Comment of the Week

Here are this week's contenders for Comment of the Week:


Comment #1: a new comment on your post "False Equivalency: Broadway Is Not The American Th...":

For technicians such as myself, it cannot be denied that Broadway productions do provide something of an "idea factory," at least in terms of technical development, for the world of theatre at large. Since very few producing entities outside of Broadway can come close to matching the budgets of commercial theatre in New York, it isn't surprising that Broadway productions can afford to stretch the limits of what we can create in the theatrical experience. From the soaring Peter Pan to the barely visible for all the fog of Starlight Express (dating myself here) to the fiascos of Spiderman, succeed or fail, these shows have pushed the envelope of our technical capabilities. On the other hand, I can't think of a community practicing theatre in America more woefully devoid of fresh artistic ideas that Broadway producers. Of course I'm exaggerating here, but it seems to me, perusing the endless string of familiar titles gaudily emblazoned on the marquees of Times Square, that, like Hollywood, Broadway has fallen into the cozy trap of simply reproducing what has already been proven to work. Commercialism is not the friend of experimental art, and marketing is the practice of giving people what they want, or alternatively convincing them they want what you're offering. I don't blame Broadway for taking the easy road here, Broadway does what Broadway does, but I, like the author of this article, will neither applaud them `for leading us into the brilliant new future of art. If that future holds no more promise than the recent derivative and repetitive string of cheap reproductions, I shed a tear for us all.   

Comment #2: a new comment on your post "Wear These Scary Backward High Heels If You Dare [...":

Well I was not expecting that. I have always been in love with high fashion (though there are admittadly time it's taken to far) but I'm a wee bit confused on where the artist is coming from. Well the shoes are a interesting idea I don't see how it makes a comentary on our search for perfection. The artist says they want to explor whats beyond perfction yet they choose a beautiful, skinny model to wear the shoes Well yes the model does look in pain it does not feel like enough to completly convey the stated intention behind the peice. This comes across more as a statment against avant garde fashionthen a statement condeming our desire for perfection of beauty. All that aside I realy do like the concept of the shoes. They part that your foot fits in is really quite similar to a point shoe (as in ballet) but the heel in front removes all the grace from her movment, creating a interesting juxtoposition between her whole look and the way she moves.

Comment #3: a new comment on your post "A Microprocessor for All Seasons":

Here's the thing about Arduino, it's not really useful on its own. It's not like you can put an Arduino Uno on your set and it magically becomes wonderful. The value of Arduino is that it is a gateway into other fields. I had little to no understanding of electronics and circuitry before tinkering with Arduino. I hadn't used computer programming since high school where I took a class in C++. It is all these other concepts, tools, and design options that make Arduino so valuable to our field. Once we introduce programming and circuitry into our TD and designer brains (I'm sure those who say it should be already) uses for Arduino will be more apparent. And even if they don't manifest themselves, that doesn't devalue Arduino's educational usage, it's ability to teach and introduce people to new technologies.   

Comment #4: a new comment on your post "Director Robert Lepage: risking it all":

I am so intrigued by this type of theater! The first few lines of this article, too got me hooked.. just delving into this story gave arise too so many questions. FIRST of all Lepage certainly seems like he is risking it all, in the best way possible, for the sake of his art, vision, and incredibly mad ideas. (The good kind of crazy!) When does this get to be too much though? For him it seems like the sky's the limit, he's not only working on this new show in Las Vegas BUT he is also involved in the MET's production of the Tempest, it seems spectacular. I always wonder how someone gets to do all of these things and stay sane for the most part! In the article it was stated that some of his previous works went up in smoke- just because of time constraints and alot going on, maybe a lot of projects and ideas that just needed more time. I think I'm just fascinated that he took a huge, tremendous risk, failed, but now is so so successful with multiple projects on the burner! I only wonder that, after what some might consider a flop, how do you pick right back up with the same amount of ambition.. I feel like it would be tough for someone starting out! I'm so pleased that I read this article though, I wish I could just find out how Lepage got to such a point where he gets to do what he loves AND is met with project after project to express that. I want to know more about how he manages it all too! And maybe a better question- how does a set designer fit into his work? Are they an equal part of the collaboration? A lot of burning questions- I am just fascinated. He is willing to triumph greatly or fail triumphantly. Amazing.

