Dear Anybody,

I promise that I will post soon. I pinky swear it.

In other news, I recently graduated, and I want to put some photos of that up here, but it's too late to do that tonight.

I've also been doing a lot of fiction writing, which makes me very happy and excited, and I hope to post some of that on here soon, as well. Rest assured, I have been proactive, and have not forgotten my beloved Babble. Just you wait.

Sincerely,

Liam

Huzzah!

I've FINALLY finished Anna Karenina! It was well worth it, at least--but what a labour!

Again, I did enjoy it. The density and the thoroughness of the storytelling is an astounding feat of writing. Tolstoy really understood human behaviour, I think, and really gloried in delving into people's motivations. Don't get me wrong: if you're expecting a book like this to fly by like a Stieg Larsson novel, you know nothing about 19th century Russian literature. It most certainly isn't the kind of tome you can devour over a lazy long weekend. It's density is something you experience rather than burn through. You taste it, savour it, and let it gather itself in your mind's eye. That's where its genius lies. That is why it is worth reading.



Unfortunately, my copy was a cheap Wordsworth edition I got when I was 11 years old on sale for peanuts at a Coles Book store. This shouldn't be a problem really (I'm quite partial to cheap books, in fact!) but I get the feeling there are better translations out there. Not only that, but the editing was terrible. It was so fraught with errors that it was actually kind of amusing. Typos everywhere. In several cases punctuation was simply overlooked. Things were misspelt. One man, whose name for most of the book is Koznyshev, was mentioned in two places on the same page late in the book as "Kozushev". My favourite though was when the word "help" was spelled "he]p".

And since spring hit I've been in the mood for something more fanciful. Fantastical, you might even say. My co-worker lent me a book of essays contributed by different fantasy writers, about the work of Tolkien and its influence on them. This has been whetting my appetite for some damn good summer escapism. It's also reminding me where my roots are.

It's funny because that word, "escapism", is tacked onto The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, and most fantasy for that matter, as if it were a bad thing; and yet if I could pinpoint when and where I became opened up to the world in a completely new way it would be upon the reading of these books. It introduced me to a vast number of subjects of interest, bodies of knowledge and experiences like no other work has singlehandedly done before. It's no exaggeration to say that through reading Lord of the Rings I gained a deeper appreciation for nature; Tolkien's love of what is green and good was ignited in myself. As well as the beginnings of an increased ecological consciousness, It opened me up to Norse, Celtic, and Classic myth, and from there, religion, philosophy, astronomy, and western literature and literary theory.

And then there are the languages! Tolkien's linguistic background seeps into every corner of his world, and it spilled into mine. I tried to create my own Elvish language, and got considerably far, for a twelve year-old. I had a lexicon, a grammar, an alphabet. I even tried to teach myself Latin for a couple of years. I have no doubt that this love for language inspired by Tolkien helped me greatly as I went into French immersion in junior high. I never picked up a rock album until I learned that some of Led Zeppelin's songs were directly inspired by Lord of the Rings. I never knew rock was that versatile, and about something other than sex, and drugs or whatever those kids were listening to.

Perhaps I would have gotten interested in these things on my own without Tolkien's influence, but the point is I didn't. His work was the doorway I stepped through. Above all else it sharpened my sense of wonder, and I like to think that it is always strengthened upon returning to it. Escapism? Hah! If anything, I was escaping into the world! But I digress...

Next up on my roster is The Half-Blood Prince. It's been a few years since it came out, my sister has always nagged me about reading it, so now that the second part of the Deathly Hallows is imminent, it seems like the right time to start on it. I'll try to get through it and the Deathly Hallows in the next 30 days or so. Wish me luck!

On Reading

After finishing How to Read and Why* by Harold Bloom, I remembered a conversation I was having with a friend of mine. I can't remember the topic of conversation, but I remember my friend saying that reading is something you do when you're waiting to do other things. I found this a little perplexing, and very telling. It challenged my own biases toward reading, and it made me wonder what the majority of society feels about reading.

So now, like Harold Bloom--but with way less credentials--I'm going to chime in on the discussion.

Excluding oppressive dictators, I get the feeling nobody will say "reading is bad"; certainly nobody will say it is bad for you. Even if some people don't like doing it, if they are rational creatures they will see the value. If not imaginative literature (and I include graphic novels and comic books), then reading the news can come in handy. If not that, being able to read instruction manuals and road signs can be a real boost to getting through life. Nobody who is literate will regret being literate. But I think a lot of people will read for more than just information on how to put together their jalsklär desk from IKEA. Book publishing is a multi-billion dollar industry, so I can only assume that it is a pretty popular activity. It certainly isn't the only thing, and being a text-oriented society has problems (and there is much good in oral cultures which we are in danger of losing to the monolith of the written word), but it has a lot of advantages too. Reading enjoys an almost universal, and perhaps curiously unquestioned status as a good thing.

