My most exciting news of the week is that my adapter cable thingy that keeps my laptop alive died, taking with it the battery and my access to all things computery. What I've learnt from this ordeal is quite simple: Completing homework and activities for The Page and the Stage is quite difficult with limited access to the internet.
I did what I could, though. And now I am going to move on....after I make a note for further reference when it comes time to write my final paper: dependability.
This week in class we did some more presentations of plays and research we've done for them, followed by a discussion of each presentation. From this I learnt that sometimes, no matter how many people you have working on the play, they still will probably not be able to cover all of the informatical (yeah, I know it's not a word) bases that ought to be covered to please everyone's thirst for knowledge. For example, none of us thought to do any research on TB, which probably would have been smart.
Moral of the story: To remember that sometimes it is the little details that might mean the most.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Thursday, March 18, 2010
I Like Those Shoes...
Well, tomorrow night -- or maybe it would be more accurate to say this evening, considering the time -- I will be attending "Frost / Nixon" at the Imperial Theatre in Saint John. I'm actually looking forward to seeing this, just because I've always found the whole Watergate thing to be pretty interesting. Hopefully my reflection will be posted soon after, and I won't forget anything too important in the meantime.
I guess that this will be a pretty short blog entry, and slightly more informal than normal as well.
This week in class we listened to a Task Force present their findings on "The Cripple of Inishmaan" -- which I am very much looking forward to -- and an Editorial Team present their Playgoer's Companion for "Frost / Nixon." Exciting stuff. What I learnt was a lot of background on "The Cripple," and not a whole lot else, besides the continuation of what I call the "Thinking like an audience" and "Thinking critically" processes.
Currently, I am waiting for the Task Force to hopefully finish fine-tuning the information they have posted on their Wiki so that the Editorial Team I'm on can take over. Hoping to get that done and over with as soon as possible.
Good night, and good luck.
I guess that this will be a pretty short blog entry, and slightly more informal than normal as well.
This week in class we listened to a Task Force present their findings on "The Cripple of Inishmaan" -- which I am very much looking forward to -- and an Editorial Team present their Playgoer's Companion for "Frost / Nixon." Exciting stuff. What I learnt was a lot of background on "The Cripple," and not a whole lot else, besides the continuation of what I call the "Thinking like an audience" and "Thinking critically" processes.
Currently, I am waiting for the Task Force to hopefully finish fine-tuning the information they have posted on their Wiki so that the Editorial Team I'm on can take over. Hoping to get that done and over with as soon as possible.
Good night, and good luck.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Please Stand Back From The Yellow Line
I despise presenting things. Loathe. Abhor. Detest. Is that enough? Because I can keep going. I’ve been told numerous times that more people fear public speaking more than death. I can almost see why.
This week’s class involved presenting things, namely our Wiki on Frost/Nixon. Not overly enjoyable. I think that it went smoothly for the most part, and we had a decent conversation going on about the information.
The Task Force for Gut Girls presented their findings, as well, and I greatly preferred listening to their presentation than doing my own. But that is beside the point.
The point is that, with these presentations, we are still exploring the world of theatre in ways that most of us aren’t used to. And the more we have been talking about the transference of the script to the stage, the more I have begun to think about the smaller details of the script: the role of blocking, use of sets, the reason that the playwright chose the wording that s/he did for the dialogue.
I’ve always thought that putting a play together would be kind of chaotic, with only the script and the dialogue. Now I’m beginning to see that it’s really more like trying to put together a decently sized puzzle. You have the corner and border pieces to start with (the stage directions and dialogue) and then there are all of the middle pieces that hint at the larger picture (lighting, positioning, personal interpretation, etc). Staging a play doesn’t just start on the page, it takes root, too, in the imagination.
I’m seeing proof of this in the way I have begun to read scripts lately: considering the pieces carefully, and seeing my own take on the story playing like a film reel in my mind. And I know that we aren't supposed to use personal experiences to illustrate our points when it comes to the learning synthesis, at least I don't think we are, but the only time I can recall this happening to me to the same extent in the past would be in my Theatre Arts class in high school. As a final project we had to produce a short play with a small group of people. my group chose a 3-hander, Canon in D Minor, I think was the title. I remember becoming frustrated when it came time to start putting it together, because my group members hadn't thought too much about the dynamics of it, but I had a pretty clear picture of what I thought would be effective already mapped out.
But anyway.
This is a shorter blog post than my more recent ones, but it has given me a lot to think about and work with, and I have to say that I’m having a hard time putting words to my thoughts right now, so I may come back to this one later.
