Frankenstein opens Thursday April 15th and runs through Sunday April 25th. The last day of class is Friday, April 30.

Scott

From "Fighting for the Higher Self" at www.garlikov.com (I don't know who this guy is):

"Books, magazines, news articles and programs, talk shows, infotainment, and infomercials, tell us all how to make more money, live longer and healthier, be more physically fit, be more active, and have more fun and excitement. Such self-improvement advice for "success", and the market for it, is pervasive. But with the exception of religious preaching, which is usually quite narrow in its exhortations(1), there is not much in popular culture nor in schools today that beckons or challenges us to "be all that we can be" in regard to nobility of spirit and understanding, and in regard to striving for a higher plane of non-material self-actualization and fulfillment -- along with whatever else we do in life.

It is not that one has to give up worthwhile physical pleasures or material comforts, joys, and goods in order to achieve higher aspirations. Even instant or merely temporary gratifications are not necessarily incompatible with higher pleasures, unless they are all one is seeking. It is that the pursuit of the physical and material need not, and should not(2), preclude thinking and reasoning of the highest order; nor should they prevent the pursuit of what is best for the spirit. Yet, in our culture today, the pursuit of the higher self -- the development of our individual worthwhile talents and abilities, the development of our senses of curiosity, wonder, and awe (which should increase, not decrease, as we gain more knowledge), as well as our senses of humor, the playful, and the ridiculous; the pursuit of understanding and wisdom (as opposed to just specific, factual or technical and practical knowledge), the pursuit of understanding of and appreciation for the good and the beautiful, rather than the possession of the merely currently fashionable and popular or immediately pleasurable(3) -- is neither fostered in schools nor modeled very much in the media, if at all. It is a pursuit that does not occur to many people, and when it does, there are forces at work that discourage it as being impractical, arrogant, too human-centered(4), anti-social, austere, disrespectful of tradition, or subversive of the allegedly more important economic need for specialization whereby people serve primarily to fill instrumental roles within viable organizations. I have titled this essay "Fighting For the Higher Self" because it takes a real struggle to overcome these forces, whether one is trying to do it for one's own inner being or whether one is trying to help others do it, particularly (one's) children. It takes as much of a struggle even to get children, and sometimes adults, to see there can be a higher self, and that it is worth pursuing, because too often, in our daily life, it just does not seem important or necessary to make the effort."

when does Frankenstein go up? We would likely have time for a rehearsal after that. I'm not really in favor of creating a script and then performing it without a rehersal process, even if it is just a couple of hours. Also, I don't think it is adviseable to do this without Mr. Santana's participation - and as it seems kinda difficult for him to get to Asheville, I'd rather have him come up for a performance of Frankenstein.

reasons to do a reading:

1 - it strokes our own egos - this is not a reason we should underestimate by any means...

2 - it challenges others in the department (our supposed audience for such a reading) to raise the level of their own discourse - or, at least, it challenges them to begin some sort of discourse. this could backfire, of course. we could end up alienating folks by our hoity-toityness. "I'll be damned if I think about high-falutin' matters - those guys are a bunch o' dorks! and they think they're better than me and my friends, just because we like 'Cats'!"

3- it asserts our humanity to a group that we have assumed thinks less of us, or at least that we assume has some misconception of DDS. restated: it clears up misconceptions about DDS.

are any of these reasons sufficient to warrant the work it would take to put together such a project?

Jess

I propose we make Tina Fey an honorary DDSer. Hey! Maybe we could start doing that -- sort of like giving an honorary doctorate. Once a year, we could write to someone and tell them we are making them an honorary DDSer and invite them to join the blog.

On another topic: I'm swamped swamped swamped. Could you guys kick around ideas as to 1) whether we actually want to do a reading, and if yes then 2) how we would go about creating a script? I think we'd probably be looking at April 30th or May 1st as a performance.

Scott

But Laura Bush sez it's GOOD to read!

You know, within an Asheville context, LSD and birkenstocks may be the onlywayto get people to payattention -- that or promise to burn Dubya in effigy....