Comment #5: a new comment on your post "Rural Theater in a Democracy":

I love that these professional theatres exist and are trying to reach out to everyone. I have to admit I have never considered what theatre is like or if it even exists in areas like the Appalachian Mountain area. But I am glad that it does. The article quotes Alexis de Tocqueville saying, 'only in the theater have the upper classes mingled with the middle and lower classes'. It must have sounded so great and noble when he wrote it, but I don't think that it is true any more. I think that 'mainstream' theatre has gravitated as a whole toward the moneymakers and the upper class crowd pleasers. Which is incredibly dangerous, because if you are only marketing to the upper rich percent, they are going to get bored eventually and theatre won't have a leg to stand on. But where Roadside thrives is that they market to everyone, the lower class identifies and when the upper class sees shows about the lower class they usually can find it fascinating. What I am getting at is that companies like this are pivotal in the future of theatre, and getting that type of art out to everyone.

Put your vote in the comments for this post.

Worth a Look

Here are some articles from last week's Greenpage that might be worth your time:

Director Robert Lepage: risking it all

Stage | The Guardian: Robert Lepage sits sipping coffee in a vast wicker chair at an old coking plant in Germany's Rhineland, looking impish. Meeting him here feels a bit like finding him on the set of one of his own productions: typically otherworldly and full of surreal encounters.

Posted by David at 10/14/2012 04:53:00 PM  

Gaycism and The New Normal: The “Hot” Trend This TV Season is Bigotry

In Our Words: In recent months, there’s been a lot of chatter on the interwebs about this thing called “gaycism” on the TV. As defined by Lauren Bans of GQ, gaycism is “the wrongheaded idea that having gay characters gives you carte blanche to cut PC corners elsewhere.” In her example, Bans cites shows like Modern Family and freshman comedy Partners as emblematic of this trend. Modern Family is an Emmy-juggernaut, a critical darling and a much-lauded champion of LGBT characterization on TV, but that progressivism comes at the expense of Gloria, the lone woman of color. Sofia Vergara is a terrific comedienne and kills in the role, but the brunt of her jokes revolve around her flimsy command of the English language. Gloria’s B-story FOR AN ENTIRE EPISODE revolved around her use of malapropisms, like “doggy dog world” and “don’t give me an old tomato,” because being foreign and sexy is her whole purpose on the show.

Posted by David at 10/14/2012 04:25:00 PM  

False Equivalency: Broadway Is Not The American Theatre

Howard Sherman: I’m sorry, but I can’t read a statement like that and keep silent. The above quote is taken from a blog by Jim McCarthy, CEO of Goldstar and one of three organizers of TEDx Broadway, which will take place this January for the second year. Jim organizes the event along with producer Ken Davenport and Damian Bazadona of Situation Interactive. I attended last year’s event and furiously live-blogged it; there was some very interesting conversation that day and what struck me about it was how little it spoke specifically to Broadway and how much of the content spoke to issues of theatre as a whole. But as much as I’ve enjoyed meeting Jim and communicating with him subsequent to last year’s event, my response to his premise is at least dismay, if not outright offense.

Posted by David at 10/13/2012 04:31:00 PM  

Creating Goodspeed's Artist Village: The first of its kind in the nation, its a dream realized

YouTube: Goodspeed Musicals' dream of building an Artists Village is finally a reality. Seventeen new homes to be used for actor housing on the Goodspeed Campus in East Haddam, Conn. are complete. The new actor housing initiative represents the largest capital project in Goodspeed history with a total budget of $5.5 million dollars all of which were spent in-state. Eighteen contractors and twenty-six suppliers from the state of Connecticut, many located right in Middlesex County, were used for this "green" project.

Posted by David at 10/11/2012 04:38:00 PM  

Rural Theater in a Democracy

HowlRound: We know that, in the aggregate, incomes and life expectancies in rural America are significantly lower; infant mortality rates and drug abuse significantly higher. Presently, there is insufficient attention to such disparities—per capita federal spending remains persistently lower in rural communities, and only 1 percent of private foundation giving in all categories reaches rural nonprofit organizations. We also know these disparities persist in a grinding recession that has affected middle- and working-class and economically poor people regardless of geography.

