Thursday, January 28, 2010

Improv: Tuesday Night Make-'em-ups


Each Sunday I do an Improv Show. (9pm, Yuk Yuk's on Elgin, Ottawa) with my group Insensitivity Training.

In the last few years there has been great growth in the improv scene here in Ottawa. Another group, Crush Improv, has started a Tuesday night gig at the Cajun Attic called Tuesday Night Make-'Em-Ups.

The idea for this is to provide a forum where improvisers from different groups in town can get together and interact. It's been a lot of fun. I've done two of them so far, and I commend the people at Crush for starting it.


Pictured: Jim Davies (dashing with no hair), Desiree Connors (glasses), Averie MacDonald (the other one)

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, January 21, 2010

How to Read Blogs, Especially Mine


If you like reading blogs, I recommend using a blog reader. There are several; I use Google Reader. It treats blog entries a bit like emails. It keeps track of which blogs you want to follow, removes ones you've read, and automatically updates when the blogs do. It's great.
I have three active blogs; it's easier to keep up with them with a reader:
    http://jimdavies.blogspot.com/
           I try to update this weekly. It has news about my life in science and the arts, as well as analyses of intellectual problems.
    http://jimdaviesidentifies.blogspot.com/
            This is a blog for cool things I find on the internet. It's rarely updated-- I use twitter more often.
    http://jimdaviesrants.blogspot.com/
            I'm not a negative person, but sometimes I just need to rant. Rarely updated.

Since the last two are rarely updated, it's kind of a waste of time to check them online very often. This is another reason to use a reader.

I also use twitter, which is like a blog, but restricted to messages 140 characters long. It's for funny quips, observations, updates on what I'm doing, and interesting web links. To subscribe, go to twitter.com and subscribe to "twitterjimmyd" which is my username.

The great thing is, you can subscribe to a twitter feed through Google Reader, as though it were a blog. Awesome!

I use ping.fm to post to twitter, and, simultaneously, to update my myspace and facebook status. So if you're friends with me on facebook, you might see my tweets there. If you're like me (I have over 500 friends) you will miss some in the deluge. So if you don't want to miss any Jim Davies, use Google Reader to follow my twitter account.

I will post a version of this every year. 

Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

The Davies Law of the Avant-Garde

The Davies Law of the Avant-Garde is this:
avant-garde performance (theatrical, film, etc.), defined as relying more on strange imagery and less on plot and character, is most effective for short pieces. The longer a piece is, the more elements of plot and character are required to sustain interest.
Weirdness is more palatable in small bits. Too much bores us.

One of the great things about music video is that it provides an outlet for avant-garde film-making. Before music video, how were you ever to see stuff as weird as Lady Gaga's "Bad Romance" video?
http://www.vevo.com/watch/lady-gaga/bad-romance/USUV70903493?w=lyrics&l=1

Music video is perfect for avant-garde film-making. It's short in format (following the Davies Law of the Avant-Garde), and not particularly important (meaning that the song is primary; the video is gravy), allowing its creators to take risks.

On the music video subject, it's one of the only media now for dance film. (see my previous blog entry on this subject at http://jimdavies.blogspot.com/2008/01/i-would-like-to-see-some-straight.html). Beyonce's "Single Ladies" is a great example of this. It's basically just dancing, but it's mezmerizing.
http://www.vevo.com/watch/beyonce/single-ladies-put-a-ring-on-it/USSM20803009


If you like this post, you might also like my law of animation, comics and puppetry.
http://jimdavies.blogspot.com/2007/08/jims-law-of-animation-comics-and.html

Pictured is Lady Gaga. You can read about her incredible video at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Romance

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, January 07, 2010

2009 book wrap up

Every year I report on the books I've finished in the previous year.
You can see all of the books I've read since 1993 at
http://jimdavies.org/personal/books-read.html

Here is 2009, in which I read 11 books. Lower than usual. I have been reading more periodicals and doing other, hopefully more productive things.


Little Brother
by Cory Doctorow

Good book. Read it free on my phone.



The Gathering Storm***
by Robert Jordan and Brandon Sanderson


Fantastic addition to a series I love.


Emergency: This Book Will Save Your Life***
by Neill Strauss

Awesome read. Love Neil Strauss.


The Ruins
by Scott Smith

Couldn't put it down.


Tomorrow's Professor: Preparing for Careers in Science and Engineering
by Richard M. Reis

Decent book.


Robot: Mere Machine to Transcendent Mind
by Hans Moravec

A bit dated, but full of good ideas.


The Mechanical Mind in History
, edited by Husbands, Holland, & Wheeler


Goldfinger
by Ian Fleming


Guilty Pleasures by Laurell K. Hamilton



The Fourth Ambit
by Dawson Nichols

Great!



Meditation
by Eknath Easwaran

Best book on meditation I've ever read.


Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, January 05, 2010

Saturday, January 02, 2010

Themes in Multi-Authored Works of Art




Theatrical productions are works of art with multiple authors. Playwrights make scripts, directors oversee productions, designers make sets, lighting, costumes, etc., and actors act on stage. Great productions hold together, with all of the pieces working in concert to bring a wonderful experience to the audience. Directors often get advice to have a theme for a production. Some like to describe themes in terms of emotions or concepts, but I prefer them in terms of cause and effect (e.g., I think the theme of the film The Perfect Storm is "greed leads to death.").

In theater and film, the director is in charge of overseeing the whole. It is his or her job to make sure stuff works together (to varying degrees the producer does some of this too). In theater, there is one element the director has just about no control over: the dialogue in the script.

Contracts for playwrights usually specify that a director may not change a single word of dialogue without the permission of the playwright. Contracts in film are not like this-- once a screenplay is bought anybody can completely rewrite it, if they like.

The good thing about this, for playwrights, anyway, is that their work is protected. The bad thing is that the playwright does not know what directors are going to come up with, and sometimes a change in dialog might be appropriate.

For reasons that are not clear to me, directors are allowed to ignore stage directions. This limits the playwright because it encourages things to be done with dialog that might be better done with action. For example, if you want the character to nod instead of say yes, the director has no obligation to have the actor nod. It's a stage direction, after all. So to play it safe, the playwright has a motivation to make scripts wordy. An extreme example would be a silent play. In a play with no dialog at all, what protection does the playwright have?

As a playwright, it's a little bothersome that the only tools I can use to communicate with the director and actors are the keys on a keyboard. This is a severe restriction. There are things that are difficult to express with a keyboard. For example, most languages have a commonly used word for the English "so-so." In everyday English, however, we don't use "so-so." Rather, we say something like "eeeh," and tilt our heads, with a slight disgust expression. Notice how long it took me to describe that. There is no elegant way to put that in a script. Another example: in America and Canada, the way we say "I don't know" has a specific cadence that is recognizable without the words. You can hum "I don't know" and people will understand. How am I supposed to put this in a script?

Talking over each other is another challenge. In real life, people talk over each other all the time, but in scripts it's a challenge to indicate this. I have my own convention, but it's not perfect and I had to make it up myself.

I read an article by playwright Edward Albee (2009). I quote:

...since a playwright must be able to "hear" his or her characters, what the character says and how the character says it must be precisely "notated." I use the composers' term intentionally, for a playwright must be able to hear as a composer hears, as precisely, and indicate it all, as a composer puts it down on paper. There are durational differences between a quarter note and a dotted quarter note, for example...We playwrights should hear these distinctions as precisely as a composer does, and use them as precisely. We should hear the durational differences between periods, semicolons, commas, three dots, and dashes, for example, as well as emphasis markings such as underlining, capitalization, italicization, and whatever else we can think up to render our dialogue as precise and "spoken" as our ears will let us.
This is interesting, because he's trying to use punctuation to indicate pauses and such. Note, however, that he does not say how long a dash is in term of time, nor, indeed, whether a semicolon is a longer pause than a dash. Not only does he think that playwrights should use these notations, but that directors and actors should follow them exactly. How they are supposed to do this without knowing how long a period lasts, I don't know.  Albee continues:

Now, no director will pay the attention they should to our specifics. Somehow our knowing what we want can inhibit their "interpretation" (read "distortion," if you like) of our work. And some actors feel preciseness can inhibit their creativity, too. (The answer here may be puppets.)


I think Albee goes a bit far here (he sounds like Mamet, who says similar things in his Black and White book). One of the wonderful things about theater is that different productions will have different themes. If each production were exactly the same, it makes it more like watching a movie. And if a particular director is going for a particular theme, it might work better or worse with the dialog exactly as the playwright imagined it. Playwrights are not always directors, and can fall into a trap of thinking that the words are all there is to a play. 


Film suffers because scripts are rarely re-made. In theater, because it's so local, scripts are re-done all the time. In television and film, people even get freaked out when different actors play the same role. Coming from a theater perspective, I don't get bothered by this at all. 


When I wrote Medea: The Fury (with a co-author) I didn't indicate in the script that there should be dance sequences. The director, Montica Pes, put in a ton of them. They were wonderful. A playwright friend of mind said that he would have not been pleased with dance numbers being added to the script. I didn't mind at all. I don't want to put dance numbers in the script, because other directors and producers reading the script in the future might not want them in and reject the script.  


The best situation, I my opinion, is when the writer is working with the production to make the best work of art on stage (or film) as possible. The predefined roles of writer and director have limitations that I believe can keep certain productions from fulfilling their potential.


REFERENCE


Albee, E. (2009). Dialog. The Dramatist. Sept/Oct 9-10.

Bookmark and Share