RE: RAT, The dramaturgy of...

[Laura Winton <fluffysingler@prodigy.net>]

Then again, Waiting For Godot has all those layers too and I suspect Beckett
was NOT necessarily concerned with whether or not his audience would "get
it".

I love both--Hamlet and Godot.  But artists have to be honest with
themselves about where their skills/talent and their interests intersect.  I
believe that being true to yourself will produce the best art.  Not only do
I have no interest in creating a Lethal Weapon movie (to take an extreme
example), I'm not sure it's something I could pull off either with any
degree of artistic skill.  I owe it to my audience to offer them the best of
what I have to offer rather than worrying about offering them what I think
they want.  Shakespeare, of course, did manage to walk that line quite
nicely.

------Original Message------
From: "Cara" <cgr9456@garnet.acns.fsu.edu>
To: rat-list@whirl-i-gig.com
Sent: January 16, 2001 2:33:01 PM GMT
Subject: RE: RAT, The dramaturgy of...


Having worked at Annex for so long, I'm all for privileging the artist and
supporting their desires and their freedom to do whatever they deem
necessary in the creation of a work.

But the play that keeps coming into my head during this argument is Hamlet.
Talk about a play rife with layers and complications and multiple
interpretations.  About 100 new scholarly type papers come out about Hamlet
every year, and tens of productions with wild interpretations and revisions
and interpretations.

My point is that even Shakespeare, to the best of our knowledge, was writing
to please his audience.  It seems the middle road between "fuck 'em all, I
do what I want/masterbatory art" and "pandering to your audience" might be
the way to go.

Cara
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rat-list@whirl-i-gig.com
[mailto:owner-rat-list@whirl-i-gig.com]On Behalf Of AnnTaylor1231@aol.com
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 8:56 PM
To: rat-list@ratconference.com
Subject: RAT, The dramaturgy of...


Hey.  Well, this is certainly topical.  This particular idea is part of
our
apparent production style at rm 120 theatre.  In other words, the idea of
our
works being understood, or not, for that matter, is not something that we
so
much struggle with as it is something that we accept and ignore.  What
interests me is not so much whether we wrestle with being "gotten" as much
as
it is something that we belligerently ignore.  One wonders: are we jacking
off?  Is it important for other people to "get" our work, or is the value
of
our work not so much in the acceptance and acclaim and recognition, etc.,
as
it is in the process and the exploration?  Well, you might guess what I
think.  Even on my most insecure days, when you call me on it, my answer
will
always be..."Fuck 'em."
Hope I have inspired some interesting RAT contribution.




Ann Taylor
rm 120 theatre

"Those poor kids.  So young.  So nauseous."
--Krusty the Klown Telethon for Motion Sickness


Laura Winton
fluffysingler@prodigy.net
http://pages.prodigy.net/fluffysingler