Call for submissions

January 27, 2006

Dear Writers:

I am currently compiling and editing a book for Signature Editions
entitled Two Hands Clapping. The volume will feature full-length plays
and some excerpts by (mainly) Canadian playwrights. The plays will all
be two-handers (for two actors) and should have had at least a
semi-professional, fringe or workshop production. It is my hope that
some of the plays will have had productions in smaller venues and
non-traditional theatre spaces around the world, as well as
representation from plays that have been produced at some of Canada’s
larger, regional theatres. Established writers will be represented as
well as voices that are not yet well known.

Submissions should be sent to Kit Brennan, c/o Department of Theatre,
Concordia University, 7141 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, Quebec, H4B
1R6.

Please include an overview of the play's production history and a short
biography with your submission.

Submission deadline is May 1, 2006, but I would appreciate as early a
submission as possible. If you are submitting after that date, please
email to inquire (kitbrennan@sympatico.ca).

Kit Brennan

Playwriting contest

SAMUEL FRENCH (CANADA), LTD. CANADIAN PLAYWRIGHTS CONTEST

Samuel French (Canada) Ltd., play publishers and authors’ representatives, is sponsoring a playwriting competition that is open to all Canadian playwrights. Writers from across Canada are invited to submit their best full-length stage plays that are original and have never been published. The winning play will receive publication and representation from Samuel French. Deadline for submissions is August 31, 2006. Completed applications and manuscripts should be sent to:

Andrew Shaver
SAMUEL FRENCH (CANADA), LTD.
100 Lombard Street, lower level
Toronto, Ontario M5C 1M3
416-363-3536

Call for submissions — Urjo Kareda Residency Grant

$10,000 URJO KAREDA RESIDENCY GRANT FOR AN EMERGING ARTIST FUNDED BY THE YOUSSEF-WARREN FOUNDATION TO BE AWARDED BY TARRAGON

This $10,000 grant is made possible by an annual donation from the Youssef-Warren Foundation and allows the successful applicant to spend up to 20 weeks at the Tarragon Theatre, working on a self-created program in collaboration with an artist or artists in the applicant’s chosen field of interest.

The grant is geared toward an emerging professional theatre artist, whether it be in the field of playwriting, direction, design or the technical arts. The residency period will occur between August 2006 and June 2007. The grant will be adjudicated by a committee consisting of senior theatre artists and a representative of the Foundation.

In the context of the theatre award, “emerging artist” is defined as an artist of any age who has spent no fewer than two years and no more than five in his/her chosen field (after training, if applicable), and who has demonstrated a strong interest in and potential for working in theatre. The applicant must have created, or participated in, at least one artistic work that has been presented, produced, or published. The applicant must become a resident in the Greater Toronto Area for the duration of the proposed program. Applications are encouraged from artists of diverse cultures and artists working on non-traditional forms of theatre. The adjudicating committee will be most interested in the individual specifics of each application.

All applications must be received at Tarragon – by mail, courier, or in person (no faxes or e-mails) – by April 28, 2006.

The Urjo Kareda Residency Grant for an Emerging Theatre Artist will be announced on (or before) June 30, 2006.

For further information about the award and application procedures, please email Andy McKim, Associate Artistic Director, at andy@tarragontheatre.com.

Call for submissions — Hnatyshyn Foundation Grants

The Hnatyshyn Foundation increases grant offers to young Canadians
pursuing careers in the performing arts. Now in its second year, the
Foundation's program of Developing Artists Grants will award eight
grants of $10,000 each to assist students in the performing arts with
their training.

2006 grants will be awarded in the fields of classical music (orchestral
instrument), classical voice, classical ballet, jazz and acting
(theatre), contemporary dance, classical music (piano), and acting for
the French theatre. Exceptionally talented young Canadians undertaking
post-secondary studies in these disciplines can be nominated for the
grants by their educational or professional training institutions. The
nominees from across Canada will then be adjudicated by experts in each
field.

"These scholarships will go well beyond the financial assistance they
provide, bringing more awareness to the arts and an understanding of the
depth of Canadian talent and the need to promote it," says Murray
Kilgour, Principal of the School of Alberta Ballet in Calgary. "There is
very little assistance for young dance artists these days, so this is
very good news indeed."

