Category Archives: Mono-blogues

Emails from my mother: a poem

In the continued conversation with my mother about poetry, art and what it means and whether we are worthy of its interpretation, she wrote this poem.  I publish it here, on her birthday. Happy Birthday Mom. Thank you for making me appreciate art and literature – lower case. And for always, most importantly, making me laugh.

Punch Line

Remember that pompous ass

who, welcoming us into his gallery

asked, after shaking our hands

“Do you know Art?”

 

We didn’t dare look at each other,

saving the laughter for later.

But then, striding off he said

“Walk this way.”

 

 

 

The Economics of Binge Watching

I have watched the entirety of ABC’s Scandal in the past two weeks. That’s 39 episodes.

The first two seasons, or 29 episodes, were on Netflix streaming. That’s how I got hooked. Every time an episode ended with a surprising twist, I hit “play” on the next episode like a rat in a cage. It was a no-brainer and free – unless you count my Netflix subscription and cable bill.

But then I had to figure out how to watch the first half of Season 3 before it starts up again on ABC in February.  Hulu and ABC.com weren’t showing the first five episodes and on ABC On Demand, there was no first episode and I had to wait a week for the next two to become available. (I have Time Warner Cable,  some of these limitations seem to have to do with their licensing deal with ABC.) I could buy individual episodes for $2.99 on iTunes or Amazon streaming, or the whole 10 episode partial season for $39.99.

I was sweating. I took a breather and thought it about it for a couple of days, thinking I could outsmart the On-Demand schedule and eventually catch everything. I also could have skipped a few episodes. But given the crazy pace at which the plot twists and turns, I decided that wasn’t an option. After shaking my fist at the dealers – I mean dealmakers – who made sure once I had my taste I had to pay premium, I eventually succumbed and purchased a few of the episodes on iTunes until I was caught up to the On-Demand offerings and banged through the rest.

Is the business model as predatory as it felt? It’s not that I think the people making TV shouldn’t profit – I am a SAG and WGA member. It was the feeling that I was being manipulated, my weakness exploited. If everyone who gets hooked in the tween-season of a show ends up buying just a handful of episodes at $2.99 a pop, that can add up to a lot of revenue. But that assumes that I am not an outlier in my TV consumption habits. I am old enough to not expect everything to be free; young enough to know how to stream and own a wired TV; and have worked in television and digital so I know how to figure out my viewing options and am not averse to watching on my computer. According to iTunes top TV downloads list, the five episodes I was wrestling over are #5-9 on their chart. So maybe I’m the norm.

But I am curious how many downloads that is. Ten? Ten thousand? A million? And whose pockets is my Olivia Pope habit lining? I hope it’s Shonda Rhimes and the writers and actors.

I intended to write a post about Team Olivia vs. Team Mellie. And why I want Olivia to hook up with Jake. And why I think Fitz and Mellie have more heat than Fitz and Olivia. Maybe it was all those lessons from the Gladiators that made me follow the money instead.

Has Everything Been Said?

I get a million dollar idea every day. But then I search for the domain name at godaddy, and it’s been taken. Pitching story ideas – be they fact or fiction – the response is often, “we already did that.”  There’s a reason the joke: “it’s Downton Abbey meets Orange is the New Black” isn’t really a joke.  And I’m already wondering how I’m going to keep this blog freshly fed.

Putting aside debates about whether there are only 7 stories in the world,  it still seems harder and harder to not feel: Oh shit, someone already did that, said that, made a similar observation.  Which is fine if, say, you’re writing a TV procedural or serial-killer story, which we seem to have a voracious appetite for. But what if you hope to express something original? If we can all post a story or observation and it’s searchable to the world, we are less and less able to pretend we are unique. Maybe that’s just hubris, to think we have something new to say. But if we’re getting paid to write or pitch, how can writers stay relevant? As we blog and write and make videos and movies, are we all repeating ourselves? It’s enough to make you a nihilist.

But Thursday night I went to see Chris Rael’s latest incarnation of Church of Betty at The Bell House in Gowanus.  Certainly musicians face the same issue of songs being written about the same themes over and over. And there are only so many notes one can play on a scale. But when I see live music, I am reminded that there are infinite ways to put them together. And another exponentially different set of ways to interpret the notes that become the songs based on what combination of musicians and instruments you invite to the stage. No one illustrates this better that Rael, a musician and songwriter extraordinaire. His love of the art of musical interpretation and storytelling is infectious. After listening to the ten or so musicians he’d brought together to overflow the stage in the front room, I am reassured that we won’t run out of things to say and ways to say them as long as we keep the passion for expression front and center.

bell house

Do yourself a favor and download Rael’s Cross of Gold.

