But can Krogans tap dance?

Song of the moment.

So, a belated happy Valentine's Day to you. Or Singles Awareness Day, as they say. I kinda tried to ask a girl to lunch Tuesday afternoon, but she turned me down, albeit very nicely.

I've been having a lot of fun in dance class! I don't know what I mentioned before, but I'm taking Beginning Tap, and Ballet Fundamentals. Not only is it fun and a good way to get a little exercise, but it's good training for me as an actor. To paraphrase what a friend of mine said, if you want to make a living as a theater actor,

1. Be male
2. Be a singer
3. Be a dancer

...the equivalent list for film includes #2: be handsome as f@ck

I got #1 down, and #2 sort of, and so I'm working on #3. Obviously left out there is being good at the actual acting, but the point is that you'll get WAYYY more work if you are versatile. And I think the reason for #1 is that there are more women trying to get into theater than men. I'm not sure if that applies to film acting as well.

Anyways, there's about thirty people in Tap, and 25 people in Ballet. Tap dance is interesting because it has the whole "tapping" aspect to it, basically turning your feet into percussion instruments. The product of Tap is visual and largely auditory, whereas Ballet is almost entirely a visual thing.

Then again, both Tap and Ballet usually have music behind them, so I suppose they are both auditory and visual. Ballet also has reams of music written specifically for it. Music and Dance are deeply connected. I imagine that their nature is akin to the relationship between magnetism and electricity— seemingly separate phenomena, but in reality deeply connected.*





Of course in Tap dance you have to keep on the beat, since you're playing a song, in a sense. I have a very good sense of rhythm (if I do say so myself) which helps a bit, but it can get me into trouble: for example, sometimes I'll get the sounds right but not the steps, since a lot of different steps make the same sounds (my right heel sounds the same as my left)

Now to Mass Effect 3, whose demo just came out the other day. I was watching this preview, and it pointed out something interesting: in response to player feedback regarding the tweaks they made to gameplay in the first two games, they implemented all the gameplay styles, and let you choose!

This just blew my mind, because it starts to break down the "genre" aspect that people often use to define video games.

When you think about it, the idea of taking a fictional world and letting people choose how to interact with it is already a thing, dating back to the 17th century when people wrote Opera treatments of famous plays. The next steps it could take might be interesting, however. Imagine, a big new story is coming out, and as a consumer/viewer/player, you could choose along a sliding scale, how interactive you want your experience of that story to be: all the way from completely passive (as a movie) to completely interactive (as a hugely in-depth video game, like EVA Online).

How about a world where "directing," like a movie director, is crowdsourced: the most entertaining playthroughs of interactive stories will be bought and sold like movies. This would be like an extension of watching gameplay videos on youtube. Obviously, the visual presentation for the viewer would have to be different from that of the player. VIRTUAL CAMERAMEN FILMING PRO GAMING TOURNAMENTS!!!

Whew! Freaked out a bit there.

Anyways...

What really interests me, however, is how to make an interactive story as moving and meaningful as a play or movie**. It may turn out that this is impossible. But I think it might be possible, and when it starts happening, I want to be there.

Here's one idea for the next level of artistic experience: theme parks and installation art have shown that the only thing more powerful than watching movies is feeling like you're in one. The amount of talent, time and effort that it takes to tailor a physical space is huge, but I think the potential for moving experiences in such a specifically designed environment is immense. And if you could combine that with interactivity, that would be really something.

I dunno why I got so excited there about virtual everything. It may not be that big of a deal. After all, we already have tons of intense, interactive, emotionally moving, meaningful experiences available in the real world. And the invention of new entertainment technology, from written language to new musical instruments to painting to photography to film to video games, has really only made us fancier toys to play with. The idea that as we invent new tools we are advancing, may not actually be true.


I guess we'll just have to see.  





