a rhino died, and here's what I'm sayin'

While driving home from a rehearsal tonight, I heard on the radio a conversation about extinction. Specifically, about the recent death oath of the last male northern white rhino, but also about the wave of species extinctions happening in the world today.

I heard them talk about human impact, about loss of habit, and climate change, and poachers, and a little about economic pressures. But the host and guest of whatever this program was did not once mention human overpopulation. You know, the fact that there are outrageously high numbers of humans on this planet. There are WAY too many of us. As of the end of last year, we are estimated at 7.6 BILLION humans. I never hear anyone talk about this anymore. When I was a kid, and there were only about 4 billion of us, you heard people talk about it. It was a growing concern. A problem. Well, apparently no longer.

Here’s my real point. We humans do some horrible things to each other, to other species (both animals and plants), and to the planet in general. It would be great if we could stop doing bad things. But... WE’RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO STOP DOING BAD THINGS TO THE PLANET. But the one thing that would make climate change and species extinction and all the other shit less of a problem is to have A LOT few humans here on the planet.

Now, I’m not comfortable saying that we should just kill off a bunch of people. But I am comfortable saying this:
Maybe we should stop treating every human birth like it’s a magical miracle from heaven. And maybe we should stop treating every human death as if it’s such a horrific tragedy that can be accepted. Maybe, just maybe, we don’t need to fight and struggle to keep every human alive and reproducing. Oh yeah! And maybe we don’t need that antibacterial hand sanitizer a dozen times a day.

It’s as if we’ve decided that every natural check on population just doesn’t pertain to us. We’re somehow special. Yep, so special that we’re fucking over tons of other species just to prove the point. And the thing is, if we keep going, we’re going to prove the opposite. That we humans can’t make as many of ourselves as we want to.

Anyway... There are too many people already. We need to slow down on the baby-making. A lot fewer humans could chop down some trees, and kill some animals, and burn some fossil fuels, and even use that hairspray with chlorofluorocarbons. All that wouldn’t be great for the environment, but the earth could probably handle it. But 7½ billion humans doing that is insane. And we don’t seem to give a fuck anymore. Just like America has pretty much accepted that we’re okay with mass shootings and other such violence, we’ve “civilized” humans have pretty much accepted that we’re going to make this planet unlivable for ourselves and many other species.

Well, get ready, cockroaches. Your chance is coming. 

Birthday wish list

My birthday is coming up soon. (Update: Actually, it’s today) If you’re thinking you should go buy me something, stop, don’t. Also, if you’re thinking, “I’ll have to go write something on his facebook page,” also, stop, don’t. 
Oh! And you know how sometimes people will say, “don’t do this thing,” but you think what they actually mean is to do it...stop, don’t. Instead, read this, and then do something on the list.

Most people just don’t know me well enough to have a realistic idea of something I need or would want to have. And, unlike many of you who feel #blessed that so many people thought of you on your birthday (when it was really just the facebook telling them it was your birthday), I find facebook birthday wishes to be an annoying reminder of my lack of meaningful relationships.

So, if you like me (or want me to like you) and want to do something that I would actually appreciate for my birthday, here’s a list. (And if I think of more stuff, I’ll add it.) You don't have to do this ON my birthday. My schedule happens to be extremely open the next few weeks. And, in general, I have too much free time all year ‘round. 

- If you’re 18 or older, model for me. Preferably nude, though I do clothed shoots as well.

- Ask me if there might be a role that’s right for you in my upcoming Fringe Festival show. Or volunteer as a stage manager or other off-stage work.

- Read a script of mine, and give me some actual feedback. Or organize a table reading and feedback session with enough people to cover all the roles.

- Find a theatre interested in producing a show that few people have ever seen (or, in some cases, no one has seen). Or hire me to write something new.

- If you’re a classical musician, perform something I’ve written. I’ve got tons of chamber music and art songs, many of which have never been heard in public. You could premiere something. Or commission a new work. This also applies to choreographers – I’ve written music for dance, too.

- Hire me for a gig, especially one that plays well, and especially working with competent people.

- Come hang out with me and have an in-person conversation that is not necessarily related to the show we’re rehearsing. Or come have a drink. This is probably the easiest thing on this list. It only requires time and effort.

- Get me a massage. Or give me a massage. Or even get a massage from me - I used to do that a bit. It was nice, actually having contact with another human.