"Instead of a straighforward interpretation of The Divine Comedy, it might be interesting to write a story that weaves the Divine Comedy as just one layer."

that's it, exactly.
Jess

Jess -- The Nine Cantos of Hell; The Nine Cantos of Dante Aleghieri; The Fellowship of the Nine Rings of Hell. (just kidding about that last one)

Scott

Oh yeah, and the tourney starts tomorry. Brian, you're a Blue Devils fan, if I'm not mistaken? Looks like it could be Duke against my Illini in the sweet 16 , and then I'll bet everyone out your way is hoping UNC will beat Miss St to set up a Duke/UNC matchup with a final four spot on the line. God, I love March Madness!

Jess

I'm afraid that bookending the journey with the drugs kinda devalues the content of said journey. Also, that doesn't sound like a storyline that would interest more than, say, college students.

What I like about the idea is the way it sets up the context for surrealism, nonlinear storytelling, wild theatrical elements, etc.. But, do we need to invent a context for these things? Won't the audience create a context that allows for these through their interp of the contract we establish from the beginning?

Also, I'm not sure we have to tell a quest tale at all - at least not in the traditional, "beginning, middle with obstacles, end" sense of a quest tale.

I want desperately to dig into the themes of especially the Inferno at this point, see if we can get to other source texts through thematic relation.

I think one theme that stands out in Inferno is the idea that whatever God decides is right. We are punished or rewarded in the afterlife according to God's judgement of our actions. The flip side of this, when you apply the "free will" filter, is that our actions "here" determine our place "there".

Also, Dante uses the text as a way to attack the political mess of the 14th century - I guess he was bitter about exile. How are we exiled today by our political system? In what way have we been estranged from what is "good"? How can we use this piece to make similar commentary?

Maybe the quest we can refer to is that undertaken by every member of the audience - by extension, every denizen of the USA. Can we not imply this journey through visual, aural and linguistic (and to a lesser extent, olfactorial and tactile) systems?

I have this idea of breaking up the piece into cantos in the same way that Dante does his text. I can envision each stage canto as being able to stand alone, but, when combined with the other pieces, serving to hold up a greater thematic and, by extension, narrative structure. This should be something that serves to engage the audience in the greater conversation of our personal odysseys.

To this end, I think a decent title for the piece might be "Nine Cantos" or "The Nine Cantos" - one for each circle of hell. I ran this by Angie this afternoon, and she suggested adding some type of adjective to the title, or making it "The Nine Cantos of..." something. All I could come up with at that point was "The Nine Kinky Cantos" or "Nine Crusty Cantos". Not real appropriate. Ideas? Or do you think we even need to add to the title, whichever one it might be? At this point, until we come up with something better, my default title is, simply, "Inferno".

Thoughts?
Jess

Ideas for working titles for the Dante piece:

1 - DIS
(that's the name of the city contained within the larger region of hell...I think it's pronounced "deess")

2 - il viaggio
(italian for "the journey")

3 - Malebolge ("evil pocket") or il nono malebolge ("the ninth evil pocket" - the ninth part of the eighth circle - reserved for the souls of Sowers of Scandal and Schism)

maybe it's not a good idea to use an italian title? I'm drawing a blank on how to make the title connotate a modern context - short of "Divine Comedy X" or "Divine Comedy 2004". Maybe something using "Alighieri", Dante's family's name? Interestingly, Dante's title was simply "Comedy" - the "divine" part was added by scholars in the 16th century for classification purposes...

Jess

Can you e-mail me your class writings? or post them here? I'd be interested to read them...

Jess

Brian -

To catch you up from today's lunch - This fall I will be directing at NC Stage Co a new script. This script will be developed along the lines of a major story in the same manner that the Frankenstein Project is loosely based on the Mary Shelley story. This script will be based around Dante's "Divine Comedy". The collaborators on this venture at this point will include myself, Scott, Kate, John, Ryan Madden and Jennifer. It is our sincere hope that you will be willing to join us in this effort.

Right now, our focus lies in identifying source materials that we can, ahem, steal from in order to piece together a storyline, dialogue, characters, etc. Part and parcel with this process will be defining major themes that we want to include in the piece. It is my supposition that such themes will be our "way in" to finding a dramatic storyline.

