Workshop 7: Chen and Rachel

This week's workshop was centered on the idea of space, the expansive or restrictive inner space of a house and the memories associated with buildings and homes.

We brought in two reading selections: an excerpt from Italo Calvino's "Invisible Cities" and from Margeurite Duras' "Writing."

The entire text of the "Invisible Cities" can be found here.

Calvino's excerpt was on a city of the dead, very image driven and somewhat nonpersonal, an intellectual exercise. Duras' is much more personal, about her experience as a writer and how space (the interior of a house, the surrounding grounds) affects her writing habits.

For introductions I asked for the women's names, per usual, and a vivid memory of a space they used to inhabit. This actually turned into a very long and wonderful discussion about people's pasts, the houses they used to live in. One woman mentioned how she always used to seek out the basement as her private space, and someone else said that for her, that place was in a tree. The discussion evolved into memories of grandparents, death, and ghosts.

We then went on to read the excerpts, and no one had much to say about them, some were eager to start writing.

The writing prompt is as follows:

For prompt 1 I gave them printouts from this website of rural ruins:
http://community.livejournal.com/rural_ruin/

1. Based on your picture of an abandoned home, imagine what the home looked like fifty years ago (or when it was newly built). Who lived in it? What did it smell like, feel like, upon walking in? You may want to describe it very specifically, going from a view of its outside and then continuing inside, taking us on a "tour." The picture is only a starting off point; you can imagine the inside of the house to be anything you'd like it to be.

And then for prompt 2,

2. Remember the first place you ever lived? Look out of one of the windows of that building. What do you see? (What you see can either be what it looked like back then, or now). If you are illustrating, use the frame of the postcard paper as the frame of the house: that is, fill in the whole card with what you see.


I think that because of the beginning discussion, people really wanted to write about their own homes, so for prompt 1 it was less about looking at a random ruin and imagining, and more about describing a memory. I gave two prompts because there was a visual element to it and one of the women, who didn't speak English very well, ended up copying a drawing. She also composed a poem in her head and then read it aloud to us from memory.

Rachel brought up a good point about the structure of workshops because of how well the discussion went. How much of class should be discussion and how much reading and writing? It's hard to say... sometimes when a discussion is going really well, I'm hesitant to curb it and move on to the next activity. When it came to the writing itself, Rachel thought that people didn't write with the same openness as they had when they were speaking. had they exhausted what they had to say? Was the page a more daunting place to put down words than in a "storytelling" group discussion?

Cold-readings in Medium

So, for the past four weeks or so Evan and I have been reading a couple plays in our workshops. This kind of format is called a "cold-reading" because its based on the idea that none of us have read the play before, at least not together.
For several weeks until the first play workshop, we had consistently been having the same three women attending our Monday evening workshops, give or take one new woman who changed every time. This had been wonderful, and four weeks ago, we brought in Tennessee Williams' "The Glass Menagerie". Having the same steady three women was so fortunate because it let us cast the play (it is essentially a three person play, with one pivotal fourth character at the end) deliberately so that each woman was very well suited to her role, and had something in that she could really get a kick out of. The woman who had never been in before said she was feeling quiet but wanted to listen, and so she was assigned the fourth character. The reading was wonderful. Within the first ten lines, everyone was on board (whereas before we began one woman in particular had expressed fear she would "sound stupid" if she mispronounced big words--this woman is a fiery poet by the way), and we were off! I even interjected one or two teeny pieces of directions when I had the sense we were comfortable with it, and those were taken and it even gave the reading more intensity and commitment. We got almost exactly half way through before we had to leave. All of the women seemed to feel really good (I think getting assigned a role, and being solely responsible for it can be so exciting and empowering) afterwards, and promised that they would come next week.
The next week, though, completely unexpectedly, we had ten women in our workshop, including only two of the three women from the week before. Evan and I had planned to finish "Glass Menagerie", but with this many people, had to make a quick decision that it didn't make sense (It was so silly because it was the one workshop we had come in thinking we already had a great plan for, whereas all the weeks before we had plan as and bs and cs!). The two women were disappointed, it was clear, and simultaneously were telling the other women how cool it had been last week but also saying that it wouldn't be the same if we reassigned the third role to someone else (and, after all, it would still leave seven women with no roles, unless we just rotated through, but that wasn't really the style we were going for!). So, we ended up improvising a workshop in which we did word at a time ensemble poetry. Each of us would say a word, and we'd have a poem, and then we'd repeat it louder, and by the second or third time around at least one woman would have it memorized and she would belt it out and get some applause. It was fun, and pretty supportive, and more based in groupmind than usual.
The next week we brought in the second half of Glass Menagerie and Arthur Miller's "The Crucible". We had four women, none of the ones from our first "Glass Menagerie" (they each had a visitor or were in Orange). We got through the first act with perfect timing. The women were really into it; I had been hesitant because of the sort of intentionally stale environment of Salem that the play is set in, afraid that the women might be "bored". That was a stupid thought. When the first woman delivered the first line, I wondered if she had been rehearsing! She had this energy that gave the whole reading momentum. Even the woman who had a hoarse voice and who had been a hesitatnt to read was asking for more parts at the end. There are a lot of little roles in the play in addition to the bigger ones, and Evan and I were reading some as well, which was so fun. Having a well written structure to explore and play in can be really freeing; for example there can be a scene in which someone is yelling at another, or suspicious of another, and it's never tense because there is this understanding that we are sort of visiting another world. Whatever-don't get me started, I think I am going on a bit. We can talk about why I (and others) had such a good time in person! The women asked to keep their scripts, and all excitedly promised to come next week.
The next week (yesterday) only one woman was there (the other three were all in Orange, I think). And we kept going with the Crucible, the three of us getting to the end of the penultimate act. We had a really nice time.
The trajectory we are on (loosely) is that next time I am going to bring in some two person scenes from different plays, and assign women different roles and after reading through them, maybe even stand them up and play around with acting them out a little more. And the workshop after that, ideally, we are going to start writing some scenes on our own, starting from brainstorms (and maybe some improvs). Maybe the women will partner up, maybe not.
One thing that is frustrating, which we have all talked about, is that participation is so inconsistent (even, as we learned, when it seems like its going to be). I think this is mainly because of Orange and discipline. Last night the guard came in and told us that one of the women in Orange wanted to give us a message that she was in Orange but that she wanted to make sure she could still participate next time, and that she wanted to very much. It's so (explitive explitive) frustrating. But, despite the length of the plays that we have read and their need for multiple workshops, the workshops have still managed to be sustainable individually, which is a tribute to the women's patience and commitment and curiosity, and to the writing.
I apologize for not writing in weeks. It's all up there now. Have a great break--it snowed today!

