Time: Thu, 03-Feb-2000 03:33:29 GMT     IP: 128.255.107.253

I intended to post a substantive review, but it's far too late in 
the week and Chris's piece completely knocked everything else out 
of my head. Well, not everything.  I can still recite the state 
capitals. 

Um.

So how are you guys?

Time: Thu, 03-Feb-2000 13:53:46 GMT     IP: 128.255.56.5

:I intended to post a substantive review, but it's far too late in 
:
the week and Chris's piece completely knocked everything else out 
:
of my head. Well, not everything.  I can still recite the state 
:
capitals. 
:

:
Um.
:

:
So how are you guys?
                                                                                  If everything was knocked out of your head,
I feel obligated to remind you of the International Radio Code alphabet: Alpha, Bravo, Charlie,
Delta, Echo, Foxtrot, Golf, Hotel, India, Juliet, Kilo, Lima, Mike, November, Oscar, Papa,
Quebec, Romeo, Sierra, Tango, Uniform, Victor, Whisky, X-ray, Yankee, Zulu.   Now if you
forget, you can come back here and find it.

Time: Sat, 05-Feb-2000 06:50:35 GMT     IP: 152.163.204.181

Okay.  The song with the guitars and amps and a real microphone 
was VERY VERY EXREMELY COOL.  :-)  Okay.  So...what were you 
saying?  Arlen, I love your music and I'd also love to know what 
you were singing about.  Okay?

PS - My friend says "Thanks for the dancin

Time: Sat, 05-Feb-2000 21:15:20 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.162

So it seems to me Mr. Jacko deserves an apology for getting his 
piece cut off like that. Doing two pieces strung together into 
one is far from an uncommon practice. Isn't it, Dan? People do 
it all the time. Don't they, Dan? Just because this one was, um, 
a bit less than flawlessly executed don't make it right fer him 
to get booted. I don't think he'd even broken the 5 minute rule 
yet. Perhaps the boardies assumed (as did I) that that end 
speech was not in the script and he was just trying to squeeze 
it in on the spot. But having seen the light booth copy of his 
script, my own eyeballs have showed me it were supposed to go 
like that. Seems to me if you not breaking any of the rules, you 
should gets to finish your piece, no matter how jumbled and 
disorganized it may be. 

As for the rest of the show, I enjoyed it. I don't know that it 
was an exceptional show, but I enjoyed it. The crowd was great: 
they were just itching to have a good time. They laughed when 
they could, and tried to even if a piece was stinkin' it up. And 
that's what I wanted to say. Pee.

Jamal  

Time: Sat, 05-Feb-2000 21:58:59 GMT     IP: 205.160.208.200

i agree that jacko may have deserved a chance to finish what he 
had to say....in fact i know that that part was in his script, 
and perhaps having two pieces in the same script doesn't make it 
one script, but still....i don't think its never been done before.

also, way to go arlen, jamal and the hansen/campbell dance 
squad.  i hurt myself laughing at you guys hurting yourselves.

also, i'd like to point out something.....as if the fact that 
there are an immense number of no shame writers willing to submit 
pieces wasn't obvious enough....check this shit out.

last night there were many regular writers out of commission (for 
whatever reason) including myself, stubble, dan brooks, willie 
barbour, james erwin, and adam hannakuh.  even though this was 
the case...i know of atleast two people who still had scripts 
rejected.

and there was still plenty of new material by the Kant girl, the 
girl who wrote the monologue that Aprille read, and kevin wall 
(kudos kevin.....way to go rookie, i laughed hard.)

i find that amazing.  we're growing by the week.

also...one other thing

WELCOME HOME GEORGE!!!!!! (keep coming back)

i have not a more thing to say.


eloquently,

-cassady

Time: Sat, 05-Feb-2000 23:24:33 GMT     IP: 205.188.198.22


For those who don't know what Arlen and Jamal were sining about, as one of the dancers I feel it
is my responsibility to elucidate. So, the song was about the latest dance craze to sweep the
nation, from California to the Oregon Trail. It was called the Jiggy Jenga (or Janga, I'm not sure
of the spelling.) For those who want to hear the words, don't fret, an album is in the works, and I
think that may be included. Minus my dancing. But not Neil's.

Time: Sat, 05-Feb-2000 23:47:41 GMT     IP: 24.9.192.139

Not to play devil's advocate but I do see why Dan cut off the 
piece (by Jacko), to a degree...  I personally didn't realize 
that the end bit was scripted, but when you take into account 
that he had been fiddle with the projector for over a minute at 
least, did his actually "sketch" and then proceded with the end 
bit, it did seem (to those who didn't know) that he was 
proceeding with an entirely different piece.  Given that frame of 
mind I can understand why Dan cut him short.
    Also I think you have to take into account what he was 
doing.  It was more of a solicitation for a way to find oodles of 
people to "do it" with via the manificant world wide web.  Not 
that I'm against that... If people dig that sorta thing, then I 
say do it till it's raw BUT I think Jacko could have handled it a 
little more tactfully.  Perhaps, by making a short mention and 
asking all who were interested to meet him in the lobby afterward 
to pick up flyers.  That would have dramatically decreased the 
tension of the situation.  I respect his desire to get the word 
out, but he could have done it a little differently.  Like they 
say "Hindsight is 20/20"

Aside all that, I think the show was pretty good!  Hopefully the 
order will be up soon so we can do some reviewing...

Time: Sun, 06-Feb-2000 00:07:06 GMT     IP: 152.163.204.206

I don't think Jacko ought to have "handled it a little more 
tactfully" . . . I thought that the passing out of fliers to the 
audience was pretty funny.  I suspect that it was not in fact a 
solicitation, but just a joke, especially considering that the 
address given on the fliers does not exist.

Merideth

Time: Sun, 06-Feb-2000 06:52:26 GMT     IP: 152.163.206.199

Nice to know I was missed Friday.

About that Jacko thing...it's ok to string two pieces together, 
but he was fucking with Kyle's piece and the "second piece" 
wasn't funny, or interesting, at least to me.

Overall was a good night. I won't expound on that statement, 
because I'm tired and I don;t want to. So there.

me

Time: Sun, 06-Feb-2000 08:49:18 GMT     IP: 128.255.111.4

:Nice to know I was missed Friday.

What's Friday?

:About that Jacko thing...it's ok to string two pieces together, 
:but he was fucking with Kyle's piece and the "second piece" 
:wasn't funny, or interesting, at least to me.

   I admit this was the situation as it seemed to me at the time 
and that I was among those encouraging Kyle just to start his 
thing.  However, as it was, in fact, in the script, it was more 
Kyle accidentally fucking with the "second (half of what was, in 
my, Mike Rothschild's, opinion, the world's greatest and most 
funny) piece" and less anything you've written.
   As for it not being "funny, or interesting, at least to me (, 
Mike Rothschild, who plays one rock ass wurlitzer)" I would like 
it if you would now reevaluate the logic of that, then consider 
any Mike Rothschild affecting repurcussions that might come 
flying out of that sort of logic like a bat out of Meatloaf.
   I, for one, apologize for being a part of the hissing crowd, 
who wanted nothing more than for him to get off of the stage and I 
apologize for crowning Dan as my Lord and Savior when he piped up.
    I don't have a more thing to say.

           Your lover,
                   Arlen

Time: Sun, 06-Feb-2000 08:56:06 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.162

About that Jacko thing...it's ok to string two pieces together, 
:
but he was fucking with Kyle's piece and the "second piece" 
:
wasn't funny, or interesting, at least to me.

No no no! He wasn't fucking with Kyle's piece! If Jacko's piece 
wasn't over, then technically Kyle was fucking with Jacko's. And 
whether or not you found the piece funny and/or interesting is of 
zero importance in regards to whether or not it should have been 
allowed to be finished. Last I checked, pieces didn't have to get 
your seal of approval in order to be performed. (And I only just 
checked 5 minutes ago so I imagine that's still accurate.) Nya! 
Nya nya nyhar!!

Will someone please post a message about something else now? 
Please? 

Time: Sun, 06-Feb-2000 08:56:56 GMT     IP: 128.255.111.4

   I closed with the same "more thing to say" used a few posts 
back by Cassady.  I hadn't read Mike's post when I posted, was in 
fact quoting "Fose Fatford vs. a Dead Bee, by Brad Smith"  
   I just think that's funny, is all...

   Get it?

             Arlen

Time: Sun, 06-Feb-2000 09:02:16 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.162

Hi, Alren. We just wrote Roths the same message at the same time 
without knowing it. That's amazing. You got yours posted 1st, 
though, so now mine looks dumb. Dumb GREAT that, is! 

Psych!

Puh-sych!

Time: Sun, 06-Feb-2000 19:53:45 GMT     IP: 205.160.208.52

here come my 2 cents as quickly as possible-
we've got quite the false dichotomy as to whether it was kyle or 
Jacko at fault for what happened.

Jacko- a guy who's new to the whole no shame forum, made two 
mistakes, assuming his technical equipment would work, and not 
making it clear that his piece was continuing after his actors 
left the stage.  apparently he just didnt know any better.

Kyle- through no fault of his own assumed that the piece was over 
and entered the stage expecting to start his own piece, could 
have been a tad bit nicer about lobbying for the lights to come 
down on Jacko to shut him up and get him out of there.

Dan- realizing the tension that erupted to volcanic proportions 
out of no where, was forced to make a decision and i, like Arlen 
and others, felt it was the right one at the time.  i dont think 
it's really fair to point the giant foam hypocritical finger at 
Dan for disallowing two pieces in one, as most of the audience 
was getting uncomfortable with the situation.  not that they 
werent uncomfortable when he was out in the hallway getting 
murdered by Chris Stangl, but this was a different kind of 
uncomfortable.

so, everybody happy, lets all get together and have a big 
shameless orgy before next weeks show.

piece out.

stubbelufugus

Time: Sun, 06-Feb-2000 19:56:28 GMT     IP: 205.160.208.52

and please stop pooping all over my face.

love,

anonymous.

Time: Sun, 06-Feb-2000 20:50:48 GMT     IP: 209.253.147.27

:Jacko
:
:Will someone please post a message about something else now?
:Please? 

No, because I donna wan't ta miss out on all of this fun.  
Jacko!  Kyle!  Dan!  and Jacko!
You know, jacko was just a patsy, a-sittin away in the book 
depository while kyle was on the grassawy knoll.  And then dan 
kill-led jacko in prison and jackie-o (kinda like jacko) is sad.

And even though neither Jacko nor Kyle were really at fault for 
this little faux paus, at least Jacko's thingy was intesting and 
not boring.  At the VERY least, any performance should be that, 
if not good or better or oo-y goo-y great.  Kyle should take 
notes.

isanybodygoingtoevenattempttoreadasentenceifidontputspacesinit?
al

Time: Sun, 06-Feb-2000 23:51:30 GMT     IP: 205.188.198.51

Ooh!!!! Too much tension on the boardroom for me. So, I'm going to attempt to alleviate some of
it by quoting random movies. Some of these lines only certain people will get, or nobody at all,
but I guess I just don't care.
"That was gooooood! I belieeeeved you!"
"Over there. On my hope chest."
"Gotta move all your accounts there."
"I'm Luigi Mario. You got a problem with that!"
"I am Eskimo. There is nothing here."
"Ouch! What do you do?"
"I want you to meet my mother."
"Cut it out, Raph!"
"I wish I could've seen that."
"You're insane... But you might also be brilliant." 
"Not me. Not me."
"You guys just don't get it in here. Hoo-hoo!"
"Gerald. Gerry. Ger. Guh."
etc.

Time: Mon, 07-Feb-2000 03:18:34 GMT     IP: 24.6.203.121

:"That was gooooood! I belieeeeved you!"
:"Over there. On my hope chest."
:"Gotta move all your accounts there."
[...]
:etc.

Wow.  If that were a quiz, I would have failed miserably.  Though 
not 100%.

I was really pleased with how responsive the audience was with 
Al's piece (considring how much was required of them with the cue 
cards an' all).  However, I felt like the very ending missed some 
of the desired badum-TSCCH! zing.  I suspect a faster blackout 
would have achieved that.  I can't remember if one was called for 
in the stage directions, but since the light booth op rarely has 
time to read the pieces ahead of time, giant, bold, highlighted 
cues along those lines can often give an ending the right punch.

-Adam

Time: Mon, 07-Feb-2000 16:43:07 GMT     IP: 209.56.125.80

Sorry for the unnecessary delay.  Not that it, apparently, 
stopped anyone from commenting...

1)  Hallelujah by George Anastasiou
2)  Nothing to It by Christopher Okiishi
3)  The Jiggy Jenga by Arlen and Jamal 
4)  The Morse Code Bit by Nick Clark
5)  Is This Piece Inappropriate for Something Called No Shame by 
Julia Wilder
6)  Girl Trouble bu Kevin Wall
7)  Why I Hate the French by Aprille Clarke
8)  Chicken Poems by Merideth Nepstad
9)  The Stench of Orphans by Neil "Balls" Campbell
10) It's That Lost Dukes of Hazard Episode by the most excellent 
Jacko
11) My Response to the One Jack-Ass Who Said I Was Self-Absorbed 
by Kyle Lange
12) I'm about to plagiarize a title, and no one will be able to 
tell or Crap, did I write that into my title, or did I just 
think it? or The Grapes of Wrath by Al Sawyer with a few jokes 
by Cody J. Doran
13) I Hope This Doesn't Take 5 Minutes by Jamal River
14) Volkswagen Beetle Buggery by Kehry Anson Lane
15) A Midsummer Night's Vagina by Chris Stangl

Time: Mon, 07-Feb-2000 17:57:33 GMT     IP: 128.255.106.226

Indeed you're right, Mr. J-Mall. However, I hadn't read his light 
booth copy, and was therefore operating on the following:
A) The lights had gone down and come up, and everybody had 
clapped, and there was Kyle onstage. I thought his (first) piece 
was over, and I immediately thought about the five angry writers I 
turned away at the beginning of the night.
B) He was selling something. This used to be an official No Shame 
prohibition; Jacko had no way of knowing this and certainly can't 
be faulted, but there was the knee-jerk reaction for me.
C) He was way over his five minutes.
I talked to him about it after the show, and he explained what was 
going on and I apologized. I don't think he's upset, and at this 
point I would venture to say that all is well.

:So it seems to me Mr. Jacko deserves an apology for getting his 
:piece cut off like that. Doing two pieces strung together into 
:one is far from an uncommon practice. Isn't it, Dan? People do 
:it all the time. Don't they, Dan? Just because this one was, um, 
:a bit less than flawlessly executed don't make it right fer him 
:to get booted. I don't think he'd even broken the 5 minute rule 
:yet. Perhaps the boardies assumed (as did I) that that end 
:speech was not in the script and he was just trying to squeeze 
:it in on the spot. But having seen the light booth copy of his 
:script, my own eyeballs have showed me it were supposed to go 
:like that. Seems to me if you not breaking any of the rules, you 
:should gets to finish your piece, no matter how jumbled and 
:disorganized it may be. 

Time: Mon, 07-Feb-2000 20:27:26 GMT     IP: 209.56.125.80

It has come to my attention that there is an excellent and 
potentially profitable opportunity available to some 
enterprising young director.  My friend Chad had been contracted 
to direct the spring musical at Regina (the local Catholic 
school) but got a job in Chicago and cannot do it.  Hence, it is 
up for grabs.  

