Skip to main content

Have You Written Today?

I have a mini post-it on my computer that asks "Have you written today? 5 mins", and has a little picture of a clock.

I write a lot over the course of a normal day: emails, fb posts, homework assignments, discussion board questions, texts, and the millions of constant scribbles on every available surface.* Most of this writing is reactionary; that is, it's in response to someone else's writing. The post-it is really to remind me that I need to write new content, pieces that spur my own action, be that a blog post, a journal entry (it's been almost a year; I have got to update that thing!), or even an email to someone I may have lost contact with. There are so many things on my to-do list that will benefit from daily writing and committing words to paper will serve to spur the Universe to action quicker on all the goals I have.

Writing to fans and friends should be something done on a regular basis, as well. How can you develop the relationship if you don't communicate with them? A short email with insider tidbits on the upcoming production is a perfect balance between taking the time to write it well but not too long before becoming too much information. But these emails can nudge a ticket purchase or serve as a "touch" before the ask. They are just as important as the answer to the boss's question or the planning work and need to be put on the schedule just like those.


*In conversation with a friend recently, the comment was made: "Are you like those crazy people in the movies, when they're finally discovered at home, and all the walls have writing on them?" I laughed. "Not quite that bad," I said, "but almost."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

High Art vs Low Art

“The masses seek distraction whereas art demands concentration from the spectator.” - -The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Walter Benjamin, 1936 Is there any more contentious question in the art world than the concept of “high” versus “low” I like venn diagrams. And shouldn't art really be in the middle?  art? Who gets to judge? What are the parameters in which to judge? There is no standard definition for either concept and personal explanations range from simple to incredibly complex. One common theory about how to explain the difference is high art is “popular” and low art is “unpopular”, that is, appealing (or not) to many people. This also links to another version of the difference: that high art fosters the widest connection between people while a smaller subsection enjoys low art. This is in direct contradiction, though, to the idea of low art being part of mass culture (raising yet another question of “is art culture” or merely a com...

Pass the Collection Plate, Please.

Various sizes of buildings, with some sort of seating arranged in rows, facing a slightly raised platform. may have curtains around the platform. people --primarily men-- take the platform to orate to the audience seated before them. A plea for donations is made at some point, either before or after the show, which may have music and will definitely have directives masked as stories on how to be a human in this day-and-age. children will be seen, maybe, but definitely not heard. the men in charge will believe they have been given a special gift for leading this particular group of people. and the people, for whatever reason, will also believe this. and this group of people will believe that their building and person and each other are completely different and somehow better than all the other exact same groups around their town/city/county/state/nation. If theater wants to be treated as church and church as theater, then both are getting exactly what they have been setting up for the p...

Death & The Theater

I was listening to a recent episode of the Tim Ferris podcast and the guest, happiness scholar Arthur C. Brooks, was discussing death meditations. And the little lightbulb in my brain turned on with the thought, "We need to talk more about death in theaters." I know, I know, that seems like an illogical statement because it feels like we're always talking about the death of theater. This whole summer has been filled with articles and op-eds from across the country about how large regional theaters are dying in major cities. But that's not the kind of death Brooks was talking about, and in reality, it isn't death these articles are complaining about, either: they are trying to stay alive in a “E’s just resting” fashion, to find some kind of life-support for the theaters, to keep them going, receive new money from new audiences or donors, new shows, new gimmicks to draw more or different people in the door. Anything to keep from dying. We don't talk about death...