Does Death Penalty Save Lives? A New Debate

By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: November 18, 2007
NY Times

For the first time in a generation, the question of whether the death penalty deters murders has captured the attention of scholars in law and economics, setting off an intense new debate about one of the central justifications for capital punishment.

According to roughly a dozen recent studies, executions save lives. For each inmate put to death, the studies say, 3 to 18 murders are prevented.

The effect is most pronounced, according to some studies, in Texas and other states that execute condemned inmates relatively often and relatively quickly.

The studies, performed by economists in the past decade, compare the number of executions in different jurisdictions with homicide rates over time — while trying to eliminate the effects of crime rates, conviction rates and other factors — and say that murder rates tend to fall as executions rise. One influential study looked at 3,054 counties over two decades.

“I personally am opposed to the death penalty,” said H. Naci Mocan, an economist at Louisiana State University and an author of a study finding that each execution saves five lives. “But my research shows that there is a deterrent effect.”

The studies have been the subject of sharp criticism, much of it from legal scholars who say that the theories of economists do not apply to the violent world of crime and punishment. Critics of the studies say they are based on faulty premises, insufficient data and flawed methodologies.

The rest here

I saw this article in the NY Times over the weekend and thought it would be of interest. The first time I remember thinking about the issue of the death penalty was in sixth or seventh grade, where my english teacher divided us into two camps: for and against the death penalty. I was put into the "against" category, even though all of us were pretty ambivalent about the issue and no one particularly wanted to be against. This summer I was tracking the case of Kenneth Foster, who was going to be executed in Texas (where I'm from), for being a sort of "accomplice" to a murder when what he actually did was sit in the back of the car. His sentence was commuted to life. While I followed his case I researched the death penalty a little bit and it REALLY surprised me that the electric chair was still used in some states (or at least allowed to be in use), and so was hanging. I thought those forms of execution were archaic and had gone out of fashion, and it was really jarring to think they were still utilized.

Anyway, there you have it. I don't really know if it's helpful to have economists debate over this issue: I mean, people aren't currency, and I have a feeling that any of these studies must be deeply flawed.

Workshop 6: Chen and Rachel

We took excerpts from "I Remember", a text by Joe Brainard that were basically memories by Brainard, each sentence starting with "I Remember." We discussed how the prose was like a poem, the syntax, visual associations that were akin to collage (Brainard also worked in the visual art collage format). The women liked writing their own "I remembers"... a lot of them cut right to the chase, such vivid memories, small and sincere and amazing. One woman wrote about her grandmother...

I often forget that not everyone sees things the way I do, or interpret them, and it's a great pleasure to be surprised by someone else's point of view that opens a window into things... There was one Brainard memory that went like this:

"I remember regretting things I didn’t do."

