holiday time

well it's the time of year when everyone gets into holiday mode- first Thanksgiving and then Hanukkah and Christmas and New Year's etc.... and like everyone else we have our traditions and it's a busy time for all.

We began our holiday eating with a meal at Michael's on East -

then the following night we joined John, Barb, Barbara, and Beth at Captain Brian's (lots of Bs in there LOL!) before the theater to see Guys and Dolls- which gets a very tepid review from me- tired- very tired- it should stay a High School Musical as far as I am concerned.  Who has an iota of belief that a missionary for the Salvation Army would hook up with a high rolling gambler and "convert" him to her work due to instantaneous love... ahem... seriously?

Then brother Larry came up from Miami the morning of Thanksgiving and we had something other than turkey LOL- which Phil doesn't like... this year it was a QUADUCANT (pheasant stuffed with quail and duck and pork sausage), We had cajun meat pies (which were excellent) and corn and crawfish chowder and then some of the usual - mashed potatoes and haricot vert and then PIES!

this was our afternoon snack/lunch-

 then we had a real starter of corn and crawfish chowder-

 Larry sent flowers for our table but Lucy was more interested in eating ferns LOL-

This was our main this year- a QuaDucAnt- then we had the usual sides- the "bird" was really good so we will order that again!

It wouldn't be a Friedman Thanksgiving without the PIES - many PIES! LOL so while we only had two last night - we have four desserts to choose from for the weekend... french silk, apple crumble, turtle pie and bread pudding with dulce de leche topping YUM!

tonight we are off to Indigenous and tomorrow to Harry's - first time on the welcome back tour for each of those favorites- then we have to get serious about getting ready for our Colombia trip- but first we will catch up with CBGB... no rest for the wicked as my Dad used to say- LOL.... stay tuned!

why we go to plays

Last night, while Phil was off doing Folkstage-y things I went to see a play at Theater Wit (you may recall my review of the last play we saw there- "Bad Jews" was amazing- and I might add now on it's third run in yet another larger theater.) This time the terrific play was "The (curious case of the) Watson Intelligence."  Here are some excerpts from articles and reviews of the play. The plot is quite complex and so I will rely on quotes from various reviews to help explain it- the two most used are from the Tribune and from the NYTimes... and since I had to pick and choose to get what I wanted to say some of it is paraphrased... forgive me original authors for my less than perfect quoting and attribution.

This was theater I LOVE- thoughtful, thought provoking theater that stays with you long after you leave the darkened venue it played out in.... it was laugh out loud funny and it was tear-you-up touching and mind challenging...

from the Trib review by Chris Jones

Madeleine George's terrific 2014 play "The (curious case of the) Watson Intelligence" is the latest in a line of shows with real appeal for tech geeks, scientists, computer engineers, mathematicians and any civilians who like their dramas not to be about "why Daddy never told me he loved me," or "how I finally learned to own my narrative," but, say, "the future of our society and how we are just a few years away from living side-by-side with robots who can do almost anything except review the theater."

"Watson," which was a finalist for the 2014 Pulitzer Prize and had not been seen in Chicago prior to Sunday night's Theater Wit opening, begins with a young woman, Eliza (Kristina Valada-Viars) sitting on her couch talking to a guy named Watson. Now, as a culture nerd will know, popular culture presents us with several Watsons. There is, for example, the good doctor who functioned as sidekick to Sherlock Holmes. Then there is the IBM computer, famously capable of answering questions posed in regular human talk and that proved superior to the human mind when it came to "Jeopardy."

Eliza, who used to work on the IBM Watson before she grew sick of working on an "overpriced trivia machine," is programming her own start-up's Watson. Here's her grand plan — and although this is just an idea in a play, it struck me a fascinating idea, period. 

Why not create personal avatar-advocates for those in our society who need someone to stand by their side? People in mental institutions, say, or in nursing homes, or in need of benefits, or workers about to be laid off. How about if they all had a device who could stand next to them — the way veritable armies of flunkies do for 1-percenters? Then, no one would be alone. Would that not greatly improve our human lot?

Once the authorial mouthpiece Eliza had articulated that idea, I was sucked into this unusual but exceptionally smart show, which ranges back to the Victorian world of Holmes and Watson, but mostly focuses on Eliza and her hapless ex-husband Merrick, a kind of old-school politico running for the office of city auditor. The pathetic Merrick calls in the "Dweeb Team" to fix his desktop computer.  Another Watson (different character, kinda maybe) arrives with his pocket protector and ends up getting hired to spy on Eliza. Ah, but Eliza created her own Watson. So which Watson is what Watson? And I Don't Know is on third.

