So I started typing in all the writing I did on the trip out East and then I had this big surge of self-doubt worried about whether the story was interesting, new, etc... What would it offer that other stories hadn't offered before. I go through this periodically when I write and watch. But there is nothing new under the sun, and the challenge is to find a way to re-tell stories to make them meaningful today. Romeo and Juliet wasn't new and it has since been re-told (West Side Story, etc...). I shall keep plugging away and keep asking myself what I need to do to make the story relevant and valuable today.
I had an interesting conversation about From Something with my older brother while in Minnesota. He had seen the show in Fort McMurray. He asked how it was going. I replied that the reviews were middling and disappointing. He asked, "Is that why you wrote it?". I said, no, but we weren't in the program and the audiences, though positive, were small. He asked, "Is that why you wrote it?". I said, "No, but it was exhausting and we weren't likely to make a lot of money". He asked, "Is that why you wrote it?". I said, "No." I realized that the reasons I wrote it and produced it were achieved. For every whiny thing I said about it, he countered with "Is that why you wrote it?" And it made me think about why I had written it. It wasn't about critical acclaim, or money, but about writing a better play and telling that story. I still have re-writes to do but I know much better how to do them so that was achieved, and the audience feedback about the relevance of the story was confirming of why I was telling the story. Sure all those other things are really nice and would make me feel better about it, but I know the play needs work, so I cannot pretend that it doesn't and good reviews might have made me do that. Also, we made some money and that is frosting on the cake. We are not in the same position as others who rely on their Fringe intake to cushion the rest of the year.
No comments:
Post a Comment