EclectEcon

The F#s

This is unbelievable, I know, but I have been asked to be a part of a combo by a couple of other musicians in our building. They are both quite good musicians, and since it is (as of now) only a three-piece combo, I can't follow my usual strategy of "I'm not good, but I make up for that by being loud."

So sometimes I play my trumpet, and sometimes I play my E-flat alto horn with them. We don't sound great, but we're not all that bad either. And we actually have a minor gig (VERY minor, but at least we don't have to pay for the privilege of performing) lined up for late next week.

I think we need a name. Since I am by far the youngest member of the group, I think we should be called "The Old F***s", and you can fill in the stars as you wish. But an extension of that, might be to call us "The F-sharps" or just "The F#s". After all, we are old f***s, but we're pretty sharp, too (looking, that is. We never play too sharp or too flat).

Theatre Brief 26: Preparing for Your Entrance

Brief #26   PREPARING FOR YOUR ENTRANCE

based on work by John Crowther 

I see no reason why the actor should attempt to be “in character” before  his/her entrance. 

This statement brings up the very valid question: what does it mean to be “in character”? Presumably it suggests that we are able to walk, talk, and behave in ways that are like the character, which just isn’t what we are doing in the moments we’re standing in the wings in the darkness while waiting for the cue. What *is* useful is to be relaxed and focused and in the “creative condition”, and herein lies the rub. The key word is focused, and focused on what?

If we are going to be “imagining and believing what has happened to the character a few minutes (or seconds) before entrance” so that we re-experience “the past and the feelings associated with them,” we are inviting difficulty. All of that exploration of the events and feelings that have brought your character to the present moment so that you can better understand and play it fully should have been done already in rehearsal. To do it as you wait for your cue accomplishes the exact opposite of keeping you focused; it scatters your thoughts because you’re not sure *specifically* which part of the past you should be thinking about. It also is not true to your character, and therefore is not “in character.”

If I’m about to storm through the door to confront my best friend with the discovery that he’s been fooling around with my wife, I am not going to be a) standing in the darkness waiting for my cue to enter, nor b) thinking of the past. Rather, I’ll be thinking about how I’m going to deal with him in the present and future. (And yes, I recognize that this is an example of one of those times when it would be appropriate to access the necessary emotion.) If I am walking into the bedroom after a terrible day at the office, I don’t need to recreate the fight with my boss, the mistake I made on the widget shipments, the bumper to bumper commute home, stepping in doggy doo when I got out of my car, etc. All I need to do is focus on how great it’s going to feel to get out of this suit and tie (that feels like a straight-jacket). 

The acting process does not necessarily involve getting ourselves more and more “into character” beforehand so that then the moments of the dramatic event will come to us spontaneously and impulsively. On the contrary, we find the character by uncovering and learning how to play each moment of the dramatic event in a way that is consistent with the character we are creating. The complexity of the character results from the simplicity of each moment, and being in character results from the cumulative experience in the present tense of living each moment of the dramatic event fully and truthfully.  In performance we are then like the musician, who begins by playing the first passage of the score as he has learned it (with whatever emotional content it contains), then transitions to the next passage, and so on. 

John Crowther describes preparing for his role as “Einstein” in a one-man show:

In “Einstein”, the lights go up on the first moment of the play and the audience sees me at a blackboard, lost in my calculations. After a few moments I realize with surprise that they are present, and turn to greet them. Whatever it is that brought me to the blackboard is immaterial, the only thing that matters is what I am doing when I’m there. Yes, it’s true that as I put on the costume, wig, and moustache I am going through a transformation, and when I’m done I am walking and moving like Einstein. I will walk from my dressing room to the wings as Einstein (which I continue to do after 200+ performances of it). But this serves more to relax and focus me than to get me “in character.” It’s like a pianist limbering up his fingers. I’m still John Crowther moving like Einstein (a simile). It isn’t until the lights come up on me at the blackboard that I’m Einstein (a metaphor).

It isn’t uncommon to find that aspects of the person we’re playing are difficult for us because they are inconsistent with our own experience and behaviour. They can be as obvious and glaring as the external walk or the accent, or as subtle as an internal feeling or a certain emotional response. A skilled actor with a deeply ingrained craft may have an easier time breaking through his natural resistance to something unfamiliar, but maybe not, depending on what he’s trying to accomplish. Imagine an experienced guitar player who comes across an extremely difficult chord he’s never seen. Before he can play it effortlessly he must practice it, over and over. Each time he comes to it he will have to slow down slightly, until eventually it comes to his fingers easily and naturally.

Another example: if you are right-handed and I ask you to write your name on the blackboard with your left hand it will feel clumsy to you and look sloppy. But with practice you’ll be able to do it effortlessly. You may not be able to copy the Town Charter with your left hand, but you can write your name convincingly. We are not required as actors to do and feel everything our characters would throughout their lives, but only those things that are required by the dramatic event, and we have to do them only *when* they are required. If a certain character might have a swagger when he walks but he is only sitting in his one scene, then we don’t have to master a swagger, we have to master how that particular character sits and moves in a chair (working either from the inside out or the outside in). If at a certain moment he lights a cigarette and smokes, then we have to master how he does it. If in another moment something amuses him, we must master the distinctive way in which he laughs. The accumulation of these details is what gives us the illusion of “being in character,” and convinces the audience that we *are* the character.

It is also worth mentioning that the more aspects of the character we master (based on the requirements of the dramatic event) the easier it is to master other aspects of the character. If we learn to write enough things on the blackboard with our left hand, eventually we can write with our left hand as easily as with our right.

