Vote for Comment of the Week

Votes in the comments.  Voting closes Friday lunchish.

Student #1 has left a new comment on your post "Is Theater Too Ideologically Exclusive?":

This article really struck home with me. I am an extremely liberal person who came from a very conservative upbringing. Whenever my family, parents, grandparents, aunts or uncles, come to see my shows they're always confused and have a lot of questions after. There's also always a lot of comments such as "of course you're a little more liberal than we are...you're in theatre." And it's hard to invite them to my shows, especially the ones who are going to bring up hard topics to bring up at the dinner table over Thanksgiving because I know the show is going to make them uncomfortable. This is what really bothers me about Broadway. Nobody ever wants to go to New York and see the really and truly great work because they can just go see fun and happy Mama Mia and nobody will have to see anything that makes them uncomfortable. I think that we as artists who strive to understand all humans on this planet and give something that will mean something should aim to make ourselves as uncomfortable as possible as often as possible and if that means doing plays that oppose our own beliefs, that could be alright. I think it's also worth noting that often conservative theater-goers or theatre artists hide their conservative nature while in the theatre world because they know that their opinion will not be popular.

Student #2 has left a new comment on your post "Is Theater Too Ideologically Exclusive?":

This article was difficult for me to read, because I had to re-evaluate my own feelings and positions. Like many theatre people, I tend to lean more liberal (ok, very liberal, but I try and keep an open mind) and I also feel strongly about the diversity of the theatrical experience. Yet, if I saw a show which went against one of my core moral beliefs, I’m not sure I could be objective enough to appreciate it. Sure, right now I could tell you that inciting anger is another way of causing emotional change, and that is a valuable theatrical tool. But I’m not sure that in the moment I could condone the performance. And I don’t know for sure what I would think in that moment because I’ve not really had that experience yet. Sure, there have been a few shows where I’ve disagreed with the way things are portrayed, but I’ve never found myself in extreme moral opposition to what’s happening. I think this trend of morally complicit theatre is also very interesting, because while the majority of those who work in theatre are liberal, those who watch theatre are heavily divided. The majority of theatrical audiences are either other theatre people (typically liberal) or the Broadway stereotype of an old white couple (where there is a higher chance of non-liberal viewpoints). So then the question is, did theatre become liberal because at some point it’s audience wasn’t? Or has it been liberal all along, it’s just that the idea of liberal has changed. It’s a question I can’t answer, since I’m not well versed enough in historical social conventions, but it is an interesting point. This article has really made me evaluate my views, and I actually hope I can see a play where I’m morally offended at some point in my lifetime, if only for the personal experience. 

Student #3 has left a new comment on your post "Is Theater Too Ideologically Exclusive?":

I haven’t ever really thought about theater in a conservative vs. liberal view like this before, but now that I am, as the writer states, I can’t really think of a well- known show that outwardly shows and supports politically conservative viewpoints. However, I can’t help but think that this might just be because theater isn’t necessarily the first place people look to when they are trying to incite political change. Most of the plays I can think of don’t have some kind of end game of convincing the audience to choose one side on some kind of political issue, but rather, are trying to convey a kind of more personal, heartfelt message about how we live our lives and how we relate to one another. While there are definitely plays that are vehemently liberal in their subject matter, I feel like that’s different from promoting a liberally- minded perspective. For example, I wouldn’t say that RENT was trying to convince people of the viability of the New York City bohemian lifestyle, but rather, to appreciate the value of friendships and relationships and to appreciate one another’s differences and see others complexly, an idea which I don’t feel is explicitly on one side of the political spectrum. On the same note, I don’t think that the orgy scene in Pippin promotes promiscuity. but, rather, is used as a plot point to show Pippin’s ascent into adulthood. Also, I feel like this article could be misleading in that it makes it seem that nothing is problematic in theatrical productions. Of course, there are definitely still plays being produced and written which, for one example, don’t feature women or people of color in a good light; should this be okay if the end game of the show is considered to be liberal? And to be honest, I’m okay with theater being, for the most part, a liberally minded and accepting place, because it’s an art form that is so inherently vulnerable and personal. If extreme conservatives complain that they feel as if they don’t have their place in theater, there are plenty of other places they could go to that would be more “accepting” of their perspectives.

Student #4 has left a new comment on your post "Is Theater Too Ideologically Exclusive?":

This is something that I’ve thought a lot about, not necessarily as a perspective practitioner of theatre, but just as someone in society. At what point are we actually open to values other than our own, not just dismissing them as the thought of another person. When do we actually watch something that we strongly disagree with and break down why we disagree with it? And what impact do we have by being creative forces in the world?

I don’t know if there are any universal answers to these questions, in fact I believe there likely aren’t any, but that doesn’t mean an attempt isn’t worth while. In fact, the pursuit of these answers is a motivating force in my life, as I believe it is in many artists’ lives. To me, just the process of trying to keep an open mind, to try and view things in a different light, that is enough to justify holding an opinion and advocating for it. I’ve found that if you actively try to prove yourself wrong, than the only two paths that can play out are that you reinforce your values, or you drop values that were flawed. Because of this, I try and surround my self with a diverse group of people, with diverse opinions, and I have conversations.

I guess all art is is an attempt at a larger conversation. Yeah, it is true that the majority of the people who attend/create theatre are likely to have some biased to liberal values, but that doesn’t mean that their contribution to the conversation is invalid. If anything, it validates their contribution through the fact that they hold beliefs that are different than others, which means that someone who disagrees with their beliefs can state why, creating a new conversation.

