Theatre is Territory

Archive for September, 2007

10 questions: Philip Graeme

Friday, September 28th, 2007
Photo by Tony Hoffmann.

1) What the fuck is going on?
Words, words, words . . . and more words. The next evolution of a rehearsal process that has been exhausting, exhilarating, fraught with discovery and failure. And now, as the ensemble bristles with the energy of the run, I can’t help thinking how wonderfully dangerous and visceral it is to perform when you’re surrounded by a group of actors, designers and directors who attack the work without fear and challenge you to rise with them.

2) What do you like about Shakespeare’s 400-year-old play Hamlet?
I think that the relationships are highly contemporary: a young man is distressed by the recent and sudden death of his father and then his mother marries his uncle; he has a girlfriend whose father and brother interfere with his relationship; he’s had to leave school to come back for his father’s funeral and now he’s stuck, out of his comfortable element, trying to reconcile how quickly people move on. I look at how fast everything moves around us and I connect strongly with where Hamlet begins – he wants time to grieve.

The play is an extraordinary unraveling of human experience, heightened to great effect by the supernatural elements, and Hamlet himself is a great deal of fun to play. He’s dense, complex, dangerous, funny, naïve – he’s everything all at once, which is, of course, unplayable and yet it opens infinite possibilities of playing to an actor willing to let the character in.

3) Why is the production called The Prince Hamlet, instead of its more traditional title, Hamlet?
The actual title of Shakespeare’s play is The Historical Tragedy of Hamlet Prince of Denmark, so in some ways calling the play The Prince Hamlet is no less arbitrary than reducing the title simply to Hamlet, but I like our title because it reminds us that this is a play about a person.

For me, the title Hamlet conjures over-studied ideas of the play as a literary entity rather than a performance text. A notion that is reinforced by dull English teachers and the egotism of so-called theatre practitioners who think that Shakespeare is sacrosanct and believe they provide the world a service by simply putting on the play and claiming universal relevancy.

Luckily, underneath all the crap is a good story.

4) What insights does the story offer about the nature of corruption and revenge?
I think of what Hamlet says to Gertrude in the closet scene when he tells her not to comfort herself by focusing on his behavior:

“Lay not a flattering unction to your soul, that not your trespass but my madness speaks. It will but skin and film the ulcerous place, whilst rank corruption, mining all within, infects unseen.”

Deception is constantly related to questions of honesty and authenticity throughout the story and I think in this moment Hamlet sums up the psychological cost of deceiving oneself.

He is obsessed with honesty and I think his revenge is slowed at first by his distrust of his father’s spirit (there is a much longer point here about what exactly Hamlet’s relationship was to his father – I choose to believe that his father was distant and indifferent and there is a clear hero-worship toward his father that, for me, belies a need to earn his father’s acceptance). Hamlet cannot, however, bring himself to act against Claudius until he has more proof and that leads to the play within the play. Revenge, at least for Hamlet, must be highly motivated and based on a certain conviction or “the pale cast of thought” weakens the resolution to act decisively.

Liz Pounsett and Philip Graeme in The Prince Hamlet. Photo by Tony Hoffmann.

5) Having played the character of Hamlet twice now, have you arrived at any conclusions about the character or the text that may not be obvious to the casual observer?
I haven’t actually performed the role twice, but I was in rehearsal for a production that was cancelled because of SARS. I feel incredibly fortunate to now have the opportunity to play Hamlet. The first time I rehearsed it I was very much stuck in my head with ideas about the play and who I thought Hamlet was and ultimately I’m glad to have been able to get a lot of my own bullshit out of my system in that process because it has made this rehearsal process much more free, challenging and exciting for me. This play comes with an unbelievable amount of baggage, but you can’t play ideas – the only things that matter are the story and the truth of the moment.

6) How do you feel about your time at the American Repertory Theatre/Moscow Art Theatre Institute at Harvard University?
Scarred. Rapturous. I learned the difference between art and banality and the emotional cost in pursuing this work. But I am but mad north-northwest . . .
7) What one thing would you change about theatre in Toronto if you could?
I defer to Marquez: “But when the moment arrived he realized that anything might say would compromise his destiny.”

8) How important is it for theatre artists to be out there seeing lots of shows?
Theatre is discourse. If we don’t see other people’s work or remind ourselves of what it is to be part of an audience then we are operating in a self-serving vacuum and, unless you like the sound of your own voice, I see no point in acting in a vacuum.

9) Why are the cynics wrong?


10) Do you have any unifying theories that inform your approach to making theatre?
I constantly remind myself that I have to choose to allow myself to be bold, be brash, be brave, be physical, to remember that every utterance is a character’s act of survival, and that the stakes are always life or death. In the program notes for Peter Brook’s 1968 production of The Tempest at the Round House there were a series of fundamental questions the production set out to examine. The questions are: What is a theatre? What is a play? What is an actor? What is a spectator? What is the relationship between them all? What conditions serve this relationship best? Ultimately, I believe these are the only questions worth exploring.