(For truly brilliant character work, try seeing Sean Penn in Woody Allen’s latest movie, “Sweet and Lowdown.” Penn genuinely disappears inside his character, seemingly without effort. The character is in the details.)

The TWENTY-SIX previous "theatre briefs" are here:

   00. Introduction and Explanation

1. Character Checklist
2. Learning Lines
3. Subtext: Does "no" mean "no"?
4. Using Goals or Objectives
5. Intentions
6. Objectives and Super-Objectives
7. Where are You Coming from?
8. Specific Intentions, Part I
9. Specific Intentions, Part II
10. Don't Get Carried Away
11. Specific Intentions and Dialogue
12. Overcoming Obstacles
13. Writing Your Programme Bio
14. Breaking down the Text
15. Overcoming Obstacles by Changing Intentions
16. Reading the Actor's "Score"
17. Using Expectations and Outcomes
18. Using (and misusing) Emotions
19. A Roadmap of Intentions
20. Beginning at Step 4? Really?
21. Disturbing the Molecules: Choosing active verbs
22. Preparing Emotionally
23. Realizations and Intentions
24. Theatre Etiquette
25. Diction

 

Not Fun to Contemplate

Do you think maybe there is a chance, given all this time, that Assad has moved his air force (such as it is) and chemical weapons to Iran? 

If so, do you think the US (with France's encouragement!!) will feel obliged to go bomb them in Iran? 

How this possibly end well for the US?

Dangerous Demagoguery: "Trust us. We will do what's good for you without telling you what we're doing."

I really resent the tone of this article about genetically modified organisms [GMOs]. It says, in essence,

• GMOs are safe. 
• Trust us. We know. 
• But the European experience shows that food processors won't use GMOs if they have to label their products as containing GMOs because
• consumers are ignorant and think GMOs are harmful.
• Therefore (?) we shouldn't have to label them.

I'm inclined to agree that GMOs are most likely safe. I have no problem with consuming them myself or letting, even encouraging, my family use them.

But someone who says they should be allowed to hide the contents of their products because consumers are too ignorant to know the truth is just an elitist interventionist. If indeed, foods using GMOs are cheaper and safe, let consumers who are savvy buy them and save money while the ignorant consumers suffer from paying too much. 

I resent all attempts by politicians and anyone else from all political persuasions who try to tell us they know what is best for us. 

Elitist snobs. And potentially dangerous demagogues. 

From One of the More Enlightened Gulf States

An Israeli film, nominated for an award, has been removed from the competition by the organizers of the competition. Why? because the screening of the nominees and the award ceremony will take place in Dubai, where political pressure was exerted to have the film removed from the competition. From the Elder of Ziyon,

Israeli film disqualified from award - because ceremony is in Dubai

This is outrageous:

The creators of the Israeli documentary "Israel: A Home Movie" were recently informed that their film has been dropped from an international competition for films based on archival footage, because the awards ceremony is to be held in the Arab emirate of Dubai.

The competition is being sponsored by the International Federation of Television Archives. According to the film's producer, Arik Bernstein, the organization's chairman informed him thatbecause the ceremony is taking place in Dubai (which has no diplomatic relations with Israel) and the film deals with the history of Israel, it will not be shown at the event. In addition, the film’s creators cannot be hosted there and the film will be disqualified from winning a prize in the competition and not mentioned at the awards ceremony. [EE: emphasis in the original, but the sentence after the emphasis seems more important]

...Two months ago Bernstein was officially informed that the film, which is known as "Kach Ra'inu" in Hebrew and directed by Eliav Lilti, had made it to the finals. A jury chose it as one of the nine best movies and the film was in the running in the “Preservation and special use of archival material” category, against two competing movies. The notice invited the filmmakers to attend or send a representative to the October 26 award ceremony. The ceremony is held in a different country every year, and Dubai was chosen as this year’s location.

However, two weeks ago Bernstein was informed that the invitation had been withdrawn and his film had been removed from the competition. "This is an international organization of which Israel [through the state broadcaster Channel 1] is a member," Bernstein said Thursday. "The total disqualification of the film followed pressure from the authorities in Dubai, which are hosting and funding this year's conference," he said.

The film is still listed as a nominee on the IFTA webpage

So much for openness, etc..

 

Some Things Are Probably Genetic

One of my granddaughters had to see the dentist last week. She had two questions before she let them do anything:

1. Can I get medical marijuana for this?
2. Will I still be able to make out afterward?

Smart-alec questions that seem funny at the time. Reminds me of too many social gaffes that I've committed over the years. 

If He's Going In, We'd Better Get Ready I Guess...

Theatre Brief 25: Diction

Brief #25    STANISLAVSKI/TORSTOV ON DICTION

(by Norman Schwartz)

 Because of the much-publicized excesses of the 1950’s and 1960’s, the Actors Studio technique churned out endless imitations of its prize-pupil Brando -- “scratchers  and mumblers” as they were maligned in their day.

 Many North Americans still associate Stanislavski with an inner and self-involved technique which paid little attention to the niceties of vocal production and speech.

 Nothing could be further from the truth!

