The Good, The Bad, and the Random

Photo

Thu, 14 Feb 2013 21:49:51 -0500

"Bitch, Tie My Shoes" : A Rant About Pinter and Mamet

Sat, 05 Jan 2013 11:59:09 -0500

I hate David Mamet. And Harold Pinter.

Let me clarify a few things, however. This does not mean I think they are bad playwrights. This does not mean I think others should not like them. This does not mean I feel they have no place on the stage.

I, personally, very much dislike what they have to say in their work. While seeing any Broadway show close is a shame, especially taking into consideration all of those who worked so hard on it…a very immature part of me was slightly pleased to know that The Anarchist’s departure hints that Mamet may not be deserving of the pedestal so many have put him on.

Mamet and Pinter are two playwrights whose work I acknowledge is well-crafted, yet am mystified (and horrified) by their popularity in the theatrical world.

The predominant reason I dislike these two writers (and perhaps this is going to sound a little odd with mention of The Anarchist) is because of their (seeming) disdain for women. No one can expect somebody to write from a perspective that’s not their own, but Jesus Christ. I can only imagine what some woman (or women) did to these guys in the past—their work reflects an oddly skewed world where everything’s a sausage fest until some bitch enters and either A) messes up everything, B) won’t shut up, or C) both those things.

I haven’t scoured the entire canon of both writers, but I stopped reading when I’d had enough (which was fairly soon, admittedly.) So maybe there are some really rad, feminist, upbeat Mamet or Pinter plays I haven’t encountered yet…but I somehow doubt it.

I had Pinter forced upon me in high school when we did a student production of A Night Out. (I hear other high schools did stuff like The Music Man; such a foreign concept to me when our drama teacher was a hardcore method Meisner fiend.) He also insisted we watch the film version of The Birthday Party (which sounded benign enough) as preparation for tackling the text. Spoiler alert: It’s not a very happy birthday.

It’s my understanding that his early work was booed off the stage. It’s also my understanding that “Pinter scholars” (such a waste of a life, if you ask me) can spend years picking apart the intricacies of each text, finding meaning where (PINTER HIMSELF ADMITTED) there was none.

Here’s what’s great about Pinter: His command of the craft. His pauses are legendary. His subtext is rich (if YOU MAKE IT SO.) Caveat: He makes playgrounds for actors…and train wrecks for audiences.

I had a 3-fucking-page monologue in A Night Out (not a ton, I understand now, but for a 15-year-old, that is a mouthful.) I kept thinking, “All of this rambling on about shepherd’s pie and broken light bulbs is GREAT, but the subtext of this is really unsettling to me.” The show is basically about a 30-something man living with his mother who feels controlled and dominated by the women around him and, in the end, snaps and asserts his own dominance by threatening to kill his mother and making a prostitute tie his shoes. Which is…so inspirational. Thank you, Pinter, the world needed more stories about the underdog men asserting power over those stupid matriarchal bitches who run everything.

So this man, who wrote such illuminating work, was mentor and inspiration to David Mamet. And it really, really shows. Except, in my opinion, Mamet doesn’t quite have the command of craft that Pinter did. At least Pinter had an ear for dialogue and experimented with structure in interesting ways (I thought Betrayal was quite well-done…but its message of bros-before-hos really didn’t appeal to me, which may or may not shock you.)

Here is what I don’t understand about Mamet: For years I heard he wrote some of the most realistic dialogue in contemporary American theatre. So perhaps I’d built him up in my mind as this incredibly observant, perceptive, magical writer who could take a true slice of life and put it on a stage. But when I actually read and saw his work, scarcely had I encountered more contrived dialogue in my life. No one talks the way his characters talk, I’m sorry. Mamet writes like an extraterrestrial attempting to manufacture “realistic” human conversation. I take no offense to his use of profanity, but having an entire world of individuals with Tourette’s seems a little unrealistic to me.

This is how EVERY conversation I have with a Mamet-lover goes:

ME: I don’t like Mamet.
THEM: But he’s one of the greatest American playwrights!
ME: Why?
THEM: Because he just is!
ME: I thought [Play Title] was horrible.
THEM: Well, yeah, that’s not his best work.
ME: Neither was [Play Title].
THEM: Okay, so he’s had a few misses.
ME: [Play Title] is getting bad reviews / just closed.
THEM: Yeah, but—but have you read/seen Glengarry Glen Ross?
ME: No, and I don’t particularly want to.
THEM: It’s amazing! It’s about a bunch of white men screaming at each other.
ME: That sounds…riveting.