I interpreted it as a memory of regret, so perhaps Brainard no longer regretted. One of the women said it might be that he was regretting again. So interesting...

It was a little hard to discuss Brainard's stuff because people were eager to write their own memories-- and his are so specific to the 70s that perhaps it was a little hard to connect with... they were also pretty simplistic. But it was a good jumping off point. Workshop ended early then and Rachel asked them to write from the point of view of an object in the room. Someone wrote a really great "surveillance" poem from the POV of a fly. Pretty rad.

Teaching, especially workshop style, is such a matter of exchange. I'm pretty grateful for everything people have shared with me and opened up about, and I realize an inherent inequality about this give and take procedure. We sort of started this conversation last Saturday, but some of it was about balancing what we are able to offer vs. what the women are interested in, their background. I still need to crystallize my thoughts on this, so look for a later post.

11/14 workshop in minimum

Today, I went in alone and did a dialogue-writing workshop. The women and I began by discussing what it means to write dialogue -- convey in writing a conversation between two people without relying on description. All of the prompts to follow were restricted to written speech only, no narration.
The first warm-up prompt was short and silly: think of a person you know at this point in your life, and write out a dialogue between that person and yourself as a 10-year-old. We wrote for about 5 minutes, some were eager to share their work...
The second prompt was more restrictive: I have them a setting (backstage of some show, dressing room), and they could write their dialogue using 3-word utterances (each of the statements/responses in the conversation had to be 3 words long). We wrote for maybe about 10 minutes, and shared again.
The last and longest assignment was more open: they were to write a dialogue between 2 people talking about another person. I warned the women that once they begin writing, I will intermittently interrupt them with prompts that they could work into their dialogue. So a few minutes into the writing, I asked them to include a rhetorical question; a little later -- an apology. Finally, the "third person" in the initial dialogue was to walk in and join/interrupt the conversation. We wrapped up after that prompt, and most women shared their work.
The feedback that I got from the women was generally positive. Three women hung around after the workshop was over to chat; they told me that they liked being challenged, because they write regularly and well but are not used to being restricted/stimulated by specific prompts. I also got feedback from other people that they found the workshop fun. As far as my perception goes... I think a significant part of today's experience was that it started off light-hearted and almost autobiographical, so there wasn't too much pressure to "write something good". I was pretty impressed with their work [especially with the energy in the 3-line dialogues, actually] and, from their enthusiasm/support for one another when they shared, generally thought that the workshop went well. It did feel a little off-balance at times, because one or two women were *really* enthusiastic about the exercise, and others were getting stuck at times. But generally people seemed to be on the same page.

Question

Britt and I are planning on doing a workshop in Medium on the Kweli lyrics to 'Get By', and then ask three prompts: To write off a verse that speaks to you, to draw off a verse that speaks to you, or to write the verses.

Has anyone done this song yet in Medium, or done something similar to this? If so, let us know so we can make sure not to overlap.

Thanks!

11/5 workshop

This week made for quite an entertaining SPACE session. Molly and I (Anna) planned a workshop focused on beauty. Our plan was to begin with a brief discussion of what we thought beauty means and then show visual works, mostly portraits, by different artists and talk about how they presented beauty. We planned on spending the last half of the class working on broadly-defined self-portraits– i.e. picking traits of ourselves that we found beautiful and finding ways to visually depict them.
In class the discussion on beauty was fine, although a bit colloquial. Once we brought out the portraits by other artists all hell broke lose at the sight of Frida Kahlo’s unibrow and mustache. It was actually quite funny, and it seemed that there was a fine balance struck between understanding the more serious undertones of the session and just having fun. The self-portraits turned out great, and although most everybody balked at the idea of having to draw themselves, once they realized the possibilities for abstraction most seemed to enjoy themselves and create meaningful works.

Becky and Britt 11/7 Workshop

Our workshop this week focused on interviewing. Beforehand, I typed up a list of questions ranging from "What is success to you?", "When have you felt the happiest?" and "What historical figure do you most identify with?" etc. (I can email you this list if you'd like.) We paired up the women randomly to interview one another based on these or their own questions, except for two women who really wanted to be together and explained that otherwise they wouldn't get anything out of the activity. We also explained that the goal was three tiered: One--to interview and find out about the person, and follow tangential conversations to get more out of it. Two--to be interviewed and share with the interviewer. Three--to write about the person you interviewed by answering the prompt "To me, s0-and-so is..." One thing I should have made clearer was that the writing assignment was meant to express their views of the person in their OWN words, not just a tally of the facts about the person. We gave the groups about a half an hour, and we told them when the half-way point was to switch. Then we spent about 10-15 minutes writing, which wasn't enough for some people, while others had finished early. Then we shared what we wrote. The women who wrote laundry lists about their interviewee presented entirely differently than those who put their own thoughts and words into their writing, and the result was that the laundry-list writers wanted to improve and bring it back next week. We got mostly positive reactions to the workshop.