The Hnatyshyn Foundation is a federally registered private charity
established by the late Right Honourable Ramon John Hnatyshyn, Canada's
twenty-fourth Governor General. Its goals are to help emerging and newly
established artists in all disciplines with their schooling and
training, and to promote to the Canadian public the importance of the
arts in our society.

Information about the Foundation and the 2006 Developing Artists Grants
program is available on the Foundation's website www.rjhf.com

Call for submissions — Summerworks

THE 16th ANNUAL SUMMERWORKS THEATRE FESTIVAL IS NOW ACCEPTING APPLICATIONS
Aug 3 - 13, 2006

Keira Loughran, Kimahli Powell and the staff at SummerWorks announce the upcoming deadline for applications to the 16th Annual SummerWorks Theatre Festival, which will take place August 3 – 13, 2006. SummerWorks is a juried theatre festival that features primarily new Canadian work, complemented by international premieres, new visions of contemporary Canadian plays and interpretations of classics. SummerWorks is a developmental festival, supporting work that has a clear artistic vision and/or explores a specific theatrical aesthetic. We encourage risk, questions, and creative exploration while insisting on accessibility, integrity and professionalism. SummerWorks is the place where dedicated, professional artists are free to explore new territory and take artistic risks. We look to introduce professional artists from diverse communities and be inspired by our similiarities and differences.

Now in our 16th year, SummerWorks continues to support the artistic visions of the participants in the festival by providing them with the best possible production resources at the lowest cost, attracting the largest possible audience, and facilitating artistic and professional career assistance. The Festival provides a complete framework, which includes the renting of professional venues, hiring of technical staff, lighting designers, festival publicity and marketing, ticket sales, technical and performance scheduling, and front of house management.

The deadline for submissions is Wednesday, February 1st, 2006 by 9:00pm. Downloadable applications are now available here. A list of successful applicants will be also posted on the website on April 01, 2006. The 2006 SummerWorks Theatre Festival has space for up to 40 shows. Eligible shows must be a maximum of 55 minutes in length.

Applications can be mailed to

SummerWorks Theatre Festival
SummerWorks Festival
P.O. Box 12, Station C
Toronto, ON
M6J 3M7

Box office: 416-410-1048
Email: info@summerworks.ca
www.summerworks.ca

Hello?! It's not a dilithium crystal, ya know?

OK, stories like this truly frighten me. I knew Trek fans were weird but this is getting into Jacko in Neverland territory.

Shatner Sells Kidney Stone for Charity
Associated Press
Wednesday, January 18, 2006; 1:43 AM

LOS ANGELES -- An online casino has a piece of Capt. Kirk. Actor William Shatner has sold his kidney stone for $25,000, with the money going to a housing charity, it was announced Tuesday. Shatner reached agreement Monday to sell the stone to GoldenPalace.com.

"This takes organ donors to a new height, to a new low, maybe. How much is a piece of me worth?" he said in a telephone interview.

GoldenPalace.com is noted for its collection of oddities, which includes a partially eaten cheese sandwich thought to contain the image of the Virgin Mary.

"This is a bold new addition to our fleet," GoldenPalace.com Chief Executive Officer Richard Rowe said in a statement.

The money will go to Habitat for Humanity, which builds houses for the needy.

"This would be the first Habitat for Humanity house built out of stone," joked Darren Julien, president of Los Angeles-based Julien's Auctions, which handled the sale.

Shatner, who played Kirk on the original "Star Trek" TV show and won an Emmy for his role on "Boston Legal," passed the stone last fall.

The stone was so big, Shatner said, "you'd want to wear it on your finger."

"If you subjected it to extreme heat, it might turn out to be a diamond," he added.

Shatner said the idea of selling the stone came up after "Boston Legal" raised $20,000 for Habitat for Humanity. With the money for the stone, Shatner said there is about enough funding to build half a house.

GoldenPalace.com originally offered $15,000 for the stone but Shatner turned it down, noting that his "Star Trek" tunics have commanded more than $100,000. His counteroffer was accepted.

I'm thinking he yelled this as he was passing the stone.

An essay from Ariel Dorfman

Homeland Security Ate My Speech
By Ariel Dorfman
TomDispatch.com

Sunday 15 January 2006

On December 27th, at 11:31 in the morning to be precise, agents of the Homeland Security Department detained me at Miami International Airport and proceeded to impound a speech I was supposed to deliver in Washington, D.C. to a plenary session of the Modern Language Association of America.

