Permanent Collection

Last Saturday night I saw Permanent Collection at BoarsHead. My biggest disappointment with the show was how small the audience was. It was a show that was perfectly put together with fine acting and a great script. It's the kind of work that theater needs to be doing--the kind of work that fulfills the mission of theater at a very deep level.

Permanent Collection doesn't preach. It doesn't make trite statements about racism or spout conventional wisdom. Instead, it provides one of the more honest discussions about the topic that have been offered for a couple decades.

In his book Boom! Tom Brokaw says that since the upheaval of the 60s, our society has been unable to have an honest conversation about race. We have too many hot buttons that keep us from tackling the problem head-on in a meaningful way. We talk about race a lot, but we're stuck in unproductive conversations that are simply a teeter-totter of accusations and denials.

Avenue Q came through Wharton last year and had an absolutely brilliant book. One of the songs in it is "Everyone's a Little Bit Racist." I couldn't help but think of the lyrics to that song while watching Permanent Collection. They sing the song in true muppet-style--upbeat, happy, and silly--while offering some extremely wise observations.

It left me wondering how different the outcome of the situation in Permanent Collection could have been if the character of Paul had been able to say to Sterling, "OK, I guess I am being racist. Help me to understand." and if Sterling had been able to respond without anger, arrogance, and smugness. What if both of them had been able to treat each other with compassion and respect and tackled the issue head-on rather than using the issue of racism as a further divider.

How would it change our conversations if we stopped arguing about whether we were or were not racist and instead said, "OK, what I'm doing is offensive. Let's work on it." and that people did not assume that because they were offended by something that the other person is automatically a bad, evil, or ignorant person?

I reviewed Permanent Collection for the Lansing State Journal here. This is one of those shows, though, where the discussion and interaction of it stretches far beyond a simple evaluation of performances and presentation. It's a show that asks a lot of questions and leaves it to the audience to work through them. It isn't educating or preaching, it's the start of a dialog that is important to all of us. In other words, it is theater at its finest.

Being too kind

Back at the NEA Arts Journalism fellowship in the winter of 2007, we had sessions where we met with a professional reviewer who was willing to act as a writing coach. We would attend a show, write a review, and then the coach would give us feedback on our writing in small group sessions.

It was an extremely helpful process, even if it was a bit nerve-wracking. I took a lot away from those sessions, much of which I've continued to mull since then. One of the things that came up was that critics do a disservice to the art form if they are too kind. That's the job of arts marketers and art leaders, but not critics.

Sure, people who take great risks in putting themselves before others and performing would love to hear only good things about what they have done. However, reviews aren't for them. They already have a director and audiences to provide them with that sort of feedback. A critic should not be in the business of directing.

A critic is in the job of having an open, honest discussion with the audience and the public about theater. Reviews should be a part of the public conversation about why theater matters and why art is important. If a critic is constantly kind and doesn't speak openly about flaws, then they not only lose credibility, but they aren't being authentic in their conversation. Their role is not to advertise, it is to help make sure that the art is seen and heard in its true form. And sometimes that means pointing out where bad choices have been made.

This is a tough one for me, because my inclination is to be kind rather than harsh. And I know there are many people out there who think it is wrong to be critical or that an over-critical eye is an insult. It's a shame, because in truth, being willing to criticize is a mark of respect to the artists and to the art. It expresses a faith in the vigor and strength of the art. It also shows a deep respect for the audience with whom one is speaking.

I've talked to some people who don't attend live theater despite the fact that they have many friends who are involved. I'm always curious why those people don't go. One response that I've heard repeatedly is that they associate live performances with poor quality. Now, yes, those of us who attend theater frequently know that you're far more likely to see an outstanding show than an awful one. However, it takes only one to turn someone off live theater forever.

So let's say that I go to a show that I think is mediocre or lacking in passion--a show that fails to excite me in any way despite my love and passion for theater and live performance. However, I know that people have worked hard and that they have day jobs, so I write a review that focuses only on the positive. I don't mention the lackluster singing or the inappropriate costuming that takes you right out of the story. I don't mention that the pacing is so slow that your butt gets numb in the seat. Instead, I write about the particular actor who does a great job despite not getting anything from his fellow actors. I write about the splendid dance number where the one actress brings incredible energy to the stage. I praise the script.

