Thursday, October 01, 2015

Vote for Comment of the Week

Put your vote in the comments.  Voting closes Friday lunchtimeish.

Student #1 has left a new comment on your post "How Educational Elitism Is Hurting Theatre": 

It sounds as though the author is trying to posit that no school is actually "better" than any other, and that all theatre students learn the same content no matter where they study. If that is indeed what the author is asserting, then what an absurd notion. Sure, not every highly regarded institution picks up all of the most talented individuals, and not all talented individuals pick the most highly regarded institution. But there's a reason the "best" schools are considered the best. There is an inherent difference that sets them apart. And sure, the circle is pretty much self-confirming. The best schools attract some of the best, most talented students in a field, who will then graduate performing at a high caliber, reaffirming that those schools are in fact the best. But there had to be something that attracted those high performing performers (ha.) in the first place. By and large, though the author had some fair points, this sounds like a case of sour grapes not about the author *not* going to an Ivy theatre school, but about the response the program they graduated from garners.

Student #2 has left a new comment on your post "Back To The Future?": 

This article was very eye opening. No one really thinks about the signals and airwaves they use when you turn on a radio, use wifi or a cell phone. However, so much these days are wireless, and just because their isn't a hard wired cord, doesn't mean it takes up space. Each microphone on an actor during a show takes up a frequency, and if you use wireless controlled head sets that does too. With a down side in the MHz spectrum theatrical companies are going to run into even more problems. Broadway alone will have to make changes to accommodate for this. Sometimes the new technology that comes out and rules the world, hurts a lot of other things in different ways that was not intended. I remember a technical theater teacher of mine telling me about when the cell phone companies took over more of the airwaves which resulted in issues for the masses trying to use them too, like Broadway in Manhattan. This is very interesting to see where this goes. 

Student #3 has left a new comment on your post "Is Hamlet fat? The evidence in Shakespeare for a c...": 

While reading this article, I imagined its author (Isaac Butler) laughing at his intended audience response, which was to be up in arms about someone suggesting that Hamlet be something other than lean, gaunt, and pretty. I reject that our culture is so heavy on skinny heroes that we couldn't come to terms with a fat Hamlet. I will believe that we live in society where this is possible, and not far away from being scorned by the bulk of us. I do want to respond to one of the last things that he said about the necessity for counter-tradition in order to change our perceptions. This is inherently wrong. You do not beat one tradition by forcing its opposite to begin to happen. This would create a duality of people who agree with a certain side, and will do nothing but argue its pointless reasons for needing to exist. Within the scope of Hamlet's body type, is mattes slightly less. However,when that logic is displaced into our society with other groups and mindsets that are oppressed, it becomes very dangerous. To force a new way of thinking into the images and media consumed by the masses of people simply sends them into retreat and makes the people making the traditional versions all the more powerful and successful. The alternative is to integrate. Invite them into the conversation by talking casually about something, without an intrusive attack into the way you think they see it. Then, once the door is opened, they will ask questions, and you will answer those questions well. This is the way of idealistic change. In the case of fat Hamlet, casting directors should be conscious of our pre-conceived notions and just start to do it (while casting for best acting first, such that there does not become a standard of body type being more important than talent in any case), which will lead people to start to accept Hamlet as a potentially fat character. In the case of other social movements, educated people need to be aware of the fight or flight mentality of less-educated people, and carefully choose the way they wish to engage them on issues that they want to educated them about. 

Student #4 has left a new comment on your post "SAG-AFTRA Video Game Voice Actors Strike: Actors T...": 

I was listening to a story on NPR a couple weeks back that grazed this topic ever so briefly yet very poignantly. Sir Ian McKellen was being interviewed by Terry Gross about general life things and there was a long back and forth about his work on the Lord of the Rings series. Terry brought up the gaming industry and McKellen’s voice work for the videogames associated with the LOTR movie. After a few short exchanges, McKellen mentioned that it behooved the actors from the movies to sign contracts for the gaming voiceovers. If they didn’t do the voice work in the games, someone would be found to mimic their voice and do their mimicked voices in the games. He seemed to be both appalled and accepting of that being the way in which the gaming/movie crossover industry works. Just from that small snippet, I gathered that the voiceover work in the gaming industry is like the Wild West. Few rules and protections for those doing the work, and all the leeway one could desire for those producing at the top. I am more than happy to see that there individual’s fighting for their rights and protections in the gaming industry! More power to them! 

Student #5 has left a new comment on your post "Monkey Business: PETA Sues On Behalf Of The Monkey...": 

I had not heard of this debate prior to reading this article, and I think I was living in a slightly better world five minutes ago. This is such a stupid thing, and I cannot believe it's being considered as an actual issue that can and should be taken to court. The picture was taken by an animal, which means it is in the public domain. Who is being harmed by the monkey's picture being used? Is the monkey's work being stolen? Is he upset about it? Maybe the monkey is thrilled that his photography is getting so much attention worldwide. PETA doesn't know.

No comments: