Things I'm doing instead of looking for a new job

Things I'm doing instead of looking for a new job: writing a novel, writing a play, writing essays, writing all sorts of things, learning French, reading novels, reading history, reading Shakespeare, reading poetry, reading theory, reading all sorts of things, going to improv shows, doing improv (hopefully), meditating, making new friends, strengthening my friendship with old friends, spending time with baby Lila, traveling, watching old movies, cooking new dishes, exercising, and convincing myself that I have enough money saved up to last me for a while, and that spending time doing these things is more important to my growth as a human being than getting yet another crappy food service job just to make a small amount of money while watching my soul slowly dies and accomplishing NOTHING. 

The Key to my Heart; or what is my drug of choice

It’s not uncommon that I find myself wide awake at 2:00 in the morning, trying to go to sleep. On one of those nights, about two months ago, I started looking up videos about opera on Youtube. I knew that Renée Fleming was doing an episode of YoungArts Masterclass on HBO a while back, and I was hoping that somebody would have uploaded a video of it. What I found were not only bits and pieces of the show but also a bunch of masterclasses and performances by Ms. Fleming as well as many other world leading opera singers living and dead. I got hooked. For the next two or three hours I watched masterclasses, interviews, and performances by many, MANY sopranos. 

Let me backtrack a little. I have been listening to classical music ever since high school. While I enjoyed it then, I didn’t enjoy it nearly as much as I do now. For the past four or five months now I’ve been listening to classical music and almost nothing else. I guess Owe that to age and experience. Growing up and becoming more refined along the way had helped me to appreciate the music more. It doesn’t just sound pleasant to my ears; it is really deeply felt. It’s the kind of love that words cannot do justice. A few months later I discovered my tremendous love for sopranos, which is beyond even that. It is beyond anything I have ever experienced. 

I have always been amazed by proper vocal productions such as found in classical singing. I have even studied how to produce such a sound myself. Unfortunately I didn’t have much of a talent for it, and the time and effort I had dedicated to the craft bore no fruits. However, my appreciation for the art never ceased. I always thought it was the closest thing to godliness a human being could get. It was as if the singer were a muse and the sound didn’t come from her body but from heaven. I feel that way about all voice types, but mostly soprano, which might have something to do with the fact that they sing in a vocal range higher than what they speak in. I have been listening to one great soprano or another every day. It is like a drug. It’s so exhilarating. It makes me burst with joy. I tried listening to other voice types and they didn’t make me feel the same way. I listen to soprano arias before I go to work, before my improv class and performance, while I’m running on a treadmill, sometimes before I sit down to meditate. The feeling of lovingkindness that meditators (generally) achieve by picturing a mother nursing an infant child, I get from listening to these arias.

It’s like I have found a key to my heart. All of a sudden the immense amount of joy I didn’t know I had flowed out of my body. I listen to Renée Fleming, Leontyne Price, Joan Sutherland, Cecilia Bartoli (a mezzo who sings soprano sometimes), Kiri Te Kanawa, Renata Tebaldi, and Maria Callas, and they keep me in such an incredible mood. I have always known that music is supposed to make you happier, but never before had any music made me this happy. I am an addict and my drug is sopranos!

"Evita" (1996)

Nine years ago I watched EVITA and loved it. I thought it was thoroughly entertaining, and Madonna was a great actress and singer. A lot has changed since then. I've learned much more about films, acting, singing, and musicals. I decided to watch this movie again to see how I would feel about it.

Surprisingly, I still enjoyed it a lot, and much more than many other movie musicals. Director Alan Parker knew how to make every scene visually appealing, so that the film was captivating from beginning to end. As for Madonna, she may not be a great singer, but her singing is more than adequate here. The score might have been written for the show-stopping voices of Elaine Page and Patti Lupone, but on screen such quality is no longer necessary. Madonna is an attractive woman; whatever she lacks, she makes up for it all with her charisma. She's got, well, more than "just a little touch of star quality." (snort) It was what made her Madonna, and it probably was what made Eva Perón Evita. Is she a good actress? I don't know. But do I believe her as a manipulative seductress? Someone so naive she truly believed she was a saint when she was corrupting the country? Definitely. 

Let's not forget her co-stars who are no less charismatic. Antonio Banderas as Ché serves as the narrator and the juxtaposition to Eva, and Jonathan Pryce as Juan Perón. They played the characters well, and they complemented Madonna. There isn't anything else that the job is asking of them. They also sang well.

The greatest achievement of the film is that it manages to be somewhere between decent and good despite the score. Andrew Lloyd Webber doesn't write good musicals. While he had turned out many hits, many beloved songs, he had yet to turn out a really well constructed score. With EVITA, you hear the same melodies over and over until they rot your brain. I admit I enjoyed a few of these songs, like the famous "Don't Cry for Me Argentina," "Buenos Aires," or the song written specifically for the movie, "You Must Love Me." But this is not good music, people. It's cheesy, catchy crap. Lyrics by Tim Rice, though far from genius, aren't dull. With lines like "I'm their savior, that's what they call me / So Lauren Bacall me, anything goes / To make me fantastic, I have to be Rainbow High / In magical colors," you wouldn't fall asleep.

And that, essentially, is what EVITA is: far from genius, but no sir, not dull.

Writing

When I was younger I read books and felt inspired to write them. Then I wondered why other people who read didn't want to write too. I couldn't see how enjoying books wouldn't naturally lead you to wanting to write one. Now that I'm working on a book I realized why that might be.

It's hard.
It's fucking hard.
It's really really fucking hard.

So I suppose that's why not everybody writes books.

