Agony-and-the-Ecstacy-of-Steve-Jobs/overview

By laynek | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

Sarah Jones: How many people can we be?

October 17, 2011 at 8:14 am

Sarah Jones: One woman, eight hilarious characters

This is yet another amazing TED talk. Sarah Jones is an incredible performer based in New York. Her one woman show, Bridge and Tunnel, won a TONY in 2006. She's incredibly talented and also an amazing human rights activist. However, the main reason I'm posting this video is to examine some of the questions she brings up in her work. This video is obviously the work of incredible talent. However, she makes the point that all these people exist. Do they exist in the real world? Have you met them before? Or do they exist somewhere inside, waiting to be lured from their cave? For actors, these are poignant questions to ask. When we become a character, are they floating in the universe, waiting for a body to assume? Or are they dashing about our insides, waiting only for the magnet that pulls them out? But more importantly, I think Sarah Jones' work asks us to embrace the full human experience in ourselves. What would happen if every Jew in Israel had to play a Palestinian for a day? And vice versa? Is there greater understanding to be gained by fully investing in humans totally different from us? I would say there is, and I'd guess Sarah Jones would too. Imagine the revolution that would happen if we all played someone else for a day.

By alassar | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (2)

The Value of Fantasy vs. Reality

October 16, 2011 at 6:00 pm

This article from one of my favorite sites, io9, sparked my interest. It's not about theatre per se, but I see many connections between this discussion of literary styles and what we wrestle with daily regarding different theatrical genres.

Excerpt:

People often charged that these works are escapism, merely a way for people to avoid reality. His response to that attitude: "In fact, the fantastical worlds that are depicted in these books are not fantasies in a psychological sense, where you can have whatever you want. These are worlds where the problems are very real and you're encountering problems that are recognizable from the real world in a transfigured form."

"One of the things about working with fantasy or surreal or even satirical or super-real material is you are creating a narrative in which there is never just a single reading. There's always another level moving around below the surface...."

By Ilana Brownstein | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (1)

It Came From Kuchar and I Love it!

October 16, 2011 at 2:47 pm

This week, I watched a wonderful documentary directed by Jennifer Kroot called "It Came From Kuchar," which chronicles the life and work of famous Underground film artists George and Mike Kuchar.  George Kuchar, the more famous of the duo, sadly died on September 6th of this year, having created over 200 films and having taught and inspired four generations of filmmakers at the San Francisco Art Institute.

The Kuchar brothers began making their films on their aunt's 8mm camera.  After this initial period of creation, they notably continued creating films with low-budget, commercial equipment.  What I find amazing about their films is the artful use of low-fi techniques to talk about hi-fi concepts.  Most mainstream filmmakers use high-tech equipment to portray life in a "realistic" way.  The Kuchar brothers' cinematography is, in contrast, absolutely absurd.  Reflecting on the 1950's melodramas they were exposed to as youths, they used jump cuts, campy costuming, monstrous makeup designs, hyperbolic sex scenes and feces (on occasion) to communicate their concepts and queer viewpoint.  For a more familiar reference point, John Waters, who appears in the documentary, uses similar techniques.

After watching the documentary, I was able to find time to watch one of their most famous short films, "Hold Me While I'm Naked," and I think it's fantastic.  The images, sound and acting techniques work symbiotically to tell an avant-garde, non-narrative tale.  In other words, the dramaturgy adheres to the world of the film, which reveals the queer, self-conscious director's struggle to exist and make art.   The documentary can be played instantly on Netflix and "Hold Me While Im Naked" is on youtube along with clips of several of their other films!