Now playing: The Prince of Hamlet

Thursday, September 27th, 2007
Click here for more info and here for tickets.

Marcel Marceau: 1923-2007

Monday, September 24th, 2007

Theatre education series

Monday, September 24th, 2007

U.S. theatre professors Scott Walters and Tom Loughlin recently put their heads together to produce a great five-part blog post series on the state of theatre education in America.

One of the arguments that emerges from these posts is the idea that theatre education has lost the ability to critically evaluate its own process – that it has become a system not for making artists, but for creating “replacement parts for the current creaking theatre machine . . . ” Radical change, they argue, is essential for the long-term vitality of the form. And it likely needs to come from outside the system.


Here’s how the posts break down:

Scott Walters on theatre education

Part 1 – How we got here
Part 2 – Corporate training
Part 3 – Production
Part 4 – Things we do well
Part 5 – Suggestions for improvement

Sample:
“Most theatre departments justify their production programs as their labs. Like science labs, theatre productions exist for students to put into practice what they learn in the classroom. It is a persuasive argument, but the reality is quite different.

“Departmental productions are focused almost exclusively on putting on a ‘good show,’ not teaching those involved. If in acting class the actors are taught to score their script, directors never ask them to do so for rehearsals; if everyone is taught to research the play’s background, nobody is asked to produce that research during the production process. The casting process is rarely about what the students need to learn, but rather on who can best play the role right now. Oftentimes, actors who play a certain type of role will simply be typecast over the course of their career, and never have the opportunity to stretch their talents. Faculty directors feel that they are being judged on the quality of the final product, not whether those involved furthered their education.”

– Scott Walters
On theatre education, Production


Tom Loughlin on theatre education

Part 1 – How we got here
Part 2 – The big lies
Part 3 – But is it art?
Part 4 – Are we doing any good at all?
Part 5 – A subversive activity
Sample:
“What can you do? I would offer a relatively simple beginning; become an agitator with your own alma mater. And don’t be passive about it; be pro-active. I often get requests from alumni of Fredonia to be invited as guest artists to talk to our students. This is all well and good, but it’s sort of passive. A more active approach would be to dig out a few Hamiltons, pay a visit to the campus, sit down in the place where theatre students gather, and engage them in conversation. Talk to them about what they’re doing, what you’re doing, find out what’s happening, and then let their professors know about what you heard and what your point of view is. You can even do this at colleges in your area. It doesn’t have to be your own university. Find a way to get involved. Offer students some opportunity to become engaged with what you do. They won’t come to you; they’re not trained to. You have to go to them.”
– Tom Loughlin
On theatre education, A subversive activity

Lots to read here. And well worth your time should you have a few minutes to think about the future of theatre education. (For further discussion, Walters is hosting a brainstorming session here.)

10 questions: Tara Beagan

Friday, September 21st, 2007
Photo by Cameron Falkenhagen.

1) What the fuck is going on?
Oh, it’s just that sometimes we fail to see our interconnectedness and that causes us to treat one another badly. Don’t worry – we’ll get better at it.

2) Does Crate Productions’ new site-specific play, The Fort at York, arrive at any conclusions about the importance of the 1813 Battle of York?
The prospect of creating the show excited me in the first place because I think there is a woeful lack of awareness as to our shared history in Toronto. Every person who lives here today has that one thing in common – the place we live – and yet we seldom take time to honour the people who kept the land before us. Learning some historical stuff, and putting that in human terms, increases our sense of community. The importance of the Battle of York is in the learning of it and the recognition that even if your ancestors were not directly involved, it is a part of your history if you live here now. We are accountable to the place we live and to each other – The Fort at York explores how and why that is a powerful thing. It makes our history relevant to our lives today, which makes us all a little more familiar to one another.

3) Seeing that mainstream historians often neglect First Nations histories in their cataloguing of North American “firsts”, how important was it for you to explore those elements of this story?
First thing outta my mouth when I met Chris Reynolds (producer and co-director) was that any play built around the events that shaped this city must deal with the absent ones – First Nations people and female people. So little is said about these cats in history and it makes me boil.

The show we arrived at represents both contingencies as they were – present, powerful, though not great in numbers. The presence of First Nations people at the Battle of York and the presence of women at the fort were significant, though undervalued in the day and today. Art can affect change, and voicing those who have been silenced is a part of that.

4) How have the site-specific elements of The Fort at York piece influenced your approach to preparing the script?
It set me up to be a rabid keyboard monkey. More than half the content you’ll experience in the show is new to this round, while some of it is reshaped from what existed in workshop last September. Once we got into it with a rabble of wildly talented folk, I found myself utterly bunged up without them and while off-site. I ended up having to type like a bastard during our three-week rehearsal process because I held off on writing until we got back into the space with our full crew. Thankfully, the actors have been brave and generate tons of tasty stuff. The site itself inspires, the actors run with it, and then I truck home and type until we have another go. Long process crammed into a short intense time frame. Joyous and mad.

5) If you could change just one thing about theatre in Toronto what would it be?
More serving story, less serving ego.