The musical is called "Once on This Island"--a fable of sorts 
about race and economic relations on a ficitonal Bahama-like 
island, told through the eyes of a naive young girl and her 
search for love.  Written by the same team that did "Ragtime", 
this was up for seven Tonys including Best Musical in 1993.  
It's a terrific, and mercifully short show.  

The best part about this job is that, unlike most everything 
else in town, IT PAYS.  Pretty big bucks, too.  Like, over 
$1000--plus, you get the experience, and a note on your resume.  
The worst part is that you have to work with teenagers.  I would 
be available to get you started, and help with auditions and the 
occasional musical direction, but cannot commit to the whole 
show.  Thus, in the words of Joni "I'm not Greg" Mitchell, IT'S 
DOWN TO YOU!

E-mail me your interest.  This could be really fun.  

Time: Wed, 09-Feb-2000 01:11:53 GMT     IP: 152.163.206.188

It's obvious certain opinions are more respected on this board 
than others.

So I'll just shut up now.

me

Time: Wed, 09-Feb-2000 01:53:52 GMT     IP: 129.255.164.120

:It's obvious certain opinions are more respected on this board 
:
than others.
:

:
So I'll just shut up now.
:

:
me


Now, that would be an un-necessary loss!  

Don't shut up, Mike.  Your opinions are valuable.

A Board Room without Mike Rothschild is like a day without lunch 
time, a winter without snow days, a lollipop without the chewy 
chocolate center.  Don't deprive us, Mike.  Don't anyone deprive 
us.  Feed.  Feed.  Fertilize.  Lather.  Rinse.  Repeat.

Time: Wed, 09-Feb-2000 05:22:21 GMT     IP: 205.188.199.189

Hey, does anyone remember back in the good old days, when there was a lot less fighting about
little details in the show on the boardroom, and about five or six piece-by-piece reviews of the
show? I'm not one to start things, I'm just making a suggestion here. All in favor? ... All in
Spanish? 

Time: Wed, 09-Feb-2000 05:56:19 GMT     IP: 152.163.206.209

Si, me gustan mucho los...reviews...y no me gustan el...fighting.

yes, I know my Spanish es muy malo.

Thanks to whomever wrote that nice email. I guess I just wasn't 
feeling the love at that point. 

besame mucho

mike

Time: Wed, 09-Feb-2000 15:44:54 GMT     IP: 128.255.56.5

1)  Hallelujah by George Anastasiou
Hallelujah for this piece.  It was a hootenanny and a half for sure.  The line "Please quit pooping
on my face" was divinely inspired, I'm certain.
2)  Nothing to It by Christopher Okiishi
I liked this a lot, though not as much as I usually like Mr. Okiishi's pieces.  But it got Adam
Burton on stage and that is always commendable.
3)  The Jiggy Jenga by Arlen and Jamal 
I could not make out the words, but the singing sounded good and the song was cool and Mark
and Balls dancing was where I laughed so hard I needed to see an ear nose and throat specialist to
fix the laughter-damage.  Does NS carry insurance for this?
4)  The Morse Code Bit by Nick Clark
Should have been about 3x as long.  It just seemed like a gimmick at this length.  I hope I helped
people learn something about morse code.
5)  Is This Piece Inappropriate for Something Called No Shame by 
It was good, but having Aprille read your monologue was a little off-putting.  I guess hence the
title.
Julia Wilder
:
6)  Girl Trouble bu Kevin Wall
Although this was really funny and interesting, I know Kevin Wall just well enough to know that
he could do something much cooler for his NS premiere than to do standup, which is, in my
opinion a hackneyed and dead form of comedy.
7)  Why I Hate the French by Aprille Clarke
Funny.  Much shorter than most of her stuff and in a very different style.
8)  Chicken Poems by Merideth "Pants" Nepstad
Hooray for this stuff, whatever it is.  Keep coming back, Pants.
9)  The Stench of Orphans by Neil "Balls" Campbell
Again, strangely acharacteristic, yet very fun and funny.  Ya Balls.
10) It's That Lost Dukes of Hazard Episode by the most excellent 
:
Jacko
It was okay.  I laughed.  I liked that id didn't make sense and was a wierd amalgam of pop culture
images.  Everything else I would like to say has already been said.
11) My Response to the One Jack-Ass Who Said I Was Self-Absorbed 
Kyle, you are a funny man.  This piece was also funny.  Not as funny asa it maybe could have
been, but good.
by Kyle Lange
:
12) I'm about to plagiarize a title, and no one will be able to 
:
tell or Crap, did I write that into my title, or did I just 
:
think it? or The Grapes of Wrath by Al Sawyer with a few jokes 
:
by Cody J. Doran
I likified this to the max, yo.  I thought the twisted TV audience effect was just as disturbing and
offputting as it needed to be.
13) I Hope This Doesn't Take 5 Minutes by Jamal River
I have a great affinity for pieces which contain nothing at all, yet manage to leave the audience
with an odd feeling of smug satisfaction.  This was such a piece.
14) Volkswagen Beetle Buggery by Kehry Anson Lane
Go KALane!  Again, the mocking the parents thing is golden.  Again the mime is supoib.
15) A Midsummer Night's Vagina by Chris Stangl
This was very informative.  I'm glad I won't be the only one doing educational pieces this
semester.  The tampon was one of the best prop gags of forever.

Time: Thu, 10-Feb-2000 03:56:21 GMT     IP: 152.163.195.196


1)  Hallelujah by George Anastasiou

This was so funny, and the delivery was awesome.  The hallelujahs 
at the beginning were the best part.  I liked everything about 
this piece until the end, which I thought was kind of cheap.  

2)  Nothing to It by Christopher Okiishi

Though this piece got a little repetitive in a couple places, I 
rather liked it.  It was neither as funny nor as good-besides-
being-funny as most other Okiishi pieces I've seen.

3)  The Jiggy Jenga by Arlen and Jamal 

I've liked songs by Arlen and I've liked songs by Jamal, but I 
don't think I've ever heard a song by ArlenandJamal before, so I 
was delighted.  Unfortunately I couldn't hear a word of it.  
Making up for this disappointment was the dancing, especially 
Mark's, and especially the end where Neil rode him.

4)  The Morse Code Bit by Nick Clark

- .... .. ...   .-- .- ...   .-   -. .. ..-. - -.--   .. -.. . .- 
.-.-.-   .- -. -..   .. -   .... .- -..   .- .-. .-.. . -.   .. 
-.   .. - --..--   .- -. -..   .... .   .. ...   --- -. .   ... . 
-..- -.--   -... .- ... - .- .-. -..   .-- .... . -.   .... .   
-... . . .--. ... .-.-.- 

5)  Is This Piece Inappropriate for Something Called No Shame by 
Julia Wilder

I liked this, and I like seeing stuff that is more serious than 
the typical NS fare.  I don't mind that Aprille did it, if the 
alternative was not hearing it at all, but, like Nick, I would 
certainly prefer seeing the author perform her own work.  

6)  Girl Trouble by Kevin Wall

I don't remember much of this, since by this time I was really 
nervous about my piece coming up.  I do remember laughing pretty 
hard more than once.

7)  Why I Hate the French by Aprille Clarke

This was clever and funny and I enjoyed it even through my 
paralyzing fear resulting from being next.  My favorite thing 
about this was the title; not because the rest of it wasn't good, 
but because I keep a list of reasons to hate the French.

8)  Chicken Poems by Merideth Nepstad

I did this.  I don't like the third part at all, and it would 
have been replaced entirely if I'd had more time, but I finished 
poems one and two at about 10 pm Friday night.  The third one 
came first, was written to stand alone, and was meant to be read, 
not heard.  I'm writing a new third chicken poem, and I'll 
include it when I send this piece to the script library.

Oh, and thanks to whoever proclaimed my pants to be the best 
pants ever.

9)  The Stench of Orphans by Neil "Balls" Campbell

This was weird and cool, and I like the unnatural way the 
dialogue was written.

10) It's That Lost Dukes of Hazard Episode by the most excellent 
Jacko

I didn't like the Dukes of Hazard thing at all.  The opaque 
projector thing didn't seem to be very well thought out, and I 
can't imagine it would have worked very well if it had worked at 
all, since it would have required frequent changes of images, I 
assume by Jacko, which would have interrupted the dialogue even 
more than holding up the images did.  Besides this problem, I 
couldn't tell what was going on, and not in a good way.  Making 
no sense can be good, but this wasn't.

The second thing with the flyers was not bad, even enjoyable, 
though I seem to be the only one who thought that this was pretty 
funny.  The idea of going out into the audience with flyers was 
different and nifty.  I liked the picture of the man cuddling 
with a manatee, or whatever that sea mammal was.


11) My Response to the One Jack-Ass Who Said I Was Self-Absorbed 
by Kyle Lange

This was pretty funny.  The best part was Kyle hitting on the 
chick in the front row.

12) I'm about to plagiarize a title, and no one will be able to 
tell or Crap, did I write that into my title, or did I just 
think it? or The Grapes of Wrath by Al Sawyer with a few jokes 
by Cody J. Doran

Two things about this, I remember, were very nice: 1. The title 
and 2. The audience instruction cards.  I seem to think that 
there were numerous lines that were rather funny, also, but I 
don't remember.

13) I Hope This Doesn't Take 5 Minutes by Jamal River

Hooray for gratuitous nudity!  This was such a good idea, and the 
timer was a nice touch.  I'm not sure why such a large proportion 
of butt-revealers felt compelled to jump up and down with their 
asses exposed, though.  Adam Hahn suggested that I ought to 
reveal my own butt, but I'm afraid that by the time I'd peeled 
those vinyl pants off of it, time would have expired.  Also, much 
the same way that those who see the face of God go mad, so do 
they who lay eyes upon my perfect ass without first being 
trained, practiced, and stretched.

14) Volkswagen Beetle Buggery by Kehry Anson Lane

The intro to this was hysterical.  The rest was very well done 
mime.  The routine itself seemed pretty run-of-the-mill, though, 
so it wasn't as enjoyable as the previous week's mime, which was 
more odd.

15) A Midsummer Night's Vagina by Chris Stangl

I've seen almost all of his pieces since fall semester began, and 
Stangl has yet to disappoint me.  This one, too, was very good, 
but for the first time in a while, his wasn't my first or second 
favorite piece of the evening.  But that's OK, since the 
overwhelming joy that last week's piece, No Shame, brought me 
will last for months to come.  I still laugh.


-Merideth

Time: Thu, 10-Feb-2000 07:01:21 GMT     IP: 205.188.193.162


I'm new to the Iowa City area, and so I don't know where good 
things are.  I visited this porn store the other day--it's about 
a block east of the Perkins by exit 242--and was rather 
disappointed.  Are there any other pornography trafficking 
establishments around, or am I going to have to obtain my adult 
necessities at home in Des Moines?  Surely someone among the No 
Shame regulars knows where the porno is.  I can't exactly ask my 
RA..

Merideth

Time: Thu, 10-Feb-2000 22:39:48 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.89

:Are there any other pornography trafficking establishments

      May I heartily recommend the Adult Pleasure Palace, located 
at 315 Kirkwood Avenue for all your 
video/magazine/sextoy/masturbating-in-smelly-dirty-booth needs.  
The counters are frequently disinfected and you can smoke if you 
got 'em.
      Should you visit the store between 12am and 8am (not on No 
Shame nights, natch!) you will be assisted by a genuine No Shame 
Regular Performer!: either Chris Stangl (Tuesdays, Thursdays, 
Sundays) or Arlen "I Love 'Barely Legal'" Lawson (Mon, Wed, Sat. 
nights!)

:at home in Des Moines?

      I think the Adult Emporium has the widest selection in the 
City of Bridges...  but no need to venture clear to our state's 
fair capitol city!  You can buy all the eskimo-and-beaver-shaped 
vibrators you need RIGHT HERE, and from people you KNOW!  The 
burning humiliation!
                      -Chris Behind the Green Stangl

        PS- Do not patronize the Adult Marketplace.  The store is 
dirty, the selection is hideous and you'll put me out of work. 
They do have the Rubber Fist, though.  We don't have the Rubber 
Fist.

Time: Fri, 11-Feb-2000 01:24:29 GMT     IP: 205.188.193.176


:      May I heartily recommend the Adult Pleasure Palace. . . 

Do you know if you carry The XXX-Files?



:      I think the Adult Emporium . . . 
 
Mmmmm. . . .  dear, sweet adult emporium

:
        PS- Do not patronize the Adult Marketplace.  The store is 
:
dirty, the selection is hideous and you'll put me out of work. 
:
They do have the Rubber Fist, though.  We don't have the Rubber 
:
Fist.
:

Yes, the Adult Marketplace was very very bad, and I would not buy 
anything from there ever, unless I were unable to find leather 
roses anywhere else.  I think black leather roses with barbed 
wire stems are neat.  

Thank you, Chris.  I knew you perverts would come through.

Merideth

Time: Fri, 11-Feb-2000 04:57:27 GMT     IP: 209.253.130.164

Al says:
I'm going to a review now.  But it's late in the week and I'm 
tired, so this one will be reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeealy  
Short.  Okay, so, take one of the following terms and reasons 
(which are listed relative to one another, i.e., #1 goes with the 
other #1) and apply it to your piece.  Be honest.  One per 
customer.  that's all.

My piece was:
1. It was okay.
2. It was great.
3. It was awful.
4. It was awfully great.
5. It was greatly awful.
6. I love you, Al.
7. It was mediocre.
8. It sucked.
9. If I had my druthers (despite the fact that I have no idea 
what a druther is), I would devote my life to you, Al, O lovely 
one.
10. I didn't do anything this week, Al, but you sure are a neat 
guy.

Because:
1. I didn't feel like writing anything REALLY good.
2. I felt like writing something really good.
3. I suck.
4. I am a good writer.
5. I really suck.
6. Because you are great, Al.
7. I am a mediocre and boring person and nobody likes me.
8. I really suck real bad.
9. So, what's a druther?  And I love you, Al.
10. I really do think that Al is neat.

krodasignalelyk!!!!!!!!!!!
Al, the one who loves you.

Time: Fri, 11-Feb-2000 16:49:32 GMT     IP: 128.255.107.122

In the words of The Dude:

"Yeah, well, I still jerk off manually".