Or better yet, treat yourself to the whole CD.

 

What I Discovered in Room 237

I watched the documentary Room 237 by Rodney Ascher this week, which presents several uber-fans’ analyses of Stanley Kubrik’s The Shining.

At first I was put off by some of the far-fetched hypotheses. Is this an ironic look at a bunch of conspiracy theories? But I was soon mesmerized by their passionate defenses – the excitement in their voices – and the footage Ascher (who also edited the film) used to illustrate their arguments. I say the “excitement in their voices” because you don’t see the fans. In fact, they’re sometimes interviewed over the phone (or according to this interview, maybe it was Skype), which adds another interesting layer of anonymity to their commentary. (There’s a great moment where a guy is deep into his analysis, which is being presented over footage of the Kubrick film, and you slowly become aware of an eerie sound of a child crying in the background. He suddenly interrupts his own commentary and says something like, “Do you hear that?” – for a chilling second I thought – what the hell is going on?? It was like a ghost had infiltrated his analysis the way ghosts haunt the characters in the movie. But then the guy says, “Hang on…” and breaks away to quiet his crying son, and I realized: Oh, that’s HIS kid. It was a weirdly thrilling breaking of the documentary’s fourth wall.) The effect of Ascher’s technique (never seeing his subjects) ultimately means you can’t judge the person, you can only judge the theory.

It made me think a lot about how we judge and what we judge and why.

I found myself thinking about the human need for meaning. We look for it everywhere. We are always crafting stories. Whether it’s an interpretation of a perceived slight from a friend or lover, an anxiety dream, or a can of Tang in the background of the kitchen scene in The Shining. What does it mean? Is he mad at me? Am I stressed out at work? Did Kubrick fake the Apollo landing? We are always wondering, looking for explanations, and when we hit on one, it’s hard for us to let it go, and we will defend it to the end. It seems to me almost every human preoccupation can be explained by this drive: religion, politics, psychiatry, film theory, tabloid journalism…

The film also made me nostalgic for a certain kind of criticism. In college and grad school I studied literary and film criticism and found it exciting. It was about trying to understand works of art. Looking for clues in an author’s or auteur’s work. Connecting stories to a personal or cultural history to better understand intention. Or just looking for clues in the work itself. But when I started working as a writer, actor and producer, “criticism” became judgment. It meant notes, revisions, reviews, or the look on someone’s face after a show or screening: Do they like the work? Do they like me? It became about success or failure. Good or bad. It became a verdict.

I miss the joy and pleasure of searching for meaning. The motivation to try and understand someone’s work, rather than to decide what’s right or wrong about it. Obviously it’s easier to obsessively analyze something you love, admire or relate to. But I wonder if there isn’t a way to get back to some of that critical analysis in our culture. Or at least in my own life and work. When I look more curiously at other people’s work, it helps me in my own. It allows more compassion for my own process of discovery in my writing, rather than the fear provoked by the rush to judgment.

Certainly Kubrick’s The Shining has had its share of critics, including the book’s author, Stephen King. But it also had its fans. The theories in Room 237 made me wonder: Can we reignite the joy and pleasure of finding meaning, and move away from the schadenfreude of discerning failure?

Why this.

As a person who has always made her living with some form of writing, I have a lot of ambivalence about blogging, vlogging, and various forms of Internet publishing. Yes, it provides a platform to express oneself; but it usually involves giving away content for free.  I worry about devaluing the very thing we are showcasing, inadvertently creating a world where people think all forms of content should be free – music, films, writing. Maybe stories and information are a human right. But they have value, and so do creators. Still…many of the projects I embark on take years and I wanted a more immediate outlet. I have convinced myself that blogging is a gateway, a creative tool, a writer’s sketchpad.

Next, I had to overcome my paralysis over what kind of blog to start. What is my “brand”? Anyone who knows me (and I assume that is anyone reading this) knows that I have a range of interests and have done a lot of things in my career. Writing books, articles, press releases, web series, screenplays, stage plays and soap operas. Acting in indie films, off-off-broadway, web series. Should my blog be about theater? Film? TV? Writing? Acting? Journalism? Do I need to just settle down and do one thing already?

I finally decided that’s not going to happen. The reason I’ve done so many things is that there are so many ways to tell stories. So many ways to be inspired. The neighborhood of Gowanus, where I live, is a daily inspiration. A hodgepodge of history and change. Beauty and ugliness. And so I have taken it as the name, theme, and sometimes-topic of my blog. I don’t know exactly what this will be. But we’ll see where it goes.

Thanks for reading.  – Marin Gazzaniga