6) Do you have any unifying theories about theatre and its relationship to community?
Theatre is a communal experience. When we embrace that, and surrender to the reality that the audience is as much a part of the collaboration as the workers are, we get theatre that shines, moves, quakes. When we try to create a solid thing and then plop an audience into the room on opening, we most often get boring, stagnant dreck on stage. A theatrical experience must be a communal one among all the people in the room, and the presenters must welcome the change that comes from new energies nightly.

Photo by Sabrina Cariati.

7) Are there any new stories being told?
Likely not, but we are telling them in new ways to people who constantly have new ways of hearing them. This makes them new to us – any new combination of people makes a story new.

8) What’s funny?
Something crass coming from someone who has no malice – my closest friends make me roar by saying the most horrible things. Barenaked honesty, such as my two-year old niece’s disgusted irritation when strangers want a hug from her. Having a loved one reflect your own idiocy back to yourself and realizing what a boob you’ve been, again, children are good for that.

Simplicity, summing up seemingly complicated things, such as the suggested tagline for this show as offered by actor James Cade: “The Fort at York . . . stupid war!” Anything that sticks out as incongruous can make me laugh on a good day.

Photo by Patrick Beagan

9) What can contemporary Canadian theatre makers do to further inform themselves about our country’s First Nations performance traditions?
We MUST have a sense of shared space and bear in mind that the first people who lived here are relevant to our lives because we all live on land that was in their care for a long fucking time. Ironically, we put so little value in the spoken word when it hasn’t been documented. Oral tradition is a huge part of all First Nations, and yet the theatre community largely thinks Canadian theatre began with imitating European structure. It’s time to stop allowing the curriculum to shape our understanding.

10) As a writer, what are you better at now than you were five years ago?
I only starting writing stuff to share in late 2003. My first play was mostly written at the back of an aisle while working front of house for the Mirvishes: I feel I’ve improved in many areas, though my ability to stop mid-thought to help Americans to the can may have weakened since ’03. Certainly I’m better at . . . making choices faster, being more concise, cutting, guiding a group of people in a rehearsal hall to make sure the story is not misconstrued. Better at making use of a workshop, at figuring out a scene without having to get up and act it out. Better at letting grammar fuck off when it does not apply. Better at organizing my drafts into wee jolly folders.

The Fort at York

Wednesday, September 19th, 2007
Opens in Toronto this Thursday, September 20.
Click here for more info and here to buy tickets.

A chainsaw killer’s message of compassion

Tuesday, September 18th, 2007

OK. This is not strictly theatre-related, but NYC-based playwright James Comtois is doing a wonderful series of short essays on seminal horror films at his Jamespeak blog. So far, he’s covered John Carpenter’s 1979 slasher classic Halloween, George Romero’s 1978 zombie touchstone Dawn of the Dead, and Tobe Hooper’s 1974 buzz-kill The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

These are uncommonly insightful little essays, especially his 1240-word piece on The Texas Chainsaw Massacre:

“I admit I find it vaguely amusing that such a vicious and graphic film is ultimately a plea for vegetarianism, but then again many of the horror films of the ’70s were far from subtle with their messages.”

Even if you’ve never seen these films (or seen them and not liked them), Comtois does a great job of peeling back the layers of mystique surrounding them – offering some persuasive theories as to how and why they’ve lodged themselves in our collective conscious.

10 questions: Joshua James

Saturday, September 15th, 2007

1) What the fuck is going on?
I’ve been busier than a one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest. It’s been a good summer.

On the theatre front: I had a couple plays produced, Ambivalent n Miami and A Gay Thing in Indiana that got some nice reviews.

Right now I’m co-creating a show with Bad Girl Productions that has the working title of Rage Against the Man-chine. The plan is to do it in New York later this year and later in Los Angeles, once we get it ready.

There may be more readings here and there, I’m always on the lookout for cool theatre companies interested in imbibing, with me, from that crank-pipe known as live performance. I’m in love with that abusive spouse known as theatre.

On the screenwriting front: I recently got hired to adapt Peter Biskind’s book Down & Dirty Pictures into a movie, which was a great, challenging job that I loved.

On the fiction front: The novel is done and about to be sent out, so cross your fingers. But the feedback thus far has been positive, so it’s all left to karma now.

On the personal front: Best news of all. Better than all of the above.

Seriously, this news is righteously kickass.

My significant other (known on my blog as the Samurai Lady) and I are about to have our first child. Any day now. Any moment.

Seriously. Baby be due. Just waiting. For those contractions to start. Waiting. Any minute now. Any second.

Baby might come by the time you get this email, I dunno.

Really, by the time I get done writing this sentence, the Samurai Lady could be throw a plate at my head and say, “IT’S LABOR TIME, LET’S MOVE IT! MARINES, WE ARE LEA-VING!”

Actually, she probably wouldn’t say the last part, she’s never even seen Aliens. But it’d be cool if she did say that.

Wait. Just a second. Did she –

Nope. Nothing yet.

