So Archer casually dropped the fact that he didn't like that his part had bad words in it today. I have a feeling that the director saw this coming and said to him TWICE that she would talk to him about it later. Later has so far NOT come, but will contine to post updates in the case that it does.
I also find it fascinating, and I was too preoccupied to mention it, that Chase has a part (Greylag) that is bigger in terms of solo lyrics and time onstage even though of the two of them his audition was much much wearker. They are most obviously saving Archer for his ability to pull off off color jokes, which he clearly can considering his near eleven-year history, but obviousy it isn't something we are proud of as a family.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Carol's auto insurance and beachfront property in Kansas
In August our auto insurance will offically become more expensive than our mortgage. Nuff said?
Monday, July 21, 2008
Ok now I am really up in arms--Suggestions please
Ok, now I have here what I would consider the first big parenting dilemma I have faced. Archer's part is not only unworthy of him, it is crass and has bad language. I told Archer if he uses the exact question "Don't you think having children use foul language for comedic purposes is in bad taste?" I will give him ten bucks. He could probably pull it off if anyone could.
I am probably overreacting. Slade just thinks I should play innocent like it is the most natural thing in the world that a community theater director wouldn't want a child to use crass language in public.
In my opinion this problem signaled the very death knell of the whole industry of community theater. No one that thinks the word A%& is funny is going to pay fifteen bucks to go watch some goofy musical about a bullfrog and a duck. They could stay home and watch something much more satisfyingly trashy for free.
Here is some random community theater version. It is totally sad, because here is some poor girl being forced to use profanity in public, and she isn't even getting any laughs for it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuDFcLOwYvA&feature=related
So what would you do, yank your kids or insist on a change that probably violates the copywright infringement because these authors of this trash are particularly proud of their ability to be potty mouths?
I am probably overreacting. Slade just thinks I should play innocent like it is the most natural thing in the world that a community theater director wouldn't want a child to use crass language in public.
In my opinion this problem signaled the very death knell of the whole industry of community theater. No one that thinks the word A%& is funny is going to pay fifteen bucks to go watch some goofy musical about a bullfrog and a duck. They could stay home and watch something much more satisfyingly trashy for free.
Here is some random community theater version. It is totally sad, because here is some poor girl being forced to use profanity in public, and she isn't even getting any laughs for it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuDFcLOwYvA&feature=related
So what would you do, yank your kids or insist on a change that probably violates the copywright infringement because these authors of this trash are particularly proud of their ability to be potty mouths?
Nightmare theater mom in training
I shouldn't have done it, because now I only have myself to blame whereas before it could have been anything, but knowing better I stayed to observe the boys' auditions for the summer kids' musical. Drake and Chase stubled through it, and I didn't really have my hopes up there. But Archer had the audience eating out of his hand. He nailed the singing and modulated his character perfectly for every part he read for. Does that mean that he got the lead? Of course not. Because naturally in the world of community theater, nepotism or some other unknown factor is involved in any and all incomprehensible casting decisions. The lead part went to some kid that the director (seeming to sense a need for making excuses for her decision somehow though I don't know who she was directing them toward) explained, before announcing who had what part, that physical characteristics were a large determining factor.
Now I can understand this. But my boys weren't exactly up for the lead of Prince Charming or anything. The play (called 'Honk') is a musical adaption of the Ugly Duckling story. The lead part "Ugly" went to a kid on the basis (explained the director, again, I don't know who she was defending herself to unless she sensed that there would be natural criticism of her decision) that his voice had changed.
Now this is totally bizarre, of course, because this is a CHILDREN'S VERSION of a Broadway musical. If it had been put on by some Middle School, there wouldn't be anyone available for the part, apparently. To me it even seemed a little sicko that among a bunch of 9-12 year old amateur actors a lone seventeen-year-old could swoop in to get the lead. This kid is going to look like he is among the Liliputians.
Of course that is where nepotism would come in. I am sure this person and his family have stubled through bit parts and costume sewing and stage manager positions so that this kid could have a musical someday built around his mediocre talent.
I know it seems like a horrible thing to say. But I am not exactly going to bat for the majority of my children. I would be the first one to throw tomatoes if someone had decided to give Drake or Chase a lead in a musical. But with Archer, you could tell that with whatever was going on onstage that everyone was watching him. Every line he delivered no matter what part he read for was believable and every joke's punch line found its way home.