By sbmeyers | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

Union Non-Occupation

October 15, 2011 at 8:09 pm

I just found an article on Backstage (which I found quite interesting that they posted this) about how contrary to what the Writer's Guild has done, the 3 actor's unions (SAG, AFTRA, and AEA) are not taking any sort of stance on the Occupy Wall Street Movement. Each Union stated their views of individual freedom and expression, and that their main concern was supporting and looking out for union members, no matter what. "Although AFTRA has not endorsed the Occupy Wall Street protests, we are supportive of the AFL-CIO's work on the underlying issues related to jobs and the economy," said Tom Carpenter, AFRTA's PR director. And although I do really support and agree with the Occupy Wall Street movement on a personal level, I do have to say that I really appreciate what the actor unions are doing. I know, I KNOW many actors, theatre people, and performs fall under the 99% category, and probably make up the majority of each of these unions, but I really like that the unions are keeping their image open to both sides alike. I sometimes (well, a lot of the time) feel like "AGH! NO ONE UNDERSTANDS ME AND MY COMMUNITY AND WHAT WE DO," and I think that these unions taking a neutral stance really opens up people's minds to the thought that everything theatre and tv can be more than just crackpot liberal. It is the individual's right and responsibility to express themselves, not a union's. And thank god these unions still believe and practice that. Can you imagine being a part of some union and having them endorse and support something you totally TOTALLY don't believe in? Regardless of the cause, I think a neutral stance is a very, very smart thing to do.

http://www.backstage.com/bso/content_display/news-and-features/e3if315d8d581fbd92cc657d5fa55ceb6d9

By bsands91 | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

Asking the “right” question

October 15, 2011 at 1:06 pm

When researching venues for my imaginary Antigone production, I came across an article in the NY times Arts Beat blog about dangerous political theatre. Ben Brantley had written an article in January about a production he saw at the Under the Radar Festival in NYC by the Belarus Free Theater. They did a production of Being Harold Pinter, and Brantley was commenting on how similarly the events of the play seemed to the lives of the actors in a highly censored, dangerous political environment such as Belarus. The members of the Belarus Free Theater Company were using the events of Pinter's play to comment on the current political turmoil in their home country. I quote, "The idea of theater as an act (and an instrument) of political defiance is a strange one these days to most Americans, for whom plays are largely thought of (if they are at all) as an occasional diversion" (Brantley). He asked his readers "when was the last time you saw a truly dangerous piece of political theatre"?

What interested me was not so much the article, but rather the first comment made on it by American playwright Bernard Pomerance, who I'd never heard of before then. He clearly offered that perhaps Mr. Brantley was asking the wrong question. He went on to say that dangerous political theater seen from the comfort of NY is easy to applaud, whereas the same production in Belarus would not be applauded, but censored, condemned even. Mr. Pomerance said that perhaps the question to ask is "when was the last time dangerous political theatre was promoted and supported in the concerned political environment?" He went on to make the point that theatre critics and artists can easily look back on theatrical events such as Waiting for Lefty and productions by The Living Theatre in the sixties, with praise and admiration for the bravery of the theatre artists in their own time. But when was the last time an effort like such was applauded and promoted in its own time?

"I am never optimistic about political theater itself in a comfortable setting, and a lot of it seems to be more anger-energy than skill to me...But I would seriously encourage you and any other interested critic to do the obvious: when you are confronted with a play about political issues, springboard off it to deal with the reality itself. Look into it and encourage others to. Stop being fearful of being a citizen as well as an employee of a publication."  - Bernard Pomerance.

Ben Brantley's applause of Being Harold Pinter educated me about the courage of the Belarus Free Theatre, but Mr. Pomerance's words left me thinking what I could do about it as a theatre artist.

"When Political Theatre Feels Truly Dangerous"

By lehuggin | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

La Traviata, Salzburg, 2005

October 14, 2011 at 8:30 pm

Watch this, it gets good at 1:45

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDriBd2dCbo&feature=related

In 2005 the Salzburg Festival put on a production of Verdi's La Traviata that was unlike any before it. Directed by Willy Decker, it took an opera famous for its lavish decadence and stripped it down to the necessities.

I've seen La Traviata three times in my life, once at the San Francisco Opera, once at the Metropolitan Opera, and once at Arizona Opera. Three different regions, astoundingly similar productions. All of them were done as period pieces and all three of them had a monstrous chandelier looming above the singers heads as well as sets and costumes so extravagant that the eye was saturated before the ear.