Well, not quite.

It is true that this is what I told some two thousand university professors of language and literature who had gathered at a forum on the "role of the intellectual in the twenty-first century" in the Washington Hilton. I explained to them that the actions of the Department of Homeland Security had made it impossible for me to convey the words I had originally written and that instead I would narrate the strange, drawn-out conversation I had held with those two intimidating men in a windowless room at the airport as they discussed my speech on how exactly to think ourselves out of the catastrophe of our era?

The loss of that speech was, of course, a gigantic literary fabrication. All through my talk, I provided innumerable clues that this was indeed a tongue-in-cheek attempt to embody the contradictions of being an intellectual in our present time of turmoil. I wanted to use this "method" to obliquely lay out my ideas without launching into the sort of preachy manifesto I dislike. I made references to Borges and Nabokov, those literary masters of deception and apocryphal manuscripts. I speculated that the agents were part of a special (and hitherto secret) division of Homeland Security dedicated to weeding out alien scholars with dangerous academic leanings.

I gave one of these agents a tall and gangly physique as well as Trotsky-like glasses and wondered whether he was not exquisitely versed in post-modern theory and subaltern studies. I detailed his derisory comments regarding my central thesis that American intellectuals could learn from the Chilean struggle against dictatorship in their attempt to confront the erosion of freedom in the United States - that it was necessary to examine the lessons of that other September 11th, the day in 1973 when Chilean President Salvador Allende was overthrown. I pushed my description to absurd levels, making those men grill me about possible Chilean sleeper cells bent on revenge against the CIA for its role in that military coup against Chile's democracy.

The whole literary exercise, in fact, was meant to be a gentle way of poking fun at the bloated self-importance of intellectuals, a way of scoffing at my own challenge to my colleagues to go beyond the thousands who admire Susan Sontag and reach out instead to the sixty-five million Americans who have devoured the Left Behind series of apocalyptic bestsellers. Yeah, sure. Grandiose plans for critical thought and seditious discourse and I couldn't even convince these two agents with my arguments.

Indeed, in my fraudulent version of events, I made my listeners keenly aware of my limitations. "You know what I think, Professor?" I had the beefier, the more vulgar, of the two bogus agents say just before they let me go, the one who hadn't seemed even remotely interested in a syllable I uttered until that second. "I think you guys at the MLA take yourselves too seriously, way too seriously. You want people to understand what the hell you're talking about? How about trying a little humor for a change?"

And I had done my best to listen to my own character. My answer to him was this attempt to be funny at the MLA forum, this small story.

It should have been obvious that it was a story. A funny story. No audience could miss that, right?

Well, not quite.

I discovered all too soon that some members of the audience had taken me seriously, way too seriously. As soon as I descended from the podium, I was stopped by several professors, none of whom I had met before. One was puzzled that those agents had not Googled me and so grasped that I was a completely harmless sort. Another wanted to know if they had also taken my computer away.

In the hours that ensued, I discovered that they were not the only ones to deem my tall tale trustworthy. People I did not know approached me in the corridors of the Hilton to express their indignation and to ask whether I had been roughed up. One of them suggested that a petition be circulated protesting this infringement of academic freedom.

At first, I was astonished. It was joke! And this was a literary convention, for Keats sake! We earned our daily bread by parsing double meanings, lionizing irony, amusing ourselves with aesthetic chicanery.

But that afternoon, in a follow-up workshop, a graduate student queried me about my experience, confessing that my story had filled her with fear. If someone like me could be apprehended in that way, what might not happen to her? What might not be happening at that very moment to so many unprivileged, invisible others who were entering the United States right now? How do we rebel against that sort of repression, she asked, if the very act of speaking out could endanger our family, our loved ones?

It was then, as I watched that small gathering of intellectuals nod in agreement, that it finally dawned on me how deeply the fictional account of my persecution by Homeland Security had resonated with unbridled fantasies that seethed inside the heads of so many men and women at that convention - and unquestionably elsewhere in the country. I doubted that any of the people I had talked to was in immediate danger of being sent to Guantanamo or dispatched to a country where they would be tortured. As one of my fictitious guards had pointed out to me when I tried to persuade him that the United States was on the verge of becoming a police state, I was totally free to say anything I wanted at the MLA, to expostulate even the most outrageous falsehoods. Nobody was going to arrest me - or my audience, for that matter - for voicing a dissident opinion.