And perhaps this is something I will never understand until I bear the responsibility of a theater director. But for some reason it seems particularly terrifying for them to cast the character parts with people who can't hack the extra 'ham it up' quality they call for. It seems like directors would rather have some vanilla average Joe spitting out lines in the lead like it was their first time reading them then have a comic relief number in the middle of the play go without someone who could pull it off well.
I remember during the church production of Fiddler last summer that the woman who played Golde was fairly good, but she was basically a place holder for the smaller parts that were more interesting. That's what Archer got, is the very typical show-stealing character comedy number about two thirds of the way through the play. But though unbiased opinions on the subject are most likely not to be found, he was seriously miscast, and it was an opportunity wasted in my obviously biased opinion to make something out of the other two thirds of the play that he is not going to be stealing away from the lead.
Now I can understand this. But my boys weren't exactly up for the lead of Prince Charming or anything. The play (called 'Honk') is a musical adaption of the Ugly Duckling story. The lead part "Ugly" went to a kid on the basis (explained the director, again, I don't know who she was defending herself to unless she sensed that there would be natural criticism of her decision) that his voice had changed.
Now this is totally bizarre, of course, because this is a CHILDREN'S VERSION of a Broadway musical. If it had been put on by some Middle School, there wouldn't be anyone available for the part, apparently. To me it even seemed a little sicko that among a bunch of 9-12 year old amateur actors a lone seventeen-year-old could swoop in to get the lead. This kid is going to look like he is among the Liliputians.
Of course that is where nepotism would come in. I am sure this person and his family have stubled through bit parts and costume sewing and stage manager positions so that this kid could have a musical someday built around his mediocre talent.
I know it seems like a horrible thing to say. But I am not exactly going to bat for the majority of my children. I would be the first one to throw tomatoes if someone had decided to give Drake or Chase a lead in a musical. But with Archer, you could tell that with whatever was going on onstage that everyone was watching him. Every line he delivered no matter what part he read for was believable and every joke's punch line found its way home.
And perhaps this is something I will never understand until I bear the responsibility of a theater director. But for some reason it seems particularly terrifying for them to cast the character parts with people who can't hack the extra 'ham it up' quality they call for. It seems like directors would rather have some vanilla average Joe spitting out lines in the lead like it was their first time reading them then have a comic relief number in the middle of the play go without someone who could pull it off well.
I remember during the church production of Fiddler last summer that the woman who played Golde was fairly good, but she was basically a place holder for the smaller parts that were more interesting. That's what Archer got, is the very typical show-stealing character comedy number about two thirds of the way through the play. But though unbiased opinions on the subject are most likely not to be found, he was seriously miscast, and it was an opportunity wasted in my obviously biased opinion to make something out of the other two thirds of the play that he is not going to be stealing away from the lead.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Relief society Lessons Online
Hey anyone who is interested. I have written up two Relief Society lessons online, which I will probably continue doing. I figure it could possibly be a resource for people who teach to exchange ideas. I took a lot of things out of them, such as the "does anyone have an expreince with X" type of discussion. But I am not big on that anyway. And I also flavored it a bit for a general audience, so it isn't exactly how I would give the lesson.
This article corresponds with lesson eleven, in the Relief Society manual, about th April 6 organization of the church.
http://www.helium.com/items/1088260-when-was-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saings-founded-how-much-has-changed-since-then
Things I added for this lesson. The church has a theme going where a pattern is established, and that pattern repeats itself in various ways in various dispensations. In fact the concept of dispensation is a pattern, in which there is a foundational patriarch, an exodous, a strengthening and then a diaspora. We are now hopefully doing a bit of the strengthening and then hopefully once people stop huddling in the mountain west, a diaspora.
Patterns from Joseph Smith in this lesson can be seen in many things that we do in the church today. His description of the firs meeting on April sixth has a lot of elements of meetings today, including prayer, business, priesthood ordinance and sustaining, and scripture and testimony.
And so because His house is a house of order, this helps in the efficiency and effectiveness of meetings today. We don't have to wonder what we are going to do week to week or rely on some pastor to come up with an effective new idea. That concept is also helpful in life. I don't really have to wonder too much what to do with my time, it is pretty much outlined for me. There is also a pattern in the organization of the church across periods of history.
This article needs a bit of help as I am just now trying to start getting things online before my lessons so others can see them, but it is lesson 12 on the missionary program. It is kind of dry. It has been kind of a stretch for them to get the topics they want in the manual to correspond with the source material, in my opinion.
http://www.helium.com/items/1101306-preparing-to-proselite-history-of-the-lds-missionary-program
Things I will bring up for discussion are Joseph Smith's zeal to preach the gospel and why it was so important for the early church, despite their other problems. I would like to ask people about the various differences they might have experienced in periods of their lives in wanting to be missionaries.