Whenever I try to explain my dislike of these writers, I’m always reminded of a quote from Tom Stoppard’s The Real Thing. His protagonist asserts that playwriting is like manufacturing a cricket bat. You need to know your craft, or the message won’t be effective—you need to make that bat perfectly, or it won’t be able to hit the ball very far. I’d like to extend this analogy to include: one must actually have a cricket ball worthy of hitting in order for that well-crafted bat to serve any purpose. Craft is important, it supports the message—but what message is being supported here?

I wholly admit that this is completely my subjective opinion. I just find it very difficult, as a woman, to connect to the work of these writers. Which isn’t to say that boys-only plays are lost on me. Some of my favorite plays include Red by John Logan and Waiting for Godot by Beckett—no women in sight, but the themes and ideas explored in these plays are so rich and insightful that they can be appreciated by any gender. Conversely, try getting one of the millions of female rape victims to identify with or appreciate the message and themes in Oleanna.

I think the opposite end of this spectrum can be equally dangerous: a female writer whose message has merit, but whose craft can barely hit the cricket ball. (Cough, Eve Ensler, cough.) I fully admit this. Perhaps I’ll have to do another post about this to balance out all of the man-hate in this one. (But it’s not man-hate, really. Just misogynist-hate. Big difference.)

But I feel like I should leave you with some alternatives. You may be thinking, “Okay, Laura, so if these guys are so bad, show me some great female playwrights I should be spending my time on instead!” To which I respond, “…Alright!”

Suzan-Lori Parks. Genius.

Caryl Churchill. Genius and politically biting.

Paula Vogel. Lyrical and brave.

Sarah Kane. Brutally honest and innovative.

Sarah Ruhl. Probing and insightful.

Wendy Wasserstein. Epic and influential.

Lillian Hellman. Ahead of her time.

Anna Deavere Smith. A true observer.

…Go forth and explore!

tastefullyoffensive: [vid/via]

Mon, 22 Oct 2012 18:55:47 -0400

tastefullyoffensive:

[vid/via]

hongdae-cafe: Like cigarettes and caffeine, I was addicted to you. “I wish I would have a...

Sun, 22 Jul 2012 18:13:38 -0400

hongdae-cafe:

Like cigarettes and caffeine, I was addicted to you.

“I wish I would have a real tragic love affair and get so bummed out
that I’d just quit my job and become a bum for a few years, because
I was thinking about doing that anyway.” - Jack Handy

Photo

Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:29:23 -0400

Photo

Sat, 26 May 2012 16:46:39 -0400

The Heterosexual Agenda: How Straight America is Ruining Our Country

Sun, 13 May 2012 23:47:52 -0400

DISCLAIMER: This is a work of pure satire. It is not intended to offend, but it very well may.

———————————————————————

My fellow Americans: the time has come. We can no longer sit on the sidelines as we watch our glorious nation crash and burn, piloted by Straight America. I have used up every iota of my patience and understanding. I have tolerated them, allowed my children to attend school with them, shared a church pew with them, and waited in line at the post office with them (before realizing that we were queuing in front of an empty lot where a post office used to be.) I am a patient, open-minded human being. While I have always tolerated them…I cannot accept them and the lifestyle choices they make.

In an effort akin to fostering the Hitler Youth, Straight America is brainwashing our children. Our media is saturated with heterosexuals—you literally cannot turn on your television or computer without being bombarded by Straight Americans and their ideologies. Should you browse iTunes, turn on Pandora, or sift through your extensive LimeWire downloads folder, you simply cannot escape the barrage of heterosexual love songs. Even in Katy Perry’s seemingly family-friendly “I Kissed a Girl” there is mention of a boyfriend—and I simply will not tolerate such filth entering the ears of my impressionable children. While my family and I try to enjoy a wholesome rerun of Will & Grace, we cannot escape the hauntingly accurate, unsettling portrayal of straight culture. The last thing we need is our little girl growing fond of—and slowly turning into—an alcoholic, gold-digging Karen Walker. I even have a guilty conscience letting my kids watch the occasional episode of Glee. I hope the producers pay Jane Lynch a hefty salary to portray a straight woman; I honestly don’t know how she and her wife are able to sleep peacefully at night. If we glorify Straight America through such means, our young people will feel that it’s acceptable to be straight. It’s already happening. Scores of young Americans are making the decision to become heterosexual. The media is a major problem, but it’s working in tandem with our education system to encourage this behavior.