 In KS’s second book of his famous trilogy on acting, he devoted chapters to the art of speaking, gesture, even walking. KS often expressed his opinions about the actor’s art through his alter-ego the teacher and director, Tortsov.  Torstov had this to say about speech:

“After many years of acting and directing experience, I arrived at a full realization, intellectual and emotional, that every actor must be in possession of excellent diction and pronunciation, that he must feel not only phrases and words, but also each syllable, each letter. We do not feel our own language, the phrases, syllables, letters, and that is why it is so easy for us to distort it. Add to this lisping, guttural, nasal, and other … distortions of good speech! The dropping of individual letters or syllables make as glaring defects for me now as a missing eye or tooth, a cauliflower ear, or any other physical deformity. Lack of rhythm in speech, which makes a phrase start off slowly, spurt suddenly in the middle, and just as abruptly slide in a gateway, reminds me of the way a drunkard walks, and the rapid fire speech of someone with St. Vitus dance. Poor speech creates one misunderstanding after another. It clutters up, befogs, or even conceals the thought, the essence and even the very plot of the play.”

EE Addendum: You and your director may disagree about how clearly to enunciate. A good example is "duct tape." If your director doesn't want to hear two "t"s because that would sound artificial, then listen to the director. At the same time, one of the better actors I worked with never developed very far because he steadfastly refused to enunciate the consonants more clearly.

 

Why I Don't Like My Samsung Note2

Over six months ago, in angry desperation because Apple didn't bring out an iPhone that was even the size of the Galaxy S3, I bought an Samsung Note2. I have been unhappy with it from the beginning. I had hoped I would get used to it, but that just hasn't happened. About the only things I like about it are the large screen, the ability to use a micro SD card, and the ability to change batteries.

As a long-time user of iPhones, I knew there would be adjustment problems. I tried to cut the Note2 some slack as a result. I'm sure there are work arounds for some of my complaints, and I am certainly willing to learn if you have suggestions. Here is a litany of my complaints.

• Android. I don't much like android. I know most people do, and so I think this is a major adjustment on my part. But I haven't made it. 
• For example, I was really used to iTunes. I loved being able to sync my iPhone to my computer in iTunes and receive the weekly EconTalk podcasts and the weekly audio versions of The Economist. With android, I haven't even figured out how to obtain Econtalk podcasts easily and conveniently, so I don't bother trying anymore. 
• And the Android application for The Economist podcasts is horribly inconvenient (especially since it doesn't seem to mark where I've stopped listening and then continue on from there the next time I open it). So I've let my subscription to The Economist lapse.
• The Facebook app for android on this phone sucks. I use the Chrome browser to go on Facebook.
• I use gmail for contacts and my calendar as well as for my email. Wouldn't you think that android (another Google product) would synchronize those things between my computer and my Note2 fairly easily and conveniently? I sure haven't figured out how to set those things to automatically sync. It has come to the point that I'm reluctant to put anything on my Note2 for fear it won't transfer to Google on my laptop.
• Stanza. I loved the e-reader Stanza on my i-devices, and it isn't available in android. (But recent upgrades have made MoonReader+ an acceptable substitute).
• Maybe it's just Rogers (my cellular service provider), but geez this phone seems to be in "no service" areas a lot more often than my iPhones were (also with Rogers).
• But the technical things about this phone are probably even more annoying. One biggie: how do you turn off the ringer without turning on the phone to do it? If I'm in a situation where I do not want my phone to ring, with an iPhone, I just flip a switch on the side. On the Note2, I must first turn on the phone and then hold a button until the volume goes to zero. If that happens in the theatre or some place similar, then I must disturb others by turning on my phone to turn off the ringer. 
• Turning the ringer on again requires me not only to turn on the phone and told down and volume button to get the volume back up, but then the phone beeps, alerting those around me that I have turned my phone on again.
• And why on earth won't this phone automagically connect to my home wifi whenever I turn it on here at home? It seems I have to turn the frickn wifi on everytime I turn the phone on. I'm sure there's a setting that needs changing, but I can't find it. And maybe it's not a Samsung setting but a setting in the battery-saving programme. 
• I never butt-called (in my case, shirt-pocket-called) anyone from my iPhone, but it has happened with the Note2 :-(
• Notifications. I have googled this type of thing a bit and cannot find a solution that I can understand. It seems that, for the most part, the Note2 requires that all notifications must be on or off. What if I want only some notifications on. For example, I do want to receive notifications of text messages, but I do not want to receive notifications every time I leave an area covered by my server, I do not want to receive notifications every time I get into or out of our car (where we have blue tooth). These two "features" are so annoying that I just leave the volume turned off all the time and, as a result, miss some messages or phone calls if I don't feel the phone vibrating. 

As you can tell, I sure hope Apple comes out with a larger iPhone soon. And if you know how to solve any of these issues, please PLEASE let me know. I'm probably googling the wrong things, but I can't find solutions to these problems.

Update: Many, many thanks to those here, on Facebook, and who sent me private messages to help with some of my problems. The sound on-off problem was one I should have seen the solution to, but I certainly appreciated the help. The wifi on-off problem may have been solved, but I'll believe it when I see it. And the sync problem has likely been solved, too (again, though, I'll believe it when I see it). The notifications issue and podcast problems are still outstanding. As one person suggested, possibly The Economist needs a better android app. 

Everyone's help will certainly make using this phone more pleasant (until Apple comes out with a bigger phone), so thanks, everyone.

My Hydro Bill

Hydro. For those of you not familiar with the term, that's Canadian for "electricity", especially in southern Ontario, where so much of the electricity was originally generated via hydro-electric power at Niagara Falls. 

A little over a year ago, we were put on time-of-day metering programme with huge incentives to use electricity during the off-peak periods, and some minor incentives to use electricity during non-peak daytime periods. The peaks are different in the summer (afternoon is the peak) and the winter, when the early morning and early evening are the peaks. 

