Prep Time

Focus Pocus

Among the many “straight to the trash” emails I received yesterday morning was one trying to sell me “an innovative way to channel and fine-tune the writing process” that would provide the “essential tools to write a best seller.”  No, it wasn’t personal ownership of JK Rowling or Suzanne Collins.  They are not mere items but cottage industries and those don’t usually go on sale, especially via internet communications (though their work is downloadable for an inflated fee.).   Anyway, as further evidence, my email implied that the purchase of this not inexpensive item would provide me with enough structure, knowledge and answered questions to really “get in the zone” of my project.  To use their words, and I quote:

“Ask any writer – once you get in the zone you can write forever.”

Is that supposed to be a selling point — writing forever?  That’s the very last thing I want to spend the rest of eternity doing.  Forever is quite a long time and if I’m going to spend it doing any one thing it’ll be eating pizza, participating in some sort of carnal pleasure, or at least receiving attention for all that I have already “written” in this lifetime and perhaps a few other incarnations before true eternity hits.

In case you’re wondering, the internet “item” in question being sold via this particular email was a computer program – and not even the original version.  In actuality, it’s the program’s 4.0 permutation, which begs the question of what happened to the poor schnooks who purchased versions 1.0,2.0, 3.0.  (No, the correct answer is NOT that they’re disgruntled iPhone users).  Were they rooked and can only hope to write for one-third of eternity?  Or half?  Certainly, for me, that deal would be even better.  And by this point undoubtedly cheaper given consumer demand for outdated software.

What would be even cheaper – way cheaper – would be to not buy the 4.0 or any other version at all.   Or any other snake oil that promises you the keys to the kingdom – the way to save you so much time that the road to success will become as smooth and easy as it was gliding down the sliding pond at your local playground when you were three years old.  Trust me, if there were a shortcut to these more adult “things creative,” all of us who came before you would have figured it out long ago, not to mention the generations before us and back through all of eternity.  My money is on the gang who built the Pyramids or the perhaps the author (or authors) who claim to be William Shakespeare.

Nope... not that pyramid.

The sad, honest and even dirty truth is that in order to be good at what you do you need to put in the time doing it.  In his new book on creativity, “Imagine,” the young author and former neuroscientist Jonah Lehrer (and he’s only 30!) spends time theorizing and positing on where creativity comes from and quotes people from all walks of life on their process.  Bob Dylan, for example, was ready to hang up his guitar and sometime rhyming ability until one day, when he sort of didn’t care, the song “Like A Rolling Stone” quickly came to him in a flash of anger.  Certainly Dylan is a songwriting genius and there is no program or book in the world that can teach you to write or sing exactly like him (some would say, Praise the Lord on the latter).  But Dylan also didn’t wake up one day with the ability to write “Like a Rolling Stone.”  It came after decades of writing and preparing for that moment where what he was feeling could be put to music so easily.  And even then, there is no promise that he’d be able to do it as well, or as quickly, again.  Yes, indeed, creativity is a harsh mistress, or gigolo, to be an equal opportunity offender.  But then again, just about anything worth having has some kind of downside.

Lately, it’s come to my attention that there are more than a few people unwilling to put in the time to “prepare” for what they aspire to do or achieve and more than a few others who have prepared inadequately, but act shocked, surprised or offended when the crown or throne or lottery check is not immediately handed over to them.  It might not seem like Kim Kardashian or her sisters ever paid their dues on the road to fame and fortune but if you google their images and Wikipedia page you will see the evolution of “the look,” reportage on sex tapes, and an obsession with fashion, fame and commerce that was inbred almost from birth.  Now, if this is your idea of a good time – start young or have your children start young.   Or even better yet use that prep time towards something else that appeals to you, because the position of young iconic reality show punching bag has already been done and will, no doubt, be done again by others much more obsessed with it than a reader of any notesfromachair blog could ever be.

Geeky in every shade

This past week I went to see MSNBC host (and one of my intellectual goddesses) Rachel Maddow being interviewed by Bill Maher in Los Angeles and was taken aback at just how staggering all of this preparation stuff can really be  (note: I have a crush on Rachel because, as she admits – she looks like a tall geeky man).    Rachel is meticulous in her research for her 5 day per week hour long MSNBC program and it certainly shows in her new book “Drift.”  Her look at how U.S. military intervention went from the Founding Fathers’ concept of checks and balances to modern day presidents from Ronald Reagan through and including Barak Obama taking it upon themselves to launch and/or continue wars without Congress approval and maintain them through private military contractors – takes a complicated, dry subject and, through penetrating research and thought, makes it read like a novel (It’s been #1 on the NY Times bestseller list for two weeks).    At the same time, unlike most novels, it will alternately also make you really angry at inarguable current event facts we’re living through in present day.

