Process Writing

        When I started my first movie review, I found it impossibly too complicated to express in a mere four-hundred words. I chose to write on Les Miserables, and there was no lack of content to talk about. In my notes I started to write different aspects of the movie, and then a few notes about them.

        After I had about a dozen different thoughts on the page, I started to think about how they related to one another, and to the film as a whole. In one category I noticed how the movie was very slow, and in another I had written that the close-up shots lasted for ages. By having them both on the page I could make the judgment that the reason I thought the movie was slow was because of the boring cinematography. 

 

        As I began to discover other mediums to write on, it immediately became clear to me why critics usually specialize. I definitely thought that I would make more assertive and authoritative arguments in my review when it was on something I was familiar with.

        For example, when reviewing the Oscars, I felt like a had an inside perspective from my experience working in the TV production studio. We had talked in class about the momentous effort in producing a live awards show on television.

        By understanding (to some degree) how the show was being televised I thought I wrote a strong review of the event, not just the movies or celebrities. The conclusion I've come to is that it's best to sample a lot of different mediums, and when you find one you like to write on, write on it.

         At the same time, though, it's been my experience that it's much easier to write on a medium that I myself have produced, or at least been involved in. It gives you an understanding that allows for more critical judgments, and as a result, better reviews.

        Sometimes the biggest challenge of writing a review wasn't the writing. I often found myself clicking 'word count' and combing the page for redundancies or superfluousness. I would take out a word here, shorten a phrase there, and the whole process really made me appreciate the art of working with words.

        My entire life writing was always an act of more, never less. More pages, more lines, more paragraphs, but with in writing reviews it's an act of more creativity. With smaller boundaries a writer has to be more flexible and solve, not more, but different problems, than say a novelist. 

 

         I don't know if I agree with Wilde that critics are the greatest of artists, but he did convince me that criticism is an art. One that I have enjoyed greatly, I hope that someday someone will value my opinions enough to pay me for them, but until then I'm glad that I had the chance to take Arts Journalism.

The Submission Review (Revised)

The Submission of Whom?

          Amy Waldman places her debut novel in the ash-filled wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11^th, 2001. The towers have fallen, and a small jury has been tasked with choosing, from thousands of anonymous submissions, a memorial to honor the lives lost. Among the jury members is Claire Burwell, the only juror to have lost a family member, her husband, in the attack. 

 

          After much deliberation the winning design is a garden, symbolic of healing and rebirth, but the decision becomes controversial after it is made public that the designer, an American named Mohammed Kahn, is labeled a Muslim by a nosy reporter. Although he does not practice, and in his own words an Atheist, many of his countrymen are insulted that he would defile sacred ground with what they see as an “Islamic Garden.”

          Waldman, a contributor for both “The New York Times” and “The Atlantic,” has a powerful, punchy, prose that seamlessly incorporates symbolism from the real-world events of 9/11 into the lives of her characters. Her imaginary garden, with steel trees reformed from the wreckage of the Twin Towers becomes an afterthought to it's imaginary designer, the media, as well as the public.

          The process of building the memorial becomes a microcosm of American democracy. A thousand different interest groups fight with one another and among themselves until the whole process is compromised to the point that an innocent women loses her life. The masses, eager to use their collective voice, finds that it has none, and that America is not a black and white country.

         That's democracy, finding a single resolution among three-hundred million different opinions, and Waldman perhaps hints at the answer in the title. There isn't a protagonist, or an antagonist either, but rather just Americans, each trying to do what they think is right. The rub is that while everyone wants to memorialize the attack, nobody can agree on how to do it.

          Waldman incorporates an intricate use of architecture and design into her prose, eloquently describing the contours and lines of buildings. It fits the story of the memorial thematically as well as engaging the reader with vivid imagery. The memorial is brought to life by her words, and the reader can develop their own opinion on it. At least until the epilogue, set some time in the future, in which everything is neatly tied up, in an underwhelming and seemingly forced conclusion.

         People say that everything changed after 9/11, and they are right, to an extent. Waldman's novel is a portrait of the changing American landscape in the twenty-first century, in which globalization and capitalism has blurred the line between 'us' and 'them'. Despite a dissatisfying ending, Waldman's writing is strong enough to carry a reader through the 300 plus pages. As a work of fiction, “The Submission” is as much a memorial to 9/11 as Waldman's imaginary garden would have been.