I have no intention of insisting upon linear storytelling. It is also my assumption that elements of dance and multi-media could be used to great effect in this collaboration. I hope to have four actors (2M, 2F) ready as a basic ensemble around which we can build this piece.

Oh yeah, we also have to come up with a name for this project by next weekend so's that it can be included in the NC Stage brochure for the upcoming season. no pressure, ya'll. Let's get brainstormin'!

Jess

I think that last exchange needs to be in the reading...

Scott

Ummmm. paper to finish for Humanities - will write more about the Guirgis piece tomorrow pm...

Jess

Shit, ya'll. I'm all for the reading. I'm also going to read all your script suggestions, and apply my filters appropriately. Then, I am going to implore DDS to take an active role in my show this fall, the manifestation of which I would like to discuss this Monday at UB. Brian, I also am in need of your input, so we'll talk via e-mail, this board, phone, etc...

Next, I will be a thorn in the side of conservatism. I alos believe I sholud try my hand at teaching. A couple of kids of my own will also be in my future, so I can personally influence today's (or tomorrow's) youth.

{...I saw "Our Lady of 121st Street" last night at Steppenwolf in Chicago. Great acting, fantastic concept, strong direction. I'm not convinced that the play is that good, though. It is a tour de force for the actors, but, in my mind, it lacks a holistic (or wholistic) punch. I was amazed by the overwhelming theatricality that the play employed. I felt distanced from the characters by such...}

BUT....

Now I'm back in WNC and I'm ready to take on the world! Grrrrrrrr......

Jess

Brian -- I don't know if I'm serious or not. I know that there were some lively, passionate and funny exchanges between everybody that might be fun to read out loud. Obviously, there is way too much material to do anywhere near it all, and a lot would have to be edited, but it might be interesting. Apparently there is great interest in DDS -- I am told a lot of people want to "join," to the point where I might start a second group! This might be a way to let people know the subject and level of DDS conversations. And it might be a way to take care of some of the curiosity!

Scott

Everybody -- I just went back to our first posts to this blog back in July. You guys are a great group. Funny, thoughtful, passionate. I was thinking -- we oughta do as a fundraiser A Night With the Dead Dramatists, in which we read favorite exchanges from the blog! Wouldn't that be a hoot? Brian would have to come back, though. Do you think anyone would come see it?

Scott

Jess -- I recommend (with some personal reservations that wouldn't be shared by most people) The Pope's Wedding or Saved by Edward Bond. Young characters. Violence. Really dark stuff, though. But relevant. Comedies with bite: Tom Stoppard wonderful one-acts: Dogg's Hamlet and Cahout's Macbeth. These might be very relevant to America under the Office of Homeland Security... Or a play I used to toy with doing: Max Frisch's Biography: A Game.

Scott

Brian wrote:
I prefer tall spanish women of high intellect with a sense of humor. What play should I choose?

Brian --
The House of Bernarda Alba OK, maybe sans sense of humor...And I guess they aren't that smart, either.

Scott

Jess -- Of course it is, Jess, and it shows you are thinking from a practical stance, which ain't all bad. Certainly nothing to be embarrassed about. But what is your goal for this show? IN what way do you want to advance your career by doing it? If the focus is on impressing Charlie and Angie, what would do that best? If that isn't the focus, then what is, and what is the best way to accomplish it. Let me give you an analogy: let's say I'm a young, unmarried guy who really loves tall women. Let's say I could only date 8 women before I had to marry one. If I were approaching this logically, I could take one of two directions: 1) I could choose 8 tall women (sounds like an Albee play) and marry the one I loved the most, or 2) I could date 8 women I loved and marry the tallest of them. Do you think these two approaches would lead to my marrying the same woman? Unlikely. Option one would probably lead to a taller woman that I loved less, and Option Two would lead to someone I loved more but was probably shorter. The order that you apply your selection filter will alter your results. Same with play selection. If you apply the practicality filter first (small cast, one set) and then choose the best play from that group, you will end up with a different play than you would if you applied the love filter first and then chose the most financially-practical of that group. Using the first option might lead me to No Exit, but the second might lead me to Six Characters in Search of a Author -- a play that would never show up in the small-cast-one-set group, but which might actually be inexpensive to produce because it takes place on a bare stage! See what I mean?

