Chat

Party Bus

  • starfleet: we're glad you're home
  • starfleet: we've been reviewing your records
  • janeway: k when is my promotion
  • starfleet: what makes you think you're getting a promotion
  • janeway: my future self told me all about it when she broke the temporal prime directive and brought me stolen future technology
  • starfleet: yeah so in that vein there are some things we need to discuss
  • janeway: if there's a problem with the paperwork blame chakotay
  • janeway: i don't do forms i do holographic irish bartenders and former borg drones
  • starfleet:
  • doctor: i can assure you that while in the delta quadrant we conducted ourselves with grace and dignity according to the highest principles of starfleet
  • b'elanna: yeah step off our balls you weren't there you don't know
  • tom: yeah you weren't there that time we stole a keg of omega molecules from some douchebag aliens who were going to blow up the quadrant
  • harry: or that time we played space nascar and ended up in the center of a terrorist plot
  • tom: or that time we were all super horny and built a fake irish city so that we could get drunk and laid
  • harry: or when we tied that guy to a chair and waited for the aliens to eat him because he wouldn't tell us what we wanted to know
  • tom: oh shit remember that time i got 30 days for ignoring the wishes of some foreign government and destroying their mining operation
  • harry: that was almost as crazy as the time you restored that old shuttle but then it fell in love with you and tried to kill b'elanna
  • b'elanna: speaking of which remember when that bomb i made for the maquis came back and tried to kill us
  • chakotay: that reminds me of when seska stole my dna and tried to impregnate herself with my child
  • tom: nothing will ever compare to the time me and the captain had kids and left them on that planet
  • janeway: we were young and innocent then
  • tom: how many lizard years to a human year i feel like i should send a birthday card
  • janeway: like 6
  • tom: you don't even know you're just saying that
  • janeway: you should talk you're such an absent father
  • tom: oh no you didn't
  • janeway: i didn't even want kids
  • starfleet:
  • starfleet: is there a reason you stenciled PARTY BUS on the side of voyager
  • tom:
  • harry:
  • b'elanna:
  • doctor:
  • janeway: is there a reason i shouldn't have
Text

mgherian:

now the story of a wealthy family who incurred the gods’ wrath, and the one son who had no choice but to complete the cycle of revenge. it’s orestes development

(Source: bloodhole, via righteous-cowboy-lightning)

Photo
fuckyeahgreatplays:

And TODAY in poorly-named places..
I dare you to sing “In Your Eyes.”

I sure hope this karaoke place has the Doublemint Gum jingle because it’s certainly all I would be able to sing, or say, while there

fuckyeahgreatplays:

And TODAY in poorly-named places..

I dare you to sing “In Your Eyes.”

I sure hope this karaoke place has the Doublemint Gum jingle because it’s certainly all I would be able to sing, or say, while there

Text

WHEN YOU GET YOUR HANDS ON A COPY OF 13P’S COMPLETE PLAYS

oberons-puck:

whatshouldwecallplaywrights:

Extremely. Limited. Edition. GOOOOOOO!

…purchased. Thanks 13P!

13Purchased! Well, except I only bought one. Which will come in the mail.

Gosh do I admire their artistic model. And a great deal of their work individually. My favorite 13P quote is definitely from Paula Vogel: “I would give anything to be the 14th P.”

Photo
Sometimes the best drama is real-life drama. Which is why I use a pen name before causing it.
Oh, Zach. If you didn’t know, he was in the three cartoons I made way back. Two were crappy, one was kind of okay. Interestingly they were better the less screen time Zach had. Take that as you will.
Oh: and I haven’t heard “Pumped Up Kicks” for two mornings, now. SUCCESS.

Sometimes the best drama is real-life drama. Which is why I use a pen name before causing it.

Oh, Zach. If you didn’t know, he was in the three cartoons I made way back. Two were crappy, one was kind of okay. Interestingly they were better the less screen time Zach had. Take that as you will.

Oh: and I haven’t heard “Pumped Up Kicks” for two mornings, now. SUCCESS.

Text

Three is Indeed Company

So, this is ridiculous. The short version is that a playwright named David Adjmi made a loose parody of Three’s Company titled 3C and is now in legal trouble.