Here is our electricity use during the past 13 months. 

Two things stand out:

• We use electricity the most during off-peak periods, regardless of the season.
• It was much cooler this July than it was last July.

Time-of-day pricing makes good sense, especially now that it is feasible with low-cost technology. It encourages people to shift their usage to the non-peak periods and hence place less pressure on the capacity of the system, reducing the costs of providing electricity to everyone over the year. 

Theatre Brief 24: Theatre Etiquette

Brief 24    Theatre Etiquette and Acting Guidelines

from the Kerry Hishon

These points from Kerry Hishon are common sense and common courtesy. They should not need to written out. But I have been in too many productions where people just don't seem to consider all these little things.

1. There are no small parts, only small actors.
2. Listen to the director.
3. Don’t direct others.
4. Always be on time.
5. Always bring your script and pencil to every rehearsal.
6. Don’t chew gum.
7. Practice, practice, practice!
8. Memorize your lines as soon as possible.
9. Memorize your cue lines.
10. Memorize the scene order.
11. Maintain a positive attitude at all times.
12. Research your character.
13. If you don’t know the meaning of a word or phrase, look it up.
14. Enunciate every word.
15. If you or someone else forgets, improvise.
16. When you are not speaking, you are silent and listening.
17. If you can see the audience, they can see you.
18. Absolutely no talking or whispering backstage.
19. Before you perform, warm up.
20. Never say anything about another person unless it’s positive.
21. Clean up after yourself.
22. You perform unless you’re dead.

 Also see Kerry's other postings on

• Theatre Etiquette concerning rehearsals
• Theatre Etiquette concerning costumes
• Theatre Etiquette concerning props

Each one of those postings is worth reading. They are clear and well-written. It might even be a good idea to post them in the rehearsal space.

Over Half of University Graduates Choose Majors with a Negative Monetary Return

No foolin'. That's what this study concludes [h/t Wendy]. I realize that university education is not just for increasing one's future income, but these results indicate the net returns are sufficiently negative that some students should reconsider their decisions about attending university or about majoring in "soft" subjects.

Once the degree's expenses are factored in, graduates from fine and applied arts programs can expect to make 12 per cent less than — wait for it — high school graduates, according to the report. ...

“If you have a B.A. in history and I graduate from high school, I can go work on an assembly line but you will not work on that assembly line. There is a negative premium,” Tal told the Financial Post.

The degrees with the highest earning potential, or earnings premium, are specialized fields like medicine, engineering and law.

But the study says students continue to major in fields that have a higher risk of falling into the low-income category.

"Those underperforming sectors comprise just under half of all recent graduates," the authors write.

"In other words, Canadian students are continuing to pursue fields where upon graduation, they aren't getting a relative edge in terms of income prospects."

As I said at the outset, there is much more to university education than "income prospects"; I understand that. But if students must cover the increased costs of obtaining degrees in the softer fields, look for fewer of them to attend or stay enrolled in universities in these fields, especially at lower-ranked universities and colleges.

As an aside, a major in a soft field might even be construed as a negative signal by potential employers. 

Vintage Snobbery? Make Way for the Philistines!

My friend Jack, knowing that I am the self-declared chair of the Philistine Liberation Organization, sent me this link which pokes fun at wine reviewers and especially wine snobs. 

My general experience has been that no matter what the meal is, I have a slight preference for flavourless white wines (e.g. pinot grigio usually fills the bill, but some sauvignon blancs are okay, too). I'll drink reds if they are being served and, to tell the truth, in the end I don't really care all that much. 

Recently Jack persuaded me to try some $40 bottles of chardonnay. I don't much like chardonnay, so I have no idea why I succumbed. And despite the big build-up, I didn't like either one of them.

What I have learned, through trial and error, is that I don't care for most wines that are less than $10 a bottle (in Canada , that is. In the US they'd probably sell for about $7 in most states). Put bluntly, flavour matters a bit to me; I'm not just looking for the biggest drunk for the buck. Yet I don't notice much, if any, improvement in the wines once we end up paying more than about $17 - $18 a bottle. So I buy what others might call "table wines" or "plonk", which is just fine with me. I prefer the taste and I don't spend a whole lot of money on wine that doesn't matter to me.

In economics jargon the extra utility from the more expensive wines is not much and is certainly not enough to justify spending the extra money. As one friend says, "Once you've had a glass or two, who can tell the difference anyway?" 

Theatre Brief 23: Realizations and Intentions

Brief #23   REALIZATIONS AND INTENTIONS

based on work by John Crowther, who devised the Basic Acting Unit concept

 

A strong case can be made for Step 4 being the beginning, but the way John teaches, the BAU begins with Step 1, the INTENTION, since it leads to the next step, the REALIZATION, which is the first action we play.  The REACTION (Step 4) is precisely that, a reaction to something that has just happened and to which we react *in real time* as it would be experienced by the character.  But our preparation for going onstage, or for the director to say “action,” is more deliberate, calculated, and drawn out than this, and thus doesn’t have the immediacy that REACTION ought to have as Step 4 of the BAU.

In terms of preparation, everything that happened to the character before the dramatic event begins is not only useful, but essential, in determining that first INTENTION, but ought not be confused with what we as the actor experience as if  we were the character. The former is intellectual, derived by conscious analysis by the actor, whereas the latter is arrived at in the moment through an interaction between that part of us that is the actor (objective, analytical) and that part of us that is the character (subjective, impulsive), both working together simultaneously (the actor in performance should be both the artist and the art at the same time).  Our “design” for the role, discovered and developed throughout rehearsal, involves a predetermined INTENTION for each BAU (often the same for a  sequence of BAUs), but these INTENTIONS will be adjusted according to our specific REACTIONS to our partner or partners.