- This one is pretty unlikely. (Then again, maybe they all are.) Find me a girlfriend. This would require finding out what I like and dislike in people. Also the things I find attractive in a woman (which are many of the same traits, plus a nice butt.) 

- Of course, if you want to throw a big party for me that takes a lot of effort, and invite people I know that you don’t necessarily know but had to find on facebook and then find out if I’m actually friends with them...I guess that would be okay. 

I suppose many of these things on this list are just a way of encouraging people to be my friend in real life and not just on the facebook. I can appreciate that it might be hard to be my friend. Perhaps you think of me as being overly critical and/or demanding. Then again, if you only know me as a music director, I would argue that is part of my job.

You could even engage me in conversation about the things can make you uncomfortable with me. Oo! If you're one of those people who feel uncomfortable with my photography, you could start a discussion with me about that. I was just saying the other day that people commenting TO ME about my photography is actually somewhat uncommon, if not rare.

political ramblings from last fall

I was cleaning out files on my computer, and I found this. It is a blog I started (and never finished) shortly after the presidential election (November 2016). I tried to flesh it out a bit, but it’s just several snippets on the topic of politics. So...enjoy? 

____________________________

I fear that we who think of ourselves as liberal, progressive, even moderate will close our eyes to the real takeaway from this election. After our shock and anger and sadness fade, after we assuage our pain with platitudes of love and family and community, we’ll simply move on without examining this whole election. All these calls for love and respect – I worry they will in reality equal doing nothing. They are simply another version of the “thoughts and prayers” that conservative offer whenever some mass shooting occurs: ultimately meaningless.

.   .   .   .   .   .   .   .

We ignore things. We worry and complain about them when they come up – the problem of the Electoral College, for example – and then we forget about it, until 4 or 8 or 12 years later when it comes up again. We know it’s a problem, a fixable problem, but we don’t fix. We don’t even make and attempt to fix. When Hillary Clinton’s supporters had to keep trying to convince people that even though they may not like her, they should still vote for her, is that not a big red flag? When the Democratic party possibly fudges the primary votes in favor of a candidate, is that not a big red flag? Apparently not, because mostly we ignore all that, too. Instead, we prefer to blame anybody who supported or, god forbid, actually voted for a third-party candidate.

.   .   .   .   .   .   .   .

Donald Trump was right, in a sense, when he said the electoral system is rigged – just in a more complex way than he meant. Our government, on most levels, is monopolized by an entrenched two-party system. An us-versus-them/all-or-nothing/winning-at-the-expense-of-right-and-reason system. And these parties have no obligation to be “fair” because they make their own rules. But the big thing that keeps them in power is they have the infrastructure to get their candidates on the ballot, the money to advertise, and they’ve convinced the population that other parties aren’t serious options. The inclusion of any third-party candidates in mainstream political discussion, much less in an actual debate, is rare. All of our “institutions” in this country tell the same story about candidates outside of the Democrat and Republican parties: that they’re unrealistic, no chance of winning, at best (or worst) steals votes from the serious legit candidates.

.   .   .   .   .   .   .   .

I suspect that many voters weren’t paying attention to every speech given by the candidates, nor to all the specifics of any party’s platform. A lot of people just voted AGAINST Hillary Clinton, because of what she represents to them, which is:

- an entrenched political elite out of touch with the average person

- a political class who speaks in “talking points” and bases decisions on focus groups

- a politician who tells you what you want instead of asking you

.   .   .   .   .   .   .   .

Significant government reform – real changes in what gets done and what doesn’t – may be simply be impossible without first getting the influence of money out of government. Campaign finance reform – that’s a good starting place. Publicly-funded election campaigns mean that candidates aren’t beholden to their major donors whenever those donors’ pet issues come up. And, I suspect, directly related to campaign finance is the way lobbyists work. Companies and organizations with money to throw around in support of their agendas hire people to wine and dine and chat up our representatives, to the point that they’re no longer OUR representatives. I think our justice system is in on it, too, when they rule that corporations are “people” and that money is “speech.” I want to say it’s insane, but it’s much worse than that – it’s devious; it’s evil; it’s repugnant. 

that school I worked at that one time

This morning I saw a facebook friend’s post about a former facebook friend getting a “prestigious” job at a private Christian college. I refrained from commenting on the post. The post was all about “congratulations to my friend, blah, blah,” and the comment that came to my mind was, “I worked there. Could not stand it. So fake. Left after one semester.” 

I didn’t post that comment. But it’s on my mind. (Apparently, I have too much free time to just have a thought then let it go.) So I’m writing about it here. 

I worked there. Could not stand it. So fake. Left after one semester. I told them half-way through the semester that I wouldn’t be staying. I worked as an accompanist in the music and theatre programs. I took the job because I had nothing lined up after a New Hampshire summer stock season which left me with not enough money to go back to NYC. Someone I knew at college posted on the facebook that the school where he was now teaching voice needed an accompanist. So I wrote him, and the school hired me on his recommendation. 

All I knew was that it was a private college – actually, it had recently become a university – that had some connection to a church. I had in the past worked at a private college that had some relationship with the Methodist Church. At that “Methodist” school, there were probably a lot higher percentage of religious students than you’d find at a state school. But it wasn’t an extremely religious atmosphere. So, I thought I had an idea of what I was getting into at this other school. 

This other school – I’ll go ahead and name it: the University of Mobile. It’s not actually in Mobile, but no one’s going to attend the “University of Saraland.” 

The Univeristy of Mobile is not a seminary, nor a bible college. When I was there, they described it to me as “a liberal arts school with a Christian perspective.” Now (I saw this on the link my facebook friend posted this morning), the school describes itself as “a Christ-centered liberal arts and sciences institution.” They are affiliated with the Baptist Church. I don’t think you have to be a Baptist to go there or work there. I wasn’t. I’m not (and have never been) a Christian. Now, if I had been teaching there and not just an accompanist, I would have had to make a profession of faith, because they would have considered me responsible for the students’ moral upbringing. 

The atmosphere there was not what I expected, not like the other school where I had worked. It was very religious and kind of disturbing. The students also had to make a profession of faith. This was a school where they would (maybe still do?) kick you out if you’re discovered to be engaging in homosexual activity. That is, unless they think you’re a significant addition to the program – you’re a really great singer or whatever – that they want to keep you there, so instead of kicking you out, they a big prayer session over you. 

It was so very fake. A lot of public praying – prayers generously peppered with the right church-y catch phrases, to let everybody who hears you know that you’re the right kind of person (or maybe the right kind of Christian?). It was like they were so “Christ-focused” that they couldn’t see how mediocre they were making their performances. When I say “Christ-focused” what I really mean is that they were busy trying to make everything they did nice and pretty and not possibly offensive or challenging to anyone because Conservative-American-Jesus wouldn’t want that. But that is not what art is about. It’s not what a higher education is about. 

And it wasn’t just about the music. There was a woman (an administrative assistant) who’s job it was at one big multiple group concert to check that all the young women’s dresses looked right – the right length or style of whatever. I don’t think any of the female students in that performance wore anything other than a dress. (Because that wouldn’t look right.) The appearance of righteousness and right-ness was obviously more important than the substance of things. I was told twice by the head of the department that I shouldn’t (or couldn’t – he had a slippery way of getting people to agree to things without sounding like he was outright telling you what to do. It took me a couple of conversations with him to realize it. I think of him as a snake-oil salesman.) talk about certain things – like the fact that I wasn’t a Christian – because “we don’t want to confuse the students.” 

Here’s the thing, though... At that level of education – a “liberal arts” university – maybe you DO want to confuse the students a little. You want to present complex ideas and encourage them to think and perhaps learn to deal with conflicting information, information that may not fit conveniently into your previous understanding. In my resignation letter to the department head, I said something that I hoped he would understand: as you mature, a time comes to “put away childish things.” (That’s from the Bible.) He liked to say that they were “training the next generation of lay leaders in the church.” I told him that if he wanted the church to do something other than shrivel away, those future leaders needed to learn how to deal with complex and uncomfortable realities. Things like the fact that I might be good at my job and have something worthwhile to contribute without sharing their belief system. 

This was 8 years ago. It hadn’t occurred to me then that “the church’s” future could be in more prejudice and fear and ignorance. I don’t know if that’s what happening in “the church” today. But that’s what seems to be happening with conservative America today. I have no current involvement with churches or church-affiliated groups. I’ve had it. I grew up going to church. We had to – my parents were the ministers. I’ve seen too much hypocrisy and bullshit. I’ve met too many people who say “I know what I believe,” yet know little or nothing about their church’s history or doctrine. People who are religious, but can’t hold a real conversation about religion because they’re just plain ignorant about it. 

I admit my intolerance of religion. Whenever I see people’s facebook posts of Bible verses or about how great God is and how He provides, or when I see people praying off to the side – or right there in front – before a performance or something, instead of going into your room and locking the door to pray privately (that’s in the Bible), I cringe. I retreat. I recognize that those people are probably not my people, even if they have other appealing qualities, like a sense of humor, or being a great performer, or being really intelligent. (And that one is the heart-breaker: really intelligent, educated, moderate-to-liberal people of faith, who never apply that intellect to their belief, unless it’s as an apologist. I just don’t get it.) 

I understand that for some people religion or faith or “spirituality” is a balm. I understand that we humans evolved with spiritual questions (about the nature of existence and out part in the scheme of things) much the same way that we evolved with language and story-telling, with tool use, with group identification. And all those things are still part of what makes us human. So, while I can’t reasonably expect humanity to entirely give up religion, or the need to seek answers to those kinds of questions, I (and we all) can and should hope that humanity lets certain things fall away when they’re no longer serving a beneficial purpose. Fall away, like the leaves that are falling off the trees right now outside my window. Those leaves will be replaced eventually. And I hope that hypocritical, fear-and-ignorance-based religions will be replaced by something useful. 

Oh! To put a nice, little, bring-it-all-back-to-my-original-starting-point bow on it... I didn’t make that comment on my facebook friend’s post, because this rant of mine has run to well over 1000 words, and who wants that on their facebook?

So, is this a poem, or what?

You were in my dream last night.
Not really you, though. I know that.

Just a copy, a doppelganger, maybe. A shadow left on my brain, 

but with dim eyes, and a small voice. A pale ghost.
A reminder
of things I thought were done and gone.

And I didn’t know 

if I should run to you or run away,
so I tortured myself instead. 

I opened up the dried box of my heart, 

looking for the words to say
or the feelings to feel that will make sense of it,
and let me be unstuck at last.


Now I lay here in bed, afraid to sleep again, 

afraid to see you,
afraid it’ll all start over again. 

I dreamed last night I got on the boat to heaven... 

Uh, no.

I dreamed last night that I was in actor housing somewhere I didn’t recognize, doing some show which was never specified in the dream. I didn’t know anyone else there, except one woman. She had been in a show I did about 9 years ago. 

This woman and I – when we did this show in real life – had a difficult...I don't know what to call it. It wasn’t a crush I had, and I wasn’t “in love” with her...okay, maybe I was, but it was more like I was insane about her. If you’ve ever heard, in some poetic context, “he was undone by her,” that is what it was. I was undone. And nothing sexual or romantic ever happened between us, but there was clearly this big thing that she didn’t want to deal with. So, I had a difficult whatever it was. She never would talk to me about it. Within a month or two I wrote 13 songs about her and a 10-minute play about her. Well, the play was more about me wanting her and not having her. She’s the reason I ran away to the beach that winter for 3 or 4 months and did nothing. 

So that’s who was in this dream. It was definitely, unambiguously her. I recognized her, and she recognized me. In this dream I didn’t have the same feelings as 9 years ago. But I also wasn’t pissed off at her, as I would expect. The last real life interaction we had – the only interaction since a few months after that show closed, when I decided I couldn’t keep trying to talk to her if she wasn’t going to talk to me about whatever the thing between us had been – was a couple of cryptic facebook messages from her which I responded to, then got angry about when she didn’t follow up.

In this dream last night, I was attracted to her, but not “undone,” though I was a little wary...suspicious, maybe. But definitely curious what was going on with her. She seemed a little flirty and a little aloof – not precisely at the same time. (That would be quite a trick.) Obviously, in this dream, it was not actually her – just some avatar of her apparently still wandering around in my subconscious. 

I’m not much of a believer. Someone once described me as generally agnostic, not only about religion but about things in general. So, while I find dreams curious sometimes, I don’t give a lot of significance to them. I hadn’t thought of her in a while, and probably the last several, or many, times I did think of her, it was just a quick, passing, shallow sort of thought: one time I did this show, and the woman who played that role – I totally crazy about her. But now, this morning, I am wondering about her, wondering what’s she’s doing these days, wondering what her experience was 9 years ago. And I’m even thinking about writing her. I don’t know what the purpose of that would be. Am I looking for closure? Or something else? I don’t know.

A few years ago, I wrote someone in an attempt to repair a damaged friendship. I sort of “extended an olive branch.” And it was clearly refused. It was as if that person didn’t want to be friends with me if it required effort. If I did write this “9 years ago” woman, it wouldn’t be the same situation. But that damaged friendship, along with the failure of various recent attempts (well, a year or two ago) to really be friends with people outside of rehearsals for a show, have suggested to me that people just don’t want to change the nature of their current relationship with others, especially if it takes any kind of effort. When you meet a new person, that new relationship is full of possibility. But once you have an established relationship, of whatever type (for me it’s overwhelmingly “friendly acquaintances”) it’s really hard to change that relationship, except when one of you gets angry or offended by the other person. 

Anyway... That’s my morning so far. How’s yours going?

tech rehearsal nomenclature

Dear people who do theatre, 

I’ve noticed lately some misuse of certain words and phrases for technical rehearsals. So, here’s a public service announcement. It’s going to be long, but if you do theatre (especially community theatre), you should at least skim through this, and share it with your friends. You may be using these phrases incorrectly.  

A “tech rehearsal” is a rehearsal WITH THE ACTORS in which the focus is the technical elements of the production: lighting, sound, sets, props, costumes. This is generally the rehearsal where these elements are added for the first time, though there may be some props or costume pieces, etc., that have been used already in rehearsals. Typically, cast and crew work through the entire show, often stopping, going back and re-doing some light cue or sound cue or scene change or quick costume change. You may go back and do a particular cue several times until it works. 

This can be a long, taxing rehearsal. In the professional (equity) productions I’ve done, tech is a “10 out of 12” day, meaning it’s a 12-hour rehearsal in which the cast gets a 2-hour lunch or dinner break. In community theatre it’s often more like a rehearsal on Sunday from sometime mid-afternoon “until we finish.” I’ve done shows where the tech rehearsal was broken up into two days, either purposely scheduled that way, or decided in the moment because it was getting late and we were nowhere close to being done with tech. 

Some people (and theatres) seem to want to skip this kind of tech rehearsal, and instead they end up stretching it out over the entire tech week, adding a few more tech elements every night – even to the point of adding a few last minutes things on opening night. Perhaps calling that entire week before the show opens “tech week” contributes to this misunderstanding. It shouldn’t be that you add the tech elements throughout this entire week, but rather that this is the week in which you work with all the tech elements. You should plan to have all the tech elements in place not by opening night but by the tech rehearsal, which then gives a production several rehearsals between tech and opening for the actors and the crew to work with and get used to all the tech elements. It also provides a buffer of several days to discover if something isn’t working and needs to be changed. 

If you’re doing a musical, do not call the band for a tech rehearsal. It is a waste of their time and your money. (You are paying them, right? Please, tell me you’re paying them.) 

You may run through all of a show during a tech rehearsal, OR it may be a “cue-to-cue.” This means you work one technical cue – lighting, scene change, etc. – repeating as needed, then you skip ahead to the next technical cue. So you skip over bits of scenes in which there is no technical cue. This is still a tech rehearsal, so THE ACTORS ARE THERE ON STAGE. 

A tech rehearsal without the actors is called a “dry tech.” This is a rehearsal with the stage manager, the tech crew, likely the designers and director (but not necessarily). In a dry tech, you may run or work or fix many of the technical elements of the show. 

I don’t know if there’s a specific term for when the director and lighting &/or sound designer(s) sit in the theatre talking about and building various cues without other tech crew and such. I’d probably call it something like “setting the light cues,” though it may fall under the category of dry tech. And, of course, there will be times when the lighting designer and some other tech crew or other folks are in the theatre physically adjusting the lights, adding gels or gobos or whatever. I don’t know what that’s called. Perhaps that’s also within this dry tech category. 

A meeting in which the director, light and sound and costume designers, and perhaps others, discuss the technical elements, possibly even talking through scene changes, lighting cues, etc., is called a “paper tech.” No one is actually moving things around or setting light cues and such – you may not even be in the theatre – but probably people are writing things down. 

A paper tech is a bit like a production meeting, but it’s specifically about the tech elements for a production. You’re talking through scene changes and costume changes, lighting and sound, etc. A producer (or artistic director or board member?) may not necessarily be there, as you would expect in a production meeting. You won’t be discussing ticket sales, nor PR, nor casting – none of that stuff. 

There. Those are different types of tech rehearsals. Please start using these phrases correctly. If I’ve missed or gotten something completely wrong, do let me know. I'll update this. 

Okay. Rant over. 

(For now.)