Fly-By-Night Theatr Company Presents: 15 Feet By: Kati Frasier...A show that should not be missed

Fly-By-Night Theatre Company would like to invite you to its show '15 Feet' by Kati Frazier, presented at the 11th Annual Greensboro Fringe Festival. Celia and Diane meet, meet, and meet again in this modern romantic comedy of family and politics. February 1st 10pm, February 2nd 8pm, and February 3rd 2pm, City Arts, Downtown Greensboro. 

http://www.flybynighttheatre.com/

 

The mission of Fly-By-Night Theatre Company is simple: to develop new and challenging works in theatre, dance, and film, all produced and performed by the talented and adept artists of North Carolina. We offer a theatrical experience that can be found nowhere else because we present fresh works that have not been done before. We push ourselves to be ahead of the curve so that the vitality of the contemporary theatrical movement endures.  We put pressure on the moment we're living in and express ourselves through creation, not interpretation. We firmly believe that superior process makes superior product. We are a group of dedicated professionals. We are active collaborators. We do what we do with verve and love  – and you will love it too. 

'15 Feet' is a thought provoking piece that will leave the audience laughing, crying, but most importantly, thinking as they leave the theater.  It will be a great experience for all audiences.

THERE IS HEAVY LANGUAGE, SEXUAL CONTENT, AND ADULT THEMES.  THIS PLAY IS NOT SUITABLE FOR CHILDREN. 

 

First Workshop

Workshops are a great thing for writers and for all artists.  I have found that I have learned a lot about myself as a writer while participating in various styles of workshops.  Even if we aren’t working on a piece that I have written, I am able to see what most readers appreciate and what they don’t and try to incorporate that into my on work.

I think that the first workshop we had on Thursday was probably one of the most helpful I have ever participated in.  I really appreciated the structure.  In previous workshops there was a serious lack of structure.  Each person involved was trying to talk at once, and it was very difficult to get anything constructive out of it.  By giving each person five minutes to speak and then allowing the discussion to continue was the biggest thing for me.  I was able to listen to what other people had to say.  A lot of times, I found that I agreed with what they had to say even though I didn’t realize it in my own analysis.

One thing that I have found to be a big problem for me in previous workshops is that most people are afraid to give constructive criticism.  Often times they simply say that a piece was ‘good’.  Well that is all fine and great.  You might really think the piece is good.  However, if you can’t back up your reasoning then it does nothing to help the writer improve not only the piece but their craft.   

I do not think this was a problem with this workshop. 

Everyone was willing to give true constructive criticism.  They were able to articulate their initial feelings about the piece well, and give reasons behind why.   The why is always the most important part, at least for me.   I was very impressed with the fact that people within the workshop did not hesitate to talk about the problems with the piece.  Even though it is important to remember to do it in a polite and constructive way, we as writers have to come to terms with the fact that not everyone is going to like what we write.  Each piece is not perfect simply because it is put down on the page.    We have to be able to listen to constructive criticism and not let it affect our egos, so to speak.    I think that this was accomplished.

As mentioned in class, the average amount of time that people spoke about the piece was around three minutes.  I do not think that it should be shortened from five minutes.  I felt I had to rush through all the things I wanted to say to stay within the five minute limitation (Okay, I admit that I do speak a lot so this is probably not how most people felt).    Of course the time we are expected to give feedback is going to be reflected in the length of the piece we are critiquing, I think that five minutes is a perfect time.  I would really hate to see that change. 

In short, I got a lot of out the workshop on Thursday.  I would like to see this structure continue.  I would like to see people be even more willing to give constructive criticism.  I treat other writers the way I want them to treat me.  I think that it is important for us to remember that we are not attacking the person, but simply giving feedback.  This feedback is not given to be mean or cruel, but to help.  Art is something that we can always improve on.  Workshops are a way for artists to do that.   I think that the environment set up within the classroom gave a safe and constructive outlet for that.    

A Critique: "Emergency" By: Denis Johnson

One could argue that "Emergency" is just another story about drug use in the 70s. There are a million of those, right?  Their argument is valid, because indeed that is what the plot is about.  However, I believe the story is much more than just a simple LSD trip.  I believe that LSD is simply the mode in which the story is propelled forward.  Johnson is allowing us to see inside the uninhibited minds of the two main characters, the unnamed narrator and Georgie, into their true fears and hopes.

We are taken on the journey of the protagonist through an hallucinogenic trip, but one of the things that Johnson does so well is allow us as readers to reflect on life, death, and the potential of rebirth.   Again and again throughout the story, gruesome images of death are used.   We begin the story with visions on blood.  Georgie states, “There’s so much goop inside of us, man…and it all wants to get out.”  This is later echoed in the story with the image of Georgie skinning a rabbit that is accidentally hit with his truck.  By this act he is making his line come to pass, by allowing the “goop inside” to get out. 

 Another strong use of the imagery of death is when the protagonist and Georgie find a drive-in theater.  Due to the drugs the protagonist does not see a drive-in theater but a military graveyard, “filled with rows and rows of austere, identical markers over the soldiers’ graves.”   Because this story does take place in the ‘70s, the Vietnam War was on the top of all young men’s minds.  The constant fear of the draft, and that they would, like so many others, end up in a cemetery with nothing more than a small identical marker in remembrance.

Each of the main characters seems to be seeking some form of redemption or rebirth.  Georgie asks to go to church, and the protagonist states repeatedly that it is the end of summer, which symbolically means to me that this is the end of an era in his life. After the crazy drug trip ends for the protagonist, I believe he finds what he is looking for. “I felt the beauty of the morning.  I could understand how a drowning man might suddenly feel a deep thirst being quenched.  Or how the slave might become a friend to his master.”   Maybe he is the drowning man, and now with the light of day he can finally keep his head above water, to finally find what he has been seeking within himself all along.