OmanyteJackson posted:

What, the neshe? the outmoded? or the exclusion?

I've seen about half a dozen plays and I knew a few people in the art scene in baltimore that talked about them in the same way. Somehow twisting flaws into strengths with words like "raw", "human", "imperfect", or "real" when plays work as hard as movies to avoid these mistakes. It's like how people talk about vinyl or handwritten letters

If you want great dialog, you can listen to radio dramas, audio books, or podcasts that focus entirely on the dialogue. The also happen to easier to get access to than a ticket to your average play.

business hammocks posted:

Where do people think actors or writers come from? Nobody becomes an actor by being on or thinking about television.

khwarezm posted:

A half dozen? Shut me up. Anyway, movies have existed for more than a century and TV for half a century. And yet still plays continue, and are probably the most important medium that adds new talent to the acting profession while continuing to be massively influential, well respected works of art. This isn't like the magic lantern of the 19th century, or the flea circus or anything that really did die off because they were outclassed by other forms of entertainment, if they really are outmoded dinosaurs they would have but they haven't because they have unique qualities for both the actors and the audience since live performances with the risks that entails can be fascinating for the audience and thrilling for the actors. Somebody made a comparison earlier with live music that applies well, by this rationale they should also have died off when recorded music became a thing, but they didn't either.

I can't believe this is an argument, if you listen to radio drama you can't see the actual physical performances, even if you watch it on television there's a certain distance between the audience and actors that's not on stage which takes away from the fun of theatre.

business hammocks posted:

Where do people think actors or writers come from? Nobody becomes an actor by being on or thinking about television.

A Gnarlacious Bro posted:

Lol ok wierdo

OmanyteJackson posted:

OmanyteJackson posted:

I think for the average american it's 2.4 with something like 80% having not seen a play at all so take that what you will.

Yes plays have existed for a long time and they will continue to, but they have transformed from a general shared form of entertainment to one that caters solely to the interests of the upper class. Again, 80% of Americans have never seen one. The reason stage plays remain profitable is the same reason there is still a fine art market, a way to showcase status and wealth and not an indication of it's quality or significance.


Having a parent in show business is a way bigger contributor to our current pool of actors/writers these days. It's way more to do with connections that dictate success and with stage plays proximity to wealth, it's a no brainer.

Also this whole "the risk makes it good" is so disingenuous. If a play sucks it sucks. Something almost being bad doesn't make it better either.

OmanyteJackson posted:

Except we all have these glass things that show people moving pictures. but i guess you need to be 30 feet away from a performer to see that they like performing.

Motto posted:

There's an approximately 200% chance that guy screams at anyone asking him to drop the transphobic language.

OmanyteJackson posted:

Sorry were you more into the trans porn discussion?

Stickfigure posted:

It's a class issue in the sense that homophobia is more widespread in lower classes and theater is gay as gently caress.

Yardbomb posted:

Don't regurgitate classist propaganda, near all the homophobes I've ever had to deal with in person were gated community kiddies and daddy's money frat (Or wannabe) pigs, it's an anecdote but one a whole lot of other people will have too, impoverished kids in wage slavery aren't the people driving cross country to have their little net nazi get-togethers. "All those 'trailer trash rednecks', 'ghetto thugs' and filthy rurals are the real glut of homophobia, while us good, educated upper class are your allies!" is some disenfranchising bullshit from the same people that try to paint the dastardly poors as the reason for the orange baby being in power, when his biggest base has always been upper middle class pricks.

Yardbomb posted:

Don't regurgitate classist propaganda, near all the homophobes I've ever had to deal with in person were gated community kiddies and daddy's money frat (Or wannabe) pigs, it's an anecdote but one a whole lot of other people will have too, impoverished kids in wage slavery aren't the people driving cross country to have their little net nazi get-togethers. "All those 'trailer trash rednecks', 'ghetto thugs' and filthy rurals are the real glut of homophobia, while us good, educated upper class are your allies!" is some disenfranchising bullshit from the same people that try to paint the dastardly poors as the reason for the orange baby being in power, when his biggest base has always been upper middle class pricks.

Darth Walrus posted:

That does sort of fit with the back-of-a-napkin maths I did a little while back on where the 2012 low-income voters went in 2016. Basically, the Dems lost about five and a half million, which is a big deal in a close election, while the Republicans gained barely any (in fact, if you take population growth into account, their share of low-income Americans dropped a bit). Instead, about two million went to third parties and independents, while three and a half million didn’t show up at all, either due to voter suppression or lack of enthusiasm.