If it happens, I’ll send you an update.

Baby. Best production ever.

2) Why do you like writing plays more than acting in them?
Hmm, I think I’m simply just built for it. Writing, I mean.

I’ve acted in some of the plays I’ve written, but most of the time, I get more pleasure in watching good actors do it.

I like acting, I enjoy it but I don’t need to do it. I like to watch, heh. Bonus if you name that movie.

I seem to need to write.

I just love creating stories. And the actual writing itself, there’s a sort of tactile pleasure from it. Just writing this email is kind of fun for me. It’s like giving something of yourself, thoughts, ideas, imaginations or sometimes just foolishness, but it’s still a gift wrapped up in words, and I kinda dig that.

Even more, there’s a real sense of giving and discovery of the self. You do it long enough and work at it so you do it well enough, you’ll find out a lot about yourself. You’ll find your own truth.

I don’t know that you can be be a good writer and hide from oneself, writing eventually communicates the subconcious to the conscious.

Pretty amazing to read Stephen King’s The Shining, written in the seventies, which covers in depth the lead character’s alcoholicism and then go back and read his non-fiction book On Writing, where he talks about how it took years and years for him to face his own alcoholism but it kept coming out in books like The Shining and Misery, the beer-monkey on his back.

It’s just hard to write fiction well and hide from personal truth.

3) Looking back on your catalogue of plays, do any recurring themes emerge that you didn’t necessarily see when you were writing them?
Hmm, wow. Good question.

I’d say a reasonable person, examining everything, could probably find three distinct thematic personalities in my work:

First, LOVE. A lot of my work deals with love, the first short plays I wrote was a trilogy called Love, Lust & Life.

Love and relationships, how people interact and navigate the truth and lies they tell each other. The first play I wrote that got attention, The Men’s Room, is essentially about how straight men love each other.

Second, DEATH. Life and death and suicide played a part in early works . . . dealing with the pain of existence . . . I’d point to The Beautiful One as an example. And my play 2 Very Dangerous People Sharing 1 Small Space Together.

There were a lot of plays like that because I had difficult times during formative years, like so many, and it’s how I channeled it.

And I think the ethics of existence is a extremely pertinent question to examine, so it’s really featured in a lot of my works, in particular Tallboy Walkin’ and Extreme Eugene and a whole lotta more.

Third. RAUNCHY HUMOR & OUTRAGE. In other words, what’s the most outrageous thing that can or cannot be said, and why can’t we say it? Plays like Spooge – The Sex & Love Monologues or The Elf, the Bunny & the Big Xmas Blowup and a whole lot of short ribald sketches to numerous to mention.

My good friend Chuck likes to tell the story of how he went to a performance of one of my plays some years ago but arrived late (also known as being “Chucked”) and wandered around the building, which was large, looking for the theatre space where my play was being performed.

He heard someone shouting, “Did you fuck her? Did you fuck her! Answer me, you lying asshole!”

And he said to himself, “Ah. That must be the Josh James play!”

Heh. The bastard.

So those are the three different thematic personalities that I can see in my plays.

Some plays, like The Penis Papers, feature all three of the above.

Lately politics has come to play, though less in plays and more in other areas of writing.

4) How do you feel about the idea that American theatre has – to its detriment – become centralized around New York City?
Ooh boy. I almost wasn’t going to touch this. But okay.

Let’s take A first, let’s break it down.

When whoever proposed this says American theatre is centralized in New York City, what are they talking about? Theatres themselves?

Theatre is centralized in New York City?

Every city and town in America has a theatre. Most have more than one. Just about every high school and junior high school and elementary school has a theatre.

I grew up in a town in Iowa that had 350 people. Had a theatre in our school. And we also put up plays in the theatre space in our church. So we had TWO.

In Iowa City, where I went to grad school, we had three theatres in our arts department, and there was a professional theatre in town and I think there was also a community theatre. All did shows all year round. Not to mention Hancher, which housed Broadway touring shows and concerts.

There are small professional companies in just about every small city, there are community theatres in almost every town across the country, there are shows done in EVERY high school all across the country, not to mention a load of shows touring.

The act of theatre, ITSELF, is not centralized in New York City.

Okay, we’ve proven that wrong.

But let’s say whoever proposed this “NYC centralized theatre” hypothesis isn’t speaking of theatre, but of theatrical content (which means, of course, they’d need to change their statement) – let’s say they’re really trying to say that the content of the theatre being produced is centralized in terms of culture, that the majority of shows produced across the country are shows set in a specific location (New York City) and specific topics (New York City topics).

Is that what we’re talking about? Content centralized in New York City Culture?

Is American theatre unfairly influenced by New York City theatre culture?

I’d say . . . I don’t think so. Not at all. Not in what I see just in New York City alone, and certainly not what I experienced when I lived outside it.

I think the majority of works produced in theatres across the country are heavily favored toward THREE things:

Free plays (shows where no fees are involved, Greek and Shakespeare), musicals (because that’s where the money is) and old plays that are proven.