And yet there could be no denying the paranoia my story had tapped into. If arguably rational academics believed me, it was because in some profound recess of their psyches they had already imagined such a possible world, had already inflicted that nightmare scenario upon themselves in the shadows of their own dread. Perhaps that's why, no matter how much I assured everyone I met that my tribulations had been a hoax, rumors of my ordeal continued to spread at an alarming rate. A former student told me she was writing a letter to the Washington Post to complain about my mistreatment. E-mails began to arrive, commiserating with my plight.

Everybody seemed absolutely ready to credit my absurd story as perfectly real, as not, in fact, at all absurd. When I lamented the naiveté of such a sophisticated audience to friends at the MLA, when I declared my amazement at the reaction I had gotten, the answer was unanimous: I was the naïve one.

Amazed? Why should I be amazed? Of course, people had found my version of events - to use an Aristotelian category - a paragon of verisimilitude. Isn't art, according to my master Picasso, a lie that always tells the truth? To those friends, my fraudulent story was terrifyingly plausible, all-too-unfortunately representative of a country where citizens and non-citizens can indeed be kept forever and a day in custody without charges, where illegal wiretapping is rampant, where that obscene word "rendition" (or the even more perverse "extraordinary rendition") has crawled into our everyday vocabulary, where the Vice President insists that certain suspects may have to be tortured in order to defeat terrorism, where the President lies and invades another country under sham pretences and is not impeached, where polls indicate that a majority of Americans are willing to give up their civil liberties in order to be "secure." Had I not proclaimed in my own essays that anything can happen in the United States, that anything can happen anywhere if ordinary citizens are afraid enough to accept the slow destruction of democracy, to justify the worst crimes against humanity if they feel their lives are imperiled? And wasn't I as responsible as my gullible audience? Wasn't I also laboring under the anxiety that this could truly befall me? Wasn't my story, my telling of it, filled with an underlying panic? Wasn't that what had made it so credible?

Undoubtedly, its credibility was also due to the unfortunate fact that the room I had described, that windowless room in an airport where I had not been detained, where I had not been interrogated, does in fact exist. How can we know what is being perpetrated at this very moment in such impenetrable chambers? How can we be sure that my speech, or any other speech for that matter, is not being scrutinized by some federal agency, transcribed for spying eyes? How can we even find out who is being interrogated at this airport, that terminal, in that other windowless room, right now? How can we be sure that we are not next?

The sad truth about my story is that it comes straight out of the trepidation and terror of September 11th, 2001. Before that date I would not have concocted my chronicle in this manner, not here anyway. I would not have thought about making it up because, quite simply, most Americans would not have understood what I was talking about, because nobody would have found it even slightly realistic.

The sadder truth is that I can invent an epilogue to my story.

Let us suppose that the United States suffers another terrorist attack of even more devastating consequences than the last one, an assault where maybe, who knows, thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children die. That day, who can say that there will not be a knock at my door and, when I open it, two men there, one of them tall and gangly with Trotsky-like glasses; the other shorter, beefier, and vulgar?

I can see them right now, right now in my head.

I can see them ask if I remember having spread lies about them, about their efforts to fight the war against terrorism.

And then I can hear them, those two men, demand that I accompany them, just for a few hours, they'll say, just for some routine questioning.

And I am left to wonder if this new ending to my story is really so unbelievable, if it is, after all, so absolutely, totally, impossibly unbelievable?

Also in today's Star

This opinion piece comes from Kevin Garland, Executive Director of the National Ballet of Canada:

For all the vociferous debates, the carefully orchestrated photo ops and the grand announcements of new policy initiatives by all of the parties in the current election campaign, there has been a curious silence on one seminal issue: No one has mentioned, even in passing, the vital importance of the arts and culture in the fabric of Canadian life.

It seems none of the political parties has the inclination to tackle the subject.

One might conclude that Canada has no cultural life, or worse, that Canadians don't care about the continued existence of the arts in our society.

Too often our public officials treat the matter of culture as either a dispensable entertainment commodity or a soft, worthy-in-principle idea that lacks the relevance or "traction" of more serious issues.

Yet the cultural sector contributes $39 billion annually to our gross domestic product, and is bigger than agriculture, forestry, mining, and the oil and gas sectors combined.

