plumtreeblossom (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
plumtreeblossom) wrote2006-03-08 10:32 am
plumtreeblossom) wrote2006-03-08 10:32 am
The Reading Period
This play reading has become addictive. Yeaterday I read 20+ one-act plays. I'm on the reading committee for the T@F one-act festival this summer. Submissions are coming in even faster than they did last year. Of the ones I've read, I've found one I love, and two I like. That's actually a pretty good percentage, considering.
Considering what, you ask? Well, a lot of play writing is happening out there, but this year and last I've been seeing a consistant and almost uniform set of mistakes being made. Specifically, I see evidence that the writer hasn't yet learned enough about theatre production and stagability, about how it works, and it's marked differences from that which is feasible for film. I'm seeing set requirements that even a professional theatre couldn't do, or focus on tiny objects that could work well in a film but wouldn't read from a stage.
Seeing it again brought back to mind an idea I had last year, which would be to teach a class for one-act playwrights at CCAE or somewhere that shows the writers the actual stagecraft and the processes involved with physical production. If their understanding of production (and specifically festival production) can be improved, an lot of mistakes could be avoided in the play writing, and they'd be able to write better, more stagable plays. Something to think about for the fall, perhaps.
For now, what I'm hoping to find in the pile is another Superheroes, something that really knocks me right out of my chair. I'll be directing one of the plays in the festival, and I want to fall head over heels with something that I can sink my budding directorial teeth into. I haven't found it yet, but I have many, many more yet to read. Back to the pile!
Considering what, you ask? Well, a lot of play writing is happening out there, but this year and last I've been seeing a consistant and almost uniform set of mistakes being made. Specifically, I see evidence that the writer hasn't yet learned enough about theatre production and stagability, about how it works, and it's marked differences from that which is feasible for film. I'm seeing set requirements that even a professional theatre couldn't do, or focus on tiny objects that could work well in a film but wouldn't read from a stage.
Seeing it again brought back to mind an idea I had last year, which would be to teach a class for one-act playwrights at CCAE or somewhere that shows the writers the actual stagecraft and the processes involved with physical production. If their understanding of production (and specifically festival production) can be improved, an lot of mistakes could be avoided in the play writing, and they'd be able to write better, more stagable plays. Something to think about for the fall, perhaps.
For now, what I'm hoping to find in the pile is another Superheroes, something that really knocks me right out of my chair. I'll be directing one of the plays in the festival, and I want to fall head over heels with something that I can sink my budding directorial teeth into. I haven't found it yet, but I have many, many more yet to read. Back to the pile!
no subject
And then nothing happens.
They stare off into space at the fade with blank looks on their faces like chess pieces the player didn't know how to use. In my grumpier moments I blame it on Raymond Carver and the character-uber-alles MFA program writing style, but mostly I think it's that most writers end up with opaque endings when they don't know what they're trying to say. On the other hand, I'm also recognizing that writing a one-act is hard, the equivalent of a 1000 word short story. It's difficult to cram any kind of character arc into that little time in an original way.
Out of the dozen I've read, I've found one I love, and even that one sort of breaks apart at the end.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)