But we seem to have a peculiar attitude about this good thing, at least when it comes to leisurely reading. Like other forms of entertainment, we find ourselves having to justify why we do it more than other things. Reading for leisure smacks of uselessness, or worse, elitism. That we call it leisurely reading shows the ambivalence we have about it; we love to do it, but it is only acceptable when it's raining out and there's nothing left to do. It's almost shameful to think of sitting at home and reading on a sunny saturday afternoon, isn't it? Or even worse, on a Friday night! The horror! Behaviour like that would just seem weird, even antisocial. The only time that would be acceptable is if it's compulsory reading, for a class. It's just not the kind of thing you do when you can do something else!

One time a friend of mine asked me why I didn't want to go to a party (or something along those lines), and I said because I felt like I needed to catch up on reading. I realise in hindsight how pretentious, rude and antisocial that must have sounded. But why is it all those things?

Some people might think it is isolating, living in an ivory tower, avoiding "life". I have to ask what they mean by "life". Why is a social gathering closer to "life" than reading? Reading is a part of life, isn't it? It engages several areas of the brain at once--the brain being a living, physical organ, an essential tool for life. In fact, it enhances that organ, and by extension, the rest of ourselves. How can that be a bad thing? The imagination is as essential to human life as our social interactions, and yet when we say "live a little", almost nobody imagines sitting in a chair and reading. So is it something we love to do but feel bad for it? It certainly seems hard to justify when you look at it: from the outside, it looks like a person is doing absolutely nothing, but staring at an object with small ink-scratchings on it. This is not profitable behaviour, so it doesn't sit well with utilitarian, economy-minded creatures.

I believe it is not only important, but deeply rewarding and enjoyable. It brings pleasure, which may put off people who think that you shouldn't get pleasure from important things. Important things are about helping other people, right? They're about productivity, thrift, hard work, and other Puritan virtues. Well, I believe the Puritans were just a little bit silly, that not all selfishness is intrinsically bad, and that we nourish ourselves with reading. We read to become more human.

This might be stretching it a bit, but it even has a meditative quality to it, as it demands a sustained amount of concentration and visualization, all in the effort to help us understand the story. Some people might dismiss this as escapism. This is inaccurate. It is an exercise in empathy as we follow somebody else's life, and understand them a little better. A story offers a blueprint to better understanding each other; so if empathy is escapism, then escapism must be the noblest thing you can do! It takes us outside of ourselves and puts us in the Other. Central to the practice of Rabbinic Judaism is the act of reading. Rabbis will read--live and breathe the literature of their faith, absorb it as fully as they can, and form an exegesis, an understanding of their text-- and will encounter wisdom. That is why they read. Sure, reading won't change the world, but it may lead to self-understanding, which will help you become a better you.

And yet, reading is still seen as something we should only do when we're waiting to do something else.

I use "we" a lot in this entry, because I believe I'm not alone in what I'm thinking. I love reading, yet I often feel guilty, or at least uneasy, for doing it. Surely this feeling is instilled in me from standards of the outside, which means it's happening to other people as well. This must mean it is a widespread problem. This is comforting in a way, but it also means that it's something we should all be addressing.

I want to challenge this problem, and encourage others to make time in their day to read. I'm not saying it's the only thing worth doing, or even the most important (and I'm certainly not entering into the argument of Books vs. Video Games, or Books vs. Movies). There's a danger to fetishizing it, of course. But there's a danger to putting too much emphasis on a social life, too. Balance, as usual, is key. But do take some time.

I have no set reading list or canon, personally. I was raised on comic books, so I try to resist bias towards one genre or another. I include comics, graphic novels, blogs and magazines, childrens books, etc. It doesn't have to be Cervantes or Tolstoy, as long as it means something to you. But I also encourage you to read what challenges you, what inspires you, what haunts you. If nothing else, read because it's fun, and fun is bloody important.


Thanks for reading!

Liam



*It's not as pretentious as it sounds, and although it doesn't completely deliver, it's still a good, challenging read.

Omar Ahmad Redux

Hey folks! Sorry for the sparseness of bloggery here. I'm in Calgary right now with my family, having a great time, and I'll probably post something when I get back to Victoria. Until then, have a look at this video. I posted it on here over a year ago, but in light of the election, I feel that it's something worth looking at if you feel like you want to try and change something but you don't know how. Omar Ahmad offers one way:



Talk to you soon, ladies and gentlemen!

-Liam

Election Day Eve

WARNING: This post is a little redundant in some parts. But I hope you enjoy it anyway.