Numerous studies, both here and abroad, have demonstrated the significant role culture plays in the social and economic well-being of any society. That is, or should be by now, simply an established fact.

Social critics such as Richard Florida have stressed how essential a vibrant cultural context is to attracting creative and innovative individuals from all walks of life and spheres of interest.

A flourishing, dynamic cultural atmosphere is not only its own reward, something to be valued in and of itself, it also acts as a magnet for talent and ingenuity of all kinds.

In any society worthy of the name, ballet, opera, music, art, literature, film and theatre are self-justifying, life-enhancing activities.

But at a time when, increasingly, urban regions like Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, and Calgary are competing to attract the best and brightest from abroad and seeking to retain their own indigenous talent, culture has an added social and economic impact — one that cannot be ignored.

Similarly, the arts have a crucial role to play in the arena of public diplomacy. There has never been a more effective and striking way of building bridges and forging connections between nations (even disparate ones) than by an exchange of cultural ideas, experiences and works.

We lament that Canada's presence on the international stage has been steadily diminishing.

By bringing to international attention the visions and perspectives of our artists, we could more fully participate in the contemporary global dialogue, while sharing our own unique diverse stories and values with the wider world.

This sort of engagement with the world is increasingly important in a contemporary context, not just for the arts, but for our country as a whole. To retreat from it as we have done means insularity and a narrowing of cultural, economic and political possibilities that no government should want to see take place.

It has to be said that there have been positive steps toward recognizing this growing importance of the arts in our society. The decision last year by the government to renew the budget for its "Tomorrow Starts Today" program was a heartening and far-sighted step toward providing stable and predictable levels of funding for arts groups across the country.

As well, the recent decision to increase funding for the Canada Council for the Arts by $5 per Canadian is a genuinely welcome sign. The arts community as a whole, from coast to coast, will be expecting to see these decisions reflected in the 2006 federal budget.

Here in Ontario, the federal and provincial infrastructure programs have led to such developments as the construction of The Four Seasons Centre for the Performing Arts and the expansions of the Art Gallery of Ontario, the Royal Ontario Museum, The National Ballet School, The Royal Conservatory of Music and The Gardiner Museum.

These are all wonderful projects that will contribute enormously to the cultural vitality of the city of Toronto.

But the process can't stop with the bricks and mortar.

We also need to fill these superb facilities with the finest programs and performances that can be imagined. And that takes a commitment to operating funding.

Our artists and the institutions that provide them with "stage" have made an extraordinary transformational commitment.

Governments must understand that investing in the arts is investing in nothing less than the public good and the forging of a dynamic cultural identity that is the foundation on which every successful nation is built.

I call upon each leader in the current election to state clearly their respective party's position on the funding of the arts in Canada and to give this vital issue the prominence in the present political debate it truly deserves.

Today's Toronto Star Editorial

Political actors overlook culture

Federal funding for the arts over the decades has been rightly credited with nurturing Canadian cultural superstars from ballerina Karen Kain to filmmaker Atom Egoyan. At the same time, federal policies have protected Canada's culture from being overwhelmed by the deluge of American programming that spills over the border.

Despite that, culture is not a priority in this election campaign.

Clearly, Ottawa's role in promoting and protecting Canada's arts community has taken a back seat to promises of tax cuts and questions about corruption. But with voters set to go to the polls a week today, Canada's culture deserves a closer look.

Last week, concerned Canadian artists took to the public stage in a bid to shine the spotlight on the culture sector. Their priorities included full and stable funding for major cultural institutions, such as the CBC and Telefilm Canada, continued limits on foreign ownership of Canadian broadcasters, and higher quotas for Canadian content. By Friday, the three major federal parties had finally disclosed their platforms, but none of them gave prominence to a strong cultural agenda.

The Liberals are running chiefly on their record, which includes a commitment to spend $860 million over five years supporting community theatres, museums and other endeavours under the Tomorrow Starts Today initiative. The Liberals also committed last November to double the annual grant to the Canada Council for the Arts to $306 million by 2008. That move was praised by performers, including Kain, who is now chair of the Canada Council and artistic director of the National Ballet. The council backs more than 2,000 groups, from such venerable institutions as the Canadian Opera Company to new aboriginal dance troupes.

In their official platform, the Conservatives make only vague promises that they will preserve the role of the CBC and National Film Board. But Bev Oda (Durham), the party's heritage critic, said last Friday the Tories will respect the Liberals' promise of $306 million for the Canada Council.