John Crowther writes:

In my first Broadway play, SOMETHING ABOUT A SOLDIER, I was playing the part of a young Army private. In the first act Kevin McCarthy, as an officer, was to enter the PX a few minutes ahead of me, so we both awaited our cues in the wings of the Amsterdam Theatre together. As Kevin’s cue approached he would pat his pockets quickly as if searching for something and then turn to me in the darkness and whisper, “Excuse me, soldier, do you have a match?” “No, sir,” I’d whisper back, going along with him. “Okay,” he’d whisper, “I’ll just step into the PX....” and if he’d timed it right it would be his cue to enter. This always seemed odd to me, because our having to speak in a barely-heard whisper robbed the “improvisation” of any truth, at least as far as I was concerned. But, and this is the point, it presumably worked for Kevin, so who’s to argue?

In the second act I waited in the wings with Ralph Meeker, who up to a moment before going onstage would be laughing and joking about his exploits of the night before (usually involving women and great quantities of alcohol). Suddenly he’d hear his cue, excuse himself quickly, and go onstage to a highly emotional, highly intense scene in which he was always remarkable, completely truthful and believable. Go figure.

 Emotional preparation for the first moment is another matter altogether, and how one deals with it depends on the demands of the play and the actor him/herself. Bursting in the door having just witnessed a fatal car accident is very different from, say, coming home from a boring day at the office, greeting one’s wife, and then being told that one’s best friend has died. We can imagine a scene in which halfway through it someone is asked about his late mother and then, while answering, recalls something that causes him to become emotional.  (This brings to mind the scene in “American History X” in which Edward Norton is interviewed by a TV reporter about his father’s murder. Norton is crying throughout the scene, which, though probably authentic, seems far less interesting than had he begun the scene trying to be very matter-of-fact and strong, and then suddenly finds he can’t hold back the emotion. Indeed, we can learn a lot from television interviews in which, during the interview, the individual becomes emotional.)

Part of the problem is that an emotional result like crying is too often mistakenly (sometimes unconsciously) treated as an intention leading to an action (INTENTION: to cry; REALIZATION: crying), but in fact most emotions are experienced in life and in acting as REACTIONS (Edward Norton’s character reacted to the TV interviewer’s continued questions by becoming emotional). This suggests that in most cases the best preparation for an emotional scene is making ourselves emotionally accessible so that we can react without inhibition to the circumstances of the dramatic event as the character experiences them. Norman has made reference to this. It’s one aspect of what Stanislavski called The Creative Condition of the Mind.

Things to Love about WestJet

I flew on something called WestJet Encore from Regina to Calgary (en route to London, Ontario). The plane seemed like a very new, spacious propjet that was pretty speedy, too. As I have said before, the attitude of the flight attendants, gate attendants, and pilots, etc. on WestJet is positive and enjoyable. But here is something else to like. The Encore flights serve complimentary wine and beer! When was the last time that happened for people flying economy class? I had two.

Too bad they don't have USB outlets or power outlets on these planes. They are new enough WestJet could have specified them in the specs. Oh well.... 

Update: Harvey King says in the comments that Encore is priced at about $70 more than the regular WestJet flights. I had no idea. I ended up on WestJet because the trip via WestJet was both more convenient and lower priced than on Air Canada.

Update #2: Another reason to love WestJet: Their little very low-resolution seat-back tvs showed the Roughriders CFL game live, so I got to watch that during the flight from Calgary to London

Update #3: WestJet is much more aggressive and in tune with the market in its pricing. For example, their one-way fares to and from Regina from London, Ontario, around the dates of the Grey Cup [CFL championship game] in late November are nearly as high as the round-trip fares from Air Canada. Not that this is necessarily something for a traveler to love,  but it is an indication that WestJet is more in tune with the market than is Air Canada.

Things to Love about the Regina Airport

It is hard to imagine that there really are things to love about any airport. The lineups, the security checks, the interminable waits. Things are different at the Regina, Saskatchewan, airport. 

I clearly arrived much earlier than necessary. There was NO wait at the security check-in (which is not always a good idea because the agents then have way too much time to pry through everything, but that wasn't the case this time).

Once I was inside the "departure lounge" it was still two hours before my flight was to leave.

There was almost no one else there (a couple off to the right who were sleeping). It looks to me as if the authorities have completely redone the departure area. It is huge and clean, possibly in anticipation of the hordes of fans who will be coming through here in November for Grey Cup (the CFL championship football game), and possibly as well to prepare for the continued growth in the area with the booming oil patch south of Regina.

The two things I love here are 

1. Free wifi. Okay, okay, there is no such thing as "free" wifi. Call it "no charge" wifi. It is a public service provided by Access, a major cable company in the area. It works, and it is easy to connect to.
2. Look at that picture above. See all those white/silver/blue-ish things under every fourth seat? those our power outlets! Yea! Whoever redesigned the airport knows that people who travel are frequently looking for places to plug in their laptops and smartphones. Here is another photo that shows them

Meanwhile I took a seat in an easy chair off in an alcove:

That's my laptop. See that black patch on the lid, under the apple? That's velcro (the soft loop part). I attach an external hard drive for backups to it whenever I am settled. I came up with this idea so that when I stand up or put my laptop aside, I don't end up slamming the hard drive onto the floor, which was happening far too often before.