On the day before the election, it feels somehow inappropriate to write about anything else. And yet I feel as though I have nothing to contribute to the conversation; no matter how closely I follow this campaign and how much research I do, I still don't know enough to offer an educated opinion about any of this. I know more or less where I stand on the political spectrum. But there's nothing I can say that hasn't already been said better by someone better informed. So don't expect anything new here. And as far as saying anything about my own politics goes, I'd most likely be preaching to the choir in this medium. I'll leave the in-depth speculation and soapboxing to the critics, pundits and pollsters.

What I will reiterate is one of the most urgent messages of all: we cannot take for granted what other people under autocratic regimes all over the world are dying to do. I keep reading articles about the surge in the NDP's popularity and how this is may herald a more galvanized votership and lead to higher turnout tomorrow. But then, it may not. Apathy is a powerful foe, even at this point, and we just don't know what it will look like until the day. So this message needs to be repeated. Social and political inertia is the result of an unnecessary self-fulfilling prophecy of cynicism. Just because something has been a certain way for as long as you can remember, doesn't mean it will be that way forever. Look at Egypt. Southern Sudan. Tunisia. Hell, look at Calgary's recent mayoral election! Just look at these, dag nabbit!

Please vote, everybody. Please. It's likely that I'm preaching to the choir and 90% of the people who read this are going to show up to the polls on Monday, but it's important to remember, even in the 11th hour.

For those who plan on voting strategically, here's a very useful tool that might help. It's called Project Democracy, and it shows how each party is faring on a riding by riding basis. You can see who has the best chance of beating a Conservative candidate in your riding, be it NDP or Liberal, and put your vote towards that candidate. As a lot of NDP-voters for the first time have the luxury of following their heart and their head, some Liberal supporters are for once in the opposite position. Hopefully this site will help both to make the best decision possible.

I also want to say that however things turn out tomorrow, whoever you vote for, and in spite of all the childish nonsense that reigns supreme in Ottawa, how blest are we to live in a country where we can speak openly against the status quo? We don't need to live in fear of heavy censorship and secret police. It might sounds fanciful to talk of these things, but lest we forget there are many places where this is still a reality. We can be critical, even to the point of real change (however rare that may be). There is the possibility for dialogue. There is public space for public anger. Stephen Harper can call it the "Harper Government", and there's nothing he can do to stop any one of us from speaking out against that absurd title, and for that I'm proud to be Canadian. There are a lot of major problems with our system, but even if our cries falls on deaf ears, we still won't have thugs busting into our houses in the middle of the night and putting away our dissidents into dark places never to be seen or heard from again.

Don't get me wrong. Prejudice, inequality, and injustice are rampant in Canada, but, as far as I know, we don't live in a country of pogroms, killing fields, and Kristallnacht. And, in the words of Martha Stewart, that's a good thing.

Four Years Later, a Degree

Well obviously, right? Geez, who wrote that title?

So, in my last entry, I said that these have been the richest four consecutive years of my life. I really meant it. They've been very hard, sometimes nearly impossible to handle, but they have given me so much.

When I entered the acting program, I was fighting an inferiority complex due to the fact that UVic wasn't NTS, or NYU, or Juilliard, or [insert any other prestigious acting school here]. I expected the program to mould me into a disciplined, and highly sophisticated acting machine, and if it didn't, then it would only confirm my fears. But I was determined. Now I believe I have a very strong work ethic. I would drive myself to the point that I wasn't even enjoying myself any more. And any point where I felt like the program had fallen short of my impossible expectations made me doubt it, as if I wasn't getting something that every other acting program in the world was getting. I will also admit that there were times I felt that none of us took it seriously enough, which contributed to a less than exemplary training environment. This is not true, of course. We all take it seriously, and I apologise to my peers for thinking that. If anything, I was the one with a rod up his arse. Also, I see now how exemplary this training environment really was.

Now, looking back on five terms of Voice and Movement and six of Acting, I realise that there's no way any school can yield more out of 3 years of training than what we went through. There's simply not enough time. It was more about breadth than depth, I'd say. But still, what breadth! We were given the opportunity to explore so many different avenues of performance--Stanislavski techniques, Meisner, ballet, Shakespeare, Chekhov, Ibsen, Mask, Laban, stage combat, Viewpoints, acting for Film and TV, contemporary dance, self-generated work, meditation, collective creation--and you could spend four years (and beyond!) studying any single one of these on its own. How cool is that? "That's what you went to SCHOOL for?" "Shit yeah!" And this list doesn't include all the great guests we had visit us and offer their wisdom--alumni, actors and directors, casting directors, playwrights, all of whom were working professionals with illustrious careers.