The New Democrats have the most comprehensive platform for the arts, highlighted by a promise that they will spend $600 million over four years to support Canadian artists. The NDP would increase funding to the Canada Council, provide sustained funding to the CBC and Telefilm Canada and require more Canadian programming.

Some Canadians will ask why Ottawa should spend any tax dollars promoting and protecting the arts when so many other causes seem more urgent, from reducing hospital wait times to improving child care.

But the arts fulfill many important roles in society. They help give us our national identity, enliven our cities and enrich our children's education. And, if that's not convincing, consider this: Canada's culture industries generate $26 billion in economic activity each year and employ 700,000 Canadians directly, much of it based in the Greater Toronto Area.

Taxpayers reap far more than they sow. For example, the Stratford Festival, Canada's best-known summer theatre, generates $66 million in annual tax revenues yet various levels of government give the festival just $1.5 million in grants. Not a bad return.

Canada's current level of public spending on the arts is paltry by international standards. It ranks second last in the G-7. Only the United States spends less. Large performing companies, such as the National Ballet, derive just 25 per cent of their budget from government grants. In France, that figure is 80 per cent.

Canada requires a strong cultural industry. It needs our support. And regardless of which party wins this election, all parties should push for continuing, stable funding for all the arts in the coming years.

Artist residency available

CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS

Artscape is currently accepting applications for the seventh term of the Gibraltar Point International Artist Residency Program, taking place May 19th – June 17th, 2006.

ABOUT THE GIBRALTAR POINT INTERNATIONAL ARTIST RESIDENCY PROGRAM
The Gibraltar Point Residency transcends political, aesthetic and geographic boundaries, welcomes diversity and provides a spawning ground for unique cultural alliances. The program is open to Canadian and international artists of all disciplines who are engaged in the research, development or creation of work. Emerging, mid-career and established professional artists are invited to apply. Participants in the residency program receive accommodation, a private work studio and all meals at no cost. Travel and material costs are the responsibility of participating artists.

The residency program aims to further the professional development of artists by: enabling the creation and production of new work; fostering an exchange of ideas and influences; encouraging the sharing of expertise; inspiring new works of art and creative collaborations; and building relationships between artists working in different media. The program is designed and managed by Artscape and takes place for a single 30-day term each calendar year at the Gibraltar Point Centre for the Arts on Toronto Island.


ABOUT THE GIBRALTAR POINT CENTRE FOR THE ARTS AND TORONTO ISLAND
Situated on the south-western beachfront of Toronto Island, The Gibraltar Point Centre for the Arts owes its name to its location marked by Toronto's oldest landmark - the Gibraltar Point Lighthouse, which was erected in 1808. Operated by Artscape, this 30,000 square foot unique facility provides permanent studio space to more than a dozen artists and a Retreat Centre, which can be rented for a variety of functions. In addition to hosting the Residency Program, the Gibraltar Point Centre for the Arts features Artscape Lodge; a short-term rental service with accommodation and work studios for up to 13 visiting artists.

Toronto Island is a peaceful 230-hectare natural park in Toronto's harbour, a short 15-minute ferry ride from the thriving downtown core of Canada’s cultural capital. The Island is part of the Carolinian Zone which includes flora and fauna not found anywhere else in Canada. Naturalized areas and wildlife reserves make it a popular stopover point for southern song birds. The Island is also home to approximately 800 individuals whose remarkable community boasts one of the highest per capita populations of artists in Canada and is the largest urban car-free community in North America.


Submission Deadline: February 10th, 2006, 4p.m.
2006 Program Dates: May 19th – June 17th

Guidelines for Submissions, a Standard Application Form and Answers to Frequently Asked Questions can be found here.

For questions regarding the Gibraltar Point International Artist Residency Program
please contact by e-mail only residency@torontoartscape.on.ca.

The Gibraltar Point International Artist Residency Program is hosted and managed
by Artscape with the generous assistance of the Ontario Arts Council.

The Red Letter

Here's a long overdue for one of my favourite arts/culture newsletters, Lisa Pijuan's The Red Letter. And guess what this issue's featured show is?

Here's Marjorie!

A few weeks ago, Cahoots was given a wonderful Christmas treat. Thanks to the generous support of the Metcalf Foundation, we will have Marjorie Chan as our Associate Artistic Director for 2006.

