Shoe Strings & Timing Part Deux: The Reckoning

Quick recap from the earlier post - are "shorties" (groupings of short plays) of less value than full-length plays? At the end, big questions were asked - what is the value of art? Is it tied to length of the performance? Ultimately, does bang + buck = time + quality?

Last weekend I had an opportunity to view Andras Schiff perform a number of Beethoven's Sonatas. The performance consisted of 3 pieces and an encore performance of Bach's Chromatic Fantasia and Fugue in D Minor. The central performance was, at most, eighty minutes long - not much "value" for the insane cost of Carnegie Hall tickets, no? But such a statement discounts the value of experiencing one of the greatest pianists tackle Beethoven. Absolutely breathtaking. I want to also note that the man did all the pieces from memory - which, I'm sure you can agree, is totally insane.

After the performance, I thought about my earlier questions. Did I get what I paid for? Was it worth it? Ultimately, I decided that, despite the "short" time I was in the theater, the experience was more than worth the dollars paid. The experience wasn't tied to the time spent in the hall, it was tied to the performance itself. I would have liked it to be longer, but I certainly didn't feel short-changed just because it didn't last another hour. As for the idea that "short"performances are less worthwhile than full length one? Preposterous. To my mind, Schiff's performance was as "valuable" as watching one of Beethoven's symphonies - probably more so, considering how often those symphonies are performed.

I'm going to have to abandon my rapidly collapsing comparative analysis - to continue to compare Schiff's performance to our "shorties" would entail us putting our work on the level of Schiff's - not something I'm willing to assert under any circumstances.

In the end, I feel value isn't tied to time but to quality. If you'll allow me another poor comparison, a 1940s Loony Toon short is better than a full-length late-70s Disney feature, right? Of course, now I'm just digging a deeper hole by breaking my own Granny Smith Apples to Golden Delicious Apples rule. A better example - a tight one-disc OutKast album versus the terrible Speakerboxx/Love Below.

So length doesn't necessarily equal value. Rather, quality is value. "Of course!" you say, "I didn't need to read all that to realize this! I knew that all along!" But what if that OutKast album was only 5 (the best 5) songs long, instead of 14? Would it still be worth your money? Or would you hold out for the "full" album even though you know the content isn't as strong as the already-released 5 songs?

BOOM - Do people have certain preconceptions regarding length regardless of value? Stay tuned to part 3!

Vestigial

So I was trying to remember the word "vestigial" - don't ask - and that got me thinking on the nature of modern theater and Feed the Bird's approach.

Yeah - try following that mental leap.

Warning: The following is just my thoughts on this theater group. (Scary, I know.) There is no overarching point I'm trying to prove or argue.

*Ahem*

My ponderous pondering focused primarily on the "lean and/or mean" structure of Feed the Bird - minimal actors, no lighting cues, only as many props as we can carry, etc. We chose this feature to be one of our theater's defining characteristics. Why? Partially because we have too, considering the realities of no-budget productions in NYC. Yet this was an artistic choice as well - our plays tend to disdain big set-piece productions.

From a FtB standpoint, the trappings of modern theater tend to distract from the point of it. We don't need a full helicopter a la Miss Saigon. We don't need a parade of animals a la The Lion King. Would the (hopefully) witty word-play of our Tradegy! A Series of Chorious Incidents really improve with a rotating stage and full choir? Perhaps, but I doubt it.

So - back to my original thought: "vestigial" & "theater". Is FtB shedding the much ado of major theater and moving forward? (Not alone, obviously - we're certainly not the only no-budget group in NYC. However, no-budget is currently experiencing a real resurgence.) Or are we regressing back to an earlier form of theater? Shakespeare did the travelogue "Antony & Cleopatra" on a blank stage. The original Greek productions took place in barren sandy amphitheaters.

If I was pushed, I'd probably argue that we're regressing, despite the negative connotations that word raises. My personal creative focus has always been on finding & manipulating the rules and conventions on media and genre. This, to me, doesn't seem like any kind of step forward. People have been messing with this sort of thing as long as "this sort of thing" has been around.