Firebugs has photo call tonight, so neither I nor Dan nor Aaron 
will be there. For shaaaaaaame.

me

Time: Sat, 12-Feb-2000 10:39:33 GMT     IP: 128.255.111.17

   Bad.  Horribly bad.  What the hell?  Why was it so very bad?  
I don't know, but I'm going to try to pick through it, here.
   Right from the start, the house was dead.  It should have been 
a million times fun to see Chris Stangl doing the announcements 
but, I'm afraid, it was not fun ...or at least it was not fun for 
me.  Maybe it would have or could have been more fun if the 
audience were a bit warmer.
   Mayhap there were reasons why the house was less than 
receptive.  First, there were far too few people in tonight's 
crowd.  I noticed this as early as the lobby.  Maybe several 
people had gone off to remote and romantic parts of the world for 
the Valentine's Weekend "celebration."  Maybe they felt they had 
"better" things "to" do.  Reason, shmeason.  The result was that, 
with far fewer people, the collective hum of the crowd dwindled 
to scarcely anything at all and, as anybody who has ever been a 
part of an audience can tell you, the quieter it is, the more 
self-conscious you become about making any noise at all(It's why 
the laugh track was invented.)  And then The Vicious Cycle came 
of it.
   The second reason for the crowd's lack of enthusiasm was, I'm 
afraid to say, Kyle Lange.  God damn it, Kyle, when you read the 
order, work the fucking crowd, don't take time between titles to 
banter with the writers, or at least not at the cost of slowing 
your pace, and keep the energy up.  That's the order you're 
reading, by gum.  The Order.  Its purpose isn't to let the 
writers know what number their skit comes up (They already know) 
nor the audience (They probably don't care.)  You're the 
motherfucking warm-up comedian and the half-assed, vulgar, 
Tourettes Family sitcom that is No Shame is dependent on you 
getting the studio audience excited.  So excite me, already.
   No offense.
   Then, there was the problem of the houselights being up at all 
times.  No Shame isn't a coffee house.  Now, I assume it was a 
mistake, or something beyond control, and that I do not need to 
emphasize how important taking the lights down are, and not just 
for the punctuating effect of a blackout at the beginning and end 
of a skit.  When you watch a movie on the television, at home, 
with the lights on, while you talk with your 
roommates/family/neighbours you've invited over, it will never be 
as powerful/moving/funny as it would be if the movie were the 
center of your universe as it is at the theatre.  The effect of 
the houselights being on was the same, to a different extent.  
There was nothing magic about the stage area, nothing that 
separated it from the audience.   
   Well, now I've given out some unsolicited and probably either 
very boring or very wrong conclusions I've spent a while 
considering.  While it may have bugged you, it interests me and I 
would like to see as many opinions as possible about why the show 
was horrible 
   I mean, some of the skits were pretty funny.  Particularly 
Neil's, Jamal's, and Kyle's(though Neil's presence in Kyle's 
monologue may have been what made it worthwhile.)  My favorite of 
the night was the Adam Hahn thing.  Not the monologue he did and 
which I don't remember.  The "Adam Hahn, total fag" thing.
   An honorable mention goes to the Pokemon fella' who showed his 
butt last week.  He was pretty funny.
   As for Al Angel's song, you couldn't hear the words anymore 
than you could hear the words to Jiggy Jenga last week, so it was 
just the same da-da dum da dum da da daddaladum  thing over and 
over, with no dancing Neil Campbell or Mark Hansen to laugh at.  
I wish I could have heard the words.
              That's all.
                      Carl.

Time: Sat, 12-Feb-2000 20:37:03 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.124

Well Carl, I must tell you that the lights were on ON PURPOSE.  

    Everyone in the theater took a collective vote and it was 
unanimous that we thought the show would be better with the work 
lights on.  This decision was reached despite no house lights 
ever having been on in past shows, and never mind that at 
multiple points in the show the performers on stage complained 
about the lights... they liked it that way!  You liked it that 
way, too! It was especially great the way it ruined several of 
the pieces, such as when Egg said "Fade to black!" and the 
lights stayed on!  Hilarious!

     Rest "ass"ured that many people made efforts to shut those 
fucking lights off during the show, but nobody could figure out 
how to do it! Seems the work lights aren't controlled up in le 
booth, but backstage somewhere, and even such theater vets as M. 
Moses Hayward and Kyle "They Said My Name On That Shitty Episode 
of 'The X-Files' About the Invisible Elephant" Lange had no idea 
where the switch or knob or whatever was located! Wotta riot!

               -Your sweet pal-o-mine, Christine Stangl

Time: Mon, 14-Feb-2000 07:43:58 GMT     IP: 205.188.193.32

Hi.  I'm going to do a review now, even though there's no order 
posted.  As you will see, I have a phenomenal memory...and I 
also have nothing better to do.  :)  I refuse to do my homework.
The order of it all is a little fuzzy, so I'll guess.
1. That Pokemon thing - It was weird and scary for me because I 
really don't like Pokemon...at all.  Over break my 8-year-old 
cousin tried his best to explain to me why it is so cool.  I 
just don't see it.
2.  Possibly Al's song - this was cool and Jamal is double-
funny.  No wait - triple funny.  The amp-dealy that made Al 
sound like a soprano was nifty, but I couldn't understand some 
of the words.  Yay for electric guitars and amps and microphones.
3.  Nick Clark - I remember laughing at this, but my piece was 
next so I was nervous and now I can't recall a damn thing about 
his, except the laughing part.  Sorry.
4.  Me - I shook my bon-bon to the Hamster Dance song.  What has 
happened to my inhibitions?  I used to be so shy...
5.  Is anyone else afraid of monsters? - this was interesting 
but a little long.  I liked the part at the beginning when he 
was really nervous and nerdy - it was cute.  Was he acting?
6.  Possibly James Horak's tornado piece - Why eat right when 
there are tornadoes and plane crashes and elephant stampedes?  I 
liked this because it made me think about being old.  Why do I 
like to think about being old?  I like wrinkles.
This is where the order gets really fuzzy, so the numbers here 
don't really mean anything.
7.  Ben Schmidt's song - WOW!  I want his CD.  This was rad.  Is 
the CD at Vibes?  I'd like to go buy it.  Really.  Where can I 
get it?
8.  Mose Hayward - Mose went away and now he's back.  Where's 
his captain hat?  Now we all know where he lives.  La-dee-
frickin-da.
9.  Chris O's vacation piece - liked the general idea behind 
this - going home and realizing that you are just like these 
people and then realizing that you have to accept it, but it was 
kind of long.  Adam Burton is so versatile...  :)
10.  Surgery thing by Balls, I think - HILARIOUS!  Hysterical!  
Are there any other H-words that mean funny?  Really gross and 
thought-provoking.  Good thing I still have my appendix or I'm 
sure that I'd be scrutinizing the scar for any sign of my 
doctor's initials.  What was Cassady eating?  It was drippy.  
Nice touch.  Yucky.
11.  Adam Hahn is a fag.  HAHAHAHAHAHA!  Then Adam Hahn's piece! 
HAHAHAHAHA!  Arlen - you are a funny guy.
12.  Adam Hahn's piece - so sorry once again, but I forget this 
one.  Maybe my memory isn't so phenomenal....either that or I 
was still laughing about Arlen's claim that Adam was a fag.
13.  Kyle's Vulnerability and Feelings - I LOVED THIS.  Kyle, 
you are a lady-killer.  Cuddling?  Feelings?  Vulnerability?  
Wow.  Your girlfriend sucks.
14.  Be a baby and fall down and it will be funny by Jamal, 
maybe?  This was funny and pointless and I liked it.  And I know 
it wasn't fourteenth, but I don't remember when it was.
15.  Arlen will never have sex - Fun and funny.  The chair that 
fell over had perfect timing.  Ha.  I laughed a lot.  I know 
that this wasn't fifteenth...but I haven't a clue as to when it 
was.
Uh-oh.  Were there actually 16 pieces?  Hmmmm....
16.  Chris Stangl was naked.  Oh my garage!  What's with trying 
to shock us all to death?  I covered my eyes, or at least 
pretended to, until I heard someone say that he had boxers on.  
The point would have been conveyed just as well if he had been 
wearing a bathrobe or a towel or something.  That's my opinion.
Wow...I just did my first review.  Wow.  La-dee-frickin-da.
Happy Valentine's Day, everyone.  Yee-Haw.

Time: Mon, 14-Feb-2000 19:08:57 GMT     IP: 152.163.207.177


: 16.  Chris Stangl was naked.  Oh my garage!  

AAAAAaaah! Chris Stangl was naked, and I missed it?  I'm going to 
go curl into a ball in the corner and die.  That is, if Allison 
doesn't find out that she, too, missed Chris Stangl naked because 
I dragged her home last weekend and then murders me by arranging 
an "accidental" sweater avalanche.

Merideth

Time: Mon, 14-Feb-2000 20:54:47 GMT     IP: 128.255.95.154

:1. That Pokemon thing - It was weird and scary for me because I 
:really don't like Pokemon...at all.  Over break my 8-year-old 
:cousin tried his best to explain to me why it is so cool.  I 
:just don't see it.

I feel fairly neutral about Pokemon, but your perspective starts 
to nudge mine towards the fears I hold about Barney...

:4.  Me - I shook my bon-bon to the Hamster Dance song.  What has 
:happened to my inhibitions?  I used to be so shy...

Yay hamster dance!  (http://www.hamsterdance.com for those who 
don't already know...)  At my last job the person in the next 
cubicle used to play that daily.

:7.  Ben Schmidt's song - WOW!  I want his CD.  This was rad.  Is 
:the CD at Vibes?  I'd like to go buy it.  Really.  Where can I 
:get it?

It's not out yet.  Workin' on the logistics'n'all.

:9.  [...]  Adam Burton is so versatile...

And white!  As Chris so graciously pointed out.  :)

:10.  [...] What was Cassady eating?  It was drippy.  
:Nice touch.  Yucky.

A beet, I think.

:13.  Kyle's Vulnerability and Feelings - I LOVED THIS.  Kyle, 
:you are a lady-killer.  Cuddling?  Feelings?  Vulnerability?  
:Wow.  Your girlfriend sucks.

"You are in your easy chair, but you are NOT easy!!!"

-Adam

Time: Mon, 14-Feb-2000 21:10:35 GMT     IP: 206.230.237.41

Even though the truth will be revealed once the order is posted, 
I feel it is my duty to inform you, Jessica, and anybody else who 
might be under the wrong impression, that the surgery sketch was 
NOT written by myself. It was written by newcomer Briana 
Sprecher, who played the nurse in the sketch.  The only thing I 
wrote that night was the Let's Get Arlen Laid sketch, which I 
co-wrote with Mike Cassady.  Though it was my idea to have the 
chair fall when it did.

The heart was an apple, cooked in a certain way to make it look 
disgusting but taste delicious.  I believe Mike ate the rest of 
the heart later that evening.

Don't worry.  All is forgiven.

-Balls

 

Time: Tue, 15-Feb-2000 01:11:03 GMT     IP: 205.188.193.152


:Yay hamster dance!  (http://www.hamsterdance.com for those who 
:don't already know...)  

the Jesus Dance is far more funny: www.jesusdance.com.  You 
should read the lyrics if you can't hear them.


:7.  Ben Schmidt's song - WOW!  I want his CD.  This was rad.  Is 
:
:the CD at Vibes?  I'd like to go buy it.  Really.  Where can I 
:
:get it?

Vibes sucks leprous goats.  Just stepping foot in the place makes 
my eyes and ears want to bleed.

Time: Tue, 15-Feb-2000 07:09:51 GMT     IP: 205.188.197.57

Even though the truth will be revealed once the order is posted, 
I feel it is my duty to inform you, Jessica, and anybody else who 
might be under the wrong impression, that the surgery sketch was 
NOT written by myself. It was written by newcomer Briana 
Sprecher, who played the nurse in the sketch.

Woops!  Well in that case - take all those compliments away from 
Balls and give them to the rightful writer, or writeful righter, 
Briana.  Sorry that I didn't give you credit!  Thanks to Balls 
for being so honest.

The only thing I wrote that night was the Let's Get Arlen Laid 
sketch, which I co-wrote with Mike Cassady.  Though it was my 
idea to have the chair fall when it did.

Really?  Wow, Balls.  That's ingenious writing...

The heart was an apple, cooked in a certain way to make it look 
disgusting but taste delicious.  I believe Mike ate the rest of
the heart later that evening.

Mmmmm.....  It was pleasantly gross.

Don't worry.  All is forgiven.

Well good.  Now I can sleep peacefully and dream of a land where 
Jesus doesn't have to dance like hamsters in order to be 
impressive.
-Jessica

Time: Tue, 15-Feb-2000 07:10:22 GMT     IP: 205.188.197.57

Even though the truth will be revealed once the order is posted, 
I feel it is my duty to inform you, Jessica, and anybody else who 
might be under the wrong impression, that the surgery sketch was 
NOT written by myself. It was written by newcomer Briana 
Sprecher, who played the nurse in the sketch.

Woops!  Well in that case - take all those compliments away from 
Balls and give them to the rightful writer, or writeful righter, 
Briana.  Sorry that I didn't give you credit!  Thanks to Balls 
for being so honest.

The only thing I wrote that night was the Let's Get Arlen Laid 
sketch, which I co-wrote with Mike Cassady.  Though it was my 
idea to have the chair fall when it did.

Really?  Wow, Balls.  That's ingenious writing...

The heart was an apple, cooked in a certain way to make it look 
disgusting but taste delicious.  I believe Mike ate the rest of
the heart later that evening.

Mmmmm.....  It was pleasantly gross.

Don't worry.  All is forgiven.

Well good.  Now I can sleep peacefully and dream of a land where 
Jesus doesn't have to dance like hamsters in order to be 
impressive.
-Jessica

Time: Tue, 15-Feb-2000 07:11:42 GMT     IP: 205.188.197.57

Sorry about that.  I know you didn't really want to read it 
twice.  I get carried away with this whole "point and click" 
thing.  Fascinating....

Time: Wed, 16-Feb-2000 07:48:45 GMT     IP: 205.160.208.221

just to clarify....i positioned that all too hilarious chair on 
friday evening, not neil, and i was the one who penciled it into 
our script just after it fell to the stage.  no offense neil, but 
credit where credit is due.  and ass where ass is due. and etc.

also, kyle lange deserves serious kudos for kicking more than a 
little ass on friday night "vulnerablitaaeee!"

also, chris stangl deserves some yummy compliments on his not-
pointless nude sketch friday...it went somewhere from the naked, 
i thought it was well crafted, as much a distraction as the penis 
was, the monologue was good.

keep the newcomers coming....theres always room for no-shame.

love,

mike "david gothard" cassady

Time: Thu, 17-Feb-2000 20:14:52 GMT     IP: 128.255.109.102

also, chris stangl deserves some yummy compliments on his not-
pointless nude sketch friday...it went somewhere from the naked, 
i thought it was well crafted, as much a distraction as the penis 
was, the monologue was good.

I agree that the monologue was good, at least the parts I 
comprehended.  It wasn't pointless.  It was just that I was so 
distraught and distracted by the sheer nudity of him that I 
couldn't catch much of anything else.  Perhaps this is due to the 
fact that I rarely view nude men.  Dang it!  I'll have to work on 
that.  Where is that Adult Pleasure Palace???

Okay - that was nasty and I'm sure my mother would roll over in 
her grave if she heard me say that....I need to go repent now.

-Jessica

Time: Fri, 18-Feb-2000 04:46:33 GMT     IP: 152.163.207.73

Time: Fri, 18-Feb-2000 23:43:10 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.60

:I was so distraught and distracted by the sheer nudity of him. 
:Perhaps this is due to the fact that I rarely view nude men. 
:Dang it! I'll have to work on that.  Where is that Adult 
:Pleasure Palace???  Okay - that was nasty

1) The Adult Pleasure Palace is located at 315 Kirkwood (next to 
Stiers' Crafts store!), open 24 hours a day, and carries a wide 
variety of vibrating objects, including those shaped like chile 
peppers, revolvers and polar bears. Ample parking in back!