Three’s Company. That old sitcom where John Ritter would often go on two separate dates with two women at the same time and then haphazardly run into his landlord who believed he was gay. The show whose principal cast changed more often than American Idol's. A show that's been out of production for almost thirty years.

Legal trouble for this?! Guys. Come on. Everything is derivative. Three’s Company itself was derivative of another sitcom, Man About the House. If someone directly rips scripts from Lost without permission and adapts them into a well-selling but poor-quality stage musical, besmirching its name while making tons of dirty, filthy money, please sue their asses off. But when a dead property is given new life—new, exciting, well-reviewed life—the correct response isn’t “cease and desist,” it’s “thank you very much.”

But, says Donald Taffner Jr. (a son of one of the producers of the defunct television program), “We’re up for renewal soon with TV Land, and we’re playing around with the idea of doing a theatrical version of Three’s Company ourselves, so we don’t want anything out there that might cause harm, and we think 3C borrows far too many elements to make a fair-use parody argument.” The chief problems with this argument, as the common sense will well reveal, is that if a real Three’s Company play were made, it would:

1. Tank. Duh. Who wants to see more new Three’s Company? I don’t. You probably don’t.

2. More importantly, it would lack the important quality of irony that a derivative work like 3C has.

It’s irony that powers many stage and filmed works in today’s atmosphere of rebootery. Particularly, whenever something older is re-imagined, audiences expect winks and nudges acknowledging that, yes, the source work is a bit campy or old or horridly sexist. Yes, that last one was aimed at Three’s Company. Some people would disagree with my jab here, arguing the show was entirely a conscious satire of its period’s sexual mores. Further examination proves them wrong, revealing that, nope, Three’s Company was a run-of-the-mill sex comedy dominated by male writers and actors.

I digress. Back to irony. The sexual mores that Three’s Company based its humor around are even more dated than its characters’ wardrobes. A derivative play like 3C will acknowledge this, examine it, and move forward. Take  Spamalot, half the book of which is spent openly acknowledging the Broadway tropes it’s being forced to give in to—and yet still writing a love letter to the form. Or The Brady Bunch Movie, which openly acknowledges the dated nature of its titular family, and uses their silliness to wax nostalgic on entertainment-at-large’s somewhat tragic loss of wholesomeness. The list goes on. A licensed Three’s Company play created by aged television executives without theatrical knowledge, likely in a committee room of underpaid writers who understand only TV, would almost certainly fail.

There’s a lot in this argument about 3C counting as parody under the First Amendment and that being the reason it’s okay. Perhaps in court this distinction will matter, as U.S. law allows art to exist only within a small set of silly, arbitrary boxes of definition. I’d argue that even if 3C is more accurately a “re-imagining,” a “derivative work,” or even an “unashamed ripoff,” the bit of revenue it’s ultimately making for Adjmi does not constitute grounds for legal action. The people going to see Adjmi’s play are not paying for admission with money they would otherwise spend on the DVD box set of Three’s Company. For the law to assume that to be the case with every ticket bought is ridiculous. To lump this case in legally with piracy, plagiarism, and theft is a gross misuse of the law against art, and threatens to dangerously dilute the myriad artistic abilities stage plays currently have to reference and surpass previous works.

Photo
beautifulpicturesofhealthyfood:

Strawberries dried in the oven…taste like candy but are healthy &natural. 
METHOD
Halve or quarter the strawberries, depending on their size; place on a baking sheet; season with salt and pepper;
Dry in the oven for three hours at 100° C / 210° F.



Hm.

beautifulpicturesofhealthyfood:

Strawberries dried in the oven…taste like candy but are healthy &natural. 

METHOD

Halve or quarter the strawberries, depending on their size; place on a baking sheet; season with salt and pepper;

Dry in the oven for three hours at 100° C / 210° F.

Hm.

Hm.

(via willwritefordietcoke)

Link

willwritefordietcoke:

I was reading this blog post, in which this young person responds to the sentiments expressed in the Wellesley high school graduation speech that made headlines.  The speaker at Wellesley HS ranted on about how the one thing these students should take with them as they commence to the next big thing is the notion that they aren’t special.