Student #5 has left a new comment on your post "Is Theater Too Ideologically Exclusive?":

Although I always knew theater was heavily skewed towards the liberal side of politics I never knew how far that extent went. To find out there are virtual no conservative playwrights writing today is crazy to me . As someone who was raised by fairly conservative parents, my politics have often fallen on the slightly more conservative end of the spectrum, although I agree with many socially liberal ideas. Perhaps I'm similar to the conservatives mentioned at the bottom of the article, ones who are able to understand liberal perspectives well, but don't necessarily embody them. While I'm definitely not as conservative as my parents, and pretty much only agree with them on fiscal issues, I've often felt that I should never get involved in politics while at work in the theater. In fact when I first started pursuing theater I remember my dad explicitly telling me to never talk politics in fear that I'd be boxed out for having a more conservative perspective. While I think that assumption was a bit extreme I can't say I always feel open about sharing my politics even here at school. I personally enjoy the ideologies present in modern theater and think they stimulate important conversations, but I do see a lack of diversity when it comes to more conservative ideas being presented, which is a shortcoming to the community as only half of a conversation is ever often being adequately represented. I personally have no problem existing in a predominantly liberal field, because the liberal focused principles of fairness, and protection from harm are crucial to creating a safe environment for new work to shape and take form, but I'd love to see a more conservative perspective enter theater as well to not only help stimulate an enriching conversation across political philosophies, but also help other more reserved conservatives in the field not feel like they have to hide part of their political agenda as they go to work everyday. 

BONUS HONORABLE MENTION:


Ruth Pace has left a new comment on your post "Papal equipment takedown could take days, Stagehan...":

The pope once came to Philly
The city went rather silly.
With massive reverent crowds
Prayers most loud,
at least the weather wasn't too chilly.
But wait! Local 8 cries,
"We put on quite the show for you guys!"
With stages and equipment abounding,
Our tech's cries are resounding,
work lasts longer than you imply.
For you see, strike will take a bit.
On our asses, we do not sit.
For this task we have multiple crews,
(such good planning surely is not news)
We'll go with the night oil lit.
Now the workers of dear local 8,
they will be working 3-5 days straight.
And when they finish with the city,
All will praise IATSE,
For the wonders they work are great.
So great it was as "seen on TV."
(Said Michael Barnes, not me)
The pope I'm sure, is most glad.
If he weren't, t'would be bad,
Such a wonderful guy, you see.
Now this concludes my epic,
a tale of tech most poetic.
I hope to god that this counts,
if not, a war cry I'll sound, and the rest of my comments will be linguistically eclectic.

Worth a Look

Here are a fwe posts from last week's Greenpage that might be worth your time...

Is Theater Too Ideologically Exclusive?

The Clyde Fitch Report: For all the conversations going on in the theater industry about diversity, social change and audience engagement, I’ve noticed recently how infrequent it is that I actually end up having a distinct, contrasting opinion to the foundational arguments of the plays I see and read. This reflection comes in part as a result of starting my own theater company, and being now faced with the inevitable question of whether or not, as artistic director, I possess a moral monopoly over the work we produce. Is it better always to produce work that, at least in some way, reflects my own values, given that I need to be able to fully stand behind all our productions? Or does this restrict the diversity of viewpoints I also want to represent?

Posted by David at 10/02/2015 04:04:00 PM  

What Is Sketching in the Digital Age?

ArchDaily: Every good design should start with a sketch. The problem, as everyone knows, is that computers are killing sketching. Or are they?

To begin with, it’s questionable whether there really has been a decline in sketching, given the conviction with which so many architects defend the importance of hand drawing. Even for the most technologically savvy architects, many simply don’t see an alternative to the humble pen and paper.

Posted by David at 10/01/2015 03:29:00 PM

Spelunking with Shakespeare

HowlRound: The most anyone can hope for is to be wrong about Shakespeare in a new way.—T. S. Eliot

My name is Lue. And when it comes to Shakespeare, I’m afraid I might be just a little bit tone-deaf.

And after working at the Oregon Shakespeare Festival for more than twenty years, I am grateful that there isn’t a competency test because I would not have had the terrific career I have had. But there is much relief in finally confessing my dirty little secret.

Posted by David at 10/02/2015 03:56:00 PM  

Stuntwomen in Movies, TV Receive Unequal Pay for Equal Work

Variety: You’ve probably seen the well-regarded — and deplorable — statistics about women’s employment in the entertainment industry from the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media, the Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism, and Dr. Martha Lauzen’s Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film. The statistics are discouraging, but I’m glad they exist. Without them we wouldn’t know the true shape of our working reality.

Posted by David at 9/30/2015 05:11:00 PM

The Sustainable Theatre Practice Treaty

HowlRound: Imagine a place without war. A place where the environment is fully protected. A place that is dedicated to new discovery and scientific research. That near-utopian ideal is present in Antarctica, where the Antarctic Treaty has insured international cooperation and stewardship for decades. Theatre should also serve this purpose. There are a number of ways in which climate change is being addressed through theatre and the arts. But as Antarctica captures the imagination and shows us what can be done in the most extreme conditions, I propose that we adopt an ambitious agreement modeled on that success to aggressively address the urgency of climate change now. Will you be party to the Sustainable Theatre Practice Treaty?

Posted by David at 10/01/2015 03:32:00 PM

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.