So what if the Phoenix isn't in Toronto, swarming with talent scouts? Alright, the business of theatre is very much about who you know, but what we should be largely concerned about while we're training is our craft, and I have no reason to believe we got less of it than any other school in the country, or the world. Some renowned schools might have great teachers, but those very same schools have their share of crappy teachers, too. Perhaps this is the wrong detail to be looking at, but it makes me feel like I haven't missed out, knowing there's good and bad teachers just about everywhere you go. The reputation of a school alone does not a good actor make. Perhaps a well-connected one, but the quality of the training is hit and miss everywhere. And even so, for all my teachers' foibles, I feel it was mostly a hit. Some I gained from more than others, but I learned from each and every one of them. And let's not forget my peers: fellow actors, directors, designers, stage managers, writers, technicians, and scholars; a whole community of people extremely passionate about the same thing as me. Even without the profs' help, it's proved to be a fertile ground for creativity.

My understanding of a BFA in Acting is that it is a time to be opened up to many different options. Don't mistake me; I'm not saying it was just one long introductory course. Some of it was gloriously in depth, and I feel like a much stronger, competent and confident actor than I was four years ago. Of course there is a sharpening of skills, but that's something that takes an entire lifetime to do. If Acting only took three to four years to master, it would hardly be worth doing, wouldn't it? Sure, maybe a conservatory style school would have a higher concentration of what we were learning, but even then it can only go so far.

If nothing else, you know why I believe this education was a success? Despite the progress I've made, I leave with many habits I had upon entrance, and that's OK. I am at peace with my incompleteness as an actor. I am spurred on by it. And above all I am ready. Not only do I leave ready to leave, ready to move on to the next big adventure, but I leave even more curious, open, and hungry than when I began. This, I think, is what this BFA should be all about. And for that, I'm so very grateful.

The Next Step

Oh hi there!

Now that I'm standing firmly on the other side of a Bachelors Degree, and am at a safe distance from a flurry of euphoric end-of-year farewells, it seems like a good time to blog and get all reflect-ey up in here.

But first, I want to post part of an entry I wrote in first year, describing the crossroads I was once at:

"So here's what I'm going to do: I'm going to work as hard as I can in all my classes and keep my grades up, and audition for second year acting at the end of the year. But I don't think double-majoring is gonna work, unless I do the Theatre/Writing program, which is an option.

"Ok, so here's the plan:

If I get into Acting next year, I'll Major in Acting and Minor in English

If I don't get into Acting, I'll do the Theatre/Writing Major, and Minor in English (second choice)

or

Directing, minoring in English or Writing (2nd second choice)

or

Theatre Generalist Option, minoring in English (3rd second choice)"

So, I went into Acting. No, I didn't minor in English (although I did try to take a Medieval English Lit. course in second year). I also tried to double-major in Acting and Writing, which became one of the most stressful school years of my life. So I decided I wanted to enjoy my University experience: Writing was cut, and I never looked back. Except for when I did.

Don't get me wrong. The following 3rd and 4th years were the second half of the richest 4 years of my life. But while not majoring in Writing need never stop me from doing it on my own, the desire kept cropping up throughout. When 4th year was under way and we were focusing on generating original work in two thirds of our performance classes, it became almost overwhelming. The talks we had of "the biz", from how to get an agent, to head shots, to how to do income taxes as an actor scared me, and made me wonder whether I wanted to do this beyond the haven of school. If I was this scared and hesitant, did that mean I wasn't in the right place?

In the second term I seriously questioned my need to act, quite frankly. It's not that I didn't enjoy it; of course I did. But did I feel compelled to do it? Was it worth going through all the hoops of auditioning and agent shopping and taxes? Did my desire really trump all those things? I've often heard that if you doubt whether you should be in theatre, get the hell out. Well, I could feel a big ol' rat called doubt rattling about in my skull.

Granted, this was also because we were all so close to graduating that the temptation to mentally 'check out' was stronger than ever. And if it helped at all, I knew this feeling was similar to what I felt in second year. To be honest, I haven't entirely shaken it off, but I'm certain that some time for rest will help me to gain some perspective. Already I'm thinking about it in a more imperative light. I know I don't have to choose between writing and acting, but right now the former dominates. And the question remains: what next?

Well, as I did in first year, I'll list my up to date options as they stand:

-Take a cross-country trip to all the major theatre scenes, auditioning and giving out headshots
-National Voice Intensive next year
-Playwriting Workshop with Daniel MacIvor at the Banff Centre next year
-Move to Toronto
-Audition for plays
-Try and create new work with fellow theatre-folk
-Mask work (full, half, neutral)
-Small film projects
-Build up writing portfolio, submit to every contest and magazine I can get my hands on, and in a couple of years time, apply for the Creative Writing MFA at University of Guelph
-Audition for Stratford Festival
-Audition for Stratford's Birmingham Conservatory
-Audition for Shaw Festival

The two big goals I'm looking at right now (and may be in competition for each other) are auditioning for Birmingham, and applying for the MFA at Guelph. Thankfully I don't have to make the decision right away, and I can still cast for both of them (likely multiple times, until one of them bites). Either way, it looks like I'm eastbound. It's just a question of when, and how I'll get there.