*Extra points for using a science metaphor to describe the arts? Or minus points for oversimplifying a scientific concept to messily describe something unrelated? (Not to the Deepak Chopra level, hopefully)


**The main reason behind this interest is my repressed need for fame and popularity. I don't always realize that's the reason. Being in a show and having the crowd clap does sate this need quite well, to be honest.

I can't wash my balls with a bar of SOPA

The following is a post I wrote a couple weeks ago, but didn't publish 'cause I wasn't sure if it made any sense. Tonight I read it again, fixed it up a bit, and I think it makes fine sense. NOW THE DECISION IS YOURS!!!
____

I'm trying to get to the bottom of this SOPA PIPA thing, after being intrigued by this, which seems to imply that the Anti-SOPA movement is not really a grassroots thing, that it's just two different types of huge corporations fighting one another.

When I heard that, I was like "well shit, am I really fighting the right fight here?" Because I tend to question and analyze a lot of stuff, especially political and news-related stuff.

So I wondered, does anyone have any data about the jobs and money lost to the media industry, that can scientifically show the link between piracy and job loss?

That question led me to this testimony document. I couldn't read it without getting pissed off. Logical fallacies, twisted words, bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.

Did any one of these people take a logic class? Reductio ad absurdum, Ad Hominem, Straw man arguments, etc. I read better supported arguments on 4chan*.

Now I must mention that I didn't take a logic class, and I am nowhere near as ruthless about analyzing things that I am less suspicious of.

Why do the supposedly intelligent and responsible people you would imagine be put on a Senate Committee let people bullshit all day in the most sacred halls of government? It's absolutely sickening.

It sounds to me like this is all just a goddamn game played between billionaires, about profit margins. The reason lower profit margins could threaten jobs, is because when profits fall, the lowest paid people will be the first to get the fucking axe. Companies don't care about their people. They care about money. And they hire people to convince everyone that they do care about people. The only reason life in America isn't shitty is that they know that if they did really fucked up things, we would get pissed off and take them down.

So it's the old rule of marginal changes, that we learned about in school: as long as you change things a little bit at a time, nobody will get pissed off enough to really stop the progress.

Okay.

Well that's enough of that. I've blown off some steam.

I may have said a little too much earlier. I don't have any direct evidence to support the assertion that corporations only care about money. When it comes down to it, corporations are just businesses, and businesses are just institutions made of people. And people usually care about each other. Then again, it's hard to care about people that you never meet, unless you present them as people.

Maybe it's just how the world works, you know? Maybe money and power can never be separated. Everyone needs money to get along, you know? Maybe the old "power corrupts" saying is literally true: no matter how hard you try, with power comes corruption.

Maybe the reason power and corruption come together is because the more power one has, the more strong the illusion of control is.

If something bad happens that you feel you have no control over, all you can do is get upset. But if something bad happens that you do feel you have control over, you try to fix it. The more power you have, the more unintended side effects your attempts to fix the problem will have. These will in turn cause more problems.

I just think of the last few times I've been really pissed off. Yesterday, for example, I had to drive to Sacramento from Lafayette, for an appointment. I was running a little late, but as I got onto the freeway, I realized I didn't have any cash for the bridge toll. "Oh shit, damnit," I thought, and I got irritated that I would be late. But what really pissed me off, was that I should have remembered that. Most of my frustration came not from the situation, but the fact that I felt I had control over it.

And what do I do when we feel indignant? I react by blaming everything but myself. "Stupid speed limit is gonna make me late," or "My stupid smart phone couldn't find an ATM fast enough." The smart phone one is another example of my sense of power making me indignant. So I start getting really sensitive about being wrong.

Here's another factor to consider, something that I think should be considered more: the national economy, which is directly related to the prosperity of millions of people, is a very complex system. I think that sometimes policymakers and other businessmen overestimate how much they understand these systems, and that lack of understanding creates unintended consequences.

Or maybe I just think it's complex 'cause I never took any advanced statistics or economics classes. But the big meltdown in 2008 doesn't give me the impression that everyone knew what they were doing.