Coincidence?  Nah.  Rachel is also an Oxford PhD, former radio show host, comic book reader, out lesbian liberal activist, and likes to drink cocktails — proving you can be smart, prepared, rigorous and misbehave, or at least have fun.  This is why her work is both smart and yet approachably human.  Mr. Maher – curmudgeonly, insensitive atheist that he is, is quicker than he’s ever been interviewing her despite being an avowed pothead, misogynist and slightly dirty old/young man who is convinced marriage is the sure death of sex.  Still, he somehow manages to convincingly sell his brand of nihilism pretty convincingly and, he has noted, this is in part because he still spends a significant part of the year doing live standup routines all over the country – something he’s done consistently over the last 30 years.  Whether you like him or not, the sharp-tongued remarks he’s consistently so good at as an interviewer don’t happen without this or some other kind of ongoing practice.  That and being an obsessive reader of daily newspapers, magazines and books also helps, as he readily admits.

Every semester I always have a few students skating by while others work a lot and then don’t work and still others are work horses who break through.  Sometimes there are also those frozen with anxiety.  And sometimes, but not often enough, a small group don’t seem to have any trouble at all and came fully formed through dedication and love of what they do (or perhaps natural talent and desire so it doesn’t feel like work).  None are recipes for success or failure on their own but each can set you on the road to good, bad or indifferent.  But students have an excuse – they are mostly young and they’re learning.   You wonder about the last few years of people seeking high office who haven’t put in the prep time, or tried to cram the prep time in over a very short period of time (I’m not mentioning Sarah Palin by name because she’s doing just fine as a media gadfly).  Yet on the flip side, I’m also not mentioning those with perhaps limited experience for the highest office in the land who still took decades of prep time prior to that election to excel at one of the finest universities in the world, become a scholar of the law, work in trenches with the underprivileged, run for elected office and lose but then win, and win a seat in Congress again.  All the while, with his other spare hand, he wrote (all by himself) two best sellers, got married and had two kids.  The latter gave him the ability to empathize with the plight of families everywhere.  That and the fact he was raised by a single working mother who used to wake him at 5 or 6 in the morning to go over his studies or do homework he had put off and got him in the routine of responsibility for doing his work – and doing it overtime if he had to (or was ordered to do so).  I don’t want to mention names again but, okay fine, but this person’s rhymes with “Shamrock Yo Mama”

Ultimately, of course, this is about more than petty political endorsements or bitchy remarks in a self-published weekly snarkfest like my own.  It’s really about – the pride we take in what we do – the time we put in – and the quality of the final product.  What does it mean to you? Or us?  Or anyone?   What are our expectations from ourself and the world with it and without it?  Master improvisers practice to be so impromptu – ask any stylish person known for his or her “disheveled look” (I used to date someone like this – trust me – there’s a real art to the properly fashionable wrinkled shirt).    Conversely, most hard-working practitioners have an improvisational skill they can count on after years of hard work, or perhaps always had it but chose to work hard to put their innate skills over the top.  In any event, each were smart enough to not take a shortcut that, in the long run, they knew would only sentence them to spend the rest of eternity figuring out why they not only didn’t fit into a particular kind of 1, 2, 3 or 4.0 requirements of a particular program.  Instead, they led the way, writing an entirely new, more exciting one based on practice and, on what they had learned.

SURPRISE!

Jack in the Box

There are so few surprises left in the entertainment world that it puts a great big smile on my face when I find one.  So it was not unsurprising that I was grinning ear to ear last night when I found out that Lauren Ambrose, the flame-haired Emmy-nominated actress who played the slightly screwed up, aspiring young artist Claire on HBO’s brilliant “Six Feet Under” TV series, was cast as Fanny Brice in the upcoming Broadway musical revival (the first in 45 years) of “Funny Girl.”

Now, for those of you who aren’t musical theatre freaks or gay, don’t stop reading.  Because there will be a larger point made.  Fanny Brice is the part that made Barbra Streisand a Broadway and movie megastar and defined her as a performer for decades.  Industry wisdom was that NO ONE could ever do it, be as good or believable, and that it was pretty much a waste to spend millions of dollars in musical theatre (or other) money in order to try and convince anyone (much less an audience) to the contrary.  Still don’t care?  Okay —

How can I explain this to readers under 40?  Particularly those who are heterosexual —

Jaden Smith

Jaden as Harry? I don't think so.

Having someone step into Barbra Streisand’s shoes as Fanny Brice would be akin to remaking the first  “Harry Potter” movie and casting – uh – say – Jaden Smith as Harry?  It just won’t feel right to most people on the first blush.  Or the second.  Or even the twenty-third.