White Pelicans on Wascana Lake

I have set this post to appear on the blog while I am returning to my home in London, Ontario.  I will, once again, feel some sadness about leaving Regina. I have a wonderful time every year that I visit here (this is the fourth year in a row that I have been here). I enjoy the support the Economics Department here provides me, and I truly love being able to spend time with the friends I have made here over the past few years, including Ms Eclectic's relatives and my friends in the Roughrider pepband, as well as those in the department. 

Another thing I will miss are the scenic vistas as I walk along and around Wascana Lake, next to the university. We have gorgeous views and scenes where we live in London, as well, but I have never seen white pelicans there (or anywhere else, for that matter). 

 

I have seen brown pelicans --- lots of them --- down along the Gulf of Mexico, and I was surprised to see any kind of pelican here.

Theatre Brief 22: Preparing Emotionally

Brief #22   Preparing Emotionally

By Norman Schwartz

Almost all the great actors and directors at the Group Theatre (1931-1941) who went on to teach the next generation put great emphasis on Emotion and Emotional Preparation. The necessity for Truthful Feeling became the hallmark of American acting training in the 1950’s and 1960’s.

It was Lee Strasberg’s belief,. held till the end of his life, that the golden key to this verisimilitude was Emotion Memory, also known as Affective Memory. The actor recalled some intense past experience, summoned up the sights and smells of that memory, and with it all the emotions involved. S/he then used that recaptured emotion for the character s/he was playing. Sandy Meisner, Bobby Lewis and Stella Adler disagreed violently with Strasberg about how to achieve the sort of emotional fullness they had all observed in the great Moscow Art Theatre players who had toured the USA in the 1920’s. 

Meisner, Adler, Lewis and others in the Group Theatre  felt that this endless digging into past traumas was both unpleasant and painful-- ultimately counter-productive as it often made the actor hysterical and unfocused on the role. They looked instead for other means of Emotional Preparation. Meisner eventually advocated fantasizing and daydreaming, Adler absolute belief in the imaginary circumstances. Whatever their technique, all of these great mentors de-emphasized Affective Memory, but emphasized the need for emotional fullness summoned up and held onto before entering the scene.

An actor can certainly use this and any technique to recreate the inner life of the character. Some actors prepare elaborate diaries and scrapbooks, write biographies, recite inner monologues. Others concentrate on what happened to the character five minutes before the play or scene began.  And yet all these methods, useful as they are, do not really prepare the actor for what is about to happen to him or her once s/he enters the scene.

No matter how vivid the inner life of your character is , how deeply you feel his/her circumstances, the actor’s ultimate task in dramatic literature is always to DO, not FEEL. This doing might be as simple as “I want to borrow a cup of flour,” or as complex as “ I want to find out who killed my father.(Hamlet)”  Dramatic action does not begin at step 4 of the BAU, i.e., a REACTION to what has happened in the past. It always begins with Step 1: INTENTION.

Before entering the scene, the trained actor focuses on deciding what s/he must DO NOW to accomplish his/her SUPER-OBJECTIVE. This SPECIFIC INTENTION is always married with a physical execution, usually speech and/or movement, which is Step 2 of the BAU or REALIZATION.  The choice the actor makes is always personal in that it reflect his/her individual point of view of the character’s behaviour. The more original the choice, the more heightened the verb of action the more powerful the performance.

The actor doesn’t enter prepared to FEEL; s/he enters prepared to DO.

[note: at this point, I have to add that I don’t really care whether you start at step 1 or step 4. Both are essential to good acting! I honestly don’t see how you can act on an intention without being prepared emotionally; at the same time you can’t act the emotion – you must act an intention]

Public Address on Education and Economics

I see from the University of Regina calendar of events that my public address tomorrow evening is the only event scheduled on campus for the entire day.  Gee, maybe that means more than ten people will be there... 

At 7pm?? On a Friday evening?? of a weekend when the weather is pleasant??? 

Title: I didn't learn a thing as an undergrad: what is wrong with higher education and what is wrong with economics

For the economists among you, it is a very intuitive, experiential discussion of signaling vs human capital theories of education.

Does This Stuff Happen with Such Regularity in the Private Sector?

An email message I just received:

Colleagues,

As many of you know the University of Regina is currently in the process of testing our enhanced Emergency Notification System (ENS).

This morning during testing of the ENS, a system error occurred which caused an emergency message to inadvertently be sent to several computers.

There is no emergency on campus at this time. As soon as the error was discovered, a retraction message was issued to those same computers. We have since identified a system flaw that will be corrected immediately.

I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.

Gophers at The University of Regina

There are also a lot of gophers around the university and Lake Wascana. There are so many gophers in the area that the gopher holes in the open areas surrounding the lake can be treacherous.

As we drove along the rural highways, we often saw gophers standing up straight and looking around. Gophers are so common around here that the Saskatchewan Roughriders team mascot is a gopher.

The gophers are all over campus. They seem especially prevalent and happy right after the lawnmower has been by, and lawn is a giant, easy buffet for them. Here is one that was right outside my apartment window.

Bunnies at The University of Regina

The University of Regina buildings on its main campus are arranged such that there is a very large open area in the shape of a large ellipse in the middle of them. There are connecting walkways between every building.

This arrangement is idea for Regina. In the winter, it can get very cold here, and it is possible to go anywhere on the main campus wearing shorts and a tank top (as some students living on campus seem to do) even when the temperature is -40 outside.

At one point the connecting walkway is a tunnel. This gap between the buildings allows vehicles and people to enter the inner court/ellipse for lawn care, maintenance, gardening, etc. 

