In my mailbox yesterday was a thick, oversized envelope with half a dozen copies of the latest (June 2006) issue of Ladybug Magazine ... a magazine for young children.
There, in the center spread of the magazine, with staples going right through it, is a "poem" of mine.
(I say "poem" with the quotes because I originally wrote it trying to sell it as an easy reader book.)
I sold the poem to the magazine about three years ago. It's hard to believe it's taken this long to see print, though it was illustrated (not by me) and I'm sure there were lots of factors involved.
With a circulation of approximately 130,000, this magazine publication likely represents my biggest sale in terms of readership.
It is always "cool" to see one's name in print, and one's words on a page (perhaps that's why blogs are so popular?).
Friday, May 26, 2006
Sunday, May 21, 2006
Two week notice?
Wow. I can't believe it's been nearly two weeks since I last posted.
Well...maybe I can believe it. I've been working two jobs. One finished last night.
I've been stage managing the ballet Cinderella, which closed last night. It was fun. It wasn't a lot of work, but it was time-intensive. We closed with some technical snafus which I've never experienced before -- I lost head-set communication with my light board operator and my sound board operator. Hence, one sound cue was missed and about seven light cues were missed before we could restore some kind of communication. Ah well... the joys of live performance.
I am also working as the production manager for the Great River Shakespeare Festival. This is also quite time intensive as well as a lot of work. But heck, I enjoy it! It's much better than sitting around behind a desk being bored out of my skull!
Well...maybe I can believe it. I've been working two jobs. One finished last night.
I've been stage managing the ballet Cinderella, which closed last night. It was fun. It wasn't a lot of work, but it was time-intensive. We closed with some technical snafus which I've never experienced before -- I lost head-set communication with my light board operator and my sound board operator. Hence, one sound cue was missed and about seven light cues were missed before we could restore some kind of communication. Ah well... the joys of live performance.
I am also working as the production manager for the Great River Shakespeare Festival. This is also quite time intensive as well as a lot of work. But heck, I enjoy it! It's much better than sitting around behind a desk being bored out of my skull!
Monday, May 08, 2006
The moons of Jupiter.
For those of you who find astronomy a nifty hobby (or even worthy of a career), you will note, first of all, that in honor of the one-year anniversary of this blog, I took out the Google ads, and put in a chart showing the lunar phase.
Also, it so happens that Jupiter is at it's closest encounter with Earth during this week. I took our telescope out the last two nights and got a good look at the planet. Even with our "little" telescope, we could get a good look at the planet and were even able to see it's four moons.
A very cool thing, to stand on planet Earth and actually see the moons of Jupiter.
Also, it so happens that Jupiter is at it's closest encounter with Earth during this week. I took our telescope out the last two nights and got a good look at the planet. Even with our "little" telescope, we could get a good look at the planet and were even able to see it's four moons.
A very cool thing, to stand on planet Earth and actually see the moons of Jupiter.
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Happy Birthday, Blog!
This blog is one year old today.
Do I have any reflections on this blog, or blogging in general? No.
Do I have any reflections on this blog, or blogging in general? No.
Monday, May 01, 2006
Shoes. No socks.
I read an interesting article from the MiamiHerald.com, via my daily ArtsJournal email. The article was about the troubles at the Coconut Grove Playhouse and the 21-year reign as artistic director of Arnold Mittleman. I found the article interesting for a number of reasons....
First, I have been to the Cocount Grove Playhouse, loading in and over-seeing a show that I worked on immediately before and immediately after it's run at the Playhouse -- it was one of those situations where an existing show was being brought in, but by some strange clause in the Equity contracts, they didn't have to bring in the stage manager of the show -- just my prompt book (I probably got paid a small stipend for it, I forget). While I had wished I could stay with the show for that period, I held no hard feelings -- my daughter had just been born and I was looking to spend some time at home with my new family anyway.