Of course, Marjorie is no stranger to Cahoots. As our Playwright-in-Residence, she's working on a new play that takes place in Beijing during the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. And she has performed in three previous Cahoots productions, Noran Bang, Mother Tongue, and The Vic.

The really good news for all of you is that you'll get to hear a different voice on The Red Hut. Marjorie will be posting regularly to the blog starting with this entry today titled:

Now is Better Than Later
or Why Buying Theatre Tickets Early Is A Good Thing

This is an email from me, Marjorie. The newest employee of Cahoots Theatre Projects (our HR dept. prefers "partner" over "employee"—just like at Starbucks - JS) courtesy of the good people at the Metcalf Foundation (shout out to the money! You learn quickly, padawan - JS). Is this just another email telling me about our upcoming production Bombay Black?

Well, sort of. But it's more specific than that. Because yes, I do want you to go. But my point is, if you are already planning to go, here are 5 reasons why you might as well go ahead and buy your tickets now.

Reason #1: Word-of-Mouth
Ah! Those magical words. Word-of-mouth. Yes, it's true. You, the theatre-going audience has an impact on the ticket sales. When you love a show, you tell your friends, and they make their way to the theatre, and they tell more friends. And everyone has a good evening, and the hard-working actors onstage have an audience. But for this scenario to work, you gentle audience, have to attend the show early in its run. And yes, every theatre producer takes the chance that you may not like the show, but the producers believe in it. They wouldn't bother producing it otherwise. They like it, so you should give it a chance. After all, if you really don't like the show, well, it doesn't matter whether you saw it early or late in the run. But, it makes a difference to the theatre company.

Reason #2: What are you waiting for?
Really. Honestly. What are you waiting for? You've seen the posters, heard the press, impressed by the artists involved before...what are you waiting for? Our culture has become so spontaneous amd impulsive. Haven't you found it more and more difficult to pin down a lunch date or a meeting? We schedule dates with pencils, knowing a phone call on the day may or may not confirm the time. We cancel appointments with ease and impunity. Cell phones and email make cancellations and changing of plans too easy. When did we become so afraid of commitment? What ever happened to making a decision and sticking to it? I'm tired of it actually. I have missed so many shows, so many evenings of culture just because I couldn't commit to going. And I regret it. I probably ended up in front of the tube watching a bad reality show instead of contributing to my city's culture and enjoying myself. If you want to go, then go. Book a ticket, call your friends. Write it in your datebook in pen.

Reason #3: The Numbers Question
If you are thinking, "I can't really spare the cash right now." Well, seeing theatre is actually very inexpensive. There is always the option of the Pay-What-You-Can dance and the Sunday morning lineup. Theatres have posted minimums, usually $8-10. I try to give at least that, and if I can afford more at the moment, I pay more. Do you know why? Because, I actually feel silly when I go see a show with a cast of 5 and let's say I put in a fiver. 5 bucks. That's not even lunch (well maybe in Chinatown). That means that 5 bucks split with just the people onstage (not including the stage manager, the designers, the director, the playwright etc etc), just split with the actors, well, that's only a buck each. One measly dollar for acting your guts out for 2 and half hours. Now, I know very well that is not how the economics of theatre work, that the PWYC option is way to make sure anyone who wants to see it, can see it and is not a box-office split. Having said that, if PWYC is only option available to you, then please come see the show.

But let's actually have a look at the costs of tickets on a regular night, okay?
$15-20, $5 Student HipTix. Now what can you buy for $15-20 these days? You can get a decent dinner. You could see a movie with popcorn. You could...You know what, I can't even finish this list. It's true there are a number of things that $15-20 can get you, but they are just not comparable. You know when I think about how much I spent at Christmas on cousins I don't even really like and who never, ever bother to say thank you...well...I just get a little sick. The fact is $15-20 for the privilege to see live theatre, professional actors, a brand spanking new play, the opportunity to share a unique story and culture with an intimate group of people, an experience that will never be the same night-to-night, well, in my opinion — it's a steal. And trust me, I'm a born bargain hunter. (It's true. Hey, she was bound to be a cultural stereotype in some way - JS)

Now, if you are still looking for a bargain, here are some more options for you:
Preview tickets: January 4 - 7th 8pm - Tickets are ONLY $10! Also do you have 9 friends? Because if you can round up a group of 10 people who want to see the show it's only $10 each. We're calling it 10 for 10. Catchy huh?