Like Spike Jonze's movie "Her," "Watson Intelligence" is really probing our insecurity about the inevitable and imminent encroachment of our sponge-like digitized assistants into the world of emotional intelligence and into our bedrooms. This Watson turns out to be a pretty decent lover — why would he not be, given that Eliza has programmed him to cater to her every need, with far more attention to detail than you ever could expect from any mere man? "I just want to give you what you need" (the Watson credo, now and forever) takes a bit of topping.  And therein lies much of the appeal of this even-handed play, a work that is neither dystopian nor idealistic.  Just nervous.

Which is, in case you have not noticed, the dominant emotion of our current moment. At one point, Eliza launches into an examination of income inequality: "The more poor people we have," she says, "the less incentive there is to take care of them." Think about it. That is pretty sound logic. You really can't help but like this Eliza. "Technology," she says, at another moment, "is developing more rapidly than our social and political infrastructures can keep up with it."  Right on, Sherlock. It makes you nervous.  

the terrific cast-

 

FINALIST! Pulitzer Prize for Drama - 2014
Watson: trusty sidekick to Sherlock Holmes; loyal engineer who built Bell’s first telephone; unstoppable super-computer that became reigning Jeopardy! champ; amiable techno-dweeb who, in the present day, is just looking for love. These four constant companions become one in this brilliantly witty, time-jumping, loving tribute (and cautionary tale) dedicated to the people—and machines—upon which we all depend.
February, 2011. A programmer perfects her new AI as IBM's Watson wins its Jeopardy tournament.
March, 1891. Dr. Watson takes his first solo case without Sherlock Holmes at his side.
March, 1876. The first voice communication by wire. 
March, 1931. Thomas A. Watson is interviewed at Bell Labs about the famous quote.
Madeleine George premieres a brand new version of her stunning 2014 Pulitzer Award finalist: a time hopping comic meditation on technology, love and communication over the last 150 years.

from the NYT review of a prior production-

Within the scenes in “Watson Intelligence” are some authentically insightful reflections on the frequently unsatisfactory nature of human relationships. Both the Merrick of the 19th century and the Merrick of the 21st are frustrated to the point of irritation (or madness) by the mysteries of the female heart.  And the Eliza of the 21st, the most fully developed character, appears frustrated that technology speeds forward, improving itself minute by minute, while human beings remain the same faulty, needy, lonely creatures, baffled as ever by the push and pull of love. “You’re the only one I want to be around,” she says to (Dweeb) Watson, in a scene in which she expresses both her need for, and fear of, commitment, “and I have a really hard time being with you.”

In the one instance in which two of the plots overlap, the Eliza of today suddenly appears to interface, as it were, with Thomas Watson, the friend and collaborator of Bell’s. He offers her friendly advice about the necessity of connection that cuts to the heart of the play’s layered meanings eloquently.  “It’s our fate to be bound up with one another, isn’t it, he muses. “We are all born insufficient, and must look to others to supplement our strength. That is not weakness, it is the first condition of human life.”

so this one gets a huge thumbs up from me... I am so happy that despite our full schedule I made time to see it! Next up- back to the trip and I think Moldova... we have dinner with friends tonight and a special wine dinner on Monday with our wine bud Neil and then dinner Tuesday with another friend as well as a last 2015 goosefoot dinner on Wednesday... so I will be working to keep up with the trip posts in the midst of all that and packing...LOL never a dull moment....

a question of genius

way back decades ago when I first moved to Chicago there was a homeless woman who frequented the Gold Coast area where my apartment was located.  she would make money to live on by selling her art work. these simple drawings had a great deal of charm but I would not call them works of genius... but then what is genius?

One way of defining genius would be when the "genius" sees things we all see and yet sees more than we do or something else than we do or has some deeper understanding of the nature of "life, the universe, and everything" (L, tU & E) to copy a phrase from a comic genius Douglas Adams.

I hadn't thought about Lee Godie (the homeless artist) in years - everyone in the neighborhood knew her. Last night's play (Title & Deed) reminded me of her, in that I think the one and only character (who might or might not have been homeless) had moments of genius interspersed with moments of lunacy. Perhaps this is "apriori" to genius to some degree.

The Michael Patrick Thornton performance was undeniably brilliant - so brilliant I kept wanting to enter into a conversation with the character he played, the Traveler.  The character made so many interesting observations about "L tU & E" - about the meaning of home, the search for home, the nature of family, of traveling, of seeking. Unfortunately these observations of genius were interspersed with the lunacy of sentences like "the ritual gargling with sand for my third birthday" - such that I felt I had fallen into the Dadaist universe of Travesties from two nights earlier...