What is your goal? What is the best way to attain it?

Scott

Hey! Anyone know where I can see a good small-cast, one-set show? That sounds great!

All kidding aside, Scott, I see your point. Let me think about the model you set up: Lowest financial risk with highest artistic benefit.

Truthfully (and I hate to admit it) "No Exit" IS on my list because it is one of the best small-cast, one-set shows I know.

Jess

So many thoughtful and provocative comments. Where, oh where, to begin? Let's start with this one from Jess:

Isn't it possible that the reason we see so many old works on stage and hear so many of such in the symphonic catalogue, isn't it possible that this is because of the dearth of quality new works and the lack of competent new artists? Sir Georg Solti has proclaimed for years that he would love to direct new pieces (and he does direct his fair share in any given year), but the truth is that no one is writing pieces as good as Telleman, Copeland or Saint-Saens and no one is even in the same ballpark as Mozart, Bach and Beethoven...

Welcome to the Chicken or the Egg Show! With all due respect to Sir George Solti, it seems to me his problem is sheer laziness. He wants to go out in the yard and pluck a beautiful, ripe tomato without having had to till the soil, dig in compost, plant the seed, water the plant, tie it up to a stake, and sprayed it to keep away aphids. Composers and playwrights must be grown and nurtured.

What does theatre history tell us about this issue? The great playwrights -- Sophocles, Plautus, Marlowe, Shakespeare, Moliere, Racine, de Vega, Goldoni -- all either ran their own theatres or had an institution committed to doing anything they came up with. This was the lesson of the Royal Court, which was almost solely responsible for the flowering of British playwriting since the mid-1950s: they committed to a playwright, not to a play. When they read manuscripts, they were searching for a voice that sounded unique, not for an already beautiful, ripe play. Then they committed to doing that playwright's plays, regardless of the quality. Because they knew that an artist has to experiment and make mistakes in order to grow, and that eventually this would pay off. The sign I have up on the bulletin board in Carmichael applies here: the only way to get a good idea is to have a lot of them.

But theatres today are too scared to do this. Their finances aren't in order enough to take risks, and so they don't. I have been taking an evening class in investment for the past month, and it became increasingly clear to me that artists' moral superiority when it comes to money (and I am as guilty as the next) puts them in the position of having to be error-free in their season -- in other words, it puts them in the position of being conservative. Take a look at NC Stage: a one-man show about a maitre de in a popular NYC restaurant? Excuse me? Have they identified some interesting new voice that they'd like to support? Or rather are they hedging their bets with a low-cost production that is likely to at least break even? The latter is the equivalent of investing your money in a bank CD -- there isn't much risk, but the return is minimal as well.

So Sartre or Burgess? First of all, are you making this decision based on the long-term or the short-term? And are you making your decision for you, or for the theatre? Do you believe that Jeremy has a unique dramatic voice that will develop over time and that you'd like to help bring to fruition? Just because Jeremy is in Asheville, by the way, doesn't mean he is the only new playwright you could commit to. This is, after all, the age of the internet, the fax, and the cell phone. You don't have to drink with a playwright to commit to his work. Also, would you do No Exit because it has something unique and interesting to say to an audience today, or because it is a small-cast, one-set show?

Everything worth doing involves risk. The statement "You can't continue to do plays if they are not cost effective" is the artistic equivalent of investing in US Savings Bonds. Nice, conservative. It looks to what has worked in the past as a way of hedging bets about the future. But just what IS a cost effective play? Isn't the most cost effective play a play that people want to see? When deciding to go out for an evening at the theatre, does a spectator say, "Hey, let's see if we can find a good small-cast, one-set play"? I think they look for something that is going to light up their eyes, something that might lead them to look at the person they came with and say "Wow! Am I glad we came tonight!" If they can't find that, then they look for something they know -- which is what Flat Rock exists for.