What she has to say is extremely interesting.  I agree with the vast majority of the points she makes.

But here’s the problem: she’s perpetuating the notion that we’re all lazy, whiny, privileged students because, while she’s probably right, she proposes no solution — there’s no call to action to prove these accusations wrong, no encouragement that we’re all going to make it some day.  She proceeds to do exactly what we’re accused of: whine and complain until someone fixes it for us.

What do you think, followers?  What do we up-and-comings have to do to get a little respect around here?

I also agree with her points. But in the purest of irony that blossoms with true rage, she’s written a nihilist post condemning nihilism. She’s trying to blame her parents, teachers, and essentially everyone born before 1980 for what she seems to frame as our generation’s lack of creative potential. Justin Bieber, I will put forward, is a strong example of this spiritual and artistic decline among people near our age. But we’re not even thirty yet; none of our generation who don’t play professional sports, look pretty on film (like Bieber), or belong to literal royalty have had any time to rack up real life notability. The kind of “special” a parent calls you is, really, not a lie. That type of “special” means “unique,” “full of potential,” and “with great individual perspectives.” Those things, while awesome and true of everyone, don’t meet Wikipedia’s notabilty guidelines. If your parents, when they told you that you were “special,” truly did have the subtext “if you’re not special anymore we won’t love you,” I’d venture they weren’t very good parents. Good parents motivate their children towards success, they don’t scare or shame them towards it.

I propose this: once we’ve acknowledged that we’re up against unfathomable odds, we step aside and do something we personally find fathomable. I guarantee that each of us young people have some field, some vocation, some thing out there that we have an advantage in. This blogger, for example? She’s got writing down pretty well. Give it time and work—which is what every successful, Wikipedia-notable person from previous generations did—and with a bit of luck some, perhaps unexpected, type of success and/or fulfillment will eventually be within a more reasonable degree of reach.

Before he became the hedonistic American playwright galore he was so famous for becoming, Tennessee Williams worked, at different times, in a shoe factory, for the telephone company, and a number of other strange, meaningless jobs. He and his parents did not have what we’d call healthy relationships with one other. His sister was cruelly lobotomized, destroying her life and traumatizing Williams for life. But instead of calling it quits under great pressure and with no advantages in sight (and, yes, after being constantly told he wasn’t special), he sat down and used his bad experiences to create some of the most lasting, impactful art ever made. He was thirty-three years old before he could even dream of supporting himself with this work that he loved. But he never shook the feeling that he wasn’t good enough.

Everyone who the world at large believes is “special” had to work to be the way they became, and I guarantee most of those people (Williams as a paragon example) have huge, huge ego problems from their talent and hard work “not being enough” at some point. Everyone who wants to be special has these problems. I have these problems. You, dear reader, might have these problems. To state the obvious: our parents’ parents, teachers, and bosses were tough on them, too. Many of them were thus bred with these problems. You’ll have to face a little adversity if you ever want to become something that, perhaps, you’ll believe is “special.” Even the greatest, most successful, most “special” people from every field aren’t guaranteed to achieve that feeling.

Except Justin Bieber. Exception to prove the rule?

Photo
Forgot to Tumbl this when it was published, so here it is now! It’s the last PlayNotes guide of the year, and so the last of these I’ll be posting. I wrote “Production History,” “Masking Nobility,” and “Renouncing Aesthetics.”

Forgot to Tumbl this when it was published, so here it is now! It’s the last PlayNotes guide of the year, and so the last of these I’ll be posting. I wrote “Production History,” “Masking Nobility,” and “Renouncing Aesthetics.”

Link

I’d be curious to hear people’s thoughts on this article. I absolutely disagree with the author here. Accepting a wide-scale downsizing of the arts—i.e. not having symphonies and theaters in every city—would remove everyone’s access to them. (Not that there’s great access to the arts today, anyway.) Without access, people won’t know what they’re missing. I’d bet you much more than 8% of the population would go partake in the arts if they were nearby and cheap, which right now they’re mostly not. Let me put it this way: without federal subsidies on meat, the price of a Big Mac would roughly equal the price of the average theater ticket (something like $20). How many people do you think would swear off Big Macs right then and there?