If I'm writing to people who are already theater folk, then no harm is done. There is great harm done, though, if someone reads the review who isn't a theater person and decides that perhaps they'll give it a try. They go and lose hours of their time that they'll never get back. They experience the disappointment of expecting something to be good and being greeted with mediocrity. Then what happens? What happens then is that they either decide that they're simply not fans of the art form--since this was supposed to be a good representation of it--or they take a cynical approach to all future reviews since this review sold them a faulty bill of goods.

Anyone who cares about audience development and getting new people into the theater have to be committed to an authenticity in their conversations, especially if they are talking to people who are undecided about the art--the people who make up the vast majority of the population.

Voice

"Voice lies at the nexus of talent (natural gifts and strengths), passion (those things that naturally energize, excite, motivate, and inspire a person), need (including what the world needs enough to pay someone for), and conscience (that still, small voice within that assures a person of what is right and that prompts a person to actually do it)."

--Stephen R. Covey, The 8th Habit

Theater that is NOT happening this weekend

That would be Greater Tuna out at the Ledges. When they first announced their season, the 2-person comedy was due to open this weekend. They cast Terry Jones and Michael Hays, two very actors who could deftly handle the comedy and the constantly changing characters.

Then Terry Jones had to go in for eye surgery. Kevin Burnham, the artistic director of the Ledges Playhouse, reports that the surgery left him temporarily blind. The decided to postpone their opening to give Terry an extra week to recover. The recovery is going well, Kevin says, though he is still blind in one eye. He will be ready for their new opening date: Sept. 12.

So if you were planning to head out to the Ledges for an evening of theater (and I do highly recommend that you do--it's a delightful experience in the park and even the temperature is starting to cooperate), plan to do it next weekend or any weekend through the 21st.

Here is the media alert they sent out with the correct dates:

The Ledges Playhouse Theater Company will be presenting the hit comedy

"Greater Tuna"

from September 12th through the 21st.

Performances are Fridays and Saturdays at 8pm and Sundays at 2pm.

Tickets are $10 and all seating is general.

Info: 944-0221

ABOUT THE PLAY

"This is radio station OKKK in Tuna, Texas serving the greater Tuna area at two hundred and seventy five watts, signing on!"

And so begins the morning on the radio in the third smallest town in Texas, where the Lions Club is too liberal and Patsy Cline never dies. GREATER TUNA is a hilarious look at life in rural America, filled with characters you love to hate and hate to love.

Using quick change artistry two actors, local favorites Terry Jones and Micheal Hays, create 20 howlingly funny characters. Tune in to hear all the latest news from Greater Tuna and join Thurston Wheelis, Arles Struvie, Aunt Pearl, Petey Fisk, and all their friends for an evening of non-stop laughter.

Genre: Comedy
Rating: PG
Length: 2 hours

Quote for the day

The Renegade Festival was excellent and inspired many potential posts--as is the book that I'm reading this weekend on arts marketing. However, it is past my bedtime, so I'm going to simply post a quote with a teaser about more entries to come.

The secret of joy in work is contained in one word--excellence. To know how to do something well is to enjoy it.
--Pearl S. Buck

Oscar Wilde Awards

I'm off to the Oscar Wilde Awards tonight at the Gem Theatre, an event hosted by Between the Lines. This will be the third time I've gone and I have to say, they throw an awesome party. It's a great night for celebrating Michigan theatre.

I'll be back in time for the Renegade Theatre Festival. There are a lot of exciting events going on in Old Town that are well worth attending. It should be a great experience.

Leaving at intermission

It's something I try very hard not to do--leave a show at intermission. In the past three years I've seen upwards of 250 shows and I can count on half a hand the number of shows that I've left at intermission. I've never done it when reviewing a show.

However, I am on a judging committee and the theaters are kind enough to comp my entry into the show. I try to honor that gift. I do so by trying not to attend on sold-out nights, but arriving at the show open and ready to receive what the artists have to offer, and being attentive and focused during the show.

So the question becomes, is it ever acceptable for reviewer or a judge to leave a show without seeing the whole thing. I tend to say yes because there comes a point at which you know things are not going to get better and staying for another act wont' help things any. Also, I think reviewers and judges have to respect their own time as well as the theater productions they see. There comes a point where if you see too much of theater done poorly, it becomes increasingly difficult to appreciate theater as a whole. It is too much of a bad thing that can make critics cynical and grumpy--two traits that no one likes for their critics to have.

I don't have a good answer for this question. I do know that I won't leave a show unless I can do it unobtrusively and in a way that is not rude. But I don't think I'm prepared to say that I'll never do it.

Keeping the conversations bubbling

I had an awesome conversation with my family this morning. It reinforced for me why I love being a one-car family, not having a television, and attending lots of live theater together.

