“The object of education is to prepare the young to educate themselves throughout their lives.” - Robert M. Hutchins

Day 33

I had to write an essay for my education class about teaching, since I'm getting an education minor and taking education classes. One of the questions was about why I think my field of teaching is important to a student's education. It's probably not the best because I wrote it in like 5 min, but it's got some good ideas. Here's what I wrote:

I think my area of teaching (theatre) is one of the best areas to truly educate children. Theatre isn’t tested on through a state standardized test. I, as a teacher, am not required to teach to any test. That, more than anything, gives me the freedom to teach what I feel would be most beneficial to my students. Theatre encompasses so many different areas of education, it’s astounding. You learn about history, science, music, art, English, math, and many, many more subjects through plays. It also is culturally informative because you get the chance to learn about different societies and cultures that are portrayed through different plays. Theatre also prepares students for the real world. You learn how to work with others, manage your time, be confident in what you do, deal with deadlines, and so many other things all through working on a play. Theatre not only educates the mind, it also educates the soul. You get to observe human behavior at its purest form and try to recreate it on a stage. You get to feel empathy for the fallen hero or rage for the evil villain. And through portraying different characters and observing others, you learn a lot about yourself as a person. Being a teenager is challenging enough, but when you are involved in theatre, you are given that extra time during the day to learn more about yourself that you didn’t know through taking a test or studying for an exam. Theatre can play a crucial role in the education of children.

So, there's my two cents about that :)

I'm just a soul who's intentions are good...oh lord, please don't let me be misunderstood

Day 32

I like people. I can deal with people of all personality types, usually. I'm patient and I don't have a bad temper, so I can deal with people. Angry people. Depressed people. People who don't have a clue. All kinds.

But, my dear friends, I cannot deal with people who don't care.


That is one of my pet peeves. You can be the biggest prick in the entire world (and I might get annoyed by that) but if you have a passion for what you are doing and try your hardest, then I can't fault you. I respect you for that. But if you don't have the drive, the passion, just the want to do something, then I don't want to deal with you.

The reason I say this is because I encountered a person like that today. I won't say the class because then it will be obvious who it was, so I'll just name this person Pat. I was partnered up with Pat for a certain activity that my class was doing. We were given instructions and then told to work on it. As soon as we were given time, Pat shut down and didn't say anything. Pat, apparently, wasn't engaged at all in the activity. Pat just wanted to leave. This infuriated me so much that I just shut down. I worked on what I needed to do in my head and wasn't worried about helping Pat at all. The fact that Pat didn't care about the class...I'm getting angry just thinking about.

This is my life and hopefully will be my career. I'm taking this class because I want to become a better actor and better understand the art of theatre. I know not everyone views it this way, but I would hope that if you are a declared theatre major or minor that you would give a rat's ass to some extent to learn about it and at least try. Why waste my time, the class's time, or even the professor's time? If you don't care, then don't show up. I just don't want to deal with people who don't care when I don't have to. I only have a year left here. I want to soak up every opportunity that I can. And I know I will be dealing with people like Pat for the rest of my life, but I wish they would just get a clue and stop wasting everyone's time!

*end of rant*

Yes, everything is beautiful at the ballet

Day 31

I saw Dance Tech tonight. I always like getting to watch dance shows because the only ones I have seen in the past have been dance recitals, and that just isn't the same. Sometimes they're good, but you just watch them for the 4 year olds. Or at least I do. Dance Tech is actually a legitimate dance performance. And it made me wish I could appreciate dance more. I think it's the same reason I don't like watching "CATS". I just can't appreciate it. Don't get me wrong, I know what they do is rigorous. I'm taking dance classes and the stuff they can do just blows my mind.

Maybe it's just with modern. It's so abstract and out there. Sometimes I can get the message of what they're trying to say, but other times I have no idea what's going on. And sometimes the movement is so random and out there that it just makes me wonder why. I think I like stuff like ballet or tap because it's got a set of rules that have to be followed. I'm not a dancer, so it's hard for me to grasp what is considered good dancing and what isn't. I know what I like and think is good, but it's probably different dancing wise.

But another reason I love Dance Tech is because of the lights. The lighting design is always my favorite of the year. The lights really make the dances sparkle. They add so much to the performance.

"Acting is not about being someone different. It's finding the similarity in what is apparently different, then finding myself in there."- Meryl Stree

Day 30

Again, the theatre geek inside me rages on. I found another slide show on the NY Times theatre site, this one about Laura Linney and some of her performances on the stage. There was one quote by the NYT critic about one of her performances that said

"A sorcerer named Laura Linney is performing an act of magic that happens only in live theater. She has rewritten a play without changing a word." — Ben Brantley.

Can you imagine any better critique as an actor? That makes me so jealous! Lol. I know I've talked to a few actor friends about classics vs. new works. I've had a really great opportunity with getting to work with a lot of new scripts. Probably more than a young actor like me should get to. But we were talking about how neat it is that you get to work with a new script with no preconceived notions in mind. You go in with a clean slate because it's never been done before. You can pretty much do whatever the hell you want. And I'll touch on this more at a later date, but you have that vs. doing a fairly well-known show. It's hard because sometimes you get a show like "Death of a Salesman" that has been done over and over again. You run into the problem as an actor of trying to make the part your own. I know for me when I read a script and analyze it and come up with ideas, I wonder if it's a me idea or if someone else already did that.