2) Spending time with naked people is not inherently "nasty," and 
if done properly is more like "a healthy expression of mature 
sexuality," and pornography is more dull and silly than nasty.

3) I am glad but surprised/ skeptical that something as mundane 
as removing one's trousers is "shocking" in any capacity.  Thank 
you for your horror.

4) One time Uggy ate a whole Chapstick!!!!!!!!!
                      -Chris-Love-a-Lot Stangl

Time: Fri, 18-Feb-2000 23:50:19 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.60

:1. That Pokemon thing - I really don't like Pokemon...at all.  
:Over break my 8-year-old cousin tried his best to explain to me 
:why it is so cool.  I just don't see it.

1) Pokemon is not just about defeating the Elite Four and beating 
the game, or, indeed, "catching 'em all."  It's also about 
raising your Pokemon into a powerful fighting force, whether it's 
for your own personal satisfaction, or to prove you're better 
than your friends.

2) "Tribbles give us NOTHING Dr. McCoy? Oh, no, but they DO give 
us something! They give us LOVE!" -Lt. Uhura, "The Trouble With 
Tribbles"  Same thing with Pokemon.

:16. Chris Stangl was naked. The point would have been conveyed 
:just as well if he had been wearing a bathrobe

Time: Sat, 19-Feb-2000 10:58:47 GMT     IP: 205.188.192.42

A review of meridith's first review.  

"Oh, and thanks to whoever proclaimed my pants to be the best 
pants ever."

You're welcome.

"Adam Hahn suggested that I ought to 
reveal my own butt, but I'm afraid that by the time I'd peeled 
those vinyl pants off of it, time would have expired.  Also, much 
the same way that those who see the face of God go mad, so do 
they who lay eyes upon my perfect ass without first being 
trained, practiced, and stretched."

i didn't notice.  i was too distracted by the pants.

"-Merideth"

ending coulda been better.  i would have opted (if my name was 
meridith, which it isn't) to go with something like "YAY!  ME!  
YAY!"  or "The real Mr. Magoo (meredith, of the shiny pants, tm)"

overall a good review, and we (by "we" i mean "me, personally") 
hope to see more of you in the future.

and remember, the merode altarpiece has super-jesus on it.  
apparently flemish jesuses (jesi?) can fly.

James "James James big fat Fames" Horak

Time: Sat, 19-Feb-2000 20:04:55 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.78


2) Spending time with naked people is not inherently "nasty," and 
:
if done properly is more like "a healthy expression of mature 
:
sexuality," 

I had no idea you were having a "healthy expression of mature 
sexuality" with every person in the audience. That puts a whole 
new spin on that monologue. 

-Ri"ver"

Time: Sat, 19-Feb-2000 22:29:56 GMT     IP: 128.255.107.122

Jesus...last night...jesus...ham sandwich

that's all I have to say about that

mike

Time: Sat, 19-Feb-2000 23:38:40 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.72

Comments on the Feb. 18 show, in no particular order:

I agree with what Jamal said in ISCA about the fight. Even though 
Kevin Wall's rendition of Rent was incredibly amusing and the 
fight was very well-executed, more than a couple of us were 
annoyed at how Dan and Kevin tried to play with us. Most of us 
know Kevin is too smart an entertainer to do a song from Rent, 
and Dan is too nice to shout someone off the stage. I admit they 
had me wondering, though, when I noticed Kevin sitting forward in 
his seat, fuming, through most of the sketches. Still, in all I 
found this performance destructive, rude and distracting to the 
rest of the evening.

My favorite sketch of the evening was Stangl's, for its bravado 
creativity. A couple of golden lines (paraphrase): "The way a 
fireman sets fires, the way a prostitute toots; that's the way a 
dead tortoise writes symphonies" and "cherry-flavored anus 
massager."

I liked Balls' impression of Jamal and thought the skit was 
funny, if chaotically staged and a tiny bit long.

Jamal's sketch was funny and a good show opener. The "tax man" 
joke was similarly funny. I love short, but in both cases I felt 
just a tiny bit ripped off because I know these were good writers 
that could have given us more quantity.

I'm not sure who wrote it (where's the order?), but the 
Hemmingway and Faulkner sketch was very very funny. Some parts 
dragged a little; I think the writing maybe could have been 
tighter. Justin was brilliant as the editor and Mike Cassidy was 
a very strong and lively Hemmingway.

I like true stories on stage. And it's fun to hear confessions 
and secrets from people, but perhaps it depends on how they're 
told / how secret they are / who's telling. In that sense, 
Aprille's sketch was interesting (though a little slow), and the 
sex and food guy's monologue was irritating and creepy.

Acting makes me nervous and I'd much rather watch. Any persons 
interested in tackling my writing style and doing a monologue 
might email me. Thanks.

I missed Ben Schmidt. His song last week was excellent.

I have more to say, but I shall wait until the order is posted.

Love and smooches,
Mose

Time: Sun, 20-Feb-2000 00:43:16 GMT     IP: 209.253.130.117

Kevin Wall...

STOP IT, PLEASE!

Everyone else, please keep in mind the fact that this is merely an 
expression of my personal boredom and dissapointment with people 
who keep on doing this kind of stuff.  Kevin and Dan and Bill have 
the right to do whatever the hell they want, but I would like it 
if they didn't continue this.  This is just my opinion, and it is 
the only one that matters (that was a joke.  the second clause 
was, i mean.  you know.)
--Al

Time: Sun, 20-Feb-2000 01:44:55 GMT     IP: 152.163.213.51


I share Al's sentiment, but I disagree with the statement that 
the people who do this have the right to do so.  I was angry at 
Chris and Dan for that staged fight, but I tried to forget about 
it and didn't say anything.  Now I'm just infuriated.  I don't 
know why you people enjoy making others think that you are 
actually injuring each other.  Being made to believe that we're 
watching people get hurt causes me and others quite a bit of 
emotional distress.  It's cruel.  This sort of deception is not 
right.

When I attend theatre-type-things, I consent to a certain degree 
of emotional manipulation.  You can pretend to hurt each other, 
and that's fine, because I know you're acting.  Even if it 
disturbs me, I consented to that.  But when you deliberately make 
me believe that bad things are actually happening, it's 
different.  I didn't consent to that.  It's not ok to manipulate 
people without their consent.  Dan and Kevin injured everyone in 
the audience who believed or half-believed that what was going on 
was real.  I know that other people feel the same way.  I hope 
this never happens again.

Merideth

Time: Sun, 20-Feb-2000 05:43:39 GMT     IP: 24.10.172.239

Actually, I fully support the blurring/destruction of the line 
divided what is believed to be fiction and what is believed to be 
real.  I do have a fair sized diatribe about this matter, but I 
do not wich to bore everyone with it now.  At any rate, what I 
don't like about screwing with the audience's head is that it has 
become a no shame trend and I see various uses/derivates of this 
many times per week.  The result: I now always see it coming, and 
there is something tremendously boring about being on the inside 
of a joke without being LET in to in, out of necessity or for 
fun.  Who the hell wants to watch David Copperfield make the 
Statue of Liberty dissapear if he/she should know exactly how he 
is doing it?  The fun of this "manipulative" magic (assuming that 
you are not the one perpetrating the trick) is not knowing.  I 
smelled something amiss during the rent song, and all of my 
suspisions (sp?) were confirmed during Dan's joint.  This made 
the whole routine very tedious for me.  This is why I want this 
stuff to stop, at least in its over-the-top, nonsubtle way, at no 
shame.  I encourage "fucking" with people, and do it often in my 
daily life and on stage, but when the "fucking" becomes 
uninteresting, I become upset.  And ask any reputed sexual 
pyscologist: when fucking becomes boring, you have a problem.  I 
just makes me sad to see an art form that I so cherish slowly die 
as it becomes a cliche.  That's all I have to say about that.
--Al the Addsheets man

Time: Sun, 20-Feb-2000 06:37:34 GMT     IP: 152.163.207.59

Okay.  No Shame has 3 rules.
1.  Original.
2.  Cannot damage the space.
3.  Cannot damage the occupants.

So number 3 is what we're dealing with here.  Merideth feels 
that the messing with everyone's heads has damaged her.  She was 
an occupant.  So it broke a rule.  I didn't enjoy it at all 
either and I know that everyone I went with thought it sucked.
Also, why does this Kevin-person want everyone to think he's a 
jerk?  If I saw him on the street, I'd probably pelt him with 
pieces of cinnamon-raisin bagel.  This is my opinion.
-Jessica

Time: Sun, 20-Feb-2000 09:10:52 GMT     IP: 24.9.192.139

What a stir Friday's No Shame events of caused!  I must admit 
that I was thoroughly duped by the entire affair.  I was quite 
convinced until about on hour after the show when I was finally 
informed.  
I have mixed feelings about the entire event.  I did like the 
fact that I was snared by the event, stunt, whatever.  At first 
I was kind of pissed to think that I was drawn in... Especially 
to the degree of running to the stage to assist Justin in 
breaking up the fight.  I was sent on a rollercoster of 
emotions.  Firstly being annoyed by Kevin's interuption of Dan's 
peice, then the "gut" reaction to intervene before someone got 
hurt.  After realizing that I reacted for no reason, and getting 
over being a little pissed, I actually appriciated the raw 
emotional experience.
One of my problems with the fight has already been stated.  That 
is that it has already been done, and fairly recently.  This in 
itself is bad.  The trend seems to be to try and shock the 
audience and continue to push things over the top.  Personally, 
I can't fathom anything that could possibly be any more 
shocking, or hilarious, or genuinely creative than the 
infamous "Feather Duster / Rectum" encounter.
My other problem with this most recent event is the inherent 
danger with such a stunt.  It's like "crying wolf" to often.  If 
someone ever does rush the stage to attack a performer, will 
anyone believe it?  Will they make an attempt to stop the attack 
before they see blood?  Will that even be enough?
Now I'm not saying that Dan and Kevin are Satan spawn or Mormon 
missionaries even, I just think that No Shame needs to simmer 
down for a little while.  Otherwise it may lose it's luster 
altogether, and then it's patrons.
I enjoyed it and it seems like I must be in the minority.  I 
know of more than one person who were so upset by the affair 
that they actually were considering never returning to No Shame. 
It was fun the first time, but I think it's time to tame things.

Time: Sun, 20-Feb-2000 10:36:32 GMT     IP: 128.255.56.5

                                                                                                    As much as I agree with Pants
that this whole business with Kevin was hackneyed and unwelcome, I feel that her argument only
provides further support for the artistic validity of the deception.  The objective of art is often to
challenge the audience's political, social and emotional boundaries, and I feel that an attempt to
violate the unwritten rule of consent to emotional manipulation is an extremely strong method of
doing that.                                Having made that point, I would like to reitterate that this whole
business was hackneyed and annoying, though it was executed with such flair and talent that, even
after having seen similar gags in Al and Chris' stuff very recently, many of us still bought it.  There
is a great deal to be said for the ability and intelligence of the creators of this particular deception. 
However, I doubt that it is really going to caus!
e anyone any serious
reevaluation of their own emotional/ artistic/ social boundaries in any positive way.

Time: Sun, 20-Feb-2000 18:46:44 GMT     IP: 206.230.238.231


So I was trying to get out of town Friday night and didn't make it to the show.  

Did I miss anything?  ;)

Time: Sun, 20-Feb-2000 19:12:49 GMT     IP: 24.6.203.121

:Okay.  No Shame has 3 rules.
:1.  Original.
:2.  Cannot damage the space.
:3.  Cannot damage the occupants.

This actually brings up something that crosses my mind now and 
then during the pre-show announcements.  The "submit a typewritten 
script in the lounge at 10:30pm before the show" bit has been 
announced as a rule for some time now.  That ain't a rule.  That's 
how to get in the show...  There are only three rules.  :)

Time: Sun, 20-Feb-2000 20:43:13 GMT     IP: 128.255.56.4

::Okay.  No Shame has 3 rules.
::1.  Original.
::2.  Cannot damage the space.
::3.  Cannot damage the occupants.
:
:This actually brings up something that crosses my mind now and 
:then during the pre-show announcements.  The "submit a 
typewritten 
:script in the lounge at 10:30pm before the show" bit has been 
:announced as a rule for some time now.  That ain't a rule.  
That's 
:how to get in the show...  There are only three rules.  :)
:
:
Good point Adam. However, in the nitpickery department, the three 
rules are techinically:
1) Must be original.
2) Cannot damage the space or its occupants.
3) Must be under five minutes.
I mention this third one with particular vehemence, because ain't 
nobody been abiding by it lately. Perhaps I'm preaching to the 
choir, here, but please, please time out your pieces. Seven pages 
is going to be too damn long.

Time: Sun, 20-Feb-2000 21:16:33 GMT     IP: 128.255.56.4

Okay, normally I think its fairly gauche to defend oneself in so 
blunt a fashion, but I've been thinking a lot this weekend.
Antonin Artaud wrote that, "More than anything, the theatre needs 
an element of danger." He posited that, in the theatre of his 
time, both the artists and the audiences were operating under a 
mutually assented-to but also mutually disbelieved fallacy: that 
they were truly affecting one another. When an audience went to 
see a particularly bad production of "A Doll's House," they would 
lie to themselves and say that they were being truly emotionally 
affected; simultaneously, the performers and directors and such 
would lie and say that they were creating truly affecting work. 
Everybody was going home the same way they came, and the theatre 
was slowly, quietly dying.
Artaud theorized a theatre (which he called the "theatre of 
cruelty", thus ensuring that everybody would jump to really 
erroneous S-&-M-type conclusions about it) in which the audience as 
well as the performers were in constant danger. Not danger in the 
sense of exposed to imminent personal harm, but danger in the 
sense of risk -- in this case risk of emotional, intellectual or 
physical participation. He wanted to make a theatre in which 
people would actually get sad during "A Doll's House" -- not just 
say to themselves "I am watching 'A Doll's House', which is a sad 
play." This is what Bill, Justin, Kevin and I tried to do.

Obviously, it came out a mixed bag. First of all, it seemed to 
work a little better than we wanted it to. Sly foxes like Al 
aside, a lot of people appeared to really buy it. My friend Tom 
was yelling at Kevin from the audience during my piece. Brave 
classmate Chris Shover was halfway to the stage before I hit the 
ground during Justin's piece. We wanted people to have about two 
seconds of total credulity (and hopefully emotional involvement) 
before they realized it was probably staged. It seemed we got a 
little more than that.

The plan was not to make people feel bad. The plan was to make 
people feel, and I think we got caught up in making it as real as 
possible and didn't devote enough time to asking, "To what end?" 
I'm not in the business of making people unhappy. That being 
said, I stand by this thing. For varying lengths of time and to 
varying degrees, just about everyone in that theater was fully 
engaged in what was happening onstage. It wasn't people passively 
observing theatre; it was people participating in theatre. I 
would love to be able to write a play that made people get up out 
of their seats and yell at the performers. I think every 
playwright would.

