I have found myself in the midst of an unofficial submission spree. In the last month, I've submitted to about 15 different theatres and competitions, and 11 of those have been in the last few days. I don't know why I thought this was so hard before. You just do what the theatre asks for and hope for the best.
It's amazing how your mind can trick you into thinking something is so hard to do. I just had to figure out a way to outsmart it.
In other news, I am gearing up for NaPlWriMo and doing some research on the play itself ('In the Bunker'). I am going to need to spend November working on the play itself, not doing research, like I did last time. So in addition to working on submissions, I am also doing research, and school, work, the cats, Bill, and crocheting are all in there somewhere too. Busy little bee, that's me!
The recent arrest of Roman Polanski brings to mind an argument I had with a dear friend, Randy, about his win of the Oscar for 'The Pianist'. Randy (and I am paraphrasing) was of the mind that Polanski didn't deserve the award because he should have been in jail. I will give that yes, Polanski should have been in jail, but the work and the man are separate. And I've been thinking about that recently as well. I still believe the work and the man are separate, but what of the artwork of Hitler? Because of 'In the Bunker' I've had Hitler on the brain. It's a hard topic to talk about, because no one wants to say Hitler was a good artist (and he was mediocre at best--he couldn't draw people from what I know of his days of being an artist), because of who he was. But what if he had painted 'Water Lilies'? Or 'The Mona Lisa'? Then what?
I don't have an answer for anyone but myself, but I would have to separate the man from the art, as despicable as the man was. My dear friend, Dorothy, posted a really sweet article about the girl that Roman Polanski is accused of raping, http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=logo#/note.php?note_id=287132570166&id=41993989526&ref=mf and it was very interesting. If you have any opinion on the whole Polanski thing, be sure to read this. It will give you an interesting perspective you might not have had before. And you will definitely think this woman is the bravest woman ever, with a good heart.
2 comments:
I'm gonna go read that article, but wanted to give my op first. I think that we should separate the man and the talent, i.e., appreciate the work, even if you don't agree w/ the personality of the person. However, I don't think a criminal should profit from that work. I agree with Randy that Mr. Polaski should not have won the Oscar. The cast and crew who worked hard on the movie should not have been penalized, but Mr. Polanski should have been. If we do not stand up for what is right, we can't expect ppl to recognize the difference. In the case of Hitler, if he were still alive, and his artwork being sold for his profit, I would call for a boycott of that artwork, no matter how good it was. But that's just my 2 cents! : )
Yeah, see what I mean? It's such a crazy topic full of all sorts of questions and pitfalls and I love it!
"If we do not stand up for what is right, we can't expect ppl to recognize the difference."
This is exactly what I want my plays, especially the ones about the Holocaust, yes, even 'In the Bunker' to make people think.
I agree, criminals shouldn't profit from things like movies and such, and I think that 'The Pianist' should have gotten best picture instead of best director, so yes, you and Randy are correct on that point. And while he should have been in jail this whole time, I am pleased that something like 'The Pianist' should come out of him running from the law. So I guess that raises another troublesome question.
I love it when art provokes this kind of conversation, because, to me, as an artist, that's what art should do--make you think, make you question things, and make you examine yourself.
Post a Comment