Blog Entry #5: Book of Love Review

Craig Donnelly has given us another production as director and writer of "The Book of Love," which purports to be "A New Twist on 'Bewitched,'" undercut somewhat in that the highly-touted "twist" is little more than a reversal of gender. Don't be too quick to criticize the production, though; "Book of Love" has many amusing moments and a heavy emphasis on audience participation which captures the audience well.

The plot is, as the postscript suggests, essentially that of "Bewitched," just transposed into a high-school setting and involving Cole, a male witch (Emanuel Silva) and his female love interest Jewel (Chelsea Ordner). The cast is engaging and enthused, ably delivering their dialogue, especially considering that most of them are freshmen. The running gags don't become too tiresome, and at times the play seems even self-aware in brief displays of post-modernism (one dance interlude prompts one character to exclaim: "Does anyone else hear that music?").

Where the play begins to fall apart is in its plausibility. As the production progressed, one feels the sensation that events are unfolding simply to serve themselves, and there is a notable disjunction between story and action. By the end, one feels that the audience's suspension of disbelief has been punched, kicked, body-slammed, shot in the leg, thrown off the top story of a building, and finally decapitated as the play proclaims that "there can be only one!" It seems as though there is a disturbingly unrealistic context for the characters, so that in the end the message becomes a little drowned in spontaneous dance numbers and throwaway lines.

In summation, an amusing divesion, not bad.


Margaret Hamilton liked it, at least.

Blog Entry #4: "Good News" vs. "Bad News"

My mother (whom I may have previously mentioned as working for CBS News) often repeats the ever-popular maxim of many journalists: "if it bleeds, it leads." Certainly one can easily observe that news articles concerning tragedies and horrific incidents are far more attractive to the public than stories on equally-important, yet more placid story topics. This, however, does not answer the question at hand: namely, which of the two "aspects" of news stories contains greater intrinsic worth, "good" news, or "bad" news?

One must first ask what constitutes "good" or "bad" news. I find that only in rare instances do newsworthy stories occur where at least one party does not suffer some detrimental effect because of the event in question. News is always "bad" to someone, even if it is only a single person. Thus "good" and "bad" are just relativistic terms borne of the reading public's frequent inability to grasp all sides of a story, usually due to the ever-increasing pace of journalism in the modern world which leads to the general public holding a continually less firm grasp on the details of journalistic stories. The question then becomes even more broad: what sort of news story is worth writing?

Simply put, "good" news is not inherently "better" than "bad" news, and vice-versa. Rather, it is the number of people which the story could potentially affect (positively or negatively) which determines its eventual relevance. A journalist wants to write a story which will be accessible and comprehensible to a large number of people, unless writing for some sort of specialty column, but such instances are the exception rather than the rule. The value of a news story depends almost entirely on who will actually end up reading the story; the audience must, in a way, write the script.

Blog Entry #3: 150+ Words; No Modifiers

"Such arrogance," scoffed Lord Letimus, brandishing his halberd without discomfort, "will not save you, rebel cur. Time and again you and your allies defy me. Time and again I take pleasure in observing your failure. Ah yes, how you crawl back to your excuse for a fortress time and again. Tell me Oren, why do you persist? You cannot hope to stand against me forever."
Oren gazed into the eyes of Lord Letimus, eyes that could have halted a boar in its tracks.
"I can," replied Oren, "and I shall. All I have is forever, Letimus. That is all that people like us are ever allowed. Forever. There is no exit for any of us."
"Wrong, Oren. Here, my blade shall provide you with an exit."
"No. Your blade will serve me instead. Death is no exit, Letimus, it is but another doorway."
"I see, yes...a martyr to the cause, eh, Oren? Statues and rites, folklore and tales throughout the ages of your deeds? Is that your wish? Really, Oren...I had expected more from you."
"Sorry to dissapoint you, Letimus."
"Not at all, not at all. Though I am disappointed that my adversary should choose his death in this manner."
"It does not satisfy you?"
"Correct, Oren. It does not satisfy me at all."
"Go to the Devil, Letimus."
"On the contrary, Oren. It is you who will go to the Devil. I will ensure it. I will do well to ensure it..."

Blog #2: Good Writing is Good Writing(?)

James Glen Stovall says that "good writing is good writing," which I am somewhat inclined to agree with. After all, there is a certain indefinable quality about the very greatest of written works which calls out to all who read them, and whether they enjoy the author or not, they can all agree that the writing is "good," that it has a sort of magical power about it.
Television commercials lend evidence to this aphorism. For all the legions of poorly-written commercials on television, there are a few which stand out and come alive in our minds, such as Capitol One's "what's in your wallet" slogan, or the "Aflac" duck.
I, for one, have always felt that my writing is not "good," but that I have improved immensely. When I was a kid, I detested writing in any degree (I cringe when I remember an essay in the fourth grade on coral reefs which somehow involved evil aliens taking over the world. Don't ask.) I was fascinated by science and math, quantifiable constants of the universe with which I could identify with; concepts that were real and understandable. As I grew older, however, I found that I could no longer identify with the world as a black-and-white sort of place; I needed shades of gray, I needed to express feelings rather than numbers. Gradually my math grade dwindled to a C-, whilst my English improved as I became more literate (aside from comic books, that is). My point is, I suppose, that writing in itself represents a great deal to many people, and the measure of its quality, however subjective it may seem, has an objectiveness that seems to defy all logic.

Academic Background, Future Plans, How This Course Fits Into Those Things

My background entails mainly English, both in literature and in writing. I've taken several classes with Profs. Perret, Smith, and other English teachers, as well as a Poetry workshop, a Narrative Writing workshop, and English I, II, IIIA, and (currently) V. I'm also currently taking an intermediate Japanese language course, something I have been studying since the beginning of Sophomore year. My minor is Philosophy.
For the future, I would ideally prefer to become a Science-Fiction writer, perhaps a novelist or something similar. Truthfully, I am unsure of what precisely my post-college years will entail, finding myself with a distinct inability to do anything useful outside of writing and dogs (I work part-time at a boarding kennel in Harrison). I might want to use my radio show as a starting point; I write, act in, and produce a radio sci-fi drama series on WMVL called Manhattanville Radio Theatre.
This course is a continuation of the Journalism I class I took last semester; media writing has proven itself to be useful, and I believe it shall continue to do so. My Mom has worked in broadcast journalism (CBS News) for many, many years, and I suppose, even unconsciously, that I admire her work and perserverence, especially her "nosy" nature, which perhaps is the ultimate reason why I'm taking jounalism courses in the first place.