from The Trial of the Catonsville Nine - Daniel Berrigan

formatting my own

From those in power, we have met little understanding,
much silence, much scorn and punishment. 
We have been accused of arrogance. 
But what of the fantastic arrogance of our leaders? 
What of their crimes against the people, the poor and powerless? 
Still no court will try them, no jail will receive them. 
They live in righteousness. 
They will die in honor. 

For them we have one message,
for those in whose manicured hands the power of the land lies, 
We say to them: 

Lead us.
Lead us in justice and there will be no need to break the law. 
Let the President do what his predecessors failed to do. 
Let him obey the rich less
and the people more. 
Let him think less of the privileged
and more of the poor. 
Less of America
and more of the world.

Let lawmakers, judges, and lawyers think less of the law
and more of justice;
less of legal ritual,
more of human rights. 

To our bishops and superiors we say:
Learn something about the
gospel and something about illegitimate power.
When you do, you will liquidate your investments,
take a house in the slums,
or even join us in jail. 

To lawyers, we say:
Defend draft resisters, ask no fees, insist on justice,
risk contempt of court, go to jail with your clients.

To the prosecution, we say:
Refuse to indict opponents of the war, prefer to resign, practice in private.

To Federal judges, we say:
Give anti-war people suspended sentences
to work for justice and peace or resign your
posts. 

You men of power,
I also have a dream: 
You have told us that your system is reformable. 
Reform it then. 
And we will help,
with all our conviction and energy,
in jail or out.

Hey, Teacher! - Addendum

I did have one more question as regards The Children Who Are Our Future...

How do we get the kids plugged into the rest of the theatre world?

Screw the kids... how do we get anyone plugged into the rest of the theatre world?

The Universities aren't producing New Work... but how are they supposed to have any idea what they should be producing? What's worth producing? They wait and let the regionals vet scripts for them... which isn't a bad path given there still only being 24 hours in a day.

Where do YOU go to hear about the fresh and new?
How much money do YOU spend on scripts you've never heard of from playwrights you've never heard of? (My answer is zero. Honestly.)

No snark intended, I have no idea.

Hey. Teacher!

More of you need to download and listen to the songs I linked in my next-to-last post. I'll wait.

---

Welcome back.

I have been pondering the Education Series that Tom Loughlin (a Yankees fan? feh.) and Scott Walters collaborated on recently. (.pdf compilation here).

As previously mentioned, I am deliberate, and I do deliberate. I wanted to try and clear up the line between what Scott and Tom managed to so clearly outline as their beliefs as to what needs to be done, and what I truly believe for myself.

I am a graduate of the University of New Hampshire with a BA in Theatre, emphasis in Secondary Education (no BFA offered, no grad theatre program) and more recently a grad school widow to a woman attending The University of Texas at Austin for her MFA in lighting design. I think that all of these things color my views of theatre education, as they naturally would.

My experiences as an undergrad were very positive, my proxy experience of grad school less so.

---

What I want out of theatre education.

1. Truth.
   We need to eliminate the myth of "pre-professional" training. Labeling any program as 'pre-professional" reinforces the lie that there is a profession to be passed on to once you have your diploma in hand. Theatre isn't law. Or medicine. Or finance. There is no national system in place for scouting and placement. And I've yet to come across the audition that asks you to bring two headshots/resumes and your transcript. There ARE institutions where you will make great contacts that may lead to you being seen by folks who can advance you, but that has nothing whatsoever to do with a pre-professional curriculum.
   
2. Programs must kill the idea of the Easy A.
   There are many students in larger (unlimited entry) undergrad programs who are theatre majors because it's easier than being a English major. There's less reading, and many programs don't require any sort of practical application of learned skills, or even require an acting class above Acting 1. Whether this is a return to the concept of scholar-artist or not (I am in favor of the return) our educators must demonstrate to their students that there is an immense amount of work to be done to have a degree in theatre. In my curriculum I would require classes in history or crit for all four years. Talent being equal? Give me the lit major over the theatre major every day, and twice on Saturdays and Sundays.
   