Let’s look at the recent theatre season from my undergraduate alma mater, Morningside College:

Cinderella (a musical, ironically enough, I acted in this as a student at Morningside 17 years ago, I played the King). Antigone by Sophocles (old free Greek play) Butterflies Are Free (old play – I think the movie version of this play is at least 25 years old, Englebert Humperdick did the film, right?) Dancing at Lughnasa – Brian Freil . . . (how old is this play, close to 15 or 20 years old, right?)

No real modern New York culture there, right. Irish, Greek, English fairy tale . . . Butterflies is set in New York, I think, but it ain’t New York of today, not by a long shot.

I’d bet if we looked at the season lists for most universities, they’d be close to the same, right?

And I’d say the season list for most professional and semi-professional companies looks very similar . . . the bigger the company, the more often one might find a new play in there . . . but very rarely.

In terms of content, I’d bet money that if we did a statistical analysis of all the theatre produced across the country, in every theatre from high schools to the pros, you’d see that Shakespeare and old musicals outweigh everything else.

I bet we’d see hundreds of productions of Pumphouse Boys and Dinettes and Greater Tune. Both of which feature rural characters and culture far, far from New York City. I’d bet there are far more productions of those shows than of A Thousand Clowns across America currently in theatres.

And I’d bet of all theatre produced, everything, from high schools to Broadway, I’d bet less than thirty percent is by living artists.

And less than ten percent is work LESS than ten years old. I’d bet.

That’s a non-scientific guess, of course, heh. I admit it when I make those. But I’d be interested to find out how close I am. Free plays by dead writers count for a lot. And the Bard wrote a lot of damn plays.

I’d also bet there’s a FUCK of a lot of productions of A Christmas Carol, which is set in England, motherfuckers.

The whole idea that the New York City culture overwhelms all other cultures when it comes to theatre is silly, I mean, Sam Shepard has a career, right? He doesn’t write about New York, he writes about the American West (and he spent four formative years in London). Lots of American playwrights don’t write about New York. Tennessee Williams (another Hawkeye) . . . Beth Henley, Tracy Letts, Rebecca Gilman, Naomi Wallace, Robert Schenkann. Come on, the list goes on and on.

Good writers write what they want, and some are from New York, like Shanley, who’s from the Bronx, and some, like David Mamet, are not.

Most playwrights I know in New York City are not from New York City. And that’s reflected in their work.

The idea that New York City has just ONE culture is ridiculous anyway – Queens ain’t like the upper west side and Brooklyn ain’t like the upper east side and don’t even get me started on the Bronx or even the individual neighborhoods in each borough . . . you can walk ten blocks in Queens and be in a different city . . . There are hundreds of cultures here, that’s the advantage, you can take three steps and find a new cultural viewpoint, and all are welcome.

All cultures are welcome here. All. Which, in a way, makes it a good place to communicate those cultures to the world.

You can’t say that about all other places in America.

One thing that is centralized in New York City is media . . . most traditional mainstream American media is in New York, the biggest papers, the biggest news outlets, they’re here.

So if the argument was that the American media is centralized in New York City, you wouldn’t necessarily get an argument from me. But the media world ain’t necessarily the theatre world.

But that might be what gives lie to the idea that theatre is centralized here. Because the media (which I’d include publishing, the big play publishers have offices here) is here and loud and outleted to rest of the country, you hear about New York theatre in the media.

You want to de-centralize the media, I’m all for that, and let’s bring back the regulations that Reagan destroyed, which left the free press vulnerable to robber barons like Murdock. I’m all for that conversation.

But I don’t believe the theatre culture, itself, is centralized here, I haven’t seen anything to lead me to believe that. I believe some things are, media, publishing, agents . . . I don’t know that theatre is.

As far as what plays are produced here in New York City, there seems to be a lot of influence from London and from American regional theatres.

Naomi Wallace is from Louisville, Kentucky, grew up there, she had plays produced here and there, she had awards but if I recall correctly, her work had to hit in London first (War Boys) before she ever got produced at the Actors Theatre of Louisville. Even though she’s from there and a lot of her work reflects Kentucky. Even though she was known and had mad props from major writers like Tony Kushner about her plays.

And she had to hit in both places, London and Louisville, and win the Kesselman award, before she got her first major production in New York City.

If New York City had an undue amount of influence on theatre across the country, it seems it would work the other way, right? New York, then Louisville and London.

What I see as the largest influence on professional theatre in New York, on Broadway and Off-Broadway, is a Hollywood, especially Disney, especially on Broadway.

I don’t know that New York City is the hotbed of “new” and daring theatrical works that it was in the sixties and seventies, or hell, even the early nineties, when I moved here.

It’s too expensive now, and it seems a lot of shows are brought in from regionals, like Sarah Ruhl’s plays, where they’re developed in places more friendly to new artists and then, when successful, brought to New York City on a professional level.

There’s a strong independent theatre community in New York City, make no doubt, filled with great artists telling great stories and finding their audiences in pockets throughout the city, but we’re not making money off of it the majority of the time . . . and I see a sharp divide between that and what happens on the Broadway and Off-Broadway scene, I do.