The Submission of Whom?

         Amy Waldman places her debut novel in the ash-filled wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11^th, 2001. The towers have fallen, and now, a small jury has been tasked with choosing, from thousands of anonymous submissions, a memorial to honor the lives lost. Among the jury is Claire Burwell, the only juror to have lost a family member in the attack. 

 

         After much deliberation the winning design is a garden, symbolic of healing and rebirth, but the decision becomes a controversy after it is made public that the designer, an American named Mohammed Kahn, is labeled a Muslim. Although he is not practicing, and in his own words an Atheist, many of his countrymen are insulted that he would defile sacred ground with what they see as an “Islamic Garden”.

         Waldman, a contributor for both “The New York Times” and “The Atlantic”, has a powerful, punching, prose that seamlessly incorporates symbolism from the real-world events of 9/11 into the lives of her characters. Her imaginary garden, with steel trees made from the wreckage of the Twin Towers becomes an afterthought to it's imaginary designer, the media, as well as the public.

          The process of building the memorial becomes a microcosm of American democracy. A thousand different interest groups fight with each other and amidst themselves until the whole process is compromised to the point that an innocent women loses her life. The masses, eager to use it's collective voice, finds that it has none, and that America is not a black a white country.

         That's democracy, finding a single resolution amongst three-hundred million different opinions, and Waldman perhaps hints at the answer in the title. There isn't a protagonist, or an antagonist either, but rather just Americans, trying to do what they think is right. The rub is that while everyone wants to memorialize the attack, nobody can agree on how to do it. 

 

         People say that 'everything changed after 9/11', and they are right, to an extent. Waldman's novel is a portrait of the changing American landscape in the twenty-first century, in which globalization and capitalism has blurred the line between 'us' and 'them'. There aren't any happy endings to be found in the novel, a harrowing reminder of the reality of the events portrayed. As a work of fiction, “The Submission” is as much a testament to 9/11 as Waldman's imaginary garden would have been.

Final Project Idea

        For my final project I hope to focus on Tyler, the Creator, an American rapper and the alternative hip-hop collective he leads known as Odd Future. Tyler has many critics, who accuse him for portraying graphic violence and homophobia in his lyrics. The purpose of this profile piece is to address the lyrics and the people behind them.

            OF is not a typical hip-hop group, rather than rap about money, hoes, and rims, OFWGKTA's songs are a bizarre mix of grotesque imagery, close friendships and sex. In other words, they talk about exactly what every other teenager in America talks about. 

 

          What I find most impressive about OFWGKTA is how they are creating an entirely new aesthetic seemingly as they go. At the center of all this innovation is Tyler, who acts as the groups graphic designer, music video director, head of merchandising, and producer. Impressive considering until this year he couldn't get served at a bar.

          I want to rely heavily on the many interviews Tyler has given and make the argument that despite his dirty mouth and 'fuck it all' attitude, there is more to him than just shock value. While Drake might have coined the term 'yolo', Tyler lives it. He is young, rich, and famous, and doesn't ever want to grow up.

   

Oscars 2013

         The 2013 Academy Awards attracted some of the biggest and brightest stars of the film industry, and in doing so failed to deliver any big surprises. The three and a half our live television event, hosted by “Ted” creator Seth Macfarlane, went more or less to plan. Academy President Hawk Koch said in his speech that this years gathering was to “usher in the future of the movies”, and one can only hope that he's wrong.

        The Oscars are supposed to be a celebration of excellence within the film industry, but from from the red carpet to the end credits the event seemed to be more of the film industry glorifying itself. First-time host Macfarlane failed to make any friends, and made off color jokes and underhanded stabs at nearly everybody in the crowd, as well as those watching at home. 

 

         When so many entertainers gather in one room the result is usually not entertainment. It wasn't just movie stars either, Adele, Areosmith, Nora Jones, and the great Barbara Streisand were all on the bill. Even Mr. Macfarlane sang a song or two, though not without first creating a social media shit-storm with the low brow show tune “We Saw Your Boobs.” The best musical performance of the night was easily William Ross' orchestra, who played classic film scores, from “Jaws” to several iterations of the classic “Bond Theme”.