It also allows animals to enter.

One evening, returning to my apartment in one of the residence halls, I saw what looked like large birds walking across the wide open space. I couldn't get my camera out quickly enough before they disappeared, but they weren't birds at all -- they were rabbits slowly hopping along. I have seen LOTS of rabbits here, both in this inner sanctum and throughout the parks. Here is just one, a young one:

I think these bunnies turn white in the winter: environmental adaptation.

An Impressive Theatre Website

A few weeks ago, Jamie of the Actor's Hub, wrote to ask if they could reproduce the Theatre Briefs I have been posting roughly every other day here on EclectEcon. I gladly said they could. 

I spent a bit of time today rummaging around their site. It is absolutely loaded with stuff for people interested in acting, both stage and video. Monologues, audition hints, acting tips; you name it, they got it. Here is the link written out:  http://www.actorhub.co.uk/

And here is their link to the first Theatre Brief that I posted a month and a half ago. I was amused that somewhere, somehow they came up with a headshot for me that is at least 15 years old. I think it is on a website I no longer have access to, for editing purposes (here, which is quite dated and pretty silly in some ways).

Actor's Hub looks like a terrific site. It will definitely be on my "go-to" list whenever I am looking for things theatre-related.

Better Questions to Ask Your Children after School

I really wish I had thought more about this topic when our children were younger. Maybe these suggestions will help you think about how to ask about their day (forget about the source, the questions are worth thinking about).

                              After-School Conversation Starters

Avoid These Questions	Try These Instead
How was school?	What’s the biggest difference between this year and last year?
Did you have fun at school?	What was the best thing you did at school?
Who did you sit with?	Tell me the names of the four kids who sat closest to you.
Was your teacher nice?	What was the most interesting thing your teacher said today? What class rules did your teacher say are important? What did your teacher say she likes to do?
Did your teacher go over the daily schedule with the class?	What is the best thing about your daily schedule?
Did you have everything you needed for school?	Was there anything you wish you had at school that you didn’t have today?
Were the kids in your class nice?	Who did you enjoy talking with the most? Did anyone have anything fun or interesting to talk about?
Did you get your schedule?	Which days look best on your schedule?
Are your friends in your classes?	Tell me two kids you remember from each class.
Was the work hard?	What was the best thing your teacher asked you to do  in ____ today?

and

Avoid These Questions	Try These Instead
Did you play with anyone at recess?	What were most kids doing at recess? What was the best game at recess? What did you talk about at recess?
How was lunch?	Who sat near you at lunch? What were the other kids eating for lunch? What was the funniest thing someone said at lunch?
Did you get your locker?	Where is your locker? Who has a locker near yours?

 

Theatre Brief 21: Disturbing the Molecules choosing active verbs

The TWENTY previous "theatre briefs" are here:

   00. Introduction and Explanation

1. Character Checklist
2. Learning Lines
3. Subtext: Does "no" mean "no"?
4. Using Goals or Objectives
5. Intentions
6. Objectives and Super-Objectives
7. Where are You Coming from?
8. Specific Intentions, Part I
9. Specific Intentions, Part II
10. Don't Get Carried Away
11. Specific Intentions and Dialogue
12. Overcoming Obstacles
13. Writing Your Programme Bio
14. Breaking down the Text
15. Overcoming Obstacles by Changing Intentions
16. Reading the Actor's "Score"
17. Using Expectations and Outcomes
18. Using (and misusing) Emotions
19. A Roadmap of Intentions
20. Beginning at Step 4? Really?

 

Brief #21  Disturbing the Molecules

(by Norman Schwartz)

 If drama is the story of someone wanting to do something against all obstacles, then the choice of SPECIFIC INTENTION--what I want to do NOW, moment-to-moment-- is absolutely essential to building the character. It is very tempting to choose a simple or obvious verb of intention.  Most plays begin with somebody wanting something from someone else, often something the other person doesn’t wish to do or give.  (E.g.  “I want to CONVINCE my husband to finish the screenplay he’s been working on for two years.”)

CONVINCE is a rather ineffective verb. The secret then is to heighten or upgrade this ordinary verb until it becomes something definite, exciting and actable.  From ordinary to extra-ordinary.

In William Bell’s must-own book on directing, A SENSE OF DIRECTION (Drama Books), he offers an excellent example of upgrading. In the scenario, the common verb CONVINCE my husband is changed by the actor to FLATTER, FORTIFY, EXALT, IMMORTALIZE him.

The actor who works this way does what Glenn Close calls “disturbing the molecules.”  When the actor chooses an active verb rather than an innocuous one, s/he creates an energy force that transports the specific moment to a heightened point of reality. The energy field has travelled from the actor on the stage to the point where it enters the perception of the spectator. G.B. Shaw referred to this effect as “the optics of the theatre” --the trick the actor uses to carry his/her emotion to the point of audience comprehension and excitement.

Sandy Meisner spoke of it this way: “ (When) you ... get the basic reality at the conversational level, and then discover the deeper meanings that fuel it with the optics of theatre, it’s not built on bed of clichés... (When) you put the real situation on the stage, you need to keep its reality so that it’s believable both to you and to the audience; but you have to raise it to a level above real life. Otherwise it doesn’t communicate.”

Ball offers this example:

I want to FLATTER him                   becomes

I want to PRAISE him                        becomes

I want to STRENGTHEN him           becomes

I want to GLORIFY him                    becomes

I want to GLORIFY him into realizing his true worth.