You're smart people and you make very reasoned arguments. Indulge 
me for a second as I use a rhetorical device that's going to 
sound a little snippy: Suppose for a second that we did three 
pieces themed around one man's (e.g. Kevin's) small breakdown. In 
the first, he tries and fails to do something, and his friend is 
forced to act in an official capacity instead of a friendly 
capacity. In the second, he lashes out at his friend the only way 
he can think of, and finds neither the success nor the support he 
craves. In the third, his frustration boils over and all heck 
breaks loose. Now, if we had done these pieces in such a way that 
no one had any question that they were staged -- playing with the 
conventions of the forum a little, but clearly "acting" the whole 
way -- no one would be upset. People would have been bored, and 
fundamentally uninvolved. It seems to me the complaint is not 
what we did but how well we did it. You say you felt bad when 
Kevin tackled me. I say you felt, and I wager that doesn't happen 
too often to anybody when they go to the theater.

I don't want to be involved in a theatre that isn't allowed to 
truly affect people. I want to go to No Shame not knowing what to 
expect. With all due respect, if you want to observe without 
participating and not really feel anything, maybe you should just 
watch TV.

Yes, we got more effect than we intended to. Yes, we should have 
considered more fully the exact effects we might create. No, we 
should not have done the same uninvolved uninvolving thing.

I may not be completely happy with the emotional fallout, but I 
stand by the work. I beg for a theatre that jerks me around.

Dan

Time: Sun, 20-Feb-2000 23:23:48 GMT     IP: 152.163.197.212


Dan,

The only reason performers should have to resort to deception in 
order to emotionally involve the audience is lack of talent.  I 
have had more of a real emotional response to non-deceiving No 
Shame pieces than I had to either of the fights that I believed.  
If you're good, and your piece is good, it will change people.  
These fights didn't change me; they just made me feel 
uncomfortable when I thought they were real and betrayed when I 
found out they weren't.  The only lasting effect they will have 
on me is resentment of those involved.

No one involved in this deception lacks the talent to make the 
audience feel.  If people don't feel, it's because they don't 
want to, and it's wrong to force them by tricking them.  

Merideth

Time: Mon, 21-Feb-2000 00:49:08 GMT     IP: 128.255.56.4

:Okay.  No Shame has 3 rules.
:
1.  Original.
:
2.  Cannot damage the space.
:
3.  Cannot damage the occupants.
:

:
So number 3 is what we're dealing with here.  Merideth feels 
:
that the messing with everyone's heads has damaged her.  She was 
:
an occupant.  So it broke a rule. [snip]

This, to me, is specious reasoning. I know it's virtually 
impossible for me to look at this objectively as an arbiter of 
rules and such at No Shame, but I don't think emotional distress 
experienced by audience members can be construed as damage to 
said audience members. If Willie does a really touching piece 
that makes me cry, has he damaged me and broken the rules? Of 
course not. How about if someone does a piece that offends me 
because it's ridiculously misogynist (like what happens, oh, 
every damn week?) Where does one draw the line?
My understanding of the space/occupants rule is that it is 
restricted to physical damage. Otherwise, it could be stretched 
to cover any piece that the board considers bad, because does it 
not damage the forum itself by taking the space of another piece 
that could have been good? I'm reducing to absurdity here, of 
course, but the point is almost any piece can be analyzed to the 
point where it violates the rules in some way. Originality alone 
can be grandfathered in to destroy almost anything. The space is 
damaged when you break something or make a big mess. The 
occupants are damaged when they feel physical discomfort or are 
made to fear for their physical safety.
Photosynthesis is the process by which plants convert sunlight to 
food.
Dan

Time: Mon, 21-Feb-2000 03:15:31 GMT     IP: 128.255.56.4

:The only reason performers should have to resort to deception in 
:
order to emotionally involve the audience is lack of talent.  
[snip.]
These fights didn't change me; they just made me feel 
:
uncomfortable when I thought they were real and betrayed when I 
:
found out they weren't.  The only lasting effect they will have 
:
on me is resentment of those involved. [another snip.]

I disagree with these two. First off, I would posit that 
"deception" (I prefer to say "invisible theatre" - q.v. Augosto 
Boal - but I'm playing for my own team, semantically) is a 
legitimate theatrical technique - just like slapstick or pathos 
or fart jokes. To say that the artists involved had the talent to 
use other methods (and speaking as one of said artists, I think 
you might be giving us way too much credit) is like saying that 
Chris could have conveyed himself better in a sonnet than by 
having Neil blow into his ass. Maybe he could have, maybe he 
couldn't; we can only address what he did.

That being said, the effect we wanted was for people to realize 
that theatre is not an activity separate from real life. Just as 
anywhere else, when you are at the theatre, you are not a 
spectator - you are a participant. You are complicit in anything 
terrible that happens and you contribute to anything beautiful. 
The best way we could come up with to do that was by blurring the 
line between theatre, which many people consider purely 
spectatorial, and "real life", which most of us think of as 
participatory. (As this passage demonstrates, the persuasive 
essay is not the best way to communicate all this.)

As far as the events of last night having no lasting effect on 
you goes, you are obviously in a much better position to judge 
your own responses than I am. At the risk of putting words in 
your keyboard, though, it sounds like you've done a lot of 
thinking about theatrical/artistic ethics, as well as why you go 
to the theatre yourself, and like you've come to some interesting 
conclusions. I'm trying to Yoda you, here; I'm just saying that I 
think you have been affected, and fairly profoundly.

After all, what besides a traumatic event could possibly make 
someone angry with me? I mean, c'mon now. Don't make me smile 
boyishly.

Dan

Time: Mon, 21-Feb-2000 05:48:34 GMT     IP: 152.163.201.177

This, to me, is specious reasoning. I know it's virtually 
impossible for me to look at this objectively as an arbiter of 
rules and such at No Shame, but I don't think emotional distress 
experienced by audience members can be construed as damage to 
said audience members.

I said that it damaged Merideth because she voiced this.  There 
are others who felt the same, but did not say anything.  Who are 
you to say whether or not that damage was substantial enough to 
matter?  Also, whether or not it mattered to you, it mattered to 
them.
All of this is me being opinionated about something that I don't 
really have just cause to be opinionated about.  I was not 
damaged.  I just didn't like it.
Bye.
Jessica

Time: Mon, 21-Feb-2000 06:19:55 GMT     IP: 152.163.206.191


Says Dan:
"I don't think emotional distress 
experienced by audience members can be construed as damage to 
said audience members. If Willie does a really touching piece 
that makes me cry, has he damaged me and broken the rules? Of 
course not. How about if someone does a piece that offends me 
because it's ridiculously misogynist (like what happens, oh, 
every damn week?) Where does one draw the line?"

By coming to No Shame, I consented to being touched or offended.  
I did not consent to being deceived into thinking that what I saw 
was real and not theatre.  

Says Dan elsewhere:
"The 
occupants are damaged when they feel physical discomfort or are 
made to fear for their physical safety."

The fights nauseated me.  Is that not physical discomfort?  I 
would rather have been kicked in the stomach repeatedly than feel 
the way these events made me feel.



To say that the artists involved had the talent to 
:
use other methods (and speaking as one of said artists, I think 
:
you might be giving us way too much credit) is like saying that 
:
Chris could have conveyed himself better in a sonnet than by 
:
having Neil blow into his ass. Maybe he could have, maybe he 
:
couldn't; we can only address what he did.
:

YOU implied that this was the only way to make people emotionally 
involved.  I didn't say that you could have conveyed yourselves 
better; I said that I was emotionally involved with nondeceptive 
theatre when the performers are good enough.  It is probably 
false that you could hvae conveyed yourselves better.  My main 
point is that the way you chose is not ethical because it is 
nonconsensual on the part of the audience.


:
As far as the events of last night having no lasting effect on 
:
you goes, you are obviously in a much better position to judge 
:
your own responses than I am. At the risk of putting words in 
:
your keyboard, though, it sounds like you've done a lot of 
:
thinking about theatrical/artistic ethics, as well as why you go 
:
to the theatre yourself, and like you've come to some interesting 
:
conclusions. I'm trying to Yoda you, here; I'm just saying that I 
:
think you have been affected, and fairly profoundly.
:

Even if I were to concede that the events did have a lasting 
effect on me, they were still wrong.  Again, because they forced 
me to feel something that I didn't want to feel by manipulating 
me in a way to which I did not consent.

I consented to theatre.  I did not consent to "invisible theatre."



Merideth

Time: Mon, 21-Feb-2000 15:14:11 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.73

Uhm, this is all very interesting_ 

I challenge anyone to find artistic "purpose" in the fight 
*other* than playing with theatrical boundaries. Toying with the 
boundaries of theatre is not an end in itself. Theater is a 
"medium," that is, something meant to transfer an artistic 
vision. Toying with the boundaries may, at times, aid in 
expression of a story or a vision. It is not interesting in and 
of itself.

I would say, if the staged fight had been a tool in service of an 
artistic vision of bringing a certain experience to the audience, 
and that the artists had seen a certain 
political/social/aesthetic reason for bringing this experience 
(as Augusto Boal did), this would be an entirely different 
debate. But, as Dan noted, he and the others "should have 
considered more fully the exact effects we might create." As it 
stands, it was more of a "prank" than an artistic vision.

It's not that big a deal, though. I, for one, was not 
"emotionally damaged."

Where's the order?

-- Mose

Time: Mon, 21-Feb-2000 15:44:11 GMT     IP: 128.255.106.226

Sorry about taking so danged long on this.
1) Puncheroo by Jamal River
2) Two Scenes and Two True Stories (Only One of Which Involves 
Cum) by Aprille Clarke
3) Final Score: Vikings 14, Attention Span 0 by James Horak
3.5) The "Archie" Comic Strip from Tues., May 11, 1982 by Arlen 
Lawson
4) How to Disappear Completely and Never Be Found by Mike 
Rothschild
5) Chixx, Pt. 1: The Furry with the Syringe on Top by Mark Hansen
6) Suzanne and Ben by Kyle Lange
6.5) A Man for All Wymyns by Justin Claussen
7) The Elitist French Pt. III or Why I Hate Duck Costumes by Mose 
Hayward
8) A Song by Kevin Wall
9) The Serious Effects of Human Cruelty on Martha Campign by Nick 
Clark
10) Dinner by Willie Barbour
10.5) Pore Jud Is Daid by Aaron Galbraith
11) Two Terrible Mistakes from Manhattan by Danger Brooks
12) A Morality Love Song Without a Moral or Firebugs, Eat My Shit 
by Mike Cassady
12.5) *stage direction: moon the audience* by Johnal Sangel
13) Dead Turtle by Chris Stangl
14) Men Without Women by Justin Rose
15) Balls Campbell and the Madcap Mix-Up by Neil "Balls" Campbell

Time: Mon, 21-Feb-2000 16:13:58 GMT     IP: 128.255.106.226

So Mose says:
:I challenge anyone to find artistic "purpose" in the fight 
:*other* than playing with theatrical boundaries. Toying with the 
:boundaries of theatre is not an end in itself. Theater is a 
:"medium," that is, something meant to transfer an artistic 
:vision. Toying with the boundaries may, at times, aid in 
:expression of a story or a vision. It is not interesting in and 
:of itself.
:
:I would say, if the staged fight had been a tool in service of an 
:artistic vision of bringing a certain experience to the audience, 
:and that the artists had seen a certain 
:political/social/aesthetic reason for bringing this experience 
:(as Augusto Boal did), this would be an entirely different 
:debate. [snip.]

And I says:
I would venture that the artistic purpose of the piece(s) was, as 
I obliquely suggested earlier, to examine one man's (Kevin's) 
recognition of and reaction to his own failure. As for bringing an 
experience to the audience in service of a social/aesthetic 
vision, dig this highbrow shit:

During the sixties in France there was a movement called the 
Situationists (if you want to stick an individual to this, check 
out Guy Debord.) They believed that the defining malady of modern 
culture (they mostly thought American culture because hey, they 
were French) was the tendency of individuals to view themselves as 
spectators in their own lives. They felt that the omnipresence of 
passive-consumer media (movies, TV, newspapers, etc.) had caused 
many people to redefine their interaction with their lives in 
terms of observation rather than participation - initially just 
with respect to larger communities, but ultimately even in their 
day-to-day activities. Consequently, they set out to stage various 
events and perform various activities that would remind people 
that they are participants in their lives rather than spectators. 
(They would occasionally walk down the streets of Paris and shoot 
out streetlights with twelve-gauges. Kinda puts wrestling in 
perspective.) This was their social vision.

Besides, there's quite a No Shame precedent for pieces that simply 
address the nature of theatre itself. Dig Arlen's Archie piece 
this week, or Stangl's Garfield work and Mark's Teen Wolf (all of 
which, by the way, I'm holding up as examples of cool stuff.) When 
we devote this much of our lives to theatre, anything about 
theatre is necessarily about our lives. In a society that concerns 
itself with aesthetics, the aesthetic is social.

Dan

Time: Mon, 21-Feb-2000 17:06:51 GMT     IP: 128.255.108.76

I just wanna throw in my 2 cents real quick, then we can maybe 
move on. I think the staged fight, the "invisible theatre," the 
making of the audience to feel something, even if by means of 
deception, was fine, good in fact. I totally condone this kind of 
theatre, in fact I wish more theatre would deceive me. If I go to 
see, say, Hamlet or something, it would be nice if the actors were 
so good I was deceived into believing that the actor playing 
everyone really dies at the end, rather than thinking to myself: 
"Gee, that death was very realistic. He's a fine actor." I don't 
know if this is totally rlevant to the argument, but that's how I 
feel. I'd rather be tricked into believing something than realize 
it's just pretend. However, I think that Dan, Justin Kevin, Bill 
and whoever else was in on it chose an unfortunately cliched way 
of deceiving us, so that we felt cheated because it was something 
we've seen before. I know that, sure, you can argue that we also 
see a lot of other things repeatedly at No Shame like any category 
of sexual reference. But I think it can also be argued that the 
staged fight is a different matter. The other unfortunate thing is 
it happened this time right before poor Balls Campbell's skit, and 
while it still was received well, there was a weird vibe left over 
from Kevin's outburst. Last time, this was taken care of, and 
that's just a little thing they forgot, which was too bad. One 
more point I'd like to make: if nausea counts as damaging the 
occpuants of the theatre, then Stangl would have been banned a 
long time ago. And prostitutes don't toot, I asked.  

Time: Mon, 21-Feb-2000 17:56:04 GMT     IP: 205.188.193.189

I don't like what happened Friday. I'm not going to try to say 
that I was damaged by it, but I have to say that I look forward 
to next week's No Shame a little less because of it. Meredith was 
right on with a lot of her objections, but I would like to add:

1) It was physically dangerous.
I was a lifeguard in a past life, which means that I can't even 
walk by a playground without thinking, "If those kids don't stop 
horsing around someone will break a tooth and there will be a 
lawsuit."
     The previous No Shame "fights" were more safely contained- 
Al and the guy never really seemed ready to hurt each other, and 
the "stabbing" took place offstage, with people who were in on it 
taking control and keeping the general public out of range.
     This time, the audience was faced with an, "if this is real, 
we need to be doing something," dilemma. Part of what made the 
event believable for me was Kehry Lane running down from the 
lightbooth to help break it up then returning absolutely 
convinced that what he had just seen hadn't been staged. Kehry 
will put himself on the short list of people who enjoyed the 
event, but he told me afterwards that he had been prepared to 
twist Kevin's wrist into a very uncomfortable position to pull 
him off.
     It just would have taken one panicked, adrenaline-soaked 
audience member to put Kevin into a cast (or worse, a neck 
brace), and we can count ourselves lucky that no one hurt 
themselves trying to get in the middle. Follow the string of 
possible lawsuits, and that one stunt might have spelled the end 
of No Shame Theatre at the University of Iowa.