Willie Decker's production is fearless. It hides behind nothing. It lays bare the music, the story, and the acting for the audience to feast upon. In order to achieve this, he made some immensely unpopular decisions. He cut all the aria climax high notes. His singers are talented, and could easily go the octave up, as has been the custom for decades. They decided though, that it didn't serve the story they were telling to stop the momentum for the customary diva moment. He also cast up and coming singers in roles that are usually reserved for older, more established singers. Anna Netrebko and Rolando Villazon worked on the opera using the techniques of Stanislavsky and Gritovwky. They created an incredibly physically active and emotionally energetic piece with Decker. If you listen to the recording (operatic recordings are usually edited to perfection) you can hear them gasping for breath and turning notes into screams or growls.

This infuriated some critics and audiences, but mostly it was received with explosive enthusiasm. This production was sold out before it opened and over the course of the run the waiting list became long enough to sell it out five times over. I think the opera community was starving for this

I love opera. I listen to it all the time. But I rarely go see it because I dread the boredom and the frustration I experience. I always find myself asking, "why does it have to be like that?" I don't understand why opera has to be stagnate. This production was the answer to my prayers. It is fluid and energetic. It is revolutionary yet classic.

They are reviving it this year at the Metropolitan Opera in NY. The singers are different, but it's the same production concept. Lets hope it's as fresh as it was in 2005 when it changed Opera forever.

By sophiegr | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

Never Say Never

October 13, 2011 at 10:52 am

I found an article on the Guardian (UK) that struck me from its title alone: "Never say never: why theatre critics should keep an open mind." It was written in response to a NY Times ArtBeat article about a critic's public declaration to never see work by Adam Rapp ever again. I initially read the article, but couldn't form my thoughts. When I found this article, it clarified things for me.

Upon reading the title, it immediately raised the idea that actors, directors, and designers should never insist that they do not do one type of show. When someone refuses to do a show they deem as outside of their realm, they're missing out on something that they don't realize. Michael Billington talks about his experience as a critic and having someone ask him to not review anymore of their works. However, the playwright doesn't realize what a diservice they would be doing to themselves. Without that opinion of "this didn't work" or "that didn't make sense," how does the playwright know what they maybe should consider and think differently about next time they write? Billington has a quote that everyone should remember "One of the key qualities of a critic is the endless capacity to be surprised." This should be something everyone remembers and thinks about before turning a project down because it isn't what they normally do. Variation on a theme leads to a monotony. Surprise yourself. Do something different. Maybe you'll discover something new and exciting that motivates you.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/theatreblog/2011/oct/10/theatre-critics-keep-open-mind

By jswolf | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

Slowly Emerging as a Theatrical Force

October 11, 2011 at 8:26 am

This past summer, I was fortunate enough to work as an artistic intern for a theatre company that used to go by the name of X Repertory Theatre. However, when I was there, this special theatre company was in the midst of a transition. They were looking to move on to bigger and better things, and I am so grateful I got to be a part of their new ventures.

Over the next couple of years, they are looking to emerge as a prominent theatre festival, much like Oregon Shakes, the Berkshire Theatre Festival, etc...What sets them apart? They boast a teaching theatre, a conservatory of sorts. While it is only a certificate program now, they are looking to find a neighboring university that will offer accreditation as a sort of MFA program.

The reason I was so inclined to write about them this week on the blog was their use of new technology and social networking for both artistic and self promotion. They have been using facebook and twitter to their advantage. It's wonderful for me, as a theatre artist, because I am able to keep myself in the loop (so I can hopefully be a large part of their future endeavors elsewhere...). They use facebook in order to release important information about their growing company. This week, after much anticipation, they have released their new emblem. I was so excited to see it pop up in my feed earlier this week and so proud that I was a part of a company that is so intent on moving forward in the theatre world.

http://myemail.constantcontact.com/More-Than-A-LOGO---A-Vision-of-Artistic-Possibilities---.html?soid=1106396447670&aid=ER1BJvIDPOY299035_256205621087835_214412985267099_663679_1903660210_n

By laynek | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

‘Occupy’ Through Art

October 11, 2011 at 12:15 am

293996_2113717602567_1234470118_32130256_44438668_n

When it comes to my taste in music, I tend to be stuck in the 40's. On any given day, in any given mood, my ipod is circling through hundreds of jazz tracks and very seldom do change it. That's not to say that I don't listen to other genres of music, I'm a huge Black Keys, Elliott Smith, and Janis Joplin fan, but when it comes to most contemporary music, I'm at a loss.