The idea that theatre, as a culture, is centralized in New York City just isn’t true from what I’ve seen, and it honestly feels more like a talking point than it does anything based on true observations or anecdotal evidence. Usually when people say that, in my experience, what they’re really saying underneath it is, “Too Jewish” or “Too gay” . . . and that underlying ickiness makes me irritable, I have to say.

There are much larger problems facing the community than that straw man argument. Especially with the endless treadmill of “development” that’s killing a lot of work before it gets out the gate.

I think we should do less play development and more playwright development. I don’t believe playwrights are paid and/or respected nearly as much as their writer-peers in other fields.

Eventually, either the lack of respect or the lack of reasonable pay drives talented writers to other venues.

I just read an article recently that Brett Neveau, an acclaimed playwright in Chicago (who I knew somewhat when we were at U of I together, go No Shame Theatre!, and very respected) just pulled up stakes and moved to Los Angeles to get into television.

The article quoted him as saying, “I love theatre but I have a family to feed” or something to that effect (Brett, if you’re reading and I didn’t get the quote right, let me know).

Most respected and award-winning playwrights write for film and television these days. Because that’s where we’re wanted, appreciated and most of all, compensated. We do it for the love, true, but we’re not stupid – we know when we’re being treated like unwanted stepchildren.

Hell, I still haven’t been paid for the piece of mine that was performed Off-Broadway in the early part of 2006.

When Rent was workshopped, all the actors, musicians, stage-managers and stage-hands got paid. Jonathan Larson did not. I read that he complained about it and was told, this is how it is. You get paid after everyone else does, after the show opens.

I read later the first major paycheck for Rent arrived two days after he died.

That’s a larger problem facing American Theatre, one that really should be addressed at some point.

Can American Theatre artists make a reasonable living at their craft?

5) Among NYC-based artists, how much support is there for a rigorous and critical questioning of the official 9/11 report?
Not that I’m aware of, at least specific to that report.

What is happening is a rigorous and critical questioning of an obviously fraudulent, corrupt and incompetent Bush administration.

That’s happening. Most artist blogs reference it often, as mine does.

Listen, about NINE-ONE-ONE.

9/11 was a terrible, terrible thing. No argument.

But more tragic is what happened after it.

By that I mean our government and the EPA lying to rescue workers about the safety of the air, and then when the workers started getting sick and dying, the government claimed it didn’t have to do with the air at ground zero and refused to pay for health care (court cases still going on), at least at first.

By that I mean the fact that the man responsible for the above tragedy hasn’t been caught and isn’t a priority for this administration, in their own words, they don’t think about him too much. He sends videos mocking us.

By that I mean the over 4,000 soldiers killed and 30,000 wounded by invading Iraq to protect us from an attack with WMD that Iraq didn’t have.

By that I mean being told we had to invade Iraq and STAY in Iraq because Iraq was responsible for 9/11, when Iraq had nothing to do with it.

By that I mean the over 100,000 dead Iraqi citizens, killed when we invaded to free them from Saddam, and the millions of displace Iraqi refugees.

By that I mean New Orleans and all the people killed there, killed not when Hurricane Katrina hit, but days after when the levees broke and the government didn’t do anything because it was mainly poor black folk and staying in the abandoned stadium without water or toilets is good enough for them, according to Barbara Bush.

By that I mean George W. Bush lying publicly, twice, about breaking the fourth amendment, essentially breaking federal law.

By that I mean the dissolution of our civil liberties and Bill of Rights, as a country who once stood for freedom and democracy around the world which now has a reputation for fraudulent lies and torturing people we don’t like, throwing them in prison and keeping them there for years without trial, without due process or a lawyer, spies on its own citizens without a warrant, just like Saddam used to do.

Those above things, when added together, especially the major tearing and bending of the constitution that binds America together as a democracy, those events are more tragic, terrible and criminal than what happened on NINE-ONE-ONE, bad as that day was.

In America, every year, more than 3,000 people die on the highways in automobile accidents. And that’s tragic, too. But because they don’t die in one spot on one highway, we don’t do anything about it.

And considering what has been done in the name of the tragedy that was NINE-ONE-ONE, maybe we’re lucky no one has tried.

6) To what degree do you think substance abuse is a problem in New York’s theatre community?
I don’t see much, if any of it. Most theatre folk I know are mostly healthy, into organic food and meditation, aside from the occasional organically grown herbal stimulant smoked or baked in brownies, I don’t see any heavy stuff.

I saw more drugs back in other industries (like sales jobs, stocks and the like) than I’ve ever seen in New York theatre communities. I don’t see any of that, but maybe I’m just uncool.

Nobody really wants to work with someone who’s undependable.

7) How have your experiences as a theatre blogger influenced your ideas about theatre?
In every way.

I get to dialogue with many people that, before the Internet, I might never, ever get to meet.

