News and Updates

OK, I'm not writing a 24-hour long play (it's more like 10 minutes), rather I have only 24 hours in which to write it. Less than that, really, because the director and actors will have to use half that time to rehearse, memorize, and produce it. I'll probably only get a few hours of writing, max, but I think it will be good to not edit too much. There's no way to prepare (at least I don't want to plan stuff out before hand) so I'm looking forward to it, but I'm a little nervous, too. Check out the Free Times article or go to the Trustus Theatre web site for more details.

So this tax day, having already filed and e-deposited our little return, I'm going to spend some time with friends at Trustus Theatre doing a reading of a new work in progress. This one is a comedy (hopefully) about death, family and gardening in the nude.

I had a great time in Texas last week, reading LOSING SLEEP at the Texas Repertory Theatre . It was really good to see them (including Wilbur the pug dog) and I was happy with the way the reading turned out. I always learn something new - something that I want to rewrite, something that I like now for different reasons - and it's great to have the validation that people who don't know me at all can somehow catch the vibe. On a selfish note, I got an "Economy Plus" seat on the plane coming home, and had no one sitting next to me, so I had some time to make play edits while they were fresh in my mind.

So next week I'm heading out to Houston, TX for a reading of LOSING SLEEP with the Texas Repertory Theatre Company . I wrote the main role, John, with my friend Steve Fenley in mind. Steve is a remarkable performer and the company's Associate Artistic Director, so I'll be doubly glad to see old friends, and hear the play from their perspective.

How fun is this. Check out this nice little interview with Martin McDonough on NPR.org talking about his new film "In Bruges". They say he wrote his 7 plays during a 9 month period of unemployment in 1994, and then spent the next decade getting them produced. After expending that much energy (smartly, I might add), now he wants to go back to his desk and "tell stories for the sake of telling stories" again.

I got a chance recently to spend some time at my parent's mountain house in western North Carolina. It was 8 degrees outside with snow on the ground, and ice on the trees, but inside I had a nice warm fire, and my laptop and ergonomic keyboard. I got to spit out a first draft of a new play that's been bugging me about family drama, American Literature, and nudism. First drafts are always fun, heartbreaking, because the ideas are now in black and white (not watery gray matter), and you're forced to see them for what they are - the first step in a long process of revise, read aloud, lather, rinse, repeat.

So for Christmas I got a copy of the 1942 classic The Art of Dramatic Writing by Lajos Egri. It's written in this great modernist style, proposing answers for our questions about how to write using a dialectical method. Brilliant. I resonate with his point that conflict should grow naturally out of the characters, as if they could do nothing else under the given circumstances, because this clearly aligns with the method of acting most artists use. I struggle however with his idea of "premise" because it seems old-fashioned; like he wants every play to prove a point. X does Y. Ambition breeds disaster. Let me tell you a story that proves it. Being in the post-modern soup, it's much more fun to jump (carrot to potato) from one observation to another, stringing them along on an arc of actions that is then interpreted as story. Mr. Egri would have something to say to me, I'm sure, but I thoroughly enjoyed the lesson.