Archaeology for the Masses

Friday, November 04, 2005

why I love my Daddy...

after e-mailing my dad to tell him that he HAD to read this great letter to the editor against my review, he sent me his summery of it.

"To the Editor:
The journalist who reviewed "Lesson from Soprano" should know a few things before sitting down to critique theater. First, research the type of genre in which you are about to sit down to see. (Probably my favorite sentence.)The choice to have people partly dressed would have been understood if she knew Lonesco wanted the audience to understand these are not characters, but real people. (So in order to understand what the author wants you to understand you have to read about his intentions ahead of time, right?) They are actors and you as an audience member are about to give yourself over to the suspension of disbelief. (I thought it was the responsibility of the author and the actors to bring you to the point where you willing suspend your disbelief.) It made Lonesco uncomfortable to watch realistic theater because he felt embarrassed for the actors. He knew they weren't really who they said they were on stage. (He was a very astute fellow!)

Next, she should have paid attention to the lesson more clearly. If she had she'd have realized the reason why you can't find a "character" for the pupil is because her name is "the pupil." She's a generic character and is suppose to stand for any innocent person who might walk through the professor's door. (So there is no character. Gotcha.) Saying she can "easily relate" to the professor means she relates to the Nazis, rapist, and molesters. I don't think she meant to imply this, but it reads that way. (Anonymous is giving you the benefit of a doubt.)

Finally, Lonesco would have loved this review. Why? It's full of cliches and doesn't make any sense. (Maybe that was your intention. Maybe you were being ''Lonesco.") Brittany Scott is good in the Bald Soprano because she looks like Reese Witherspoon? You just did her a disservice by saying that! (You should have lied and said she didn't look like Reese Witherspoon.) What the Bald Soprano makes fun of (people using lots of words to say nothing, saying cliches, missing the point in a conversation) is exactly what this writer did. It seems like she should have taken a "Lesson" from "Soprano". (Maybe you were applying the lesson you learned from "Soprano." Maybe anonymous -- isn't anonymous a cliche? -- can't take a joke.)


His name is Ionesco, you twit!

you have to read this!!!

1. That's not the playwright's name.
2. I did not say that that girl was good because she looked like Reese, I simply said she was good AND looks like Reese
3. I understand the genre (ohhh big word) that is, I understand it well enough to graduate from here with a minor in Theatre
4. She represents any innocent person? Okay, well then the actress sucked at being innocent.
5. If my choices were to side with the girl who sucked or the Nazi (which is not implied at all in the play (I read it) or by the Director and is something you'd have to know from Ionesco's writings because Absurdist Theatre is pretty lame) then Deutschland Uber Alles
6. I have the balls to use my real name in the article

I love that I bother them this much with one little review in one little school paper, damn, get a life. At least I'm building a portfolio.

best e-mail ever

got the funniest e-mail this morning
"Mike Fordham has requested to add you as his boyfriend, but before
we can do that, you must confirm that you are actually in a relationship with

To confirm this request, go to:

thefacebook team."