We were driving down Willow so that I could be dropped off at work. My 10-year-old son (whom I’ll refer to as D) asked what the unusual odor was that we were experiencing. My sleepy husband pointed at the construction vehicle in front of us. D said he couldn’t decide whether the smell was good or bad. I suggested that it was an industrial smell. When he expressed delight at the term, I inquired as to whether he knew what I meant by industrial.

Showing off his video game knowledge (he’s been playing a lot of Sid Meier’s Civilization), he said that you could build railroads when the Industrial Age started. This got us talking about other things in the Civilization game, including why Lincoln was designated the leader of the Americans, Julius Caesar the leader of the Romans, and Cleopatra the leader of the Egyptians.

D twice saw Julius Caesar this summer at the Michigan Shakespeare Festival. He was a little distressed to learn that Marc Antony went on to become a leader in Rome and a “friend” of Cleopatra. (D. thought that the Republic survived the assassination of Caesar and that the Empire only started after the war between Brutus, Cassius—and he then tried to name all the conspirators—and Marc Antony, Lepidus, and Octavius Caesar was over.) He asked whether Marc Antony was the first ruler of the Roman Empire. A discussion then ensued about when exactly the Roman Republic ended and the Roman Empire began (we failed to exactly pinpoint it, but we tried).

This then led into a discussion about how sometimes there are periods of anarchy that precede the rise of a new form of government. This he also understood from playing Civilization. He then asked whether our government would ever change. Richard and I were quiet for a moment and I then explained that Thomas Jefferson was of the belief that when the government wasn’t working, the people had a responsibility to overthrow it and form a new government.

D replied, “With all the wars going on, it must not be working.”

So we talked about the dangers of overthrowing a government if you don’t have another system to take its place. He then pointed out that in the game Civilization, you could hire entertainers to make citizens who are revolting happy again. He suggested that today, that entertainment would be video games. I laughed, saying that yes, television and video games were the great panaceas that keep people from fixing their governments.

We then had to end our conversation because I had arrived at work.

I love, though, that theater sparks such conversations between us and that they give us an opportunity and a context to talk about things that are important to society. It was a reminder to me once again of why knowledge is just as (if not more) important than skills.

Stealing from Tony

I've been slowly catching up on my blog reading as well as my blog writing. One of the blogs that I enjoy is Tony Caselli's blog over at Live Journal. Last week he posted a meme and invited people to do the same on their journals.

Here are the rules:

RULES:* 1. Post these rules.* 2. Each tagged person must post 8 things about themselves on their journals.* 3. At the end, you have to choose and tag 8 people* 4. Go to their pages and send a message saying you tagged them.* 5. No tag-backs

Like Tony, I'll skip rules 3-5, though I welcome others to share their 8 either in comments or in their journals/blogs.

Here are my 8 things that perhaps some people don't know about me.

1. While clarinet was the instrument I played the most/longest, in marching band, I played tuba.
2. The summer I interned at The Grand Rapids Press, I tried to teach myself Russian, Italian, and Swahili. I failed at the latter two while having some modicum of success with Russian.
3. I used to be horribly afraid of trying to socialize in crowds (defined as groups of more than three people).
4. I think Michigan is a paradise on Earth.
5. I haven't owned a television since 1990.
6. My husband first gave me his class ring on the day the space shuttle Challenger exploded.
7. My husband is the first man I ever kissed and my high school sweetheart.
8. My father claims that the spelling of my first name is because they were under pressure from the author of the birth certificate while my mother insists that they spelled my middle name wrong. Is it any wonder I'm an editor?

Getting back into the swing of things

In about 10 minutes, I'm leaving to see Riverwalk's Raisin in the Sun. While I've seen a few shows locally this summer (Talley's Follies at Williamston was particularly enjoyable), I've been so focused on work that I've not really had much time to think or write about them. Nor did I even have time to write much about the Michigan Shakespeare Festival and there were lots of interesting things about both productions that I typically would have enjoyed blogging about.

I'm looking forward to getting back into the groove. I'm also looking forward to having the time to read the two performing arts-related books that have arrived on my doorstep: Arts Marketing Insights and Invitation to the Party. What little I've read of both of them so far (about a chapter a piece) has been inspiring and exciting.

There are three shows going on this weekend. I'm planning to make it to two of them:

• Riverwalk's Raisin in the Sun
• Sunsets with Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet
• Holt-Dimondale Community Players' Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat

(Hmm, blogger isn't letting me fix the italics so that only the play name is in italics.)