There isn't a right answer here, just like there isn't a way to predict what the stock market will do tomorrow. One of the first things that we did in this investment class was take a survey to determine our risk tolerance and the time frame of our investing (i.e., are you investing for the short-term or long-term). Artists might benefit from taking a similar survey about the investment of their talent: do you have a long-term goal, or are you focusing on the short run? Are you willing to roll the big dice, or does that make you nervous? (In this class, the question was: Would having your money in the stock market during a downturn keep you awake at night?) The next thing we learned is that we wanted to decrease risk and increase profit. Decrease, not eliminate. Don't take unnecessary chances. Look at what the successful people do and learn from it. We were looking for a strategy that had the least amount of risk and the greatest amount of profit, which is actually what the successful people do as well. Artists, despite all their high ideals about their commitment to taking artistic risks, tend to focus almost exclusively on decreasing risk when they put together a season. And when you decrease risk too far, you don't profit -- you just don't lose, which is not the same thing.

So: what are your artistic goals? Are these short-term or long-term goals? What is your level of risk tolerance? Would suffering through an artistic downturn keep you awake at night? How can you achieve the minimum amount of financial risk while generating the maximum amount of artistic profit?

Scott

While I embrace the results of the new focus that ya'll propose, I am hesitant to agree with what all of you are saying - which sounds a lot like "new artists and their works are not emerging because of the overabundance of past masters and old works."

Isn't it possible that the reason we see so many old works on stage and hear so many of such in the symphonic catalogue, isn't it possible that this is because of the dearth of quality new works and the lack of competent new artists? Sir Georg Solti has proclaimed for years that he would love to direct new pieces (and he does direct his fair share in any given year), but the truth is that no one is writing pieces as good as Telleman, Copeland or Saint-Saens and no one is even in the same ballpark as Mozart, Bach and Beethoven...

There is absolutely a lack of good new playwrights. I'm working with just about the only damn one in Asheville (not that he's "good", but that he is "new"). Should I direct a work by Jeremy Burgess at NC Stage this fall? Charlie and Angie are letting me pick my own script, so that is a possibility. Or should I explore an old work like Sartre's "No Exit" to see if a past master is still relevant to an audience today?

There is also our old issue of commercialism that wreaks havoc with these ideas. You can't continue to do plays if they are not cost effective. I don't have the time or resources to put a fantastically collaborative effort on the NCSC stage like that which is being produced in the shape of the Frankenstein Project. I WILL do the best I can with the time I have. Realise that such is possible with Frankenstein because of the circumstances (academia) in which it is being produced. For exactly these reasons, I think UNCA's drama dept should ONLY be doing such new collaborative works.

Under what circumstances would such artistic collaboration and creation be commercially viable? I contend that there must be a parent organisation to foster such. Peter Brooks has made a career out of these types of projects, but only because Peter Hall and the RSC initially gave him a space in which to create. His work's existence did not depend on the box office receipts it generated. The rest of the RSC season supplied the capital, Brooks' only charge was to create as he and his company saw fit.

Jess

John raises an interesting question: why is theatre so past-bound? Except for the occasional remake, film isn't obsessed with turning out new interpretations of old films, nor is the music world obsessed with recreating old scores...except the classical music world, which is probably the closest to the theatre scene that we have. Symphonies regularly program the popular composers from the distant past -- Mozart, Beethoven, Mahler, etc -- and virtually ignore living composers. Result? A withering of new symphonic music. Same in theatre: repertory theatres schedule seasons of classics (includ9ing classics of the recent past) mixed in with a few newish plays that have received the stamp of Broadway respectability. Result? A withering of new plays. I frequently find myself returning to Antonin Artaud's No More Masterpieces, in which he doesn't say we should ignore the old stories (many, many of which are archetypal tales that apply powerfully to now), but that they should be embodied in a form that reflects contemporary society.

I have been reading Socrates' Way and How to Think Like Leonardo Da Vinci recently. Both of these books use ideas and figures from the distant past, but put those ideas and figures into a contemporary context. To my mind, they bring these figures to life as part of today. Same with The Frankenstein Project: we are putting a new spin on an old story.