Britt and Becky Halloween Night

In reaction to popular requests to celebrate Halloween in some way (ie decorations), Britt and I did a workshop that was half writing and half mask-making (not allowed, as it turns out). The writing prompt was "What is your spirit animal and why (If you could be any animal, what would you be and why?)". If they could only think of an animal that they definitely were not, then they could write about that as well. After sharing our animals, we made masks of our animal with cut-out Gate pizza plates, leaves, construction paper, magazine images, paints etc. But, making disguises is against the rules as we and Ariel were notified later, so no more mask making again. Otherwise, it went really well and the women enjoyed it.

10/29 workshop

This week's workshop went pretty well. We brought in a poem by Lisa Lewis called "Bridget" that addresses issues of gendered violence and female solidarity. We read the poem aloud (each woman--there were about five women present-- read a section of it), and then had a discussion. Several women talked about ways in which they identified with the speaker and subject matter in the poem, and even shared narratives of their own, some of which I (Molly) felt ill-equipped to respond to. In general, though, it was a good discussion, and I think people liked the poem. When we asked how they felt about turning a subject of violence and violation into a work of art, one woman said something along the lines of, 'When I read this and can identify with it, I know I'm not alone.' We talked about expanding the solidarity discussed in the poem into a broader solidarity between us as female readers of the poem and the female author. After the discussion, everyone wrote a poem in response to the poem, beginning with the last few lines of "Bridget." We shared what we had written at the end of the workshop. Everyone seemed willing and happy to share, and also supportive of one another's work.

Workshop 5: Chen and Rachel

Oscar Kokoschka, Bride of the Wind

We went in this past Thursday and did a visual arts oriented workshop. I was thinking that after the last color workshop, there was a gap between skill-based learning and the motivation to think about art at all. I thought that bringing in some reproductions of paintings and just talking about them, looking at them, would spark some interest that would perhaps lead to a desire to learn more about color. I think of it as analogous to reading and talking through a poem before taking pen to paper and writing a poem yourself. I also wanted to think about color in a different way, using the medium of small bits of colored paper as the mixing tool, as opposed to actually mixing color. The advantage in this is that you don't muddy up the paper. What you "mix" will stay pure.

These are the paintings we brought in, in chronological order. I made a handout to accompany them.

Justinian and his Attendants, a mosaic made in the 1500s in Ravenna, Italy
Georges Seurat's "Les Poseuses"
Van Gogh's "Starry Night"
Oscar Kokoschka's "Bride of the Wind"

The latter 3 were all made sometime in the late 1800s, and Kokoschka's was early 1900s. They all use fragmented color to different effect, and mosaic is a tiling medium, so different from paint, but the thing about these painters is their unadulterated color, their separation of each stroke/dot of paint so that the unity lies in walking back from the painting, not from standing up close. "Starry Night" has always looked mosaic-y to me, and Seurat is a practitioner of pointillism, which has a whole scientific ethos behind it as to why dots of color should be used instead of mixing.

We started out asking for names and what kind of art people liked. Most people didn't have anything particular in mind (we had 5 people maybe at the beginning of workshop), but someone mentioned liking cartoon art and someone else was really into pop art/Andy warhol, although the kind of stuff she herself liked making was "trompe l'oeil" (trick of the eye... a sort of illusionistic realistic art). So we began with that, then had a conversation about the first two pieces of art which lasted for 35 minutes... Some people left because they had to, and then we felt we should probably get started on the activity. We had torn colored sheets of construction paper into bits (not small enough bits, I felt... a shredder would've worked better, probably). We just told them that they could play around with it or copy a picture I brought in, but I think if I ever hold this workshop again, I'll make the time frame more rigid and have enough time for them to copy a simple color study (that way they are actually mixing the colored fragments in a way that makes them think about color...) A similar activity would be to bring in markers and have people copy a color picture but without making broad swathes of color-- they have to create it by making points only (a version of pointillism without ever having to bring in paint.)

Rachel can talk more about the dynamics of the group, which I thought were totally mellow compared to other workshops. I don't know why, but looking at art was pretty calming, so was playing with little paper bits. The two women who stayed through the whole workshop said it was fun and they'd like to more visual arts workshops. It's hard because I hate to lose anyone on account of which type of activity we bring in. last week a woman didn't join us because we were doing writing only, and then this week a old-time writer didn't join us because were doing visual arts (I think that was the reason, may've been something else.) But I guess you can't win them all.