As a blogger in general, not just a theatre blogger, but as a presence on the Internet, I’m able to communicate with a wide variety of folks and hear and see and learn from people from everywhere.

The nice thing about a blog is that it’s interactive and immediate. An idea pops up, good or bad, and the moment you put it up, it travels fast. It gets linked here and there and suddenly it’s in our consciousness, opened up and examined and sometimes even beaten to death, but it’s a good thing.

It’s like a round table with all the smartest people in the world (and some that aren’t the smartest) and you can speak to them and ask questions and listen to what they have to say.

I’ve had internet conversations with NY Times Bestseller authors, Oscar-nominated screenwriters and Pulitzer-prize-winning playwrights.

I’ve gotten advice and knowledge and all around life experience shared from a whole LOAD of accomplished people, and it wasn’t one way, it was a dialogue and nothing is as edifying as that.

Remember in college, when they’d bring in people like that to speak to you and it was usually one of the most exhilarating experiences of college, hearing what someone like Maya Angelou had to say about things TODAY, had to say in response to your question, at that moment (she came to Iowa) remember how thrilling that was? Now folks can do that via the Internet and blogs.

Information from those in the know is always, always a good thing.

Communication is always a good thing.

A huge influence on me, as that people I admire, smart people, I try to listen and learn from and now, due to blogs, I have access to more than I can even reasonably want in several lifetimes.

Myself, I’m always kind of surprised when I post something and hear from a lot of people about it . . . I always figured that maybe my brother and a friend or two would check in, and if maybe five people read what I write on my blog, I’ve had a good day. I always have trouble believing it’s a few hundred or more.

I see my stats, but I always figure it’s the spambots jacking the numbers up. When I blog something and folks talk about it, I’m always like, “Really? You read that? Holy shit!”

I haven’t even really told the REALLY scandalous stories yet, heh.

But it’s nice to share some of this stuff. And it’s a form of writing that’s good exercise for me, which is the main reason I began doing it.

I still get emails, even today, from playwrights who’ve been burned by directors and they read Let me explain my concept for your play or Playwright as an adult who can chew bubblegum, walk and do other things too and for me it’s nice to hear that some of this stuff doesn’t happen just to me.

Playwrights are different from actors in that we don’t meet a whole lot of our peers that often. We meet actors and we meet directors, but meeting other writers, before blogs, was harder, except at short play festivals.

Now on blogs we can really exchange ideas and experiences and it totally rocks.

Man, I love blogs.

8) Are there any new stories being told?
Absolutely.

Heh-heh.

9) What do you like about Tokyo?
It’s a great city, food is great, people are great, the subway trains all have digital clocks on the platforms and if it says the train will arrive at 10:11 AM, it pulls in at 10:11 AM on the dot.

And when it rains, the trains still run, which further differentiates them from New York Subways.

10) As a writer, what are you better at now than you were five years ago.
Everything, I hope.

I know I work harder than I did five years ago. I do know that.

The rest, I don’t know, I can only hope . . . life is a flawed work in progress.

I hope I’m smarter, more mature, more caring, more responsible and a better citizen than I was five years ago.

I hope I’m a more dependable friend to those I love and care about than I was five years ago.

If I can do those things and work hard, then the writing should take care of itself.

I can’t control whether or not someone digs my work or wants to produce it or even likes it, I have no control of that.

So I work hard as I can and try my best to speak to the truth.

That’s why writers and artists and musicians and poets exist, I believe.

To speak truth to power in a manner most excellent.

What’s the difference between marketing and PR?

Thursday, September 13th, 2007

For a great take on the answer from someone who definitely knows her theatre stuff, check out Simon Ogden’s interview with Vancouver-based Public Relations specialist Ellie O’day.

Political theatre

Tuesday, September 11th, 2007
1.

2.

3.

4.

. . . because bananas ain’t got no bones.

10 questions: Laura Nordin

Saturday, September 8th, 2007

1) What the fuck is going on?
Risk. At least that’s what I hope is going on right now. It’s exciting.

2) How do you feel about your time at the Institute for Advanced Theatre Training in Boston?
Awesome. I wouldn’t change a thing. I am different because of my training there. My body, voice, confidence, knowledge of self, and especially the consistency in my acting improved. All the training and rigor has ignited a sense of what is possible and what there is to explore for me as an actor. It didn’t really provide me with answers. It was about asking questions and enjoying the process. It provided me with the exploration of different techniques and has helped me to voice my questions.

3) As an actor, what are you better at now than you were five years ago?
I am better at auditioning. What I mean to say is that I am able to get excited about an audition and excited about the preparation for it instead of sabotaging myself over and over again. I am constantly searching for how to make auditioning a work of art. Progress is slow, but better than five years ago.

4) What do you look for in a director?
A director who communicates their vision with passion and generosity. One who enjoys challenging themselves and all those involved in bringing the story to life for the audience. A director who loves the audience and who loves actors.

5) What does feminism mean to you?
Wow. This is a really big question. Feminism for me is about bringing the stories of women to audiences. To create more female-driven stories and more female roles that are exciting and complex. To tell stories that haven’t been told because they were taboo or hushed in the past.