This week’s class involved presenting things, namely our Wiki on Frost/Nixon. Not overly enjoyable. I think that it went smoothly for the most part, and we had a decent conversation going on about the information.
The Task Force for Gut Girls presented their findings, as well, and I greatly preferred listening to their presentation than doing my own. But that is beside the point.
The point is that, with these presentations, we are still exploring the world of theatre in ways that most of us aren’t used to. And the more we have been talking about the transference of the script to the stage, the more I have begun to think about the smaller details of the script: the role of blocking, use of sets, the reason that the playwright chose the wording that s/he did for the dialogue.
I’ve always thought that putting a play together would be kind of chaotic, with only the script and the dialogue. Now I’m beginning to see that it’s really more like trying to put together a decently sized puzzle. You have the corner and border pieces to start with (the stage directions and dialogue) and then there are all of the middle pieces that hint at the larger picture (lighting, positioning, personal interpretation, etc). Staging a play doesn’t just start on the page, it takes root, too, in the imagination.
I’m seeing proof of this in the way I have begun to read scripts lately: considering the pieces carefully, and seeing my own take on the story playing like a film reel in my mind. And I know that we aren't supposed to use personal experiences to illustrate our points when it comes to the learning synthesis, at least I don't think we are, but the only time I can recall this happening to me to the same extent in the past would be in my Theatre Arts class in high school. As a final project we had to produce a short play with a small group of people. my group chose a 3-hander, Canon in D Minor, I think was the title. I remember becoming frustrated when it came time to start putting it together, because my group members hadn't thought too much about the dynamics of it, but I had a pretty clear picture of what I thought would be effective already mapped out.
But anyway.
This is a shorter blog post than my more recent ones, but it has given me a lot to think about and work with, and I have to say that I’m having a hard time putting words to my thoughts right now, so I may come back to this one later.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Halfway There
With the option to write either a journal entry or a mid-term learning synthesis this week, I find myself thinking about concrete learning and what has gone on thus far in the semester. I can say for certain that I’ve learnt – or think I’ve learnt – a good number of things in The Page and the Stage already, but reading the evaluation of how Learning Synthesis’ will be marked has left me questioning how much of it is what I was supposed to learn.
I’ve been learning to think more critically about how it is that a play will be transferred, literally, from the page to the stage. I’ve been learning to ask questions about the characters, the sets and lightning….even the background of the plays I read.
I’ve been asked to think about how previous knowledge on a subject may influence my reaction to any particular play, and by considering which knowledge it is important to know or share beforehand, I’ve also been led to question how a play can sometimes influence what knowledge we’ve previously had.
This epiphany did not come simply from sitting around idly and thinking. I witnessed the effect firsthand when we researched the history of the story presented in Sally Clark’s play, Life Without Instruction. Because of the research done beforehand for the Playgoer’s Companion, I knew that Artemisia and many of the other characters were relatively historically accurate. That gave me more respect for her character and her situation when I finally saw the play. The reverse was true in my perception of Artemisia’s character. From reading about her history, I had an image of a serious young woman, who seemed to be able to handle herself. This was not the impression I got after rereading the play. I came to view her as childish and not at all in control of her own life.
I chose not to do a Mid-term learning synthesis and just a blog post this week, because I think that the other will require much more time for consideration than I can give right now, and perhaps even more time for discussion with fellow classmates. I would prefer to go through all of the prompts again, and to reconsider what I’ve learnt and which bits of it are relevant before even attempting to write the leaning synthesis.
I’ve been learning to think more critically about how it is that a play will be transferred, literally, from the page to the stage. I’ve been learning to ask questions about the characters, the sets and lightning….even the background of the plays I read.
I’ve been asked to think about how previous knowledge on a subject may influence my reaction to any particular play, and by considering which knowledge it is important to know or share beforehand, I’ve also been led to question how a play can sometimes influence what knowledge we’ve previously had.
This epiphany did not come simply from sitting around idly and thinking. I witnessed the effect firsthand when we researched the history of the story presented in Sally Clark’s play, Life Without Instruction. Because of the research done beforehand for the Playgoer’s Companion, I knew that Artemisia and many of the other characters were relatively historically accurate. That gave me more respect for her character and her situation when I finally saw the play. The reverse was true in my perception of Artemisia’s character. From reading about her history, I had an image of a serious young woman, who seemed to be able to handle herself. This was not the impression I got after rereading the play. I came to view her as childish and not at all in control of her own life.
I chose not to do a Mid-term learning synthesis and just a blog post this week, because I think that the other will require much more time for consideration than I can give right now, and perhaps even more time for discussion with fellow classmates. I would prefer to go through all of the prompts again, and to reconsider what I’ve learnt and which bits of it are relevant before even attempting to write the leaning synthesis.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
...Action?