The plot says the wife convinces the husband to finish his script. The actor acts something much more theatrical and exciting. 

Fixing Water Leaks: Costs and Benefits

Back in 2006 when I was teaching in England, there had been quite a drought, and there was concern everywhere there about water shortages. Several articles appeared, documenting all the water that was leaking from London's aging water-supply infrastructure. 

At the time, it would have been counter-productive for the water authority to defend those leaks with some reference to cost-benefit analysis. Imagine the outrage if people thought the concept of opportunity costs was being applied by bureaucrats to the water system. What could the bureaucrats say? "Because the costs of hiring and paying people to work on the water system in London are so high, it's cheaper just to let the water leak out of the pipes than it is to fix them." 

It looks as if there is a similar situation (albeit on a MUCH smaller scale) here at The University of Regina. Every day when I walk across the open area to and from my office, I pass this scene:

The water is always there. It never dries up, and it seems to be emanating from some source off to the right of the sidewalks. 

I don't know why it is there. If that water is flowing from some sort of underground watering system, it seems to be over-doing it. If it is the result of a leak, I suspect the university hasn't fixed it because the costs of fixing it outweigh the costs of letting it go. 

Opportunity costs at work!

Update: I had noticed this water ever since I arrived on campus 3 and 1/2 weeks ago, and I took the photo on the weekend. Wouldn't you know it: the day I post about it on the blog, there are dirty footprints all around the places where the water had been flowing, but there is no water! 

People Respond to Incentives (and demand curves are downward sloping)

Businesses understand this. Or if they don't, they learn pretty quickly that raising the price reduces the quantity demanded. 

But so many stupid policies have been made assuming that if taxes are raised, people won't change their spending patterns. Of course we will. This little video is one demonstration of it.

 

Note to US Foreign Policy Advisors: Egypt is not Chile

I wonder if the US is just hoping that after the Egyptian military takes power, they'll become nice guys (eventually), stop killing the opposition, and (eventually) hold free elections, and (eventually) with proper guidance from smart economists, the economy will grow and people will be much better off.

After all, isn't that what happened in Chile? Pinochet and military had the socialists ousted from office and, in the process, many were killed. But eventually with help from many bright economists the economy grew much faster than it possibly could have under Allende and the socialists, and eventually democracy was restored.

But the Muslim Brotherhood is not the socialists of Chile. Its members are not nearly so likely to give in, be swallowed up, and become part of the mainstream. I hope the US is not being myopic in its strategic planning about what to do and how to react to the recent military coup and the killings of people from just about every group by members of just about every other group.

Friday, August 23rd, 7pm, RIC119

Signaling Theory vs. Human Capital theory? Well maybe a bit.

Theatre Brief 20: Beginning at Step 4?

Brief #20   BEGINNING AT STEP 4?

Adapted from writings by Mark Paladini and Robert Epstein

 

Sometimes it can be helpful to focus for a moment on what JUST happened to your character before moving forward to the first thing s/he wants.  It reminds you that you are coming from somewhere in a very specific sense and what  JUST happened would naturally colour what the character wants and what s/he does to realize that intention.

 In a sense you must start with Step 4 of the Basic Acting Unit (BAU) when you are starting a scene.  Why? Because there is no intention without a prior event.  Of course, Step 4, the ‘reaction’ only pertains to a preceding event with a PERSON.  If the event involves a car or a building or being late for work, it is not a ‘reaction’ that you’re dealing with, but a physical circumstance.  Other than that you are still dealing with “step 4 or the equivalent”, because what it causes is your first intention for the scene, which leads to the first realization, etc.......

Since every scene starts in the middle of the character’s life (unless it starts from before birth - haven’t seen that yet, but I’m sure I will) the actor has to account for the “first action” he or she is going to take in the scene. Once started, it’s less of a problem because events and responses will continue throughout the scene.  But how do you get the original intention with which you enter the scene?  It is only from the “preceding event” that takes place immediately before the scene that the logic of the scene can be revealed.  And starting correctly is everything.  You don’t have time to start out confused about what you’re doing and catch up later.

So if you are entering the scene to “warn the other person that there is a fire next door” and get them to “get out as quickly as possible”, it would be worthwhile to get in touch with where the fire is, how big it is, what it would be like to have just run from the fire and how that makes you feel, before running in to warn the other person in the scene.  Otherwise you would have only a general or generic notion of why you’re there, and you will likely find yourself “acting out” how you feel since you had given yourself no basis for the initial feeling of fear and panic.

In this context, how can you enter without some sort of emotional preparation based on the preceding circumstance, even if you are so brilliant that all you need is the suggestion of what happened to get your emotional response. You certainly need at least that. It wouldn’t make sense to think that you could stroll into the scene, obviously, and when you make contact in the scene suddenly get in touch with the fact that you’re coming from the fire. It has to be there before you enter, and it should propel you into the scene.

This is true with every scene.  How can you enter truthfully from “nothing”?

In “Crimes of the Heart”, one sister enters with the idea of getting the other sister to help her prepare the birthday cake to celebrate the third sister’s surprise party.  What she finds when she comes in is the second sister with her head in the oven attempting suicide.  The scene would of course make no sense if the first sister ignored the fact that her little sister was attempting to kill herself, and went on preparing for the party!  But on the other hand, the scene doesn’t work if the sister doesn’t come in all happy and excited about her preparations, only to immediately find herself in a totally different situation, forced to change on a dime.  That’s the essence of the scene, and without full preparation for what she DOES expect, the impact of what she actually finds is diminished.