I know it;ll never be the same because every actor brings their own take on a character. and I personally believe that no matter what character, there is always a little bit of you in that character. You can't help it. Otherwise why would they cast you over random girl b? But I think it's a little bit more challenging to take a well-established character and make it your own. But when you get that chance and have someone note that it's a completely different take that's brilliant is always a plus. That quote inspires me a lot. It makes me want to work harder at a role. Or just as an actor in general. To strive to get a quote like that said about me.

"Geez, I'd like to do that...I wonder if they get paid anything" - Liev Schrieber

Day 29

I'm a theatre nerd. To the extreme. Want to know why? When I get bored I go to the New York Times Theatre section online and just read the articles they have on random plays. They do this really neat thing where they'll interview an actor or playwright about a particular play they are doing at that time. Then they'll make a slideshow and put the audio from the interview with it. It's fascinating to watch and listen to. One that I just found is by Liev Schrieber. He is currently acting in a revival of Arthur Miller's "A View from the Bridge".


http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/01/25/theater/20100125-liev-schreiber-multimedia/index.html


I've never read the play so I don't know exactly what it's about. I'm not a big Arthur Miller fan. I feel like his plays are formulaic a lot of the time. There's the father figure who is the backbone of the family, the wallowing mother who stays strong but will break at any instant there is weakness in the family, the son or other male who is troubled and reveals some deep secret, and the other random wilting flower girl. I like to read the plays by themselves, but when you read one after the other, it all kind of flows together, like dejavu. I probably can't talk, I'm just and undergrad and have read only a handful of his plays.

But, back to the interview. I really want to see his performance in the show because he is getting rave reviews, and this interview is just icing on the cake. He seems like an extremely intelligent actor. I won't get into this now, but I truly believe that the best actors are some of the smartest people in the world. I think you have to be smart to be a good actor. You have to take into account so many different aspects of a role on top of analyzing a script and so much more. Anybody can act. I really believe that any person can get on a stage an act. But the thing that separates a good actor from a bad one is intelligence. Now mind you, I know there are exceptions to the rule. There are some really good actors who are dumb as a rock and some really bad actors who have a PhD...I get that. But I find, more times than naught, the better actors are very well-roundedly smart.

Yes, I made up a word, deal with it :)

"Every adversity, every failure, every heartache carries with it the seed of an equal or greater benefit"- Napoleon Hill

Day 28

I read an interesting play. It's called Woyzeck by Georg Büchner. After reading it, I didn't know what to think. It seemed very episodic, which I've noticed I'm not a fan of. I like things to connect in some form or fashion. I guess it's the human nature in me that looks for a purpose for everything. I think I also went into reading it thinking it was going to be something completely different. I read it for a theatre history class, and we were talking about 19th century theatre. I guess I was thinking it was going to be more melodrama in the stereotypical sense. Boy was I wrong lol.

After going through those thoughts, I started to actually think about the play. It was very depressing in the sense that it depicts this working class guy trying to get by in the world. He works for a Captain doing side-jobs and does clinical trials (basically) for a Doctor. He eventually goes insane and murders his mistress, only after getting beat up by this guy the mistress was flirting with. And all I could think is geez, can't this guy catch a break? But I can relate to this play a lot actually. No, I don't have a baby daddy that I want to stab to death, but just the simple fact of being a middle-class joe that can't catch a break. Ever. That has been the story of my life for the past school year and in my life. I overcome and overcome shit that life throws my way, and just when it seems like I'm getting back on my feet, something new has to appear and knock me back down.

I like this play a lot. It's not a happy-ending sort of tale. It depicts a human life, in all its "glory". It's sad, yes, but so true in many ways. So many people can relate to this. I know it was a reflection of society during that time in Germany, but the same could be said about society today in America. I see him almost as a German Willy Loman. Just trying to get by. And I guess that's all we can do. Just get by.

Techies do it in the dark

Day 27

I am not a technical theatre person. I have come to realize that while being here at Tech. I wish I was a lot better at that side of the theatre world. I just never had that official training in high school. I was the actor. There was a big split down the middle between actors and technicians. They usually never crossed over. The closest I ever got to that side was basically making myself the props manager during UIL. Even my first year in college was like that. It wasn't until I got to Tech that I realized how little I knew about the technical world. It's so bizarre to me. Well, maybe not bizarre, but just uncharted territory.

I'm thankful for the practicums and principles classes they make us take, because otherwise I would never have the chance to learn about it. I know that I'm probably one of few who will say that they appreciate practicums. They are a pain in the ass and they take so much time out of your schedule, but I like it. It's gotten to the point where I won't volunteer for run-crews anymore. I don't want to learn how to sit in a greenroom and move a set piece once or do someone's hair. That's not going to help me learn. What will help me is getting to build a flat, or hang and focus a light in the lab. This is where I truly learn. And I appreciate that.

It's frustrating because I wish I could learn more. Or, better yet, I wish I could retain all the information that I'm getting. It's like using a different part of your brain that you don't really use that often. I get acting...in the general sense. Technical theatre, not so much. But I've gotten a lot better than I used to be. And I'm proud of that. I just yearn for more knowledge. Which really isn't anyone's fault but my own.