What did I learn this week in class?
What if I didn’t learn anything? What do I do then?
This week in class was kind of a rough one. It seemed to me that there was a bit of tension because people hadn’t been doing what they were supposed to, or simply weren’t keeping up with the class work. Which got me thinking.
Even though certain aspects of this class are based on group work, most of it comes from the individual and working by yourself, on your own time and depends largely on individual discipline. The deadlines that are given are few and far-between and, for the most part, are not flexible. The plays we see create our due-dates, and we can’t beg for an extra performance if we miss the ones that are presented.
This brought me to the conclusion that a person taking this class who had no, or very little, self-discipline and time management abilities would be in pretty big trouble – assuming they care about their courses.
It’s hard to get a move on when working on things that you know aren’t due for another two weeks, or even in a month or more. “There’s no rush,” is a common thought for me. But then the time that I was going to use for that Far Far Away Project fills up with other things by the time I get to it, and what’s really let is just a teeny sliver of the whole cake.
Nobody likes being left with just a sliver.
Take these blog entries as an example. I’m supposed to be thoughtfully considering my activities of each week, sharing what I’ve learnt. Carefully organising all of my new reflections into a this little blogspace, and creating something that will eventually supply me with material to write my final learning synthesis. Thing. But sometimes – some weeks, rather – I find myself not really thinking about what I’m doing as I’m doing it, and just doing what seems like the ‘right’ thing to write at the time. So, by the time I get to working on my weekly blog post, I get a little stuck and can’t figure out what to write about.
I think that this whole class works in pretty much the same way. If you don’t take a second to actually think about something in this class while you’re doing it – reading a play, researching something about it, or even just writing an ‘inkblot’ – then you’re not going to get a whole lot out of it. And if you don’t even get as far as doing some of this stuff because you just can’t seem to motivate yourself for whatever reason…well, the rest of the class will be getting a bit of a let down, and you’re probably not going to have all that great an experience in the course.
I need a day-planner.
[Sorry for the over-use of the ever intrusive “You” in this post. I don’t mean “you” the reader. It’s merely meant to be an inhabitant of my hypothetical situations.]
What if I didn’t learn anything? What do I do then?
This week in class was kind of a rough one. It seemed to me that there was a bit of tension because people hadn’t been doing what they were supposed to, or simply weren’t keeping up with the class work. Which got me thinking.
Even though certain aspects of this class are based on group work, most of it comes from the individual and working by yourself, on your own time and depends largely on individual discipline. The deadlines that are given are few and far-between and, for the most part, are not flexible. The plays we see create our due-dates, and we can’t beg for an extra performance if we miss the ones that are presented.
This brought me to the conclusion that a person taking this class who had no, or very little, self-discipline and time management abilities would be in pretty big trouble – assuming they care about their courses.
It’s hard to get a move on when working on things that you know aren’t due for another two weeks, or even in a month or more. “There’s no rush,” is a common thought for me. But then the time that I was going to use for that Far Far Away Project fills up with other things by the time I get to it, and what’s really let is just a teeny sliver of the whole cake.
Nobody likes being left with just a sliver.
Take these blog entries as an example. I’m supposed to be thoughtfully considering my activities of each week, sharing what I’ve learnt. Carefully organising all of my new reflections into a this little blogspace, and creating something that will eventually supply me with material to write my final learning synthesis. Thing. But sometimes – some weeks, rather – I find myself not really thinking about what I’m doing as I’m doing it, and just doing what seems like the ‘right’ thing to write at the time. So, by the time I get to working on my weekly blog post, I get a little stuck and can’t figure out what to write about.
I think that this whole class works in pretty much the same way. If you don’t take a second to actually think about something in this class while you’re doing it – reading a play, researching something about it, or even just writing an ‘inkblot’ – then you’re not going to get a whole lot out of it. And if you don’t even get as far as doing some of this stuff because you just can’t seem to motivate yourself for whatever reason…well, the rest of the class will be getting a bit of a let down, and you’re probably not going to have all that great an experience in the course.
I need a day-planner.
[Sorry for the over-use of the ever intrusive “You” in this post. I don’t mean “you” the reader. It’s merely meant to be an inhabitant of my hypothetical situations.]
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Take 3! And…
Monday, February 8th, year 2010.
Briefly: We split up into our Task Force groups for the first time (except those people working on Problem Child, I suppose) and briefly outlined and discussed our plan of action. The task force for Problem Child presented their Wiki to the class that evening as well, giving the rest of the groups an idea of what ours will have to look like.