2) It broke the rules.
When Dan reminds the No Shame community to watch the length on 
its pieces, he is not preaching to the choir, he is pontificating 
from within the pit of eternal damnation. 
     When Stangl's pieces double in length because he has to wait 
for the laughter to die down, that's excusable. When someone who 
has never been on stage before doesn't realize just how long it 
takes to read a monologue, that's excusable. When someone (a 
Board Member, no less) decides to take nearly fifteen minutes for 
one piece, that's not excusable. Kevin was cut off after about 
five minutes, Dan's monologue might have been a little less, and 
the Hemingway/Faulkner/fisticuffs took at least as long. Anyone 
performing "teatro invisible" should be limited to the same five 
minute stage time everyone else gets. Taking three performances 
worth of time on one night (and cheating every performer who got 
up between the first portion and the last by diverting the 
audience's attention) is an abuse of the forum.


That's how I feel about it, but I'm not one to hold grudges,
Now, to look at the order and remember I had opinions about other 
stuff that ha

Time: Mon, 21-Feb-2000 17:58:17 GMT     IP: 205.188.193.189

Dammit, I always get clipped.

My closing was:
That's how I feel about it, but I'm not one to hold grudges,
Now, to look at the order and remember I had opinions about other 
stuff that happened Friday,
Egg

Time: Mon, 21-Feb-2000 18:12:34 GMT     IP: 128.255.56.5

Art and ethics are two unrelated and irreconcilable subjects.  However, some notion of one's
audience and what they need/want to see is vital to art.

Time: Mon, 21-Feb-2000 20:56:52 GMT     IP: 152.163.204.211

:
6.5) A Man for All Wymyns by Justin Claussen

I did not like this at all.  After the people who came out of the 
audience went back into it, and the guy was still talking, I 
really really wanted it to stop.  Allison, who didn't like it 
either, said that she thought that something like this would 
inevitably happen in response to some of the maybe-misogynistic 
things that go on at No Shame, but that the real cause of this 
piece was "just not getting it."  I agree with her.  But then, 
she and I are misogynists, so maybe we shouldn't talk.

:
11) Two Terrible Mistakes from Manhattan by Danger Brooks

This was really neat, and the ending was really neat, and I've 
read stuff by that Orion guy, which I think is really neat.


:
13) Dead Turtle by Chris Stangl

I think this may be the funniest thing I have ever seen.  I 
laughed so hard I actually cried; I've never done that before.  
Chris, if you heard someone who sounded like she was 
simultaneously weeping and hyperventillating and couldn't stop, 
that was me.  Sorry about that.

Is there any way I could get a copy of this script?


Merideth

Time: Mon, 21-Feb-2000 23:39:05 GMT     IP: 128.255.107.122

hi boyz and gurlz

I've been pretty torn about the whole fight thing. I thought the 
idea was really good, the setup was strong, the punchline itself 
was well delivered, but the execution was weak. We all know Kev 
is a better than having to do a song from a shitty musical (and 
No Shame pieces are supposed to be original), and we all know Dan 
wouldn't shout a guy down, especially Kevin. We've all seen 
people go on stage and make total asses out of themselves, and 
nobody puts a stop to it because we're Iowans and we're too nice. 
I bought the fight just because I was too tired to think about 
it.

I'm brought to another point. Maybe the "theater of cruelty" 
shouldn't be inlicting damage on the audience, but stopping 
hackneyed performers from inflicting damage on the audience with 
shit material. And don't piss on me about "doing your best". We 
know what's good and what's shite. And the fight wasn't shite. It 
was manipulative as hell, but it wasn't shite. We've seen shit. 
So maybe it's cruel to cut someone off after 10 minutes of 
stuttering, lifeless material. But why make 100 people suffer to 
make one person feel good? Yes it's right wing and didactic but 
fuck off. THis is why NS goes two hours plus, when it should go 
80 minutes...people aren't censoring themselves in terms of 
volume of writing, and there's no quality control. Be your own 
quality control. If you have something to say, say it. If you 
have nothing to say, shut up and give the stage to someone else 
who has something to say. 

Anyway...

let the slings and arrows begin.

mike

Time: Mon, 21-Feb-2000 23:51:45 GMT     IP: 128.255.107.122

:Sorry about taking so danged long on this.
:1) Puncheroo by Jamal River
Short and funny, just the way I like em.
:2) Two Scenes and Two True Stories (Only One of Which Involves 
:Cum) by Aprille Clarke
I liked Aprille using a more confessional style instead of the 
sitcom cleverness which is funny (take it from one who uses it 
constantly) but a bit hollow. I dug it.
:3) Final Score: Vikings 14, Attention Span 0 by James Horak
I was in this. It was funny, but I don't quite grasp the point...
:3.5) The "Archie" Comic Strip from Tues., May 11, 1982 by Arlen 
:Lawson
I don't remember this one, sorry Arlen.
:4) How to Disappear Completely and Never Be Found by Mike 
:Rothschild
I'm happy with how this went. It was a step for me, in that it was 
as personal as I've ever been and likely will ever be on the NS 
stage. I'm thinking about using it in a larger play, so any 
feedback would be super duper.
:5) Chixx, Pt. 1: The Furry with the Syringe on Top by Mark Hansen
I don't remember much of it, but it probably was funny.
:6) Suzanne and Ben by Kyle Lange
Nice work, Lange. Much lighter than most of his other songs. I 
liked. 
:6.5) A Man for All Wymyns by Justin Claussen
this started poorly, went way up when he started talking about 
rpgs and girls, but the "fight" was nothing. And it was way too 
long.
:7) The Elitist French Pt. III or Why I Hate Duck Costumes by Mose 
:Hayward
Funny and real, but Mose, go for the X-Acto knife instead of the 
butter knife. Quickness and lightness, my man. 
:8) A Song by Kevin Wall
I talked about this.
:9) The Serious Effects of Human Cruelty on Martha Campign by Nick 
:Clark
I don't remember the text because I was busy passing put parts of 
that awful bagel to attractive women in the audience (yes I am a 
sexist!!!). But it was a cool concept, and I love big numbers of 
people on stage.
:10) Dinner by Willie Barbour
A little too long, but I could identify with it. Not that I've 
ever masturbated...but I know people who have.
:10.5) Pore Jud Is Daid by Aaron Galbraith
I don't know how much of this came off to people who didn't see 
the Matrix or the Firebugs. But I liked it a lot.
:11) Two Terrible Mistakes from Manhattan by Danger Brooks
Well, I didn't hear much of it...but it was very real. Could have 
done with out the kissing thing at the end. Made me feel stupid 
and bad, and I can do that well enough on my own.
:12) A Morality Love Song Without a Moral or Firebugs, Eat My Shit 
:by Mike Cassady
Stack of Holy Bibles, now that's funny! Mike's songs rule. Is 
there anything I can do that he can't?
:12.5) *stage direction: moon the audience* by Johnal Sangel
Don't remember
:13) Dead Turtle by Chris Stangl
I'd rather not talk about this.
:14) Men Without Women by Justin Rose
Great stuff with Hemmingway and Faulkner, but the fight kinda 
ruined it. The ripple wine line at the end was great.
:15) Balls Campbell and the Madcap Mix-Up by Neil "Balls" Campbell
And at 1:07 AM, the final piece begins. I was so tired that ants 
crawling on a banana would have been funny. But the concept was 
cool, and again, big numbers on stage rule.

write shorter pieces, fuckers!!!!

mike

Time: Tue, 22-Feb-2000 00:29:28 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.103

                     Notes On Rule Breaking
                  by Chris "Balki" Stangl

I'm going to flex my board-member muscle here, which is still 
tender n' tentative. But:
     Egg, Rothschild and Merideth-Pants have expressed concern 
re: whether D "Danger" Brooks, K. "Mackey" Wall and J. Rose 
violated ALL THE RULES on Friday with their meta-theater stunt-
extraordinare.  Never mind my personal feelings on the "quality" 
of these piece/s (mixed, incidentally), but here are my personal 
feelings on the "legality" of these pieces:

"1. Pieces must be original."
     This in reference to Rothschild's implication that 
Wall's hilarious take on Rent was "unoriginal," a remark he's 
made before re: Brad Smith's brilliant "Dance" (which reenacted 
a scene from It's Christmas Charlie Brown).  Wall's piece 
amounted to po-mo parody by way of reinterpreting/ 
recontextualizing and generally fucking-with Rent, much as the 
River/Stangl/Hansen/Lawson "Teen Wolf" "parodied" its source 
text by forcing "Teen Wolf" to be judged on it's own terms, 
with  words entirely from its own mouth.  These are original 
pieces.  And "awesome," if I may say so.

"2. Pieces may not damage the space or occupants."
     It has always been my understanding that this rule 
refers wholly to physical damage inflicted by the performers.  
That  is all.  All.
     Dan was not "really" being beaten.  K. Lane -&- J. Horak, 
the brave/ gullible lads who rushed to the rescue were not 
injured.  The space was unscathed (Nick Clark's piece, though, 
got bagel crumbs all over the floor).
     This rule does have a grey spot, and here are my 
thoughts:
    Audience members are not allowed to damage the space, 
either.  Luis Bu¤uel's film "L'age d'or" caused riots when it 
was shown in Paris.  What are we to do if a piece were to cause 
audiences to riot, punching other Theater B patrons and slashing 
seats? I'm inclined to chalk one up for Art.  Likewise for a 
piece which made audiences vomit or spontaneously ejaculate, 
potential fluid-damage to the space.  Artists exempt.
     Personalized aesthetic issues: Extending this into 
"emotional damage" is absurd, and proposing that you are not 
allowed to be emotionally challenged, damaged or downright 
violated simply because you're in a designated Art Hole is 
plainly offensive and dangerous.  That is how we end up with art 
martyrs. You have not entered into a sacred pact with artists 
stating that they will not horrify you.
    Nepstad's concern about being "tricked/ manipulated" is 
irrelevant. What was witnessed was a premeditated event with 
stage combat and evidently some convincing acting.  When the 
Lumiere brothers' film "Arrival of a Train at the Station" 
played to early cinema audiences, patrons fled, terrified, as 
the engine puffed towards the screen.  It can't be helped if a 
No Shame audience is screaming at cinematograph locomotives.  
Sometimes you feel like a Brecht, sometimes you don't.  Theater 
is "deception" either way.
    Nepstad's accusation that she was forced to "feel something 
to which I did not consent" doesn't mean anything in terms of 
the rules.  She "consented" to an evening of Art, and she got 
it. You paid for a seat in Theater B for two hours, and you got 
it. That the content veered in unpredictable/ confusing 
directions has nothing to do with "consent."  I paid to see "The 
Green Mile."  It was a fucking piece of shit.  I didn't consent 
specifically to seeing a fucking piece of shit, but I ain't 
asking for my money back.
     I'm simply disgusted with "Jessica": "Who are you to say 
whether or not that damage was substantial enough to matter?"
   1) Dan is a "board member" thus partially "in charge of 
deciding when the rules have been violated and disciplinary 
action has been taken."
   2) Even if someone did a piece like, say, consisting of the 
phrase "Adam Hahn? Total fag!" BLACK OUT, there's not a rule to 
address it.  That might be "mean" or "way not cool." Has Jamal 
River grounds for a lawsuit because he had to plug his ear-holes 
during Brooks' screwdriver-dentistry masterpiece, "Life"? A: No.
   3) Demanding that art which jabs a nerve needs to be reigned 
in is called "censorship." Some of us think that's a "bad 
thing."  You can not LIKE the piece, you can explain WHY, but 
suggesting challenging art be denied a is "wrong."  If you don't 
Like It, then deny Dan an willing audience.

    Point here is: never mind if you like your art perilous or 
not, we have an Amendment that allows it to be so, and no NS 
rules about ideologies that scare you.  No Shame has a rule that 
prevents you from getting sprayed with water, egg innards, 
creamed corn, pelted with pornography or marshmallow Peep heads 
that have been in Chris Stangl's mouth.  There is no rule about 
your feelings getting hurt.  Cry-babies are likewise encouraged 
to continue to attend!

"3. Pieces must be under 5-minutes."
     Egg: Duh.  C'mon, mang.  You're kidding, right?  Or as 
the Beastie Boys said, "Don't be a fag."  You didn't get one 
fifteen-minute, rule-violating piece.  You got FOUR pieces for 
the price of three.  You got a narrative arc extending through 
three legit, under-five-minute pieces which amounted to a 
subplot-gone-rampant.

-Your best friend in the universe, Chris Stangl, cofounder Sled 
Club!!!!!

Time: Tue, 22-Feb-2000 01:04:10 GMT     IP: 128.255.106.241

"current theatre is in a state of decadence because on the one 
hand it has lost any feeling for seriousness, and on the other for 
laughter.  Because it has broken from seolemnity, from direct, 
harmful effectivness - in a word danger.

For it has lost any true sense of humor, and laughters physical, 
anarchic, dissolving power.

Because it has broken away from the profoundly anarchic spirit at 
the basis of all poetry."

Artaud was/is a genius.
Artaud was/is insane.

Time: Tue, 22-Feb-2000 01:57:46 GMT     IP: 205.188.198.41


Says Chris:
"Egg, Rothschild and Merideth-Pants have expressed concern 
re: whether D "Danger" Brooks, K. "Mackey" Wall and J. Rose 
violated ALL THE RULES on Friday with their meta-theater stunt-
extraordinare."

For the record, I never claimed or implied that any of the rules 
were violated.  I don't care about the rules.  I said that it was 
mean, that it upset me, and that it manipulated people without 
their consent, which I believe is wrong.

You can go up to someone's door and make him believe that you ran 
over his dog, just to fuck with his emotions.  You can even call 
it theatre.  But it would be wrong, because the guy didn't know 
it was theatre.  I didn't know the fights were theatre.  Some 
audience members still don't.  So they took place in a theatrical 
setting -- that doesn't make any difference if people don't know 
that it's theatre. 

Pants

Time: Tue, 22-Feb-2000 06:53:27 GMT     IP: 128.255.56.5



1) Puncheroo by Jamal River

-I have two technical questions about this piece: how did the sound of chris hitting Jamal come
out so perfect without appearant damage to J'ml's head (my guess is that Chris punched only the
upstage side of Jamal's face) and also, how did Jamal produce that extremely humorous voice? 
Once these questions are answered, I will say something as meaningful about this piece as I have
said about all the others.
:
:2) Two Scenes and Two True Stories (Only One of Which Involves 
:
:Cum) by Aprille Clarke
-This was so different from the stuff Aprille usually does, and yet so quintisentially Aprille thAt I
could not help but to love it to death.

:3) Final Score: Vikings 14, Attention Span 0 by James Horak

I wish horak would do stuff more frequently.  I always like his stuff more than it seems like I
should.  I totally dug all of the viking dialogue, and the smack on the head to change channels was
also quite amusing.

:3.5) The "Archie" Comic Strip from Tues., May 11, 1982 by Arlen 

:Lawson
One question.  Is this really a transcibed comic strip from may 11th 1982?  Answer this and I will
review your piece as thoroughly as I have reviewed Jamal's.