The last two sentences above ring 100% true- this was a brilliant performance- it wasn't even really a performance he so inhabited the character he WAS the character....

so here is the thing- I frequently wanted to laugh (and did so mostly into my hand) because I found some of the dialogue so outrageous and ludicrous- there was one point where he goes on and on about a field of shorn sheep and a couple of cows all facing in the same direction huddled together in the snow- yeah... right... remain calm buddy - time for the medication. but then he would say something so brilliant - it was a kind of razor's edge - genius and lunacy...

in the end - I found it painful - so much to talk about and so little opportunity to have the discussion...
so I find myself unable to give a thumbs up or thumbs down because this one is out beyond that kind of review. I found myself wondering if reading the script would give me a better understanding, but then again maybe not...

anyway to bring things full circle- I never considered Lee Godie an artistic genius but apparently others did because she has a wikipedia entry  LOL -

Lee Godie (born Jamot Emily Godee; September 1, 1908 – March 4, 1994) was an American self-taught artist who was active in Chicago during the late 1960s until around the early 1990s. She was a prolific artist who was known for her paintings and modified photos which are shown in galleries and museums such as the Hayward Gallery in London and the Smithsonian American Art Museum. She is often considered Chicago's most collected artist.

Lee Godie was notoriously wary of divulging personal information about herself. She was married twice and had four children. It was possible that she had once wanted to be a singer, but wasn't allowed by one of her husbands. Following the death of two of her children, her life was transformed and Godie reinvented herself as an artist in Chicago. Godie remained in downtown Chicago for almost a 30-year period, becoming a facet of the social milieu during that time.

Godie lived on the streets, sleeping outdoors or in transient hotels. She could be seen sleeping outdoors in sub-zero temperatures, "on a concrete bench...clutching her large black portfolio case." Living outdoors seemed to be by choice, since she had quite a lot of money saved and did not seem to enjoy being indoors.

Godie had a unique fashion style and could be seen wearing different swatches of fabric wrapped around herself or fur coats that were pieced together. She also used her own paint to transform her own personal image, painting "big orange circles over each cheek" and painted-on eyeshadow.

so maybe (and clearly the answer for some is YES) she was an artistic genius- but I did not find her art to be such-  Here are some examples from the internet...

here she is- when I was running into her she looked like the photo n the upper right hand -

so it is a question of genius... what is it? who has it? and how can it be differentiated from lunacy? and I do not have the answers but appreciate those whose seek them...

next up The Herd at Steppenwolf...

and then we will also squeeze in another work about genius - this one- my favorite film from the Sarasota Film Festival about the (IMHO) genius David Foster Wallace... (see - http://blog.semifreelife.com/2015/04/competition-blown-away.html )

So as always- stay tuned!!!

National Theater - LIVE!

Tonight, a new adventure! Our very first "LIVE" remote theater.  We went to the Historic Asolo Theater on the grounds of the Ringling Estate  to see the UK National Theater production of David Hare's Skylight.

Here is the plot summary of this EXCELLENT -on so many levels- play---

"East London school teacher Kyra Hollis is visited on the same night by Edward Sargeant and, later, his father Tom Sargeant. Kyra had been living with the Sargeant family years earlier but left after her affair with Tom was discovered by Tom's wife, who has since died. Edward now accuses Kyra of having left him as well, as he saw her as a big sister, and he demands to know why she left his life.

"Shortly thereafter, Tom, a wealthy restaurateur, with real life references to Terence Conran, appears unheralded and for no apparent reason. Kyra's less-than-glamorous lifestyle leads him to poke fun at her to the point of insult, accusing her of self-punishment. After Kyra cooks a spaghetti dinner (which the actress cooks on stage), the talk turns to their relationship, and it becomes clear that their chances to be rekindled rest on whether one of them can change preconceived notions of the other. A new production directed by Stephen Daldry and starring Carey Mulligan, Bill Nighy — reprising the part he'd performed in 1997 — and Matthew Beard opened at the Wyndham's Theatre in June 2014. The play was broadcast live (or near-live) to cinema audiences via NT Live. " (wikipedia)

Two thumbs up from this audience - lots of funny lines and good "jokes" while still delving into the essence of the characters and their willingness/unwillingness to make comprises in order to establish a renewal of, and long term committed, relationship. They both seem to desire the love, but have difficulty making progress towards it, being so bristly and righteous with each other.  The excellent dialogue- humorous and touching at turns - was worth a close listen.  

the show was broadcast in the Historic Asolo Theater- and had a 20 minute intermission (interval in Brit speak- LOL) just like at the theater- I would have preferred to have had the thing run straight through and since this was a rebroadcast not LIVE (despite the name of the feature) they could have eliminated or shortened this IMHO...