This weekend, I went to my very first 'electronica' show at the Paradise Rock Club right down the street. The tickets weren't too expensive, and Chloe and I were treating some lovely sophomores to a night on the town. I wasn't really looking forward to the show, as it was not something I predicted to enjoy given my antique taste palate. However, what I found was that there is an underground movement of politically infused electronica that is changing the youth who listen to it.

With the Occupy: Wall Street movement in full swing this week across the nation, one has to consider the origins of the protests. Millions of young middle class Americans are standing up together against our flawed capitalistic system, big banks, and our government's laissez-faire attitude. This movement has been spawned by social media, videos and blogs, and (what I learned on Saturday) music. The opener for the band we were seeing was called DJ Philistine. And on top of being a crazy amazing DJ, he was inspiring. Behind his set up there were projections of modern commercial consumerism that played and changed with every downbeat. He told the crowd he was from Barcelona and that earlier this year they had a movement similar to the one we're having now. Thousands of Barcelonians crowded the streets in peaceful protests against the failing government, and through his show, he was attempting to spread the word. The fact that Philistine was so successful in communicating this message to a group of young American electronica lovers (at one point he shouted "We had our time, now this is your time! Occupy Boston!" to which the crowd responded with resounding cheers) is amazing to me. The power of music, the power of art, can be used for igniting a flame within people and fueling a politically active fire.

Not only did I walk away with the inspiration to create change through art, but also with a greater appreciation for the contemporary music movement. Perhaps there will be a few new tracks to add to my usually constant jazz playlist.

By mcherzog | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

Borrowing or Stealing?

October 10, 2011 at 11:34 pm

Having just started reading "Arts Beat" on a regular basis, tonight I found an article titled "Beyonce Accused of Plagiarism Over Video." Immediately, I thought, "They finally called her out for using Fosse's choreography in 'Single Ladies.'"  As I began to read the article, I found that there was no mention of Fosse's movement at all.  Instead, author James C. Mckinley Fr. was referencing "Countdown," a new video which directly "borrows" movement from Anne Teresa De Keersmaeker's work from the 1980's.  Having a familiarity with De Keersmaeker's work (she is a famous post-modern choreographer who runs P.A.R.T.S. in Belgium), I was surprised that a pop idol like Beyonce would be influenced by her non-commercial/conformist art.  Nonetheless, I found myself asking questions about the process of "borrowing" in art making.

The obvious question here, for me at least, is what can be identified as plagiarism of movement?  The concept of "borrowing" is a major compositional tool taught in dance-making.  When does something borrowed cross the line to engender a drastic change in terminology, especially in movement?  Wouldn't that mean every plie and pirouette is stolen from Louis XIV?  I think this is something artists struggle with constantly, especially in dance.  In this case however,  this is not just an issue of movement replication but also of cinematographic copying.  The Anne Teresa De Keermaeker work is "Dance for Camera," which is an art unto itself.  The shots in Beyonce's video, which are compared to the Belgian choreography in a youtube clip at the top of the article, are starkly similar.

The inspiration of the Belgian choreography could have, in my mind, been abstracted rather than directly replicated.  Many artists understand how to reference work without "stealing" it. On the other hand, many artists have gotten away with "stealing" without penalization or even notice.  I think it's safe to assume that most Americans are unaware of Anne Teresa De Keersmaeker's work.  Until she was forced, Beyonce did not acknowledge her international inspiration.  This act may be understood as flattery by some artists, but in no way does that excuse disrespect.  I remember similar to points made by Felicie Hardison Londre in relationship to dramaturgical plagiarism.  If credit were paid to the origin and originator of the crafting, this probably wouldn't have become such a problem.