It is interesting to consider...

Scott

Brian,
It seems to me that there are several artificial constraints that hobble learning: 1) the production line approach to learning -- everyone must learn the same stuff at the same time in order to "efficiently" utilize the instructor's time; 2) (grows out of #1) the teacher controls the material covered, and the speed in which it is covered. Both of these substitute authority for curiosity.

The natural state of the human being is curiosity. By the end of K-12, the process of teaching has almost destroyed this natural curiosity in all but the most determined children. This is the Spartan approach to education, rather than the Athenian. What the child learns is a deadly combination of obedience and passive resistance. Forced to learn what the state thinks they should learn, rather than what is most important to them at that time, the child gradually learns to play "the game" and to stifle their own needs. By the time I get them, they are almost totally intellectually numb.

Then I continue the process. Sure, I encourage "independent thought," but I control the syllabus, and everyone moves through it at the same pace. The Game continues.

I think this approach is obsolete. It comes out of a time when there were few books, and so professors disseminated the ideas in those books to large numbers of students in the most efficient way -- through lecture. When done by a powerful lecturer, these ideas can touch the logos and the pathos -- the intellect and the heart.

But now there are lots of books -- and videos and DVDs and the internet. And the professor still controls the classroom as if there were only a few books, and he owned them all. Students no longer need to learn the same thing at the same time and at the same pace. Perhaps they should be allowed to follow their own curiosity wherever it takes them. Maybe present a brief survey of the terrain -- a fly-by, as it were -- and then let students head for the part of the forest that most interests them.

There is a story that Joseph Campbell tells all the time. It is one of the Arthurian legends. In it, the assembled knights of the Round Table see a vision of the Holy Grail, which then disappears. They resolve to set out to find it. And then these lines occur, which also seem to me to reflect on what we are talking about: "They thought it would be a disgrace to go forth in a group. Each entered the forest that he had chosen where there was no path and where it was darkest." Wow! Now that makes learning an adventure in seeking out one's own truth. And the teacher in this metaphor becomes an advisor -- not a guide who takes you where you want to go, but an advisor who knows the forest and can answer questions along the way.

In many ways, The Frankenstein Project is a small, unconscious step toward this model. Each participant in the creation is entering the forest he or she has chosen where there is no path and where it is darkest. And it has been very exciting to watch each playwright, for instance, finding their own way, and following their own path.

There is an old saying that where you stumble, there you will find your treasure. If the teacher provides a smooth, well-worn path -- how will a student ever find their treasure?

Scott

A transcript of an on-line chat with Ronald Gross, author of Socrates' Way and Peak Learning. Got me thinking. (Can you tell that my new sleep apparatus has my mind feeling more lively?]

[Full transcript at http://adulted.about.com/library/blchat-082300.htm]


Emiliano Children are also easily distracted - particularly teens. It's those hormones.

Paula But try to teach a child math on a sunny day or during the first snowfall.

SOCRATES [Ronald Gross, author or Socrates’ Way and Peak Learning] Emiliano, I have been struck by the passion with which you Americans pursue your hobbies, interests, and even intellectual passions, well outside the realm of what is required by your occupations.

Emiliano How does Socrates achieve discipline? Why are so many young people into Chess? That is a hard subject!

Paula So many strategies go into teaching!

SOCRATES I strive for discipline by focusing on what people WANT and NEED to think about and learn about. Then, no discipline is required. Chess is a wonderful example, Emiliano. We Greeks had a word for what grips such hobbyist: autotelic. That's an activity in which the reward is in taking the next step. And note too, Paula, how COMPETITION in chess -- contesting with strong players intent on defeating you -- can sharpen skills and spur progress.

Paula If they NEED to pass the standardized tests to graduate High School, but they are not interested in some of the areas... that would be the challenge to a teacher

SOCRATES Yes, Paula -- the need to pass tests makes the teacher's job much more difficult. I believe those tests are a bane on your educational system in the U.S. I am glad to see they are coming under fire.

Emiliano Tests do not test what students study. That is why they are so hard. Back to chess. There are 3858 people playing chess on Yahoo right now!