____


There you have it. My opinion about it now is that I'm glad they shot it down, and I agree with the Obama administration's stance that legislation is needed, but it needs to be better than this. In the meantime, I'm going to try going totally legit as far as my media diet. I'm an artist myself, you know. Hell, since I'm an actor maybe I can at least write my Netflix bill off as a business expense.

~Chris

"Are you not entertained??!"

So today I had a great matinee of Broadway Bound. Good audience, too, around 55 people, even on Super Bowl Sunday!

I was especially pleased with my big fight scene with Pop, because Tim was really into it and I actually felt angry. The job you have as a performer changes as the show progresses from first read, to rehearsal, to opening, to closing. In this show, we've already performed it eight times, so we have it down pretty well. The challenge here is keeping it honest and fresh, and not switching into autopilot. 

The actors in the cast are all really good at finding new stuff, that is to say, discovering a new meaning or line reading that wasn't there before, and exploiting it to enhance the depth of the performance. Discoveries also help keep the material fresh for the performers.

Photos by Jerry Telfer. From Masquer's Midwinter 2012 newsletter. The other cast  members are Zac Shuman, Marylin Hughes, Timothy Beagley, Avi Jacobson, and Georgie Craig. Set by John Hull, Costumes by Marjorie Moore, Props by Jean Rose, Lighting by John Gourdine.

I really look forward to certain parts of the play that I have down really well. When everything is clicking, and the other actors are on the same groove, it's almost like meditating, because thoughts cease and there's only awareness and reaction. Usually the problem with me is I think a lot, even on stage, and I'm very proud of myself that I've gotten some zen moments in this production.

After the show I went over to Grandma's house to visit her and watch the second half of the Super Bowl. She just had her left ankle replaced, and she has to have it in a cast until around Easter. It's an interesting situation for Grandpa, who isn't super used to cooking and other things. He made us eggs Benedict for dinner. 

On the way over, I was listening to the radio, and the halftime show, and I was getting chills and choking up a little just listening to it. Nothing really gets to me like big events where there's a ton of people watching, I guess. I have always loved the dramatics that sports provide, and even when it's not my team, I still get pretty into it.  

In a way I think athletes are similar to actors, because of the nature of what they do: it involves intense practice and rehearsal, and the culmination of it is a spectacle with high stakes. Granted, performers and stage people are not in direct competition with one another. But they are fighting for things. They're fighting against the small attention spans and critical eyes of the audience, in order to give them a story that has meaning and is entertaining. They're fighting the inherent difficulties found in any collaborative art project, in order to deliver the playwrights' message as clearly as possible. Now that I think of it, entertainers are in a sense fighting each other for the attention and money of the viewers, but not in the direct way football teams do. 

the coin toss

Plays and Sports both have a unique ability to inspire. 

In a similar vein, I must add that I love stadium shows, especially the Olympics opening and closing ceremonies. I have very clear memories of every Opening ceremony performance I've seen. They're just so unique...in terms of artistic expression, scale, budget, or people involved. And of course the whole world is watching. 

The 2000 Sydney Olympics opening ceremony

It's inspiring to me to see so many resources put forth for an artistic event. To me, if so many people want to put so much effort into an art project, maybe the ideals of art aren't as pointless as they can sometimes seem in modern society. Also, the diversity of skills and personalities that are all working together makes me hopeful that people can work out their differences in other areas like politics and war. 

But it doesn't have to be an artistic event for me to get excited about it. As I mentioned above, sports inspire me, for the dedication, skill, and cooperation that is required to succeed. Space exploration also is something that gets my heart pounding. 

I hope all this is at least mildly interesting to y'all. I've included some pictures to break up the text a bit. 

Also I feel a little bad for reposting those pics of the show without the photographer's permission. I will hopefully get better quality versions from him, he's an excellent photographer.   

TTYL