Second, the situation reminded me of my time at the old Los Angles Theatre Center, whose troubles mirror what was being reported on by the Herald. Any time there is evidence that grants and loans are being used to pay off other debts, rather than what the grants and loans are specifically ear-marked for, this should wave gigantic red flags! The article mentions this problem, but skims over it. I was immediately tossed back to 1982 where I lived through the same things -- building and construction grants being used to pay salaries. The LATC closed it's doors for good shortly after.
Third, I was reminded of my recent blog in which I wrote that the problem with theatre is not that there aren't any great plays being written, but that there aren't any great producers taking risks and nurturing talent. Was Arnold Mittleman an exception to that comment? I don't know. I don't know the precise history of his tenure at Coconut Grove, but the fact that he has been there a long time and maintained a vibrant theatre community for so long might suggest that he was certainly doing somethig right. I doubt he was a nurturing, progressive producer (but I don't know -- we'd have to see if any "new" playwrights were developing their craft there), but the role of producer for a regional theatre is very different. There is a constant battle to produce what the community wants to see (usually Neil Simon plays, and "feel-good" 1950's musicals) and maintain artistic standards and expose the patrons to new work.
That Mittleman and Coconut Grove is now in trouble suggests that there has been a severe failure in this battle. How much time and lenience do you give someone who has a good history, but who also appears to have been deceptive in use of funds?
Four, but mostly the article was of interest to me because I don't like Arnold Mittleman. It has nothing to do with his work in theatre, his hiring or not hiring me, or even his possibly running the theatre into the ground. My dislike springs from something entirely different.
After my very first introduction to the man, I turned to an actor friend of mine and said, "I dont know why, but I don't trust any man who does business, dressed in a suit, but doesn't wear socks. Shoes. No socks."
First, I have been to the Cocount Grove Playhouse, loading in and over-seeing a show that I worked on immediately before and immediately after it's run at the Playhouse -- it was one of those situations where an existing show was being brought in, but by some strange clause in the Equity contracts, they didn't have to bring in the stage manager of the show -- just my prompt book (I probably got paid a small stipend for it, I forget). While I had wished I could stay with the show for that period, I held no hard feelings -- my daughter had just been born and I was looking to spend some time at home with my new family anyway.
Second, the situation reminded me of my time at the old Los Angles Theatre Center, whose troubles mirror what was being reported on by the Herald. Any time there is evidence that grants and loans are being used to pay off other debts, rather than what the grants and loans are specifically ear-marked for, this should wave gigantic red flags! The article mentions this problem, but skims over it. I was immediately tossed back to 1982 where I lived through the same things -- building and construction grants being used to pay salaries. The LATC closed it's doors for good shortly after.
Third, I was reminded of my recent blog in which I wrote that the problem with theatre is not that there aren't any great plays being written, but that there aren't any great producers taking risks and nurturing talent. Was Arnold Mittleman an exception to that comment? I don't know. I don't know the precise history of his tenure at Coconut Grove, but the fact that he has been there a long time and maintained a vibrant theatre community for so long might suggest that he was certainly doing somethig right. I doubt he was a nurturing, progressive producer (but I don't know -- we'd have to see if any "new" playwrights were developing their craft there), but the role of producer for a regional theatre is very different. There is a constant battle to produce what the community wants to see (usually Neil Simon plays, and "feel-good" 1950's musicals) and maintain artistic standards and expose the patrons to new work.
That Mittleman and Coconut Grove is now in trouble suggests that there has been a severe failure in this battle. How much time and lenience do you give someone who has a good history, but who also appears to have been deceptive in use of funds?
Four, but mostly the article was of interest to me because I don't like Arnold Mittleman. It has nothing to do with his work in theatre, his hiring or not hiring me, or even his possibly running the theatre into the ground. My dislike springs from something entirely different.
After my very first introduction to the man, I turned to an actor friend of mine and said, "I dont know why, but I don't trust any man who does business, dressed in a suit, but doesn't wear socks. Shoes. No socks."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