Inevitably, the integrity of the commercial spin does not hold weight.  The reality is that the original artwork has a completely contrasting dramaturgical history.  Anne Teresa, talking about her work the '80's that nfluenced "Countdown," states:

"In the 1980s, this was seen as a statement of girl power, based on assuming a feminine stance on sexual expression. I was often asked then if it was feminist. Now that I see Beyoncé dancing it, I find it pleasant but I don’t see any edge to it. It’s seductive in an entertaining consumerist way.”

Having watched Beyonce's music video, I can see what isn't working.  In Keersmaeker's work, angsty, post-modern dancers drive a percussively uncomfortable dance juxtaposing freedom with restraint.  In Beyonce's interpretation, she the movements are sewn into a well-manicured fabric of mainstream femininity (highlighting "bootylicious" dancing).  The work, therefore, loses its raw sensuality in exchange for a hypersexual, overly polished exacerbation of mainstream media and culture.  The moments in history are completely different, as are the artists who are making the works.  This could provide evidence to support Beyonce's innocence.  The moments in Beyonce's piece she "stole" appear amongst other non-related moments and must viewed differently by her audiences.  Regardless if it is or is not plagiarism, Beyonce's video is unsuccessful in its artistic attempts.  Still, this is an opinion I may not share with others, nor may it be of concern to them, but after all, we only learn by sharing.

By sbmeyers | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

Tim Walker, and, Not Feeling Guilty For What I Like.

October 10, 2011 at 10:03 pm

As I was trying to think of what to post this week, I found myself searching for something impressive. I was talking to a friend trying to explain what the assignment was, and they innocently asked, "well, what do you like?" I, of course, immediately responded that the only things I read on the web were "stupid," or, "not art." Then I looked at my browser history to find out what I did like. Facebook, Entertainment Weekly, and a couple of other mundane websites came up. But what I found out is that I spend a lot of my time looking at beautiful things that bring me joy. The Sartorialist, for instance, is a blog site filled with pictures of people all over the world who dress impeccably and create art everyday via expressing themselves (their thoughts, opinions, aesthetics, etc.) on their bodies with their clothes. Then I found Tim Walker's website, who is a fashion photographer for Vogue and budding filmmaker. I read this article/interview about/with him when his first 20-minute short film was coming out. As I re-read it tonight searching for something to post about, I kept thinking, "this isn't smart/artsy/interesting/thought-provoking enough." But it IS. It's what I find interesting and beautiful. I encourage everyone to read the article and flip through his pictures and take time to think about how people create art even in the commercial world. I also encourage everyone to embrace what they love and what brings them joy and what they consider to be art, even if it's not performed 8 times a week in a dark theater.tim walker 1

By ccleary7 | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (1)

My Tehran For Sale

October 10, 2011 at 9:15 pm

Marzieh Vafamehr was sentenced to 90 lashes and one year in prison this Saturday, following her starring role in My Tehran For Sale,which cast her native country of Iran in a "negative light."

Covertly filmed in 2009 in Iran and produced in Australia, My Tehran For Sale premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival. The film is largely based on Vafamehr's own life and struggle as a theatre artist in Iran. Indeed, her character (the protagonist of the film) is arrested and beaten for behavior considered "too Western" and banned from all theatrical endeavors. Vafamehr now faces a similar charge to the character she portrayed.

In the film, Vafamehr's character is depicted with a shaved head and without a hijab (the traditional Islamic head-scarf that covers the head and neck) and engaging in drug use. These aspects of the film caused it to be banned before its release in Iran, but Vafamehr was arrested this July after illegal copies of the film were found to be circulating. By sentencing Vafamehr to 90 lashes and a year in prison, the Iranian government has effectively proved the point of My Tehran For Sale, rather than quashing what they perceive as anti-Islamic propaganda.