I’m a huge “Six Feet Under” fan and a Lauren Ambrose fan in particular.  Her current turn as a bizarre pharmaceutical rep on the Starz series “Torchwood” is a gem and I’ve seen her be good in lots of stuff over the years.  But playing the quintessential Jewish American musical comedy heroine, the same part played by THE real-life quintessential Jewish American musical performer/heroine of the last century?  Are they kidding?

Then I thought about it and realized.  Well, she can act.  But can anyone act that well in a part that’s been done so perfectly that they’re not right for? (at least according to conventional wisdom).  Hmmm.  Maybe.  But even accepting that, how could she sing it?  I mean, I’ve actually heard her sing.  A former writing partner of mine directed the film version of “Psycho Beach Party,” one of her first roles, and she was quite good.  But – “Funny Girl?”  Are you kidding?

Then I listened to this –

And this

It’s oddly infectious.  And off.  And funny.  And she can really sing.  But I mean – really sing.  Not necessarily like Barbra Streisand.  But the funny, quirky, infectious thing she does could possibly remind me of some performer.  Maybe one from the past.  Let me think.  Hmmm.  Still thinking.  Maybe – Fanny Brice?

The point here is not whether Lauren Ambrose will be a great Fanny Brice or perhaps the disappointment a small handful of nasty and bitter Lea Michele fans were hoping for.  (No, she didn’t get the role – get over it!).  It’s that it took a performer with the drive and talent of Ms. Ambrose to not let the industry define her – but define herself and forge her own path despite what any of us naysayers think.

Can you imagine if after “Six Feet Under” she’d said to her agents – you know what I’d like – to do a big Broadway revival of – “Funny Girl.”  HUH????  Answer:  What about the star of your own TV series on NBC, honey?  There are potentially millions of dollars in that.  What about movies?  They want you as Katherine Heigl’s sister in “29 Dresses” and it’s lots of exposure to a new audience.  What about, uh…wait, even if you can sing, no one can compare to Streisand.  Why set yourself up for failure?  As your agents we’re here to tell you….

Oh, go jump in the lake, CAA.

Now I’m not entirely sure that’s how the conversation went but I can guess.  That’s the advantage of being the chair of this blog.  And I don’t know that I’m so far off.   Except that I hear that Ms. Ambrose is quite a lovely person and would probably not treat the people that represent her so shabbily.  So I’m quite happy to do that for her.

The reason I’m willing to mouth off is that someone needs to occasionally speak for creative risk-taking and artistic independence.  Or at least shine a small (albeit very small) light on artists who  “walk the walk” and follow their muse — Creative people who take chances when they don’t have to, probably passing up many more seemingly sure things in order to do this.  This goes not only for someone in Ms. Ambrose’s position as a working actress, but also for any person in the creative arts who is not working.  We all make choices every day on which projects we’ll work on, what we will devote our time to.  Are we choosing the “sure thing” (as if there were such a thing) or deciding to do what is “calling” to us?  In Ms. Ambrose’s case I can only guess that when some years ago when she decided to play in small clubs as a singer with a retro jazz band called The Leisure Class that she was answering “the call.”  Because it wasn’t for the money or attention.  This isn’t the 1950s. Or even the l920’s.  This isn’t the age of girl singers.  Or turn of the roaring twenties singers.  That really went with, well, was  pretty much last popular in — the age of Fanny Brice.  Oops.

I might have told this story before but it bears repeating.  Many years ago I worked as a publicist on the set of the sequel to “Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure.”  It was admittedly not the high point in my career although for some weird reason it is now met with some odd kitschy respectability.  But what I particularly recall from that time is the look of surprise and disbelief on the face of some of the (above-the-line) crew when they found out I was a writer.  (“Yeah, sure, who isn’t”).  This was nothing compared to the absolute shock on some of their faces when by the end of filming I had sold a screenplay I wrote that was packaged with several big stars and given a green light to be filmed less than six months later.  “Did you hear the PUBLICIST sold a movie?”  “How can that BE?”

The entertainment industry (actually the world at large) pretty much wants to define everybody.  It’s easier that way.  Even as I’m writing this I have to cop to the fact that I am probably guilty of it too.   But we all make a big mistake when we set the limits for someone else.  And – for what it’s worth – an even bigger mistake when we set limits for ourselves and what we can do.   If you’re in the creative arts, the very nature of it, the very fun of it, is that there ARE no limits.  It’s a playground.  And aside from a few basic parameters when you’re in the playground there are no rules.  You get to make up the game as you go along.  It’s better that way, certainly a lot more fun.  Because every once in a while the odds are that if you play the game you make up right, you get to be the BIG, BIG winner.  The verdict is out but I suspect that is what’s in Ms. Ambrose’s future.  And perhaps one of ours if we’re willing to follow her path.