I will also point out that we shouldn't always compare ourselves to people that feel realy gung ho about doing it. Some people, and I mention Slade in this lesson, never really thought that going on a mission was going to be his thing. He didn't believe for a second that he would ever come home talking about how it was the best two years of his life. And I think the fact that some people DO talk that way, might scare some young men away from the prospect of serving missions, or young women or adults for that matter. They figure that if they aren't on fire about it perhaps it isn't right for them. Except that it is a commandment and all. And of course some of the benefits of doing it come even though we don't happen to feel as though we enjoy it.
This article corresponds with lesson eleven, in the Relief Society manual, about th April 6 organization of the church.
http://www.helium.com/items/1088260-when-was-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saings-founded-how-much-has-changed-since-then
Things I added for this lesson. The church has a theme going where a pattern is established, and that pattern repeats itself in various ways in various dispensations. In fact the concept of dispensation is a pattern, in which there is a foundational patriarch, an exodous, a strengthening and then a diaspora. We are now hopefully doing a bit of the strengthening and then hopefully once people stop huddling in the mountain west, a diaspora.
Patterns from Joseph Smith in this lesson can be seen in many things that we do in the church today. His description of the firs meeting on April sixth has a lot of elements of meetings today, including prayer, business, priesthood ordinance and sustaining, and scripture and testimony.
And so because His house is a house of order, this helps in the efficiency and effectiveness of meetings today. We don't have to wonder what we are going to do week to week or rely on some pastor to come up with an effective new idea. That concept is also helpful in life. I don't really have to wonder too much what to do with my time, it is pretty much outlined for me. There is also a pattern in the organization of the church across periods of history.
This article needs a bit of help as I am just now trying to start getting things online before my lessons so others can see them, but it is lesson 12 on the missionary program. It is kind of dry. It has been kind of a stretch for them to get the topics they want in the manual to correspond with the source material, in my opinion.
http://www.helium.com/items/1101306-preparing-to-proselite-history-of-the-lds-missionary-program
Things I will bring up for discussion are Joseph Smith's zeal to preach the gospel and why it was so important for the early church, despite their other problems. I would like to ask people about the various differences they might have experienced in periods of their lives in wanting to be missionaries.
I will also point out that we shouldn't always compare ourselves to people that feel realy gung ho about doing it. Some people, and I mention Slade in this lesson, never really thought that going on a mission was going to be his thing. He didn't believe for a second that he would ever come home talking about how it was the best two years of his life. And I think the fact that some people DO talk that way, might scare some young men away from the prospect of serving missions, or young women or adults for that matter. They figure that if they aren't on fire about it perhaps it isn't right for them. Except that it is a commandment and all. And of course some of the benefits of doing it come even though we don't happen to feel as though we enjoy it.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Hey
Sorry no posting. I hate it when I go offline and my last few posts aren't very good. Anyway, nothing that wonderful to report. Slade's truck was a total loss. It was our first new car, and we shouldn't have bought it because we really couldn't afford it at the time. Less so now, obviously, since it has been a devastating few years to our finances. It even had that new car smell, well at least until we bought Harry it did.
We are going to have to buy one of those starving student specials, now. It is very strange being this poor. I never thought I would be at my age. But then again, I used to be very healthy.
So on the very small bright side, I got a pretty interesting freelancing job. I am being paid fifty dollars an article (way above my usual rate so far) to write travel articles about cities in Europe. I sent them some links of my Helium stuff and they loved it. They said I can work for them as long as I want. The money will be a drop in the bucket to all the money I have lit on fire in the last few years as the expenses of my medical bills and car wrecks have piled up.
Sorry to be depressing. I tried to take the edge off.
We are going to have to buy one of those starving student specials, now. It is very strange being this poor. I never thought I would be at my age. But then again, I used to be very healthy.
So on the very small bright side, I got a pretty interesting freelancing job. I am being paid fifty dollars an article (way above my usual rate so far) to write travel articles about cities in Europe. I sent them some links of my Helium stuff and they loved it. They said I can work for them as long as I want. The money will be a drop in the bucket to all the money I have lit on fire in the last few years as the expenses of my medical bills and car wrecks have piled up.
Sorry to be depressing. I tried to take the edge off.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)