Whether knowingly or not, Vafamehr has made close to the ultimate artistic sacrifice, risking her life for her art, to portray-- as the trailer for the film reads--"The voice of an unheard generation." It is my hope that this beautiful contribution will not go unnoticed, that Vafamehr's voice will not go unheard.

Marzieh Vafamehr in "My Tehran For Sale."

Marzieh Vafamehr in "My Tehran For Sale."

By geawill | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

oh, what a world, what a world

October 10, 2011 at 8:20 pm

last chanceI went to New York this weekend for my sister's birthday and we decided to have a get together on the roof of her apartment to watch the sunset.  As we were baking in the heat, we suddenly saw a plane writing something across the sky.  It wrote "Last" and then we tried to guess what it would be, such as, "Last day" "Last chance" "Last Laugh" and so on.  It got to "Last Chan" so we searched "Last Chance across New York sky" and sure enough, there was an artist behind it, or under it.  We found out that it was artist Kim Beck, who chose the phrases "Last Chance", "Lost Our Lease" and "Now Open" to comment on the faltering economy.  Now I fully support and respect any and all artistic expression, but something irked me about this smoky sky show.

So I did some research to see what other people thought of the event.  Most people who responded to it (mostly all through Tweeter) were at first terrified by the phrase "Last Chance", fearing it as another terrorist attack.  Beck commented on her art and how she didn't want people to feel it was an attack, placing the show in October to avoid any connection to 9/11.  This reminded me of how we have to think about our audiences for our antigone projects, and who we think needs to see the work.  Along with this, I think it is important to think about who doesn't need to see the work.  I feel like Beck could have thought about her audience a little more than she did, and the repercussions 9/11 had on any airplane too close to the city, let alone one scribbling cryptic messages in the sky.  In an article I read, it mentioned how the plane was financially supported by city and state public funding and that Beck was not paid for the project.  This struck a nerve in me because I don't understand why this project was felt to be so necessary by the city or public, when the public didn't even understand.  I felt the work was underwhelming for such a grand gesture, and felt it more useful to focus their finances on a more worthy project.  Because in the end, I do think that people were  too frightened by the concept to actual understand what Beck's initial intentions were.  Beck said that the Wicked Witch of the West's  "Surrender Dorothy" message over Oz inspired this project.  The ozians and New Yorkers seemed to react to the message the same way and were with out a doubt left trembling in their boots.


By ofine | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

Frank Langella On Acting, Aging And Being Very Bad

October 10, 2011 at 8:15 pm

Gotta love NPR and their theater interviews. Frank Langella gives insight into the challenges and benefits of playing characters with a serious lack of redeeming qualities, and provides a careers worth of advice in only three succinct phrases.

I'm happy I ran into this article at this particular point because of the examinations of Antigone we've been having in class (not to mention my own personal challenges). Both the original version (regardless of translation) and the various adaptations have had some truly unsavory roles. In particular, I was having trouble with the Governor from Tegonni. The man is written as an absolute monster,  and I couldn't help thinking over and over how daunting it would be to direct or act such a part. In playing the villain in the past, it's been my own tendency to downplay the evil, turning the part into comedy as a way to defend myself from my fear of the character itself. What Langella has to say on this matter was helpful:

"I have to see it all from his point of view," Langella says. "I can't judge him. I can't say, 'Oh, how terrible of him to do this, wink wink, let me find a way to soften what he's doing.' 'Cause when you're inside yourself, no matter what you are, you believe in what you're doing. You don't say, 'I just screwed somebody over in business. ... I'm a really mean person.' You lie to yourself and tell yourself all the reasons why it's OK for you to do what you do."

It's a fascinating look into human nature and an important lesson for any aspiring actor. Maybe it's something I've known subconsciously all along, but to see it in such simple terms did a lot to clarify the concept. To play at being evil is one thing, but it is something else entirely to internally justify the evil actions one's character takes. From the villain's point of view, he or she is not the villain, but the hero of their own story.

