Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 18:11:38 -0700
To: puptcrit-AT-puptcrit.org
From: The Independent Eye <eye-AT-independenteye.org>
Subject: Re: [Puptcrit] Subj: Re:  fwd: Ernie's Eyes


>So, everyone can make puppets, too, right?  You bet.  Doesn't  mean they're
>any good.  This is what's so continually frustrating  about puptcrit - - so
>much mediocrity that's presented here is  cheerleadered as "terrific" and
>backslapped as "wow, great  costumes."   When in reality, compared 
>to the level this
>art has  achieved and is capable of achieving, it is high school puppet  club
>level, at best.   {etc.}

	Having seen the work of only a few members of Puptcrit, I 
can't speak to that point, and I've never heard of a high school 
puppet club, so I'll focus only on the issues of "cheer-leading" and 
"originality."  I don't know your work, Howard, but I think if we got 
together over wine or whatever, we'd find many points of agreement. 
But I want to use your comments as jumping-off points of my own.

	The performing arts are so much akin to hemophilia and so 
little rewarded by the outside world that I don't begrudge anybody 
whatever plaudits they get, wherever.  Yes, sometimes I do get highly 
pissed when audiences or critics go ape-shit over something I think 
is ninth-rate - the injustice of it all!  But I have to ask myself, 
why am I so offended by someone taking joy in something?  Because it 
degrades the art form?  That's an abstraction.  Over the years my 
mate and I have both taught acting.  I have great skills in telling 
students exactly what's wrong with what they're doing; Elizabeth has 
great skills in responding to what's good, in inspiring them with a 
joy in it.  By all critical standards, I'm much more objectively 
correct - but she gets better results.  (Most of the time we try to 
team-teach.)

	In fact, I'd propose that the greatest harm to the art form 
is done by people like Henson, Beckett, or Picasso, who spawn a 
legion of imitators.  If we could only eliminate genius, we'd all 
have to work a lot harder.  (I say that in jest; this being the 
Internet, humor is friggin' risky.)

	The other issue is originality.  Having spent my 38 
professional years in what's ponderously called "experimental 
theatre," yes, I share that desire to be out there on the cutting 
edge.  But I also really distrust it.  Of course most work I see is 
totally derivative, just fusions of one kinda thing with another 
kinda thing and tossing in some video effects.  And nothing wrong 
with that except that I often come out of the theatre remembering a 
few neat visual images and not having any idea how I felt or why I 
should care - other than (very perversely) longing for the old days 
when plays actually told a story.

	Generally, the greatest innovators haven't produced the 
greatest art.  Thespis invented drama for the Greeks, but it's three 
5th C. BC tragedians whose plays we have.  Ever heard of The Spanish 
Tragedy?  Ever heard of Hamlet?  Thomas Kyd was the innovator; 
Shakespeare wrote the masterpiece.

	Yeh sure, this is a far stretch from the question of copying 
Ernie's eyes.  But I recall about 43 years ago being in a directing 
seminar at Stanford with Carl Weber, a gifted director who'd been an 
assistant to Brecht at the Berliner Ensemble.  I'd seen his 
production of Caucasian Chalk Circle at the old Actors Workshop in 
San Francisco, and it still stands as one of my great theatre 
experiences.  So we were outlining staging ideas for some scene, and 
I said jokingly, "Well, I'd like to do such-and-such, but you used 
that in Caucasian Chalk Circle."  He became livid and spent the next 
half hour reaming me out and DEMANDING that I NEVER hesitate to steal 
an idea if it worked - if it made the story strong and beautiful and 
potent for the audience.  Because that's our job.  We're not here to 
prove we're brilliant.  We're here to tell stories, memorably.

	So sure, if using Ernie's eyes is just a way of cutting 
corners and cashing in on a sure thing, think again and push yourself 
harder.  But if as a storyteller those eyes do something for you that 
nothing else will do, sin boldly.  Whatever our vast aspirations - 
and I'll spare you a full confession of my own - all we're really 
doing is trying (a) to feed our face and pay the rent and (b) to 
bring some joy to those transitory bits of protoplasm who gather 
before us and agree to see us do our Show & Tell.  However deep our 
art is, that's all it is.

	Carefully dismounting from soapbox because I hurt my back 
carting firewood and I'm starting a clown/physical theatre workshop 
(as a 65-yr-old student) this Monday.

Peace & joy-
Conrad

-- 
Visit our website at <http://www.independenteye.org>, for listening 
to our public radio series, Hitchhiking Off the Map.

  ***

On our live performances:
"Lives revealed with intense clarity  through admirable, 
uncompromising acting." (Variety)  -  "A series of highly 
premeditated acts of imagination and intelligence."  (American 
Theatre)  -  "Achingly beautiful."  (Philadelphia City Paper)  - 
"Seasoned storytellers for the stage"  (The Washington Post)- 
"Funny, wise, richly detailed."  (Back Stage West)
_______________________________________________
List address: puptcrit-AT-puptcrit.org
Admin interface: http://lists.puptcrit.org/mailman/listinfo/puptcrit
Archives: http://www.driftline.org