SOCRATES Delighted to consider CHESS further, Emiliano! Just think how welcome Chess classes are to that minority of people truly interested -- and how boring for others.

Emiliano I'd still like a better solution to getting a young pre-teen interested enough in Math for her to study it willingly. Like she does with horses!

SOCRATES Lifelong Learning offers a way out of the constraints which are destroying schools and colleges. If it were fully accepted that Learning was Lifelong, schools would not feel the terrible pressure to instill so much knowledge doomed to early obsolescence. They could focus on Learning How to Learn.

SOCRATES That "young teen" you posit, Emiliano -- WHY does she have to study Mathematics at that point. Why not wait until she has a need for Mathematics, or at least is at a point where such a need can be evoked.

Emiliano Good question. Answer needs thought.

SOCRATES Emiliano, perhaps our Host knows of a website on Learning How to Learn.

AdultedADM Good question, Socrates - I don't know of any off-hand but I will research it.

Emiliano Math is almost never needed until you need to balance a check book. And that is very low level math. Higher level math is needed if you want to study more difficult subjects.

SOCRATES That Great Spirit, Ortega y Gassett, addressing working men and women in Madrid during the Spanish Civil War, said that there was only ONE requirement to studying Metaphysics -- a NEED for metaphysics. In the dialogue called the MENO, I showed a slave boy, who my fellow Greeks thought had only half a brain, how to solve one of Euclid's greatest theorems.

Emiliano But, by the time you decide to study subjects that require math, you may need years of catching up. This would delay one's career. Imagine someone at 25 deciding to be a programmer and then needing to learn Arithmetic, Algebra, Geometry, and Trigonometry!

SOCRATES Delay of career and need to "catch up" might not be too great a price to pay to avoid all the wasted effort, agony, antagonism, and depression that results from forcing people to learn mathematics at the wrong time.

Emiliano Interesting.

SOCRATES I would imagine they would learn it faster, better, and with more enjoyment than at any other time. What's the hurry?

Emiliano Is there value in a society having a certain "base" level of common literacy?

SOCRATES Yes, if it is truly "common," truly functional, and truly relevant to the needs of the individuals and the society. So many people say that the math they were forced to learn in school has never given them any use or delight.

I probably have a short attention span, but I want to propose a new topic: how do you educate an artist? Let's pretend that no institutions already exist, no curriculum is already invented. We want to create a place where young people with artistic interests can grow in the way that best suits them. It is not a school to train people for a specific art form (i.e., it isn't a Theatre School or a Dance School), but rather is a place where young artists come to explore their world, their ideas about representing that world in some way, and develop those skills that they need in order to fully express those ideas. Further, let's imagine that we are not trying to create a one-size-fits-all curriculum, but rather some way that each individual can follow their own path toward knowledge, wisdom, and skill.

We live in a world with almost unlimited resources (despite what the government would have us believe). We have libraries filled with books that can be checked out for free; we have the internet with its boundless resources; we have countless magazines, newspapers, videos and DVDs, books; we have email, faxes, and phones to contact anyone in the world who knows what we are seeking; and we have airplanes and cars to travel where we need to go. How can we piece all of this together in order allow artists (or anyone else, for that matter) to achieve full self-actualization? How can we create a situation where people can productively and effectively "follow their bliss"?

In part, this comes out of my own interests; in part, it comes from hearing Jess express his frustration about lacking the financial wherewithal to pay for a month-long class with Anne Bogart. The arts are probably one of the last places where you don't really need credentials in order to play. Yet we are increasingly moving toward a model that makes becoming an artist as institution-bound as becoming a doctor or lawyer. How can we get around that? How can we grow through self-directed learning?

Scott

"Do not think you have to make big waves in order to contribute. My role model, Sojourner Truth, slave woman, could neither read nor write but could not stand slavery and second-class treatment of women. One day during an anti-slavery speech she was heckled by an old man. 'Old woman, do you think that your talk about slavery does any good? I don't care any more for your talk than I do for the bite of a flea.' 'Perhaps not,' snapped back Sojourner Truth, 'But the Lord willing, I'll keep you scratching.' A lot of people think they have to be big dogs to make a difference. That's not true. You just need to be a flea for justice, bent on building a more decent home life, neighborhood, work place, and America. Enough committed fleas biting strategically can make even the biggest dog uncomfortable and transform even the biggest nation. Be a flea for justice wherever you are and in whatever career you choose in life and help transform America."