Feminism isn’t just about equality for me. It’s about the beautiful diversity that women add to this life. Women’s stories are men’s stories, children’s stories, stories of countries and cultures. These stories must be celebrated and debated. Personally, I feel that there are fewer roles for complex female characters in theatre, television, and film than there are for men. It’s getting better, but growth is slower than I wish for it to manifest.

Laura Nordin and James Murray in a workshop for an upcoming Praxis Theatre production.

6) Do you have any unifying theories about theatre and its relationship to community?
I simply feel it is symbiotic. Theatre moves and transforms as does the community around it and sometimes it’s the community that asks for the theatre to create something that speaks to the community and other times it’s the theatre that creates and ignites community. No theories here, just feelings of togetherness and opposition that make me love this constant dialogue.

7) What is your fondest memory of being on stage?
I’ve been blessed to work with amazing artists. This is genuinely how I feel. My fondest memory . . . it might be the night I went on as an understudy at A.R.T. in Chuck Mee’s Snow In June. I was given six hours notice (Thank God!) and backstage I started to pace and worry because I heard the announcement over the speakers about my being the understudy for Qian Yi (an opera singer everyone had paid to see sing six arias in Chinese – gulp), followed by silence, and then the deafening sound of the rustling of programs looking for my bio. In that moment of terror, Rob Campbell came over and put his hands on both my shoulders looked into my eyes to steady me and said with the kindest smile, “You know the blocking and the lines . . . now it’s time to tell the story. Your job is to tell the story and have fun doing it.”

The moment was off stage, but it definitely made that night stand out. It was exhilarating. When I was on stage throughout the performance I felt transported. I didn’t think. It was a wonderful thing to let go of expectations and to just be telling the story. I search for that feeling, the letting go, in every performance.

Margaret Evans and Laura Nordin in a press still for Dyad.

8) Do you have a working definition of what it means to be an artist?
Being an artist is whatever I make it to mean on any given day. I feel very vulnerable. Whether I am teaching, auditioning for a commercial, or writing a screenplay, there is this minute sense of fear. It can be difficult and wonderful at the same time. For me, it means I am working for myself and hopefully contributing to my community. I believe in entertainment, in challenging the status quo, and in sharing thoughts and knowledge. I have a lot of freedom in my life. The only restrictions are ones I create for myself, which is a lot of responsibility and can be quite sobering in the tougher times. I love that I essentially choose to play every day.

9) What could Praxis Theatre be doing better, from an organizational standpoint?
Oh. Well . . . there are lots of things that I wish I knew more about from an administrative point of view. I would like to be more organized. To have someone extremely business-focused. Someone to keep us on track financially and administratively. I think we are doing the best we can with the skill sets we all bring to the table and we are all learning a lot about how to keep things moving forward and growing, but I feel we need one person who is really focused and dedicated to the inner workings of how to support the creative work we all love to do.

10) Why acting?
Because I have always loved it. I almost pee my pants every time I’m about to go on stage. I love the adrenaline. There is nothing like being on stage and newly discovering the lines with your scene partner after having done the same scene for the past month or more and just now, right here and now, you are both finding it new again and it’s like flying or like rolling down a grassy hill together. I just feel so alive. I don’t want to do anything else. The connections I make with the people involved and, of course, the audience. When the audience is hanging on your every word and every move it’s like no other feeling on Earth. In the “dark times” I genuinely pray that if I’m supposed to be doing something else that it will reveal itself to me, but that’s when I usually land a gig or read a play that inspires me or have a great conversation with someone and I get back on track. I am thankful that prayer hasn’t been answered yet.

Re-membering the whole

Friday, September 7th, 2007

“At its origin, theatre was an act of healing, of healing in the city. According to the action of fundamental, entropic forces, no city can avoid a fundamental process of fragmentation. But when the population assembles together, and a momentary healing reunites the larger body, in which each member, re-membered finds its place . . . Hunger, violence, gratuitous cruelty, rape, crime – these are constant companions in the present time. Theatre can penetrate into the darkest zones of terror and despair for one reason only: to be able to affirm, neither before nor after but at the very same moment, that light is present in darkness.”

– Peter Brook
Threads of Time, 1998

Holy TAPA!

Tuesday, September 4th, 2007

Back in early August (is the summer really over?) the Toronto Alliance for the Performing Arts (TAPA) launched a new blog. Here’s the blurb from its About page:

“Welcome to the TAPA Blog, your online source of industry information . . . The TAPA Blog has been created as the next generation of the TAPA Weekly E-Bulletin. By changing the e-bulletin to a blog, we can now post information as it arrives, rather than a weekly e.mail. This also allows you, the viewer, to check back as often as you like – and it won’t clog your inbox with e.mails!”

Lots of great content so far. In particular, the sheer number of theatre-related job postings makes us optimistic that there may yet be full-time jobs to be had in this industry. Check it out: The TAPA blog.

Much better than a kick in the teeth. Thanks TAPA!