Posted by David at 10/10/2012 03:48:00 PM

Time's Up

I think we can declare that it has been long enough for some things to have become common parlance and therefore should be within the capabilities of every day people. It is interesting to watch as technology becomes more and more mainstream and more and more folks come in contact with it what catches and what doesn't catch.

I guess the single best example of this would be the VCR clock. When VCRs first came out all the clocks were fine and that was because it took a person of a certain amount of technical facility to buy a VCR. Then, over time, VCRs became more mainstream and all of a sudden in TV rooms all across the nation one could find VCR clocks blinking 12:00 over and over because now that mainstream folks were buying VCRs the skill gap between someone that would have the device and someone that knew how to use the device had gotten wider.

I guess it doesn't have to be a skill thing. It could be a stubborn thing. My dad's last car would beep at you if the driver and the passenger didn't have their seatbelts fastened. My dad would hear the beep and then declare "it'll stop eventually." I guess it would be a different discussion to decide where stubborn becomes stupid.

I don't really profess to be a technical outlier. I still have a landline. I haven't cut the cable cord yet. My iPhone isn't jailbroken. There's quite a bit of technology just outside of my reach, even though I might be able to see it. I've been planning to do a home media center for years now. Just can't quite reach.

But I think the time has come for just about everyone to be facile with email. Again, I'm not looking for any fancy kung fu. You don't have to have everything ported to gmail and have all kinds of extensions and filters and automation and whatever. That's more than what I would expect. But there are a few things I'm just about over hearing about.

I don't want to hear people can't open their email. We all have about 47 different ways to access email now. This no longer requires a CS degree.

I don't want to hear from anyone anymore IN ALL CAPS and not have them understand that all caps is shouting.

IT IS SHOUTING. THE WORLD HAS DECIDED. YOU CANNOT HAVE SPECIAL RULES FOR YOU.

I've really, really had it with people that can't properly meter their use of "reply to all." It's a fairly simple concept, we've all had quite a long time to learn it. Get with the program.

Finally (and for sure that finally is only temporary) I think it is past the time for people to recognize when a link in their email has been corrupted by a carriage return. We should all know by now that when you click it and it says "404 - not found" that the very next thing to do is to see if the full url is in the address bar or if part of it is cut off. Links in email have been around for a while. We should understand how to use them by now.

So how do we make this happen?

Death Panels

It's the lie that doesn't die. Or maybe lie is too strong, it is clearly a mischaracterization but perhaps not totally false. There will be a board, it will make decisions about what care is covered and what care isn't. It's just unlikely that the decisions will be specific, like with a doctor on the other end of the phone line waiting for the board to vote on some imminent procedure.

Republican candidates love to bring up the Death Panels when they are trying to whitewash the ACA. Over and over again: "Obamacare will create an unelected board of non-medical bureaucrats to decide what is covered."


This is presented as if it is the end of modern medicine as we know it. That each time a doctor makes a decision there will be some government specter hovering over their shoulder cramping their style. I just don't understand how this is a problem. Or rather that is also a misstatement, what I don't understand is how this is a new problem.

Will someone please explain to me how this is different than it is right now?

I can think of only one circumstance where there isn't already a faceless board controlling all the decisions and that would be if for some reason the patient was uninsured and well to do. If you were paying cash then you could have totally unfettered care.

But if you are paying with insurance, well then you already have a faceless board of unelected non-medical bureaucrats making decisions about what your insurance will cover or not. Do ACA opponents really think insurance companies just pay for everything? Surely they know better. Every single insurance company is looking to minimize costs - that's the benefit the ACA opponents are trying to sell us: that private insurance will be more competitive and manage costs better. But how do they do that? By not paying for things. And who decides what to pay for and what not to pay for?

You?

Your doctor?

Or could it be your private insurance company's very own death panel?

Death Panels are nothing new. At least if it were a government committee there might be some hope of transparency and accountability to patients. As it stands right now, how ACA opponents want it to remain, the process can be totally opaque and is only responsible to corporate interests.

How could that possibly be better?