That said, overall turnout was slightly up in 2016, even accounting for population growth, and this was due to a surge of high-income voters - Trump got one million, and Clinton got a whopping five million. In other words, 2016 was a demographic shift in the electorate from 2012 - it was more of a rich person’s election. Clinton and her team were kind-of-sort-of right that they could recoup their losses amongst the working class by picking up wealthy suburbanites - what they overestimated was the degree of their appeal to their new demographic (they still got a lead on Trump, but it shrunk rather than increasing), and the way that this would interact with a badly deformed first-past-the-post system. They turned small minorities into large minorities in wealthy areas, and turned small majorities into large minorities in poor areas.

Yardbomb posted:

Don't regurgitate classist propaganda, near all the homophobes I've ever had to deal with in person were gated community kiddies and daddy's money frat (Or wannabe) pigs, it's an anecdote but one a whole lot of other people will have too, impoverished kids in wage slavery aren't the people driving cross country to have their little net nazi get-togethers. "All those 'trailer trash rednecks', 'ghetto thugs' and filthy rurals are the real glut of homophobia, while us good, educated upper class are your allies!" is some disenfranchising bullshit from the same people that try to paint the dastardly poors as the reason for the orange baby being in power, when his biggest base has always been upper middle class pricks.

Max Wilco posted:

OmanyteJackson posted:

Sorry were you more into the trans porn discussion?

Max Wilco posted:

I don't know if anyone here is familiar with I-Mockery, or if it's really relevant to the thread, but I checked in on the site today, and I saw this: http://www.i-mockery.com/re/

Tired Moritz posted:

Man this year sucks

Max Wilco posted:

"Why would people put on plays when you could just make something for film or television?"

I dunno, why do people play board games or make miniatures when you can automate for cheaper on a computer?

Also, I don't know how closely it relates to the discussion at hand, but I remembered that there was a stage adaptation of The Secret of Monkey Island: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R91iBFsdrvI




https://twitter.com/LilithLovett/status/1011370604539211776

https://twitter.com/lonelytiefling/status/1011304170622767108

Max Wilco posted:

I don't know if anyone here is familiar with I-Mockery, or if it's really relevant to the thread, but I checked in on the site today, and I saw this: http://www.i-mockery.com/re/

Arcsquad12 posted:

Just to keep the misery train going I found out Markiplier's niece was killed in a car accident.

What a lovely week.

Leal posted:

Jesus Christ

Arcsquad12 posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkrCQDK1QdA

While it's not happy, Mark has done a good thing by turning to his subscribers to help cover the funeral expenses.
You can donate here.

Waffles Inc. posted:

I usually just lurk the thread but I'm so astonished by "plays are bad" as a take that I had to weigh in. Like, not to cast aspersions on ya' OmanyteJackson but to be totally frank, I desperately hope you're not in a position of any policy-making power because everything you're saying is frightening and dangerous to the arts

Yours is the voice that would strip public schools of music and theater programs, and the humanities requirements from undergrad.

Theater is a powerful storytelling, humanizing and empathetic art form, and you should seek out more of it. Shame on you for your position, from the bottom of my heart.

OmanyteJackson posted:

You should actually those posts rather than clutch pearls. The whole point is that plays and the culture around them are less accessible than other forms of art. If your a kid in highschool and want to see, say, an independent artist work a quick google search all you need to find there songs, writings, paintings, short films etc., but if you want to see a play, you have to physically go there. If anything I'm saying there should be more arts programs that cater to more forms of expression than what's available now.

Play's aren't uniquely humanizing. People talk about plays as if the actors and the audience are in dialogue but there goal is to do their part weather the audience is into it or not and that's the expectation. In fact plays are closer to film and tv than they are improve when it comes to planning and production. The Big Bang Theory is essentially a play recorded for tv. If the show didn't have cameras would it be more empathetic?

While not a perfect 1-to-1 comparison, wrestling is better at all these aspects that are unique to plays despite being considered low art. requiring levels of storytelling, improvisation, audience interaction, and showmanship that a play just cannot do and it shows. despite wrestling not being taught in schools, more people watch wrestling than watch plays.

I listen to alot of NPR and when they talk about the local theater scene, the question always comes up: How do we get people who aren't affluent white professionals to come see plays? The answer is usually something about pricing or casting more people of color, but they never approach the structures of the theater system and how they limit participation and they definitely don't talk about the culture of theater being a thing people of certain classes would find off-putting.

If the goal is to get more people interested in seeing live performances of actors there are things that can be done, but if "Hey, Theater as it is, not that great" is beyond the pail than please, continue your breakdown.