Listen to the interview and remember:

The cathartic possibility of the theater needs nothing more than the actor and the stage.

Mean it.

Leap empty-handed into the void.

By atsiegel | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

The Power of the Puppet

October 10, 2011 at 5:53 pm

I took a trip to NYC this weekend and was fortunate enough to get tickets to see War Horse at the Lincoln Center. (The theatre just recently started a new discount program called LincTix in May and it allows 21-35 year olds to get $30 tickets to any of their shows --membership is free!). If you guys haven't hear about War Horse then I'll give you a quick overlook. The play started off in London and was first produced on Broadway about a year ago. Adapted from a children's book, War Horse is, simply put, the story of a young boy, Albert, and his relationship with his horse, Joey, amidst the tension of World War I.

The incredible horses, which were created by Handspring Puppet Company *check them out*,  are operated by three puppeteers (the head, heart and hind). Let me just tell you how unbelievably magical these puppets are to watch. The details that must have been painstakenly put into the creation of the horses along with the highly specific movements of the puppet on stage are unlike anything I've seen. The simple realistic breath of the horse was enough to give in to the illusion of this large mammal to exist in a theatre. The show was enthralling, passionate and inspiring. Everyone should try and see this show next time they are in New York.

It's one of the few shows that I felt completely transformed into the world of the play and thought of nothing else but what was in front of me. My whole body was glued to the action of the stage. After the show, and after my personal recovery from leaving its special world, I started to think about the dramaturgical aspects of the play. First of all there is the obvious need to understand the issues surrounding World War I. I was much more interested in the amount of research and exploration the actors, designers and directors had to spend focusing on horses. As I said before, these details were so specific and so dead-on that there had to be an extensive about of inspiration derived from directly working with actual horses. From the technical aspects of how the horse moves his limbs when he runs vs when he trots, to the wide range of vocal variations the horse uses (which the actors produced all on their own), to the small twitches, breaths and ticks of the horse standing motionless. What an exciting undertaking to explore. I want to be a part of this. I want to get my hands on this kind of inspiration. I just think it was overwhelming how much I wanted to experience what these designers and actors must have gone through. The immense power of puppetry was reinforced in my theatrical/creative brain. It's an area of theatre that allows such an amazing amount of possibilities and creatively to get audiences to just believe.

Here's a great look at the Handspring creation of Joey, if you want to learn more.

By dkeohane | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

Autonomy, Mastery, Purpose

October 9, 2011 at 6:12 pm

Want to learn to be more creative? Check out this talk.

Daniel Pink, a social scientist, makes a case that the traditional idea of human motivation as being based on extrinsic rewards is not only ineffective, but actually harmful to creativity. The "carrot and stick" method, as he puts it, serves to narrow a persons focus to the specific task at hand. This can be good - if the task has a clearly specified set of rules and a clear outcome. But people are much more creative when motivated "intrinsically", from an internal desire to complete a task because of interest or desire.

While the speaker specifically talks about this idea of intrinsic motivation in terms of business, citing such companies as Google for making strides forward, I was struck by how strongly his ideas relate to the arts.

In the arts, even MORE so than in business, it is important for people to be able to think creatively and autonomously. There are almost never clear rules, and certainly never a clear outcome. This is the nature of the theatrical process. When I think about directing and acting, I realize (in hindsight) how true Daniel's ideas are. The time I have felt most stifled, most narrow and uncreative, were when I had some idea of where I wanted to be in the end. As Alexander technique teaches, I was "endgaining".

Daniel's ideas, I feel, are also important to keep in mind when it comes to school. The nature of school is that one shows up for classes, fulfills a set of requirements, and then receives either a reward or a punishment for the quality of one's performance. I took this structure for granted until college, mainly because I never studied art in school before college. Here at BU, however, I realize how much this academic "carrot and stick" structure has the potential of murdering my creativity. Just being here is not enough - I need to be constantly aware of how I am learning, how I am applying myself, or I will be turning my wheels in the mud. Autonomy, mastery, and purpose. Keep them in mind.

By Joseph | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (2)