Last weekend, on a night where my brain had trouble sleeping, I selected a book to read that I haven't read in a long time. Natalie Goldbergs Writing Down The Bones. I have currently been overally ambivalent about being a famous writer. Yet I have apprehensions and nervous feelings about writing down my work in journals. I have been fudgety and fissy and prissy. I need this I need that! When all I really needed was to take a step back and breath a really long breath. I had an epiphany when I read the first three chapters of the book. I realized that my writing should come from my heart not from my deterministic ambitions. I should write about what moves me what causes me to sing in the morning, gasp for air, smile merrily, welcome the sunshine in the morning, all that jazz! I was fidgetdy before about getting the 'right' materials the 'right' equipment. Hell, such a thing never exisited. I was merely apprehended by nervous and dscrinimating thoughts plauging my head. And I also realized that even if I wasn't famous that I would be happy with who I was and happy as a writer because I love writing. It doesn't matter if I'm famous. I don't have to be famous. I can just be me. :D This makes me happy. If I hadn't opened the pages of Writing Down The Bones I would've been still stuck in that stupid realm of stupidy which is fidgety fussbudgeting. Sigh. I am happy again. :D
So I want to go to CVS to get a spiral notebook and a pen. (NOT A BALL POINT BEN! Why? There is no control. In Writing Down The Bones Natalie gives some suggestions on some pens to use. No pencils either. I can't write my ideas down quick enough. There needs to be a balance of control and free flow for ideas. Besides, good handwriting doesn't matter in personal notebooks.)
Subscribe To It Just Blew In One Morning
Posts
All Comments
11/11/09
Random Theater musings
My previous entry was about Inherit The Wind. I also saw a rehearsal of that performance as well.
What amazed me was the professional atomosphere the actors created versus a high school atmosphere. The actors were really good at their lines and with voice, diciton, prounounciation, articulation, speech basically. The actors obvioulsy looked like they'd reharsed the scene often, and aslo they were performing without a script. INCREDIBLE!
How can theater be made to appeal to families and to younger audiences? Families like educational things. Hence the numerous memberships to museums of art, science, and history. Perhaps if theater examined social issues that pertain to modern audience or other educational content, then families will wilingly go. However, even when education is incorporated into theater the result (to my knowledge) is that schools take the oppurtunity to take the kids to plays and not families. What then is holding back the typical family from attending the theater? Perhaps people think of entertainment like the theater in terms of modern television. Perhaps when they think of the theater they think of familiar tv programs like Glee, Grays Anatomy, or perhaps shorter versions of movies. Affordibility could be one problem. Not many families have enough money to subscribe to a theater membership. Whereas museum memberships are about $50-$100 on average, tickets for a one show run around $75-90 for a family of five (cleveland playhouse). The average family doesn't have enough money for the theater on a regular basis. If memberships to the theater were made family friendly, for example five tickets to all the performances of the Great Lakes Theater Festival for only $100, then many families would quickly sign up. If a family has really young children attention span may be another. Although parents would most likely take their school aged and high school children with them to the theater. Limited participaton could also be another factor. Whereas in todays theater modern audiences just sit and watch. A very passive activity. At least in art museums the people who go walk around and look at art and think about it or admire it. Although art history is a private knowledge these days, enjoyed by few. So little people today understand the value and meaning of art. So how can we encourage families and young people to go to the theater? Perhaps by making the theater more affordable, experiential, and appealing to familes and young people.
What amazed me was the professional atomosphere the actors created versus a high school atmosphere. The actors were really good at their lines and with voice, diciton, prounounciation, articulation, speech basically. The actors obvioulsy looked like they'd reharsed the scene often, and aslo they were performing without a script. INCREDIBLE!
How can theater be made to appeal to families and to younger audiences? Families like educational things. Hence the numerous memberships to museums of art, science, and history. Perhaps if theater examined social issues that pertain to modern audience or other educational content, then families will wilingly go. However, even when education is incorporated into theater the result (to my knowledge) is that schools take the oppurtunity to take the kids to plays and not families. What then is holding back the typical family from attending the theater? Perhaps people think of entertainment like the theater in terms of modern television. Perhaps when they think of the theater they think of familiar tv programs like Glee, Grays Anatomy, or perhaps shorter versions of movies. Affordibility could be one problem. Not many families have enough money to subscribe to a theater membership. Whereas museum memberships are about $50-$100 on average, tickets for a one show run around $75-90 for a family of five (cleveland playhouse). The average family doesn't have enough money for the theater on a regular basis. If memberships to the theater were made family friendly, for example five tickets to all the performances of the Great Lakes Theater Festival for only $100, then many families would quickly sign up. If a family has really young children attention span may be another. Although parents would most likely take their school aged and high school children with them to the theater. Limited participaton could also be another factor. Whereas in todays theater modern audiences just sit and watch. A very passive activity. At least in art museums the people who go walk around and look at art and think about it or admire it. Although art history is a private knowledge these days, enjoyed by few. So little people today understand the value and meaning of art. So how can we encourage families and young people to go to the theater? Perhaps by making the theater more affordable, experiential, and appealing to familes and young people.