Classrooms across America are succumbing to the Straight Agenda. Children in kindergarten are being exposed to opposite-sex relationships, and it makes my skin crawl to think of the consequences. If you allow 5-year-olds to gain knowledge that a man and woman can potentially have a relationship, the conversation inherently unfolds into horribly inappropriate territory. I can already hear the ensuing monologue of an uncomfortable kindergarten teacher: “See Dick and Jane run! What’s that, Little Billy? Why are Dick and Jane running together? Well…Dick and Jane are heterosexuals. What are heterosexuals? Well…When I say that Dick and Jane are heterosexuals, it means that they are more than just friends. It means that, depending on how many vodka shots Jane has had, Dick will put his penis inside Jane’s vagina. And then take it out. And put it back in again. And then take it out. And then…” And suddenly you have an educator, living off our tax-payer dollars, creating improvised erotica in front of small children. That is the slippery slope we are on. Children must be sheltered from the idea of straight relationships. The concept will leave them confused and demanding answers from their blushing, embarrassed same-sex parents. Sadly, for some, it’s too late. Not only is this making the mothers of our nation weep, it’s also making those mothers into grandmothers at an exponential rate.

Putting aside the issue of the unsustainable overpopulation of our planet, let us narrow our focus for a moment: America has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in the entire world. We spend $9 billion on dealing with the consequences of teen pregnancy every year in this country. It is a scientific, proven fact that heterosexuality is the main cause for this epidemic. Arizona’s recent legislation on allowing religious employers to refuse birth control as a health benefit to their female employees is, in my eyes, a highly admirable move in this day and age. Arizona’s doing something right. I would argue, however, that this law needs to be extended to non-religious businesses as well. Women should not be on birth control, because women should not be having heterosexual sex in the first place. Pro-straight organizations like Planned Parenthood are destroying our country by supporting opposite-sex unions and giving them vital family-planning advice and services. When heterosexuals have the resources they need to properly raise a heterosexual family, it means that fewer mothers choose to give up their children to normal, non-procreative families like mine. Heterosexual pregnancy, teen or otherwise, is a problem too expansive to ever fully eliminate—I certainly recognize that. Still, the children created from these unholy trysts need to wind up in loving same-sex homes. If they continue to be raised by heterosexuals, propped up by the Straight Agenda advocates of this nation, these children will surely grow into heterosexual adults themselves. And the cycle continues.

I have some startling, first-hand experience with heterosexuals. Our neighbor is a straight. We were quite wary when she moved in; we worried about the effect she might have on our peaceful neighborhood dynamic. She lives on welfare—off our hard-earned tax dollars—raising children from various fathers who are no longer in the picture. She has been married three times, divorced three times, and currently has a list of various suitors calling on her day and night. I often wish we could adopt her poor children; save them from witnessing such reckless behavior. In the past, I have done my best to be respectful of the straights…but with each day that passes, I grow more and more disillusioned. My wife and I have been together for 22 long years, and finally were able to marry when Vermont legalized same-sex marriage in 2009. I can’t help but feel that our neighbor’s heterosexual marriages (plural!) cheapen the loving union my partner and I have. It is meant to be the joining of two loving, committed human beings who intend to support each other and, potentially, a family. If most straights could maintain a healthy marriage—instead of a national 50% divorce rate—I might be swayed to support their rights. But it breaks my heart to see heterosexual people do nothing but demolish the sanctity of this institution. 24-hour marriages, one-night stands, prostitution, children out of wedlock, women using men for their money, men using women for sex. Those pushing the Straight Agenda will have you believe these are all horrible stereotypes. But, I assure you, these stereotypes are based on cold, hard facts. One of Straight America’s most vocal supporters, Rush Limbaugh, has been married four times. Four. Times. If straights insist on treating marriage with such disregard, I propose we take this benefit away from them, especially in cases where children are being birthed into unstable unions. Perhaps it should be a right only reserved for non-procreative heteros, such as infertile couples or post-menopausal women. Future legislation aside, I’m sure you’ll agree that, presently, there is no greater offender in ruining the sanctity of marriage than Straight America.