--Marian Wright Edelman, founder of the Children's Defense Fund, in The Measure of OUr Success (quoted in Socrates' Way by Ronald Gross, p 173-174).

"Experience is not what happens to us. It is what we MAKE of what happens to us."
--Aldous Huxley

Perhaps theatre can contribute to this process by giving us examples of people making something out of experience...

Scott

Yes, Brian, I have found out the hard way that even justified anger can have a negative effect. A lesson I continue to have to learn. I suspect you have to learn it to.

So. Shall we get back to morality, or has that time passed?

Scott

Brian -- Any teacher who calls a student's comment "idiotic" deserves everything he gets. Clearly, this guy is a bully. It took guts to stand up to him that way, Brian, and while generally speaking shouting expletives is not a great way to communicate in academia, I think in this case you can be forgiven. But I'll tell you what -- "Long Day's Journey" can have a awwwwwful effect on people!

Scott

Brian -- I agree with Jess, although not with quite so much enthusiasm. Because I know firsthand how you get, Brian, when someone disagrees with you, and sometimes that means that you dig in your heals, stop listening and go for the jugular. Richard Paul, the critical thinking guru in America, defines a critical thinker thusly: "It is someone who is able to think well and fairmindedly not just about her own beliefs and viewpoints, but about beliefs and viewpoints that are diametrically opposed to her own. And not just think about them, but to explore and appreciate their adequacy, their cohesion, their very reasonableness vis-a-vis her own." Ludwig Wittgenstein would often approach a disagreement from another direction, according to my stepson -- he'd ask, "What would he have to go through, to think, to experience, to lead him to say what he is saying?"

I must say that, from your description of several of your teachers, most of them sound like they could use being smacked around by a student. I hope your teacher learned something from the encounter. Please let us know how things came out.

Scott

Stick to your guns, Brian. Knowing you as I do, I recognize that you will stick up for what you believe in. Of course, I'm not saying "get yourself kicked out of grad school" -- just know that I'm in your corner and understand that sometimes, in the heat of the moment, unfortunate things get said.



If only everyone could be even-keeled and temperate and thoughtful. Like me.

Hee Hee!
Jess

Brian -- So the point of disagreement, as I see it, is between a concept of moral universals and a concept individually-created morality. Agreed? Now Socrates would attempt to find an example wherein the initial proposition leads to an unacceptable conclusion. Before undertaking that investigation, let me ask for clarification: your approach centers on an individual forging of one's own moral code. Within such a situation, what happens to the Social Contract? Can a society enforce laws, for instance? If so, on what basis? Also, isn't "authenticity" a universal value as it is being defined by Sartre?

Scott

Brian -- Hear hear! Let's have a Socratic dialogue that might actually get somewhere.
Point of agreement, I think: morality evolves. It changes with time.
Point of agreement, I think: morality has effects. It alters the way people interact, and the things that are valued.
Point of agreement, I think: it is undesirable to achieve total agreement on moral issues. There should always be questioning, which in turn leads to evolution.

Socrates almost always started by trying to reach an agreement concerning terms. In this case, what is moral and what is immoral? After we reach even a temporary agreement on this, we can move to discussing how ideas of morality apply to life, and also to art.

Perhaps my position is Kantian: that the basis of morality is the idea that all human bbeings be seen as an end in themselves, and not a means to an end. Thus, my revulsion about The Shape of Things or In the Company of Men. It is also the basis for my discomfort with some aspects of capitalism.

Is this a start?

Scott

I will refrain from responding at length. But I will say this: I disagree that "morality is subjective," and the fact that this idea is believed is, to me, a sign of the decadence of our society. Morality is complex, but then so is the weather and we talk about it all the time. But when it is described as subjective, you might as well say it is meaningless.

Scott