3. Collaboration
   This is where I shouted my most hearty amen to Tom and Scott's posts. Theatre programs at universities have considerable resources. They often don't feel that way, but they don't get out much. If those resources were shared in even a small way with their local theatre communities it would be a huge boon. I am aware that there are programs that do this with regionals, but it needs to be widespread and move both up and down the chain.
   
   Fer'instance: here in Austin, The University of Texas at Austin has immense resources both capital and human. Why not, as part of the curriculum, give over the Lab Theatre to be curated by Salvage Vanguard or the Rude Mechanicals? Participants in the linked classes would then, under the tutelage of the guest artists, create pieces that would be performed in the space. The students get to Create. The company gets access to a space and the University creates ties to the community. [yes I'm aware that both named companies in this case HAVE a space]. It also gives the students some idea of the constraints of not working with full department resources behind a project. Also, with stronger ties to the community both on a personal and institutional level, there may be a better shot of keeper some of that talent you've just developed local.
   
4. Production
   Wherein I mostly disagree with my Elders.
   More production not less. Big, small, full, reading. Every member of your program should have almost never ending chances to be in SOMETHING. There is no way to figure out how to use the tools you're being given unless you are being asked to use them in a real world(ish) situation. This would also allow the non-stars of your program to get their feet wet.
   
   Am I disappointed with many universities seasons? Sure. But  seems to me that we should reform the selections not eliminate the lab portion of students educations. My alma mater has (in my lifetime) selected a classical piece, a modern piece, a childrens' piece, a musical, and a mainstage dance concert. Along with class projects their were a TON of opportunities to take advantage of in our (relatively) small program.
   
5. Encourage
   Student work. In all ways, in every way. If there is a student production company mentor it, and nurture it. I figured out a whole myriad of things I never would have otherwise in being involved with Mask and Dagger at the University of New Hampshire. In my time at UNH Mask and Dagger went from doing one show a year to producing a season, and from all reports is now operating on something like 5 times our old per show budget all run by students. Programs shouldn't resent the time that it takes away from the department, it's a vital part of  theatre education. Get MORE involved to make sure that folks aren't picking up bad habits maybe, but leave that playground open. My own partner's entree into theatre post high school was as part of a student production, and I was heavily involved for 4 of my five years so I am most definitely biased on this score.
   
   There is seemingly little of this at The University of Texas at Austin but biannually they present the Cohen New Works Festival. The provide financially support and provide space for the students to roll their own pieces. It is very well attended and innovation is highly encouraged. By all accounts the faculty hate it. It is a huge logistical nightmare. But students walk away with a workshopped show and a sense that THEY can create, they don't need to wait for the mysterious Other to create something for them to work on. Indeed my next production is the result of a short piece my partner created as part of New Works 2005.
   
6. Don't lose sight of the undergrads.
   In programs with strong graduate school it is common to focus on the upper level while using the undergrads as a resource bank to keep funds and cheap labor around. Which I understand. It's always more fun to play with better tools, but in order to keep churning out new tools you need to make them.

I'm sure there are big things I'm missing. It's really a mammoth issue and something that needs to be addressed to keep the incredible talent in this country from being underdeveloped or from quitting due to post-college myth destruction.

All I want is literate performers who understand the realities of the post-millenial theatre world in the US and aren't afraid to get their hands dirty in any part of a production from creation to mopping.

Homework

• In my experience, graduates of small programs are more polished and more pro-active than graduates of large programs, regardless of prestige on either side of the equation. I have no answer as to why. It feels important in the quest to solve the larger training issues to figure that out.
  Is it true in you experience?
  Why do you think it is?
• Why am I having such a hard time coming up with training issues on the technical/design side of the ball? I don't think I'm blind to it. Is technical/design training simply handled better? Or am I missing some really huge flaws there?

Technorati Tags: theatre, education, Scott Walters, Tom Loughlin, The University of Texas at Austin, Univeristy of New Hampshire, Mask and Dagger