Outside of that, there isn’t all that much to reflect on from our three hours of class this week. I did take the time to read the script for Frost/Nixon outside of class, and can add more on that subject.
I will of course be expanding on these ideas in my reflection of the play that I will be posting on the forum soon enough, but just to give an idea – a sneak peek, if you will…
It came to my attention while reading the script that, much the same way as prior knowledge can influence your viewing or reading of a play one way or another, the opposite is true as well: reading a script may alter your opinion of what you think you already know. I’ve learnt a lot about Nixon as a President between Journalism and Politics classes taken in both high school and here at St. Thomas, mostly about his involvement with the Watergate case.
Truth be told, I’ve never been overly fond of him, a bias probably partially inherited from those who have taught me about his history – though he did, admittedly, do some good things during his career. Peter Morgan’s play succeeded in making me wonder about this opinion, and induced feelings of sympathy for the man that I hadn’t had before even though I knew I was reading about a character Nixon, and not necessarily the real guy. I think that it was those scenes with the loafers that got to me.
That’s all for this week. It’s that time of semester when everyone wants something handed in, and learning begins to come in bursts.
Briefly: We split up into our Task Force groups for the first time (except those people working on Problem Child, I suppose) and briefly outlined and discussed our plan of action. The task force for Problem Child presented their Wiki to the class that evening as well, giving the rest of the groups an idea of what ours will have to look like.
Outside of that, there isn’t all that much to reflect on from our three hours of class this week. I did take the time to read the script for Frost/Nixon outside of class, and can add more on that subject.
I will of course be expanding on these ideas in my reflection of the play that I will be posting on the forum soon enough, but just to give an idea – a sneak peek, if you will…
It came to my attention while reading the script that, much the same way as prior knowledge can influence your viewing or reading of a play one way or another, the opposite is true as well: reading a script may alter your opinion of what you think you already know. I’ve learnt a lot about Nixon as a President between Journalism and Politics classes taken in both high school and here at St. Thomas, mostly about his involvement with the Watergate case.
Truth be told, I’ve never been overly fond of him, a bias probably partially inherited from those who have taught me about his history – though he did, admittedly, do some good things during his career. Peter Morgan’s play succeeded in making me wonder about this opinion, and induced feelings of sympathy for the man that I hadn’t had before even though I knew I was reading about a character Nixon, and not necessarily the real guy. I think that it was those scenes with the loafers that got to me.
That’s all for this week. It’s that time of semester when everyone wants something handed in, and learning begins to come in bursts.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Dawn of the Second...Post?
Inkblotting.
The exercise that we did in class on February 1st reminded me a lot of grade school when we were told to write a Stream of Consciousness in order to help us plan out our essays, short stories...whatever we happened to be working on at the time. This time, unlike all of those other years, I think it may have actually helped.
Not to mention that, by reading the inkblots of others, the exercise brought me into contact with some thoughts and opinions that I may not have stumbled across all by my lonesome.
We talked about what kind of information we thought would be important to share with people going to see a play. I couldn't help but think of how, last weekend whilst doing homework, I rewatched Disney's Mulan (yeah, I know. It's a classic, give me a break) and how this time around I was able to focus a lot more on the details outside of the main plot because I already knew the gist of the story. For example, the lucky Cricket. He is a lot more entertaining to watch than I would have ever realised had I not rewatched the film.
That's why I think that what kind of knowledge you try to share makes all the difference. Background info that people may not have known beforehand can deepen the experience, helping the audience to appreciate some of the references and nuances that the playwright included to enrich the script.
The exercise that we did in class on February 1st reminded me a lot of grade school when we were told to write a Stream of Consciousness in order to help us plan out our essays, short stories...whatever we happened to be working on at the time. This time, unlike all of those other years, I think it may have actually helped.
Not to mention that, by reading the inkblots of others, the exercise brought me into contact with some thoughts and opinions that I may not have stumbled across all by my lonesome.
We talked about what kind of information we thought would be important to share with people going to see a play. I couldn't help but think of how, last weekend whilst doing homework, I rewatched Disney's Mulan (yeah, I know. It's a classic, give me a break) and how this time around I was able to focus a lot more on the details outside of the main plot because I already knew the gist of the story. For example, the lucky Cricket. He is a lot more entertaining to watch than I would have ever realised had I not rewatched the film.
That's why I think that what kind of knowledge you try to share makes all the difference. Background info that people may not have known beforehand can deepen the experience, helping the audience to appreciate some of the references and nuances that the playwright included to enrich the script.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