11/10/09
Inherit The Wind
Last saturday I had the pleasure of seeing Inherit The Wind for the Cleveland Playhouse College program. The play was very interesting. It dealt with the issues of the place of evolution and the bible in education. At that time, the bible was a much a staple in the south as cotton is to plantations. So here comes evloution, which religous leaders believed, was against the scriptures of the holy bible. A law was passed outlawing the text from being taught in schools. Scopes went against the law and continued to teach evoulution. Well he was snitched on, and a trial ensued. The scopes monkey trial. It was one of the biggest trials in decades because of the content of the trial. The play is based of off the true story, but fictionlizes it a bit with a slight romance, different names for characters, and a bibilical fanatic by the name of William Henry Harrison, who had almost been elected president 3 times.
The story is as relevent today as it was back in the 1920's when the scope monkey trial occured. Today we are still debating: science or religion? But why should we say or? Perhaps we should say AND. Science AND religion must be held hand in hand because science explains the world one way and religion the next. Science can never hope to acheive the spiritual, nor can religion hope to acheive the concrete and rational.
In a reccent study that was done (I saw the results in Parade a while back) spirituality is the new norm in America. Instead of a strict religion dominating our lives, more people are opting to choose their own spirtual path, a leap forward considering the legacy of religion in America. However, strict religion still dominates the lives of most Americans. Although, Religion will perhaps always be commonplace in America. Perhaps that is because of our freedom of religion, or the various ethnic groups that make up America. Or it holds us together, keeps us in one paridgm, the American paridgm. America is the anomly in the industrilized world. Many european countries don't have as religious a country as we do, although on the other hand they do have religions that have had a long existance in those countries. Like french catholics for instance. Catholicism dominates france because the ruling family who had power long ago was Catholic. England is mostly protestant. Ireland is mostly catholic. So is Italy and Spain. Overall, religion holds humans together, for whatever reason, in order to survive.
Back to the theatre.
Theater can demonstrate many social issues effectively. In Inherit the Wind the debate between the religious realm and the scientific realm was clearly exhibited. By using the theater to convey these social issues, the audience gains a more real life experience to these social issues up front. However, the theater can be more experiential. Mostly older audiences are commonplace in theaters. When the Cleveland Playhouse College came to watch it, we took up 2-3 rows. The stage manager had to ANNOUNCE TO THE OLDER AUDIENCE WHAT THESE 'YOUTH' WERE DOING THERE! This is sad because it shows that not many young people come to the theater often enough to make a significant presence.
I encourage families to take their children to the theater. Weather it be local theater, regional theater (like the playhouse), festivals (like Great Lake), or uber professional theater (playhouse square), the theater is an essential social catalyst and media form and needs to be perserved.
The story is as relevent today as it was back in the 1920's when the scope monkey trial occured. Today we are still debating: science or religion? But why should we say or? Perhaps we should say AND. Science AND religion must be held hand in hand because science explains the world one way and religion the next. Science can never hope to acheive the spiritual, nor can religion hope to acheive the concrete and rational.
In a reccent study that was done (I saw the results in Parade a while back) spirituality is the new norm in America. Instead of a strict religion dominating our lives, more people are opting to choose their own spirtual path, a leap forward considering the legacy of religion in America. However, strict religion still dominates the lives of most Americans. Although, Religion will perhaps always be commonplace in America. Perhaps that is because of our freedom of religion, or the various ethnic groups that make up America. Or it holds us together, keeps us in one paridgm, the American paridgm. America is the anomly in the industrilized world. Many european countries don't have as religious a country as we do, although on the other hand they do have religions that have had a long existance in those countries. Like french catholics for instance. Catholicism dominates france because the ruling family who had power long ago was Catholic. England is mostly protestant. Ireland is mostly catholic. So is Italy and Spain. Overall, religion holds humans together, for whatever reason, in order to survive.
Back to the theatre.
Theater can demonstrate many social issues effectively. In Inherit the Wind the debate between the religious realm and the scientific realm was clearly exhibited. By using the theater to convey these social issues, the audience gains a more real life experience to these social issues up front. However, the theater can be more experiential. Mostly older audiences are commonplace in theaters. When the Cleveland Playhouse College came to watch it, we took up 2-3 rows. The stage manager had to ANNOUNCE TO THE OLDER AUDIENCE WHAT THESE 'YOUTH' WERE DOING THERE! This is sad because it shows that not many young people come to the theater often enough to make a significant presence.
I encourage families to take their children to the theater. Weather it be local theater, regional theater (like the playhouse), festivals (like Great Lake), or uber professional theater (playhouse square), the theater is an essential social catalyst and media form and needs to be perserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)