David Hare the playwright was interviewed during the "interval" -

the set - Kyra's flat in a dreary housing project called Canon House-

Tom putting on his coat to stay warm in the unheated flat - the heater lights up but doesn't really work (as each character comments upon it during the play.)

Kyra-

so- don't know if you will ever get a chance to see this play anywhere but if you do see it advertised - definitely worth seeking out a seat...

This excellent NYT review (by Ben Brantley) of the production summarizes the dynamics perfectly and is entitled- 

Volatile Chemistry in an Underheated Flat

"When acting is this focused, your own vision seems to improve miraculously. Watching Carey Mulligan and Bill Nighy in Stephen Daldry’s laser-sharp new production of David Hare’s “Skylight,” at Wyndham’s Theater here, you may feel you’ve been endowed with superhuman insight.

It’s as if you had been allowed omniscient access to the thoughts behind the words and actions of the former lovers portrayed by Ms. Mulligan and Mr. Nighy — and the emotions behind the thoughts, and the history behind the emotions. You may even wind up thinking that you know these characters better than they know themselves, which is fair, or better than the stars playing them, which is not.

For what occurs with such seeming spontaneity onstage has to have been achieved with extraordinary care and full consciousness of the many levels, personal and political, on which this 1995 drama operates. “Skylight” is partly about our desire for ideal balance in our lives. Human beings being human beings, that’s impossible. But occasionally, just occasionally, it occurs in art.

In program notes, Mr. Hare writes that “Skylight” was his first play to be set entirely in a single room. But with “Skylight,” he demonstrates that close quarters don’t pre-empt expansive views. In measuring the distance that separates two people caught in an eternity of a single night, he also examines a dangerous gap that yawned at the center of British society when Mr. Hare wrote this play.

Of course, that’s essentially the same gap that the eminent Victorian Benjamin Disraeli was talking about when he wrote that his country was made up of the affluent and the needy. And few people in the United States are pretending that the same gap doesn’t loom just as large today.

In “Skylight,” the geography of these disparate nations is mapped most articulately by Kyra Hollis (Ms. Mulligan), a 30-ish urban schoolteacher, and the much older Tom Sergeant (Mr. Nighy), a self-made restaurant entrepreneur. Though they were lovers for six years, they haven’t seen each other in three, not since Tom’s wife found out about their relationship.

Now Kyra and Tom are reunited, in deep winter in her shabby and underheated London flat. Their sometimes anguished, sometimes heart-shatteringly funny, weighing of their inner and outer worlds translates into two impeccably chiseled hours onstage and a lifetime of pain and longing.  These two redefine the laws not just of chemistry but also of physics, with each coming across as both immovable object and irresistible force. I was always aware of how ineffably, achingly attracted each was to the other, and of the diametrically opposed ways in which that attraction became flesh.

Tom’s wife died the previous year. But he has been mourning the loss of Kyra, who was secretly his mistress while working for the couple’s restaurant business, for much longer. Tom has come to tell her that he wants her back.  The tidal pull of that wanting would seem destined to overwhelm anyone. But this Kyra is a formidably centered presence, the still counterpoint to Tom’s charming, full-court-press animation.  And what shades Ms. Mulligan, who at 29 bids fair to become the great British stage actress of her generation, finds in stillness. Sacrificing creature comforts to a life of social selflessness doesn’t come altogether naturally to Kyra, who (compared with the once “bog poor” Tom) grew up in relative affluence.  Mr. Hare wants us to know that morality is never purely instinctive but a conscious choice, an act of will. And Ms. Mulligan makes us privy to every atom of strain that Kyra feels in making that choice. She responds to the tug of Tom’s charm. How could she not, as Mr. Nighy plays him? On some level, we want her to give in, so that whenever she shows signs of doing so, we melt.

The friction and the possibilities of fusion between Kyra and Tom — who must be together and cannot be together — make “Skylight” one of the most intelligently sentimental love stories of our time. Detailed arguments about the sin and the necessity of capitalism are as organic to this play as lines that might have come from a latter-day version of “Casablanca.” (There’s even a variation on “We’ll always have Paris.”)  We know which side of the divide Mr. Hare comes down on. But it is to his credit, and to that of this nigh perfect production, that as long as we’re watching “Skylight,” our sympathies are always torturously in flux. Be ready to cry. The thinking can happen later."

Photo from the NYT review- 

Phil and I disagreed about the "post evening future for Tom and Kyra with each of us envisioning "the ending" differently... and you will just have to seek it out to find out how you would predict the outcome for these two strong people.....