:4) How to Disappear Completely and Never Be Found by Mike 
:
:Rothschild
I can't remember this, so I have one question for you, mike: what was it?

:
:5) Chixx, Pt. 1: The Furry with the Syringe on Top by Mark Hansen
This was as intensely disturbing as anything written by Mark Hansen could be.  A large part of
that is that Chris played the really disturbing character, who, in retrospect was not so much
disturbing as just a social retard.  Kudos, Mark Handsome.

:6) Suzanne and Ben by Kyle Lange

Yay Kyle.  I liked this song the most out of all the Kyle Lang songs I have heard, which must
mean that I liked it immensely, which I did.  Great melody, lyrics which seemed to make an awful
lot of sense.
:6.5) A Man for All Wymyns by Justin Claussen
This would have been an interesting use of the meta theatricality of the forum if it hadn't been so
grossly outdone.
It seems to have had a lot to say, which is not bad, but all that it seemed to have to say was a
basic, run of the mill, anti misogynism message, and I think the average NS attendee knows that
misogyny is bad.


:7) The Elitist French Pt. III or Why I Hate Duck Costumes by Mose 
:
:Hayward
(I liked this.  I liked the line about how Mose just made up the masturbating duck to get his
girlfriend out of there quickly
especially much.  I had a weird view up the nose of Mose cause he was standing very near me.

:8) A Song by Kevin Wall
Knowing as I do that Kevin is a very gifted writer, I was waiting for the gag.  Then I figured that
the thing was dragging on for such a long time was the gag.  And it was really funny.  I really
lauged and felt good.  Then when Dan cut him off, I figured that there might be a big finish, where
Kevin delivers the real joke, that he was upset about not getting to get to, yet, knowing as I do
that Kevin and Dan are good friends, I couldn't really understand why Kevin would be so upset
with Dan about cutting him off.  Wouldn't he be able to just explain that the joke was
forthcoming?  Something seemed fishy, and yet I did not get it...

:9) The Serious Effects of Human Cruelty on Martha Campign by Nick 
:
:Clark
-I am PISSED that people started throwing the bagels.  That is all I would like to say.

:10) Dinner by Willie Barbour
-Yes.  Food and sex.  What else?  I can't think of any.

:10.5) Pore Jud Is Daid by Aaron Galbraith
Yay.  This was fun.  The especially fun parts are where Dan is the mean engineering aviser who
has a mohawk, and Mark is the homophyllic liberal-arts advisor climbing all over stubble's body.
Also, being one of the three persons was good.  I forgot what Aaron told me I was supposed to
do and sat down, but all was not lost.

:11) Two Terrible Mistakes from Manhattan by Danger Brooks
-I was pissed at Dan at this point and figured that if Kevin was really that angry with him, he must
have been a real jerk in some way I had not understood.  I was ready to help the interruptions,
even to go onto the stage and escort DAn from it, because I percieved that Dan had really
wronged Kevin.  I'm not sure what this says about me.  I prefer not to ponder it.  The kiss and
"It's going to be a good year" at the end was extremely annoying, and the only part which I
remember.

:12) A Morality Love Song Without a Moral or Firebugs, Eat My Shit 
:
:by Mike Cassady
This was Mega-Funny.  I don't remember how.  I remember the line "It's a nightmare, really."  and
this was a hootenanny since, working on Orestes 2.0, I hear this line about thirteen times an
evening.
The playing was very good, especially with the information that Mike only started over break.

:12.5) *stage direction: moon the audience* by Johnal Sangel
-I think that every piece Al writes from now on should rhyme.  Actually I don't, but it was a good
schtick to generate this piece, and I did think that the piece was just about entirely the product of
the rhyme schtick.  Still, it was hilarious and fun.

:13) Dead Turtle by Chris Stangl
Everything about this was funny.  I loved the turtle as a character.  There were enough visual gags
to fill Harpo's trenchcoat.  One thing I wished there had been more of is SKIT.  Chris told me he
was going to do a for real skit for the first time in a while, and it turned out to be just another
character monologue augmented by the occasional comment from Balls.

:14) Men Without Women by Justin Rose
That was the funniest Faulkner impression I had ever seen.  And I've never seen one before. 
Hemmingway could have been more funnily written, but no more funnily acted.  Shiela as
[Virginia Woolf?] was unneccesarry, unless Justin was just grasping at any method he could to
bring a woman into the midst of these two very masculine literary figures.  As for the tackle, I
knew for sure Kevin would not do that to Dan.  He would have a loud argument after the show at
the worst, so at this point my suspicions were confirmed.  Though, the way that Kevin just lay
there on the stage was so convincing.  Maybe now Kevin can come back with some for real
material of his own.  I welcome that.

:15) Balls Campbell and the Madcap Mix-Up by Neil "Balls" Campbell
-It was really fun to be in this and get a chance to impersonate Mike Cassady and Arlen Lawson,
but I doubt it was that much fun for the audience.  It didn't seem to be up to the usual Balls
Campbell level of bizzaire whackiness.

                                                               "So Saying, Mega-Love became infant love.  It spoke to
me through the spokes on a baby carriage.  I listened, hiding in the darkness beneath the carriage."

                                                                                                                                    Nick Clark

Time: Tue, 22-Feb-2000 07:13:50 GMT     IP: 4.4.74.105

Meideth says (and I believe her):
For the record, I never claimed or implied that any of the rules 
:
were violated.  I don't care about the rules.  I said that it was 
:
mean, that it upset me, and that it manipulated people without 
:
their consent, which I believe is wrong.
:

:
You can go up to someone's door and make him believe that you ran 
:
over his dog, just to fuck with his emotions.  You can even call 
:
it theatre.  But it would be wrong, because the guy didn't know 
:
it was theatre.  I didn't know the fights were theatre.  Some 
:
audience members still don't.  So they took place in a theatrical 
:
setting -- that doesn't make any difference if people don't know 
:
that it's theatre. 
And I say (and I believe me):

Let's set aside the "what is theatre?" issue for a second here, 
and examine what I perceive to be the real heart of Merideth's 
argument. Merideth's position, as I understand it, is that it was 
wrong for us to trick the audience with the fight, because it is 
wrong to "fuck with people's emotions." Let's accept as a priori 
the second part. If we do, the question arises: Why is it wrong 
to fuck with people's emotions? What, exactly, makes it bad? 
(Keep in mind, I'm not asking a rhetorical question, here. I 
really want to know this.) I ask because if we answer that, the 
question then becomes, What is the difference between 
manipulating emotions in a theatrical setting and manipulating 
them in a "real world" one? (This question ignores my belief that 
what happens in a theatre is no less a part of the "real world," 
but I'm willing to do that for the sake of argument.) In other 
words, why is real manipulation wrong and theatrical manipulation 
not wrong?

If you answer "implied consent" then the question is, how far 
does that consent extend? Can you say, "I'm willing to let this 
piece of theatre make me happy, but it's not allowed to make me 
sad"? Or, "I consent to letting you try to manipulate me, but I 
can't abide by you actually succeeding"? Because this is what I 
see the Divine Miss M's response boiling down to. Set me straight.

Just for reference, the argument that a piece is mean doesn't 
ship much water with me. My work has been accused of being mean 
since my freshman year. This is a fallacy. A work of art (failed 
or successful) is not mean or kind. It is not good or evil. It is 
effective or ineffective. When we critique art, we can only 
critique its effectiveness. When we critique its message, we are 
discussing morals. And when we critique its methods on any terms 
besides the efficacy of those methods, we are engaging in 
rhetorical deception.

Which would be mean.

Dan

Time: Tue, 22-Feb-2000 16:09:04 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.121

Dan makes the bizarre claim that a piece of art should be 
evaluated only as effective/ineffective (as opposed to 
moral/immoral, mean/nice, etc.), thus seeming to say that all of 
Meridith's objections were not a relevant critique of art.

Let's say for a moment that I'm working in an artistic medium that 
is truly socially relevant (television) and that I produce a work 
called "Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?" The show is a mixture 
of Theatre and its Double; a beauty pageant with the winner 
receiving an as yet anonymous millionaire husband, to whom she 
will be legally, forcibly married. Let's say my goal in producing 
the work is to rivetingly punch holes in the fabric of society's 
moral code while offering an alternate moral universe that is 
bizarre, repulsive, and innately engrossing (all of this, of 
course, in service of higher ratings). Do we evaluate my work of 
art based only on its effectiveness/ineffectiveness? A feminist 
might want to examine this in light of society's gender 
traditions. A sociologist might be interested in to what degree 
this work affects or reinforces widespread gender attitudes. A 
biologist or psychologist might ask whether the work reflects 
certain ingrained Darwinistic human behaviors and desires. A 
televangelist might ask whether Satan is finally upon us. All of 
these questions have important moral ramifications that should be 
considered by the artist, and all add something as criticism. If 
we want to stick to effective/ineffective, we can to turn to TV 
Guide, which might ask whether the show was highly rated enough to 
be repeated.

What I mean to say, Dan, is that Meridith's, mine and others' 
criticisms were relevant, though they sometimes did not address 
efficacy. Theatre is not a void in which moral questions become 
irrelevant. This should hardly surprise you, since you find little 
distinction between theatre and real life.

A tender contentious hug,
Mose

Time: Tue, 22-Feb-2000 16:32:18 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.121

Some more comments on skits I forgot to talk about earlier:

3) Vikings skit had funny nonsense. I'm not sure what I was doing 
in it. When I remembered I was supposed to be in it. My only 
suggestion would have been to cut me out of it.

3.5) Arlen's joke was an interesting recontextualization, as I 
guess someone already said.

4) Rothschild and sex life. I'm a big fan of fiction/nonfiction 
meshes and stories of sex lives. I guess in this case the story 
was ineffective for me. There was neither emotional weight, 
character interest, nor the successful jokes to sustain the 
monologue. I didn't laugh, but I remember registering on an 
intellectual level that some of the jokes would have been funny 
if correctly delivered. By the way, Rothschild gets big points in 
my book for being the first to get past the Fight and do a full 
show review. I would like to see more opinions, because it's 
useful to the writers and performers, especially since a No Shame 
audience is so bizarre, and, like Rothschild, some of us would 
like to write for other contexts as well.

6.5) A Myn for all womyns. I was sure I had seen this skit 
before. The writing was trite and flabby. The delivery was OK.

9) The bagel fiasco: This falls into the category of "Wouldn't it 
be funny if _?" skits, where you're sitting around and you go, 
"Wouldn't it be funny if I just read a bagel recipe?" or, 
"Wouldn't it be funny if an audience member was planted and 
started talking back?" or, "Wouldn't it be funny to have two 
performers get mad at each other and then there's a fight?" Then 
an audience has to sit through the self-indulgence. I was really 
hungry, though, and appreciated the food.

Mose

Time: Tue, 22-Feb-2000 17:39:52 GMT     IP: 209.56.60.2

To answer your questions, Nick:

How Chris Punchy Jamal??: Yes, yer right. He only punched the 
upstage side of my face. That way the audience was spared the 
sight of my tooths coming out and my eyeball exploding. The way 
the sound was so good was he hit me so hard. On the skull.

How You Voicey Jamal??: I produced the sound out my mouth. That's 
where it came. I stole the voice from a movie. That I 
like. "Billy-Bob The Friendly Tard" I belive it is called. I 
tried to dress like the character in the movie. I tried to have 
laughy hair like the character in the movie. But still I did not 
look like him. I was 100 pounds under weight and not bald. And 
not that friendly.

1) Puncheroo by Jamal River

-I have two technical questions about this piece: how did the 
sound of chris hitting Jamal come out so perfect without 
appearant damage to J'ml's head (my guess is that Chris punched 
only the upstage side of Jamal's face) and also, how did Jamal 
produce that extremely humorous voice?  Once these questions are 
answered, I will say something as meaningful about this piece as 
I have said about all the others.

Time: Tue, 22-Feb-2000 19:15:57 GMT     IP: 206.230.238.167

:1) Puncheroo by Jamal River
funny characters, good fight choreography, short in length, good 
start to the show.

:2) Two Scenes and Two True Stories (Only One of Which Involves 
:Cum) by Aprille Clarke
Aprille seemed depressed which made me depressed, and dammit i 
never consented to having my emotions manipulated by you 
pretencious fuckers on stage!!!  that was a joke, sort of.  good 
stuff Aprille.  i liked

:3) Final Score: Vikings 14, Attention Span 0 by James Horak
funny concept, could have picked up the pace, maybe tried more 
channels.  always enjoy seeing two men kiss on stage.

:3.5) The "Archie" Comic Strip from Tues., May 11, 1982 by Arlen 
:Lawson
was this the taxman thing, or whatever?  odd.

:4) How to Disappear Completely and Never Be Found by Mike 
:Rothschild
some interesting parts, didnt really get me involved though.

:5) Chixx, Pt. 1: The Furry with the Syringe on Top by Mark Hansen
hillaciously hellarious.  good character chris, great writing 
mark.  and i loved the french waiter character too.

:6) Suzanne and Ben by Kyle Lange
great song kyle.  continue to kick ass

:6.5) A Man for All Wymyns by Justin Claussen
i liked the nervous guy at the beginning and end, but didnt care 
for what happened in between at all.

:7) The Elitist French Pt. III or Why I Hate Duck Costumes by Mose 
:Hayward
great to have you back mose.  very good monologue.  i liked.

:8) A Song by Kevin Wall
i heard about kevin's (or bills or whoever's) idea to make the 
audience not like kevin a few weeks ago, so i knew this was fake 
from the start.  if you wanted to do it poorly though, dont use 
comic timing so well.  same problem with the stand up routine a 
few weeks ago, it was actually good!  and as for those of you who 
have pointed out that "dan would never tell someone to leave the 
stage" he did that to jacko two weeks ago!  this was a funny piece 
what with all the audience helping him out.

:9) The Serious Effects of Human Cruelty on Martha Campign by Nick 
:Clark
question mark?  i agree with mose on this one.  it might have 
looked great on paper, or in the oven, but am not sure it was that 
well suited for the stage.  hope you didnt mind me throwing bagels 
at you nick, as it seemed that the idea was that the bagel eaters 
were to steal all attention from the recipe reciter

:10) Dinner by Willie Barbour
food and sex are yummy topics and well explored by mr. barbour.  
would like to see new stuff, like the really touching spinal 
meningitis monologue from a few weeks back.

:10.5) Keiner Liebt Mich von Doris Doerrie
dies war ein gans interesantes film.  ich glaubte das die 
schauspielern konnten besser sein, aber am endes, waren alle tot 
sowieso.  ne veuz ale par...o media.  (gehen sie nicht zur media).

:11) Two Terrible Mistakes from Manhattan by Danger Brooks
i would have liked to have been able to concentrate on this piece 
rather than be distracted, but i guess that was the intent, so, 
well done.

:12) A Morality Love Song Without a Moral or Firebugs, Eat My Shit 
:by Mike Cassady
excellent!  brilliant mastery of comic timing and making it look 
like you have no rhythmic ability what so ever.  i wonder why more 
songs dont sound that shitty- it really made me laugh.