All said, I'm okay with where we are. I look to entertain - myself and my audience. I have no desperate desire to push the art of theater forward. In fact, I tend to think the people who actively set out to "progress" are pretentious assholes. Doing something successfully is, for me, more than enough.

I'll leave the argument about regression versus evolution of theater to those who care. At least, more than those who care for more than the length of a blog post.

I Read a Book about John Dos Passos

So, just to clear something up.

Because people have asked:

We are not a street/guerrilla theater group. There's a purpose and proper time for that (mostly in protest situations) but our mission here is not to force theatrical events onto an unwilling audience. There are enough other groups that do that. Take what implications you might from that...

Well then, now that we sound like total jerks, moving right along...

So we're planning a fundraiser and the initial thought is an open bar, I wonder what people would think is a fair price? It looks like it might end up being $30-32 for 2 hours ($20 to the bar, $10-12 to the theater) or $12 donation to get in for a cash bar, but no promises.

Also, the more I think about it the more I am considering removing the bit about "gritty realism" and "absurdism" from our purpose. I think we're better off simplifying it to minimalism in terms of production and not trying to force ourselves into other boxes. Thoughts? Anybody? (note, 1/11/09: well, too late, it's done)

I love you and everything is beautiful*,

Spencer Soloway
Artistic Director
Feed the Bird

*The Spurt of Blood by Antonin Artaud

Merde!

With respects to King Ubu...

So, everyone else has a blog and, in the words of the fans of countless sports teams, why not us?

Feed the Bird is a new theater for a changed landscape. We believe that theater as currently constructed in New York City (with a few exceptions) is dull, over excessive, and inaccessible to large swabs of the population. Perhaps if you're 80 years old with blue hair, a lot of disposable income, and a love of musical comedy you disagree. Well, that's kind of the point. Same goes for teenage girls who love High School Musical and that horribly bastardized version of Spring Awakening. This is starting to sound negative so...

Oh, fuck it. Let's just get this clear, if you like saccharine sweet musicals, think Shakespeare is the be all end all, believe that large Broadway theaters with enormously expensive sets and wooden acting are the bee's knees, wear a monocle, or count Scary Movie among your favorite films, we are not for you. Well, I'll make an exception on the monocle part, those are pretty cool. But beyond that, forget it!

Okay, so who are we for then? First and foremost we're for anybody who has struggled in theater, been told they can't do this or that because of a lack of budget, a lack of connection, a lack of experience, or even a lack of skill. The dirty little myth in the industry is that only certain people with certain training can do certain things. At some point in the 1970s this barrier was broken down in the music world with the rise of Punk, but for whatever reason it never quite panned out that way in our art besides street theater which, let's face it, is pretty obnoxious.

But I'm rambling so without further adieu:

The Purpose of Feed the Bird is to present theater that adheres to the following guidelines:

• The productions of Feed the Bird must be easily recreated by anyone, regardless of their experience, skill level, budget or connections in the theater world.

• The productions of Feed the Bird must be, above all else, simple to stage. Minimal lighting, props, sets, and cost are paramount to the mission of the Company.

• Feed the Bird will strive to present minimalist theater.
  

• Feed the Bird will support collaboration by artists as well as the general public. Active audience engagement and interaction is highly encouraged.

• The Company is dedicated to performing in a variety of spaces both non-traditional and traditional including, but not limited to, black boxes, public squares, bars, parks, apartments, and rooftops.

Well, that's that to start. Stay tuned to this space for more as we begin the process of incorporating the company in the next few days, announce our first fundraiser, and offer more information on upcoming productions.

"The ice is broken, said our fathers to our mothers, in the first springtime of their life which was both honorable and gra-cious." - Tristan Tzara (The Gas Heart)

Mahalo,

Spencer Soloway
Artistic Director
Feed the Bird