The worst part of the Heterosexual Agenda is the desire of heterosexuals to be treated as superiors. If I want to verbally attack a straight, or even pursue physical assault, the judicial system will invariably side with the heterosexual. (Guess who has all the money and controls our courts? I don’t need to tell you, do I?) For some reason, straights expect special treatment. This is America: land of free speech and the right to bear arms! If I want to berate and proceed to kick the shit out of a heterosexual, or resort to gun violence, it is my constitutional right. Yet I am forced to live in a society where heterosexual sex takes place every night (even next door to me and my family) without any repercussions. It utterly disgusts and horrifies me. What if one of my neighbor’s male lovers finds his way into my home? What if he tries to have straight sex with me or my wife? Or one of my children? Heterosexuals are known rapists and pedophiles. My family and I, as American citizens, should not have to live in this kind of fear. We should have the freedom inherent in our constitution to openly discriminate against the heterosexuals. Sadly, if we voice our opinions or act on our anger and fear, the media (and society at large) will portray us as victimizers, and the straights as victims. What a backwards time we live in, America.

Love. Tolerance. Acceptance. Turning the other cheek. We must rid our country of these things because they are heterosexual, Christian values. Take a look around, America. Our country—and our world—is run by heterosexuals. This is a damaged, recession-stricken civilization with a foundation that is crumbling beneath us. Read through this brief list of past and present heterosexuals, if you don’t believe me when I say they run our world:

Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Dane Cook, Josef Stalin, Saddam Hussein, Mao Tse-tung, Pol Pot, all the members of Nickelback, Osama bin Laden, Charles Manson, Ted Kaczynski, Casey Anthony, Homer Simpson, Fred Phelps, Rod Blagojevich, Sarah Palin, Rebecca Black, Timothy McVeigh, Don Black, Kirk Cameron (speculative), etc.

At the end of the day, heterosexuality is wrong. It opens the floodgates to all kinds of social deviance that undermines the American way of life. At the tip of the iceberg, it leads to: polygamy, bestiality, necrophilia, mechanophilia, divorce, homelessness, smooth jazz, Body Dysmorphic Disorder, TLC programming, and death. All of these things exist, because we have tolerated opposite-sex relationships in the past. Even Ancient Greeks, the founders of Western Civilization, couldn’t be bothered to take time away from their nude male-on-male wrestling to admonish heterosexuality.

Wake up, America.

Which side of history will YOU be on?

Ford’s Theatre in Washington, D.C. c. 1999. Took this when...

Wed, 02 May 2012 19:57:59 -0400

Ford’s Theatre in Washington, D.C. c. 1999. Took this when I was a kid—with actual film (!) …Just stumbled upon it again and it still gives me the creeps.

Possibly my favorite Peep Show moment. Ever.

Wed, 04 Apr 2012 20:44:47 -0400

Possibly my favorite Peep Show moment. Ever.

Just watching Charlie Brooker’s “Screenwipe”...

Sat, 31 Mar 2012 13:04:28 -0400

Just watching Charlie Brooker’s “Screenwipe” when this happened. I will now have nightmares forever. Thank you, Saint Horrifying Pie Face… O__O

Photo

Fri, 16 Mar 2012 14:22:42 -0400

Self portrait.

Sat, 03 Mar 2012 21:51:00 -0500

Self portrait.

…I’m sorry, what? No, I’m cool.

Fri, 24 Feb 2012 19:25:00 -0500

…I’m sorry, what? No, I’m cool.

TYPEWRITER TO THE FACE! Testing out my .gif making skillz in...

Thu, 23 Feb 2012 01:08:33 -0500

TYPEWRITER TO THE FACE!

Testing out my .gif making skillz in Photoshop Elements 9. Crossing all fingers that this works alright…

>__>

Amen.

Wed, 25 Jan 2012 22:37:35 -0500

Amen.

coodikilluh: OHMADAYUM

Sun, 01 Jan 2012 21:22:00 -0500

coodikilluh:

OHMADAYUM

Photo

Fri, 30 Dec 2011 09:43:54 -0500

Praise Jebus, “The Bleak Old Shop of Stuff” has been...

Thu, 22 Dec 2011 17:58:17 -0500

Praise Jebus, “The Bleak Old Shop of Stuff” has been uploaded to YouTube!!! After NickFromFulham got his account banned, I never thought this would happen. But he’s back! Nick, I’ve never met you, but I think it’s fair to say you’re probably the best human being ever. We non-British people of the world bow down to your awesomeness.

smitty-werben-jager-man-jensen: randomlinktime:

Sat, 10 Dec 2011 21:59:38 -0500

smitty-werben-jager-man-jensen:

randomlinktime:

fabianlemagne: coolest tattoo ever!!

Mon, 03 Oct 2011 22:30:41 -0400

fabianlemagne:

coolest tattoo ever!!