You can learn a lot from about writing from taking courses, joining writers' groups, reading, going to retreats, etc. But the best way to learn to write is probably just to write. You will encounter new challenges in every corner. Most of my writing time is spent overcoming these challenges, which is, I confess, more fun that the actual writing itself. If I were equally or more passionate about other vocations, I probably would have quit writing long ago and pursued them instead. But I'm not.

My Gleedictions

DO YOU LOVE GLEE??? Me either. Do you watch it religiously? Me too. So here's my gleedictions (Glee preditions) on what's gonna happen in season 3 episode 15 when the show returns after THE MOST INTENSE CLIFFHANGER EVER!!!

1. Quinn isn't gonna die, but she'll be severely injured and it's gonna make the gang question life and choices or some sappy shit like that. And Rachel will blame herself because she was texting Quinn, distracting her so that she got in the accident. She will go visit Quinn alone and LEA MICHELE WILL GET ANOTHER SOLO YAY!!!

2. Rachel is gonna throw the wedding, because it's the dumbest idea ever, and, oh, because QUINN IS SEVERELY INJURED. 

3. Sebastian is gonna transfer to McKinley High and join the New Directions so he can compete in the states competition. The gang is gonna be pissed off about it, but Mr. Schu will be like "We have to let everyone in, you guys. That's our policy. And I'm an idiot and a gigantic pussy.)

4. Rachel, Mercedes, and Santana will be pissed because Sebastian will be taking all of their solos.

5. Blaine and Sebastian are going to elope, because they're both hot and Kurt is NOT HOT.

6. Sebastian is suddenly going to disappear because Grant Gustin is going to get clubbed to death by the gleeks who love the Klaine story line. 

7. Finn is going to break up with Rachel and start dating Sugar.

8. Sam is gonna....WHAT DOES SAM EVER FUCKING DO ON THIS SHOW ANYMORE? Sorry Chord Overstreet, they probably fired you before because they didn't know what to do with you. And now that you're back they still don't know which lines to give you now that they have that Iris kid to worry about. They'll probably fire you again.

9. That Jesus kid (who apparently won the Glee Project? I don't know because I didn't watch that show) will join the New Directions. This is the dumbest gleediction ever because it's not dramatic in any way. So maybe he will get in a fight with Puck and Artie?

10. Mr. Schu will find out Mrs. Schu is pregnant RIGHT BEFORE Sue has a miscarriage, creating more drama and turning Sue against Will YET AGAIN!!!

It's plausible that none of these will actually happen. The writing staff on Glee is capable of coming up with all sorts of stupidity that exudes my expectations. And with so many insane characters, many of whom I didn't make any gleediction about, the show could really go anywhere.

I don't love to hate Glee. I genuinely wish the show were better. I think it has a lot of talents and potentials, but it fails solely because of the lazy writing. But, who cares, it's still hugely popular. Kids these days don't know what good musicals are so that they don't mind eating up this garbage. It would be nice to have a great musical TV show, but since such a thing has yet to exist, I guess having Glee around is better than nothing. 

"Les Choristes" (2004)

Wanting to improve my French and expand my movie watching experience, I decided to dedicate this entire month of March to watching French movies. And instead of browsing the Netflix catalogue and choosing the selections myself, I had asked my friends on Facebook to give me some suggestions. The first selection was suggested to me by Heather: LES CHORISTES directed by first-time director Chirstophe Barratier.

I remember when this movie came out. I meant to go see it but didn't for whatever reason. I was still in high school and it would have spoken to me then, though in a different way from what it does now. It's about a new teacher in a boarding school for troubled children, who uses choral singing as a way to inspire the kids. I had thought this kind of plot was tired. We've seen it over and over and it has become sappy rather than inspirational. But this film is so heartfelt that it convinced me. I was thoroughly entertained and moved. It helped that I used to sing in choirs when I was in high school. It made me quite nostalgic.

Aside from the music, the setting of the film makes it even more moving. The school is situated in a countryside, which enhances the sense of isolation. Despite the picturesqueness of the scenery, nobody seems to take notice of it. It goes to show that the beauty that surrounds them doesn't compensate for what these children lack. While we don't get detailed accounts on what had brought each of them to the school, there is a sense of abandonment and loneliness in all of them. And without remarking on it, the film shows in a very powerful way how healing is the music the make together.

There are people who enjoy hearing the same story over and over again. There are people who find inspiration only in something innovative. For the most part I don't care what kind of story gets told as long as it's told well. LES CHORISTES works because it doesn't rely on familiarity but, instead, on honesty.

Oh! And here's me singing in my high school choir. I'm the guy who blows the pitch pipe at the beginning of the song!

"Jane Eyre" (2011)

I have mixed feelings about this version of JANE EYRE, one of three that I have seen. I'm not one to reread his favorite books before watching the films, and so I didn't for this one. It has been years since I read this Charlotte Brontë's classic, and I was excited to sit down and let this heartbreaking love story unfold before me again.

A lot of the novel is missing here. Many story lines and important characters are omitted. Are they necessary?--that's what I'm trying to answer. I feel like my brain was doing a lot of filling in the gaps, drawing from what I remembered from reading the book. I wonder, would I have felt like the story was too thin or somewhat incomplete had I not read the book? The actors are so well cast. Jane is supposed to be plain, and Mia Wasikoska is plain here, but she makes plain interesting. Both her innocence and her idealism are believable. And who can resist Michael Fassbender? Rochester isn't supposed to be attractive. Fassbender is, but can act otherwise. Both actors look unconventional, but in the context of JANE EYRE they are captivating and compelling. It is beautifully filmed, too. I don't think it is as bold as it wants to be, but it is far from the much more mainstream version in 1996, as if its main goal is to resist being anything mainstream audiences would want it to be.

I had a great time. It captured my attention all the way through. I found it fulfilling. Is it a great film? I still can't make up my mind about that.