Convinced yet? Ready to buy your tickets? yes? No? Okay, read on.

Reason #4: The Gas Gauge
Think gas gauge equals production company's bank account. Have you ever been in your car, on your way somewhere, and you look down at your gas gauge...and the red light is on. But then you go over a hill and the red light goes off. A few minutes later, you're waiting at a stoplight and the red light goes on again. You keep driving. Because you know why? You know your car well enough to know that even though the red light on your gas gauge is going on and off, you have enough gas to make it to your destination. It really isn't the best thing for your car, but you don't really have a choice because you're already on the road and you've done it before and you'll make it through barring any surprises.

This is what it is like when you produce a show. All of the theatre's resources are currently tied up in the show. So everything that a company can throw at it, everything to make the show happen, it's being utilized. Small non-profit theatre companies, like Cahoots, like many others, they often have to go to their very limit, their very edge to make shows happen. They are driving with their gas gauge on. Sometimes the cash flow is better and the light goes off, but it will keep coming back. This is a very crucial time; this time while the show is in tech and doesn't open for another week. All of a theatre's resources have now been spent, the tank is so empty. But where is the next gas station? Well, revenue from the box office doesn't really start coming in until the show opens - in another week. But, (and this is where you come in), but if you buy your tickets in advance, guess what? You top up the tank. It's not a lot, but it means so much to the theatre company. It means that if there is some sort of emergency, or some unforeseen expense, the theatre company has something in the tank to handle it and bring you the best show possible. (Amen to that. The payments on the company Hummer are a killer - JS)

Reason #5: Plays Get Lost in the Rockies
Okay this is low down the list, because it is not really a reason to buy early, just in support of this play and playwright. I don't know what it is, but despite a vibrant theatre scene in Vancouver, there is little sharing of great plays and playwrights. For some reason, great plays that do well on the West Coast get lost somewhere over the Rockies and take a long time, if ever, to make it to Toronto. I feel like that about plays from Toronto too, that they have a hard time moving West, but it is my impression that it is worse going the other way. I really don't know why this is — except the very painfully obvious reason that I am loathe to consider. Is the Toronto scene actually that arrogant, to think that only Ontario playwrights have anything worthwhile to say? I'm sure the rest of the country might have that impression, because, well, I think Toronto gives off that impression. I suspect it probably has more to do with available funding for writers of new work at the municipal and provincial levels. And also perhaps producers want to produce a show from someone whose name the public might recognize, so they pass over a non-Ontario playwright for an Ontario playwright. But of course the question is how are other writers going to develop a name, if they aren't given a production? And so a conundrum of a circle is created. Unless. Unless, a brave company (or in this case two) with some vision takes a chance. Nightswimming is a dramaturgical theatre company, specializing in developing, but not necessarily producing new plays. Nightswimming liked what they read coming from Vancouver playwright Anosh Irani, coughed up the funds and commissioned a new play. Cahoots, being a producing company was happy to take on the challenge of producing Bombay Black, because they believed in Anosh. And who wouldn't? His play The Matka King (at CrossCurrents at Factory) was startling and revelatory and riveting. (And not just because my boyfriend was in that reading.) In fact, the titular Matka King was played by Sanjay Talwar who takes on another fascinating role in Bombay Black (One that hasn't been castrated - JS). Back to playwright Anosh. This is what was written about this very exciting writer's first novel The Cripple and His Talismans:

"Magic realism at its finest ... We are in the grip of a storyteller, at once inventive, capricious, comic, dark, ribald and tender..." - The Globe and Mail.

Ribald AND tender? Pretty awesome combination. Generally unbeatable in my book.

Wow. I can't believe that you have read down this far. You must share some DNA with me, or possibly be one of my few friends or like me, have insomnia. Thank you for reading this. Please think about what I had to say. Really. Of course, I want you to buy tickets to Bombay Black, but I also hope it gets you thinking when some time in the future, when you are considering going to the theatre. Buying early really helps. Okay that's all. I'm done. Soapbox back under the bed with the dust bunnies. I hope you are well and have a happy new year. Here's to 2006 and another year of creation!

Cheers,
Marjorie


Thanks for that post, Marjorie. You'll hear more from her in the near future—without my annoying annotations.