:12.5) *stage direction: moon the audience* by Johnal Sangel
cool idea, i think sheila screwed it up for you by not making the 
beginning more obvious.  i think she did the part where the 
"author" comes on stage, attempts to speak, then sits back down, 
before the audience knew the sketch was even starting.  it 
probably would have made the ending make much more sense for 
everyone.  havent heard anything about ejaculating into someones 
cerebral cortex from al for quite some time now.  yay!

:13) Dead Turtle by Chris Stangl
good stuff as always, chris.  i too was fooled into thinking this 
would be an actual sketch though.  i love the stangl monologues, 
but miss the stangl sketches.  oh, and did anyone else see neil's 
lips actually touch chris' butthole?  ???  ?????

:14) Men Without Women by Justin Rose
very funny.  good characters.  "i told you to suck my cock, 
ernie!"  too bad the only time we can get justin on stage is to do 
a sketch for the purpose of ruining it with a staged fight.  i 
dont know how you all feel about the staged fight deal, but i 
think thats a topic that we could devote some time to discussing 
here in the board room.

:15) Balls Campbell and the Madcap Mix-Up by Neil "Balls" Campbell
good material as always neil.  doing impressions of each other is 
fun.  i have yet to see a good "me" though.  not for sure what my 
typical gestures/mannerisms are.

and sorry about the letterman thing, that wasnt very nice of 
me...tee hee, suckers.

stubblufugus

Time: Tue, 22-Feb-2000 20:20:07 GMT     IP: 128.255.106.201

I propose a No Shame fight club. We put mats on the floor and 
walls of B, go by Fight Club rules, and whoever's left standing 
at the end of the night wins.

I also have some final thoughts on the fight.

The buyer must beware of what he/she is purchasing. When you 
spend your dollar for NS, you should be aware of what you are 
getting into. that NS isn't traditional Albee/Inge/Miller 
theater, it isn't a poetry slam, it isn't therapy and it isn't 
fucking SNL. It's No Shame. Learn it, live it, love it. We fuck 
with people's heads, and that's just how it is. If you can't 
deal, maybe you should get out.

Also, write shorter pieces.

thank you

mike

Time: Tue, 22-Feb-2000 22:22:21 GMT     IP: 4.4.74.71

Dice Mose:
:Dan makes the bizarre claim that a piece of art should be 
:
evaluated only as effective/ineffective (as opposed to 
:
moral/immoral, mean/nice, etc.), thus seeming to say that all of 
:
Meridith's objections were not a relevant critique of art.
:

:
Let's say for a moment that I'm working in an artistic medium 
that 
:
is truly socially relevant (television) and that I produce a work 
:
called "Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?" The show is a mixture 
:
of Theatre and its Double; a beauty pageant with the winner 
:
receiving an as yet anonymous millionaire husband, to whom she 
:
will be legally, forcibly married. Let's say my goal in producing 
:
the work is to rivetingly punch holes in the fabric of society's 
:
moral code while offering an alternate moral universe that is 
:
bizarre, repulsive, and innately engrossing (all of this, of 
:
course, in service of higher ratings). Do we evaluate my work of 
:
art based only on its effectiveness/ineffectiveness? [snip.]
:
What I mean to say, Dan, is that Meridith's, mine and others' 
:
criticisms were relevant, though they sometimes did not address 
:
efficacy. Theatre is not a void in which moral questions become 
:
irrelevant. This should hardly surprise you, since you find 
little 
:
distinction between theatre and real life.

Yo digo:
Well, of course. My point is that while you can and should 
discuss the moral/ethical/aesthetic statement being made by a 
piece of art, when you qualitatively judge that statement you are 
not judging the art but rather the message behind the art. If 
John Q. Noshame (or Juana Q. Vinylpants) wants to say, "Dan's 
message that we are participants in everything we witness even if 
we think of ourselves as spectators is stupid" then he's more 
than welcome to. If he wants to say, "Tricking people is wrong" 
then he should, too. However, the fallacy enters in when he says 
"The message is stupid and tricking people is wrong, therefore 
the art is bad." We said what we wanted to say and we did it the 
way we wanted to do it, and in my opinion it came off pretty 
effectively. That's where art crit lives -- in discussing 
effectiveness. Nail the morals to the wall all you want, but 
don't pretend you're discussing the art when you do it.

I look at it this way: If I'm in a playwriting class and someone 
writes a play about college students trying to find romance in 
bars, I'm allowed to say, "I think the scene where your 
characters talk about going to the bar drags a little, and it's 
detracting from your overall theme of being at the bar and 
finding romance." That's art crit. I'm not allowed to say, "I 
think plays about college students in bars are stupid," because 
that's personal/moral/aesthetic taste, and it's fundamentally 
unarguable. I can say it all I want outside of class, but when 
we're supposed to be talking art crit my discussion of the 
validity of the message is irrelevant.

Obviously, I talk message a lot (witness my continual harping 
about the pervasive misogyny at No Shame.) I'm certainly not 
suggesting we ignore the messges when we discuss pieces. I just 
want you to understand my frustration when I see "Tricking people 
is wrong, and the piece tricked me, so the piece is bad." I don't 
know how to respond to that, because it comes down to me saying 
its okay to trick people for their own good and other people 
saying they believe differently. Talk morals. Argue value.

Dan

Time: Tue, 22-Feb-2000 23:09:11 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.88

Uh, we're getting semantically messy. We probably agree at this 
point on everything except terms. I would say, if the "message" in 
the "artwork" is bad (morally wrong), the "artwork" is necessarily 
bad.

We have a responsibility to point that out this "badness" if we 
are critiquing, say, a misogynist play in your playwriting class.

Underlying this argument is the assumption that all is not 
relative and we can agree on what is moral. Unless your 
playwriting classmate believes as a moral absolute that women are 
evil, pointing out the play's misogyny is useful art criticism.

You did say you want to see the "messages" critiqued, but you also 
said you frustrated with this because we just end up arguing 
deeply held morals. But I think you, Kevin and Justin have a moral 
compass generally similar to that of your critics; that in the end 
we'd all like to see the audience have a rewarding experience. You 
felt you were providing it (through this teatro invisible, 
situationism, prank, whatever), many of your viewers, for various 
reasons cited, didn't. So our "art criticism" on moral grounds 
should seem worthwhile to you. That was the hope, anyway. 
Mose

Time: Wed, 23-Feb-2000 01:07:13 GMT     IP: 128.255.107.247

 Dear John,

   I was bored.  I am still bored.
   I was fooled for a few moments during Dan's joint but, by the 
end of the night, had the "I'm pushing an elephant up the 
stairs..." line stuck in my head.  It's hard for me to wrap my 
brain around the truth that the majority of the audience was 
hornswoggled.
    Unaware of a friendship between the participants, I still 
found the whole thing as believable/emotionally jarring/artistic 
as your typical TNT Sunday Nitro.
   And all this discussion is leaving me with a bad taste in my 
mouth or, if that is in fact untrue and an overused figure of 
speech, at least the words "What?  What?  Why are you saying 
that?  What is the reason you have for saying that.  Stop it.  
Stop it before I vomit.  After every meal.  Until I'm thin.  And 
pretty." 
          
          The only man who ever really loved you,  
                                       Arlen Lawson

P.S. I would write a review of the show, but, after every review 
I've written, I have been left drained, exhausted, and unwilling 
to even think about writing for a period of at least a thousand 
years.  

P.P.S.   That's right: One thousand. Ten of hundreds.  Hundred of 
tens.  1/1000 of largest prize on "Who Wants to -BE- a 
Millionaire," divided by dollar and multiplied by year.

Time: Wed, 23-Feb-2000 02:07:06 GMT     IP: 209.253.130.117

I likey butty poo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Heather Butticus MacFombaComba

Time: Wed, 23-Feb-2000 02:10:03 GMT     IP: 152.163.195.213

Says Arlen:
   "I was bored.  I am still bored. . . . Stop it.  Stop it 
before I vomit.  After every meal.  Until I'm thin.  And pretty." 

I too am bored.  And I will stop it before either of us vomits.  
I don't care anymore, for this discussion has ceased to puzzle 
and entertain me.

And you're already pretty.

Merideth

Time: Wed, 23-Feb-2000 06:43:31 GMT     IP: 205.188.197.169


:I likey butty poo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:

:
Heather Butticus MacFombaComba

Thank you, Heather. So succint it succed. (um, tee-hee.)

P.S. Is Butticus your middle name or your maiden name?

Time: Wed, 23-Feb-2000 16:39:21 GMT     IP: 128.255.107.221


:And you're already pretty.
:
:Merideth
:

Am I pretty too? I sure I hope I is.

mike

Time: Thu, 24-Feb-2000 03:27:28 GMT     IP: 128.255.60.115

:14) Men Without Women by Justin Rose
:That was the funniest Faulkner impression I had ever seen.  And 
:I've never seen one before.


1- Yikes, Snick, learn to format your posts or I'll take you out 
back and shoot you like a red-headed stepchild.

2- See Los Hermanos Coen's brilliant "Barton Fink," in which you 
will witness John Mahoney doing a sweet-as-corn-syrup Faulkner 
impression and also some pus oozing out of John Goodman's ear, 
which also looks a bit like corn syrup.

                        -Make Room For Chris Stangl

Time: Sat, 26-Feb-2000 02:01:40 GMT     IP: 128.255.111.18

:
:Thank you, Heather. So succint it succed. (um, tee-hee.)
:
:P.S. Is Butticus your middle name or your maiden name?


   How about it's your maiden name!  And it is!  And, for you, 
like what you said except sucks.  So succint it sucks.  Yah!


          Heather Butti-"li"-c-"io"-us MacFombaComba PhD

Time: Sat, 26-Feb-2000 17:16:18 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.126

Thank you everybody who made last night such an interesting and 
enjoyable show. Only at No Shame could Arlen's and the egg boys' 
divergent wild ambitions coexist so beautifully.

In between the extremes, the evening was filled quality moments. 
I'll post more soon.

Mose

Time: Sat, 26-Feb-2000 19:11:30 GMT     IP: 24.6.203.121

Here it is!  All pieces performed by author alone unless
otherwise noted.

1. Frahnglth, by Jamal River--performed by Jamal River, Neil 
Campbell, Mose Hayward, and Chris Stangl

2. Three Stories Inspired by Daniil Kharms (or Why the Russians 
Hate the French), by Aprille Clarke

3. Song, by Ben Schmidt

4. The Oreo, by Sabrina Taylor

5. Telephone, or Maybe something Else, by Jonathon Angel--
performed by Al "Jonathon" Angel, Chris Stangl, Arlen Lawson, 
Nick Clark, and Mark Hansen

6. A Truth about Me, by Jessica Ahrendt (sounds like "aren't")

7. Shakespeare: As Chewed, Swallowed, and Pooped Out into the 
Toilet by Mithter Jameth Horak, Ethquire--performed by James 
Horak, James Erwin, Mike Cassady, Aprille Clarke, and Chris 
Stangl

8. Sylvia Plath and the Goofy Gas Leak, by Chris Stangl

9. The Soup Sketch, by Mary Fons

10. The Windfall Syndrome, by Arlen Lawson

10.5. Egg 2.0, by Adam Hahn

11. When a Renowned Poet Was a Lonely Depressed Teenager, He Went 
by "Angst'on Hughes," by that guy who forgot to put his name on 
his script (anyone?)

12. Oi! Oi! Oi! Oi! Oi! Oi! Oi! by Michael Rothschild--performed 
by Michael Rothschild, Aprille Clarke, and Neil

13. Betty and Immanuel, by Mose Hayward--performed by Mose 
Hayward, Jamal River, and Chris Stangl

The piece about blowing out the eggs--title not on script--was 
really multiple pieces by different authors woven together, two 
copies turned in, one numbered "14" and the other numbered "15". 
 Authors:  Grace (last name?), Dan Brooks, Bill Bungeroth, Justin 
Rose, Kevin Wall--performed by authors, minus Grace.

Time: Sat, 26-Feb-2000 20:43:59 GMT     IP: 4.4.74.56

Just for reference, Adam "I Am Far More Responsible Than Dan When 
It Comes to Posting the Order" Burton, "Grace" was the title of 
the piece(s.)
Yeah.

Time: Sat, 26-Feb-2000 21:23:02 GMT     IP: 24.6.203.121

Frahnglth, by Jamal River
-This was a fun way of relieving any leftover tension from the 
shenanigans of weeks gone by.  I didn't see the stuff from last 
week, but in context of what I heard this was hilarious.  
Especially the bit about calling out to Kehry Lane for help.

The Oreo, by Sabrina Taylor
-Always good to see a new performer.  The delivery could have 
used a little more punch, but practice makes perfect.  And for a 
first timer she was admirably un-nervous.  Do more!

A Truth about Me, by Jessica Ahrendt
-I thought this was touching.  Simple, short (less than two pages 
double-spaced!  watch and learn, folks) and still able to reach 
the audience.  Cool.

Shakespeare: As Chewed, Swallowed, and Pooped Out into the Toilet 
by Mithter Jameth Horak, Ethquire
-Heh...  How many people are going to hell because of this skit? 
 Very very funny.  

The Soup Sketch, by Mary Fons
-"Oh my god.  I can't eat any more soup."  I love moments like 
this.

The Windfall Syndrome, by Arlen Lawson
-I'm glad there were no copycats in the audience...

Egg 2.0, by Adam Hahn
-This is called "comic timing."  Even if there was a large 
element of serendipity.

Betty and Immanuel, by Mose Hayward
-I was particularly impressed with the dialogue.  That certain 
disconnectedness of conversation one runs into sometimes with 
very old people or people who are in some other manner 
disconnected is difficult to capture.

Yep.

Time: Sat, 26-Feb-2000 23:01:06 GMT     IP: 152.163.201.191

10.5. Egg 2.0, by Adam Hahn (Yes, I'm vain enough to talk about 
myself first, but only because I would have been booed offstage 
had I not fled it so quickly)
This didn't work as well as I had hoped for a number of reasons, 
not the least of which being Arlen's merciless slaughter of the 
audience's humor (and mine) seconds before.
Also, I had to explain to irregular audience member friends of 
mine who Arlen was and why I was calling him a lousy lay.

10. The Windfall Syndrome, by Arlen Lawson
I thought it was weird that Arlen was eating Taco Bell in the 
theater.
If his intent was to get us to wake up and pay attention, he 
succeeded.
He had such a large jar, it was disappointing that he vomited as 
little as he did.

11. When a Renowned Poet Was a Lonely Depressed Teenager, He Went 
by "Angst'on Hughes," by that guy who forgot to put his name on 
his script (anyone?)
The guy's first name was Will. He had a middle and last name too.
Good to see a new face onstage, even if it was pierced. Hope the 
bunny comes back.

4. The Oreo, by Sabrina Taylor
Speaking of new faces, hope she comes back too.
From the (relatively short) time I've been here, I'd have to put 
these two among my favorite first-timer pieces.

6. A Truth about Me, by Jessica Ahrendt
One of my favorite second-timer pieces. It was very real and very 
touching, but something about it made me think she'll be writing 
things that are much better in a semester or two. (not that this 
piece wasn't good)

12. Oi! Oi! Oi! Oi! Oi! Oi! Oi! by Michael Rothschild
Did anyone else notice that the last word Mike said in his 
hooligan voice was "y'all"?

14-15. Grace by Dan Brooks, Bill Bungeroth, Justin Rose, Kevin 
Wall
Gee, where have