         The franchise celebrated it's fiftieth anniversary and won a modest two awards to mark the occasion. One for Best Original Song, the other for Best Sound Editing. This makes sense considering that Adele sounded much better in the movie than she did in her live performance.

The other tribute was to the best musicals of the last decade. Catherine Zeta-Jones gave an exhilarating rendition of “All That Jazz” that put the cast of Les Mis' performances of “Suddenly” and “One Day More” to shame.

         Director Ang Lee beat out favorite Stephen Spielberg for best director, and when it was all said and done “Life of Pi” received a total of four awards. Maybe Tarantino was right is declaring this year as the “year of the writers”, but the ceremonies indicated it as more of a year of the celebrities. The stars were the main attraction, not the films, and the Oscars aren't nearly as much fun watching from home, without the open bar.

"Progress" Report

        Last Friday, in the black box theatre of the Fine Arts Building, a sell out crowd was fortunate enough to witness the Senior Play Series production of “Progress”. Billed as an “environmental theatre” piece, written by Kalamazoo College's Imani Sims and Marissa Rossman, the play was more experimental than your typical college production.

        Rather than force the audience to be passive observers, environmental theatre encourages audience participation, to the point where the crowd becomes an important element of the production. Instead of sitting and watching, one must move about the set, broken in to three rooms, up close and personal with the actors and props. This intimate point of view creates a powerful connection between performer and audience.

       “Progress” is set in 1930's Germany, and chronicles the stories of a doctor, his patients, and the consequences of the forced sterilization programs that were in effect. In order to immerse attendees into the world of the play, Swastika's and propaganda posters adorned the walls. While performing all of the dialogue in German might have been a bit of a stretch, the close perspective made language almost irrelevant. From such a close perspective the plot becomes clear through body language and action alone.

       The biggest difference between a piece like “Progress” and a more traditional production is the decisions the audience must make to appreciate the play. In order to follow the story, one must change his perspective, but also account for the other patrons who are trying to do the same thing. The result is everyone seeing a different play, a woman might walk through the middle of a scene to pass through to the next room. Or a man might step on your toes as you jockey for a better viewing angle.

        “Progress” is an emotional and dramatic piece, brought to life in a youthful and exciting style. It is more the form than the script that makes this show such a refreshing theatre going experience. Hopefully this type of theatre gains traction and will be more commonplace in the future.

Evening With the Dudes, but then again, no

         Two roaring fireplaces at either end of the Hoben lounge made for a warm and inviting atmosphere where a great crowd gathered to spend an evening with the Kalamadudes. The audience chattered over hot chocolate and cookies waiting for the show to being. The Dudes donned their classiest attire and opened the performance with Peter Gabriel's “Book of Love”.

         Like the song says, the book of love is where music comes from, but some of it's really dumb. While A Capella might not be dumb, the appeal is not in the music. The Dudes do a good job of not taking themselves too seriously, which makes them easy to like. They are relaxed and laughing between songs, talking with the audience and amongst themselves.

         An Evening with the Dudes was part college Friday night part high class night out. The venue, the Hoben first floor lounge had poor acoustics but completely fit the theme on the bill. From the elegant arched windows to the elaborate matching trim of the floor and ceiling, one might have confused it with a room from Versailles.

          The Kalamadudes rendition of “Your Song” felt forced and emotional, as did the Bon Iver interlude, in the otherwise relaxed atmosphere. Again the theatrical elements of their performance was the saving grace of a painfully ordinary cover. The crowd, prompted by the Dudes, clapped in time, for the most part, with the music, contributing to the already lively atmosphere.

          Things got better when the Dudes had the opportunity to loosen up with Sugar Ray's “Every Morning”. They seemed much more relaxed and in their element dancing to 90's feel good hits than they did standing awkwardly parroting emotional ballads. The high energy songs compliment their quirky humor and light hearted attitude.

         When they sang the Coldplay hit “Yellow” the performance hit its climax. It was exactly the right song for them to sing. It fit the theme, and more importantly it fit the performers. It sounded natural, fluid and would have been the high note to end on.

         Unfortunately the Dudes chose to give an unrequested encore, which was far less impressive. Things had been getting progressively better until the end where the Dudes dropped the ball. For a night that was supposed to be filled with elegance it couldn’t have ended more awkwardly.

For Better or Worse

The review of “Sherlock Holmes; The Final Adventure” published in the Western Herald was nearly as predictable as the production itself. John Campbell offers little more than summary and praise to a show that left much less of an impression on myself.

Unfortunately by simply retelling readers what happens he exemplifies the greatest weakness of the show, the script. Watson (Craig Sloan) simply runs about doing exactly what Holmes tells him to, and walks upstage to occasionally narrate. The criminal mastermind Moriarty seems more likely to shoot one of his imbecile henchmen than his corncob pipe-smoking arch rival.

In fairness Campbell does give credit where credit is due; the costumes are great, the sets create elaborate, vast scenes ripe for adventure. The waterfall in the Carpathians where Holmes and Moriarty face-off in an epic final encounter looked spectacular. Mark Wedel's review in the Kalamazoo Gazette rightly notes that while the performance looked fantastic, the sound left much to be desired.

Sherlock (Michael P. Martin) sounded far away and Irene Adler (Marin Heinritz) certainly didn't sound like a world renowned opera singer. The performances were solid, but the acoustic issues were distracting and unnecessary.

Wedel does a better job of pitching the show to readers. He gives fewer boring plot details than Campbell's review, but by being less dynamic, it more accurately describes the show. Even with it's high production value “Sherlock Holmes; The Final Adventure” has flaws in the script that no amount of lighting or acting could mask.

Something for Everyone: The Ten-Minute Play.

        Saturday afternoon proved to be the most exciting showing of the Theatre Kalamazoo! New Play Festival. Five ten-minute plays were read and staged with minimal sets over the course of an hour long production. The ten minute play is the theatrical response to the flash drama audiences have become accustomed to through years of watching television.

         In a theatre there no one has a remote control, no way to fast forward or change the action. The actors read their lines and the audience listens until the curtain, and the same is true for the ten-minute, but in the brevity lies the beauty. 

 

          Not all plays are created equal, and there's nothing more grueling than trying to survive two hours of a tedious play. In the ten-minute form, all the action is condensed into a few minutes of dramatic tension. The rapid fire succession of the plays keeps the audience's short attention spans satisfied as well as their theatrical inclinations fulfilled.

         It was surprising to see such a variety in the audience, packed like sardines into the black box theatre. It was not your usual company of elderly couples and artsy types dressed in black turtlenecks, but a collection as diverse as the selection of plays. Children sat quietly in between their parents, while students chatted away during intermission. 

 

         In the opening act of Chekhov's “The Sea Gull” the aged Sorin tells the aspiring playwright Treplev “We can't do without the theatre.” to which he responds “But we need to make it new. Revitalize it, make it new! And if we can't do that, we should just do without it.” 

 

         The ten-minute play does exactly that. Less emphasis is put on the sets, costumes, and other technical aspects, but in exchange the playwrights have an opportunity to create more compelling and entertaining scripts. By stripping the play down to it's most core elements the Theatre Kalamazoo New Play fest creates a casual atmosphere in which local artists can showcase their talent. 

 

         It isn't fair to say that television is better than the stage, or to say the opposite. They are different mediums and have their own distinct advantages. The TKNP uses the ten-minute play to combine elements of each to create a revitalized theatre worth watching.

Theatre Kalamazoo! New Playfest

        The 3rd annual Theatre Kalamazoo New Play Festival was a diverse showcase of local playwrights and a celebration of the communities' lively theater scene. Featured were first time playwrights such as Darrell Kellog, alongside most established pieces by Jason Lentz and Bonnie Jo Campbell.

        The festival commenced on Jan 25th with a pair of one acts, followed by a series of 10 minute plays on Saturday afternoon, and concluding that night with another 10 minute play and two more one acts.

        Held in the Epic Center in downtown Kalamazoo, the black box theatre was packed from wall to wall with people. Sometimes theatre is criticized for being pretentious or elitist, and sometimes it is, but the TKNP couldn't have felt more organic. Instead of feeling like a production, it felt like being a part of a giant writing workshop.

       In an effort to encourage the contributing artists to make changes to their plays, the actors read from scripts that were, in some cases, printed out within hours of being read. No lines to memorize, not much in the way of costumes, and the set design was a whisker above minimalist. The lack of production value gave a folksy atmosphere that was a much appreciated break from the whole suit and tie affair that so often encompasses a night of theatre.

        Following each performance the audience was encouraged to stay for a half hour talkback with the playwrights, mediated by Ed Menta, theatre professor at Kalamazoo College, and Steve Feffer of WMU. The talkbacks were used as an opportunity for the writers to learn what worked and what was less effective in their plays. Some interesting opinions were aired, but Menta and Feffer kept things going smoothly.

        With an admission fee of zero dollars, you get exactly what you pay for. Or rather, you don't lose anything. Why not go downtown, eat a nice dinner, drink a few glasses of good wine, and spend a few hours watching some plays. The TKNP is the perfect excuse to have a good time, and it would be hard not to.

"Queen of Versailles" Review

          In documentaries, as in life, things don't always go as planned. “The Queen of Versailles” begins with David Siegel, founder and owner of Westgate Resorts, the largest time share company in the world. He and his wife Jackie are in the process of building the largest single family home in the United States, which they have designed in the image of the palace of Versailles.

         On a technical level, the film is mediocre. The cameras are sometimes shaky and amateur, but is a small price to pay for such an intimate perspective of the Siegel family and the real life conflicts they find themselves in. 

 

         In a series of dramatic twists the family finds it's fortune in jeopardy, and the struggles that emerge between Jackie, David, and his business have all the drama of a Chekhov play, and all the tension of an episode of “The Alfred Hitchcock Hour”. “The Queen of Versailles” follows the decline of the American equivalent of royalty through a stunningly profound examination of the stock market crash of 2008. 

 

         Despite being a non-fiction piece, “The Queen of Versailles” could have just as easily been written by a team of first class scriptwriters. The Palace of Versailles previous occupant went from the top to the bottom, as David Siegel does in the 100 minute run time. This historical connection makes for a compelling storyline, put into an exciting historical context.

          Sometimes Jackie, David's second wife, is easy to laugh at. She appears to be an out of touch aristocrat when she asks the rent a car representative about a chauffeur. But at other times she shows herself to be an intelligent, determined woman who cares very much about her children and her family. When their marriage goes from richer to poorer it is Jackie, not David who goes to the greatest lengths to keep their family together. 

 

         By personalizing (I hate to use the phrase) “one per-centers” the film almost asks for pity unto a man who climbed to the very top of the mountain only to fall off the peak. While at the same time sometimes painfully exposes weaknesses and faults that transcend class lines. In an age when the public tweets for a revolution, it is easy to forget that no one lives without a struggle. “The Queen of Versailles” exposes consequences to the dark side of achieving the American dream.

Fighting Giraffes

This. Is. Awesome.  Here I was minding my own business on my computer and then this little video comes across my screen, and my life was never the same. In blissful ignorance I lived my life thinking giraffes were long-necked leaf eaters who roamed the savannah. But after seeing this I don't know if going on Safari is such a good idea.

It's not that I'm surprised they fight, all animals fight. I don't get teary eyed when the stealthy crocodile gets his jaws around the gazelle quietly drinking from the lake on those BBC documentaries narrated by Richard Attenborough. But this is just dirty!

I didn't know Giraffes were allowed to attend the Cobra Kai dojo. The way they flail their necks into the others knees, like some freakish car lot sales gimmick.

It's clear to me now that giraffes are not the peaceful, gentle giants I thought they were. The first thing that came to mind when I watched this the first time was the scene in the Karate Kid where poor Ralph Macchio gets his leg swept by the guy from Cobra Kai.

To assume makes an ass of u and me, but I don't think these giraffes give a damn about your assumptions. They'll kick your ass six ways to Thursday, so don't get in their way.

"Tweaking Rap's Rules, but with Respect" (NYT Defense)

        Jon Caramanica is no stranger to the state of affairs in the rap world. As the music editor of Vibe magazine, a bi-monthly publication dedicated to rap, hip-hop, and R&B, Mr Caramancia has witnessed the rise of many a young rapper. 

 

         In an article published January 17^th, 2013, in the New York Times arts and culture section, he turns his attention to Harlem based rapper Rakim Mayers, better known as A$AP Rocky. 

 

         The A$AP acronym Rocky adopted stands for; Always Strive and Prosper, Assassinating Snitches and Police, or Acronym Symbolizing any Purpose, depending on who you ask. The ambiguity surrounding his moniker is a reflection of his own pioneering style, from the thinly veiled double-entendres in “Cockiness” to the the Marty Mcfly references in “Back to the Future”. 

 

         A$AP prefers “how words sound rather than what they say”. Even so, he exhibits a mastery of language, exemplified in his latest album, “Long.Live.A$AP”. Being his first major label release, A$AP has made the leap from releasing obscure mix tapes online to becoming one of the most promising young rappers in the game.

A$AP Rocky- Purple Swag 
"Tweaking Rap's Rules, but with Respect" -Original Article

Les Mis? Indeed. (edit)

         For a musical, Les Miserables attracted a lot of attention to itself for a very long time. Premiering on Christmas day, underpaid teens across the country were mopping theater floors flooded with tears. Who wouldn't be crying after 157 minutes of sitting?

         Les Miserables needed to decide what it wanted to be. It hyped itself as a musical, but with actors instead of singers. Janitors clean, writers write, and actors act. It's what they're best at, actually. Actors can take a script and bring it to life, but in a musical the script is a lyric sheet. It seems that if the entire movie needs to be sung, that singers should be the ones doing it.

        Not to take anything away from the performances of Hathaway and Jackman, both of which exceeded my, albeit low, expectations. Even Russel Crow gave a valiant effort, but there's no point to using actors if the camera is just going to be trained on their mouths while they sing, no matter how attractive or famous they are.

         Victor Hugo didn't write a musical; he wrote a very dense and very long book. Which was then adapted into a musical for stage, and then again into a movie. The problem is, film is a completely different medium than the stage, and director Tom Hooper didn't incorporate nearly enough creative camerawork to keep it exciting. The shots were long, slow, and as a result the movie was too.

         There's nothing inherently wrong with adaptations. If Lord of the Rings has taught us anything it is that great epic books can be great epic movies too. Great epic movies with all star casts win Oscars. However, Le Mis lacks the core elements of cinema that make it such an entertaining medium.

        At least when watching it on stage the audience gets an intermission to stretch their legs. The singing wasn't phenomenal, but it was good enough for Hollywood. The acting was first class, but poor cinematography made it difficult to appreciate. In five years Le Mis the film will disappear into the obscurity, while both the book and musical will retain their rightful place in history.

Le Mis? Indeed.

        For a musical Les Miserables attracted a lot of attention to itself for a very long time. I sat in the packed theater with my Aunt on Christmas Day and watched her wipe streams of tears from her eyes for forty-five minutes. I couldn't blame her though, it is a tragic story. The characters are well developed and have compelling stories to tell. And the all star cast delivers professional performances. In fact lately I've enjoyed watching several videos of people crying in the after seeing it. (actually crying.)

         Les Miserables needed to decide what it wanted to be, it hyped itself as a musical, but with actors instead of singers. Janitors clean, writers write, and actors act. It's what their best at, actually. Actors can take a script and bring it to life, but in a musical the script is also a lyric sheet. If the entire movie is going to be sung, it is my preference that it were sung by singers. 

         Not to take anything away from the performances of Hatheway and Jackman both of which exceeded my expectations. Even Russel Crow gave a valiant effort, but if you're going to use actors, let them act! But there's no point to using actors if the camera is just going to be trained on their mouths while they sing. I was almost physically uncomfortable being on a two minute shot of Fantine falling from grace. 

         Constantly I was getting bored of seeing the same people doing the same thing for such a long time. At least on stage you get an intermission to stretch your legs. The slow camerawork results in a slow movie.

         Victor Hugo didn't write a musical, he wrote a very dense and very long epic. If Lord of the Rings has taught us anything it is that great epic stories can be great epic movies. Great epic movies with all star casts deserve Oscars. However, historical fiction love story adapted to a stage musical and then into film don't. 

         If you like tragedy, go see it, you'll leave in tears. If you like musicals, go see it, you'll leave whistling the soundtrack. If you like movies, you might be disappointed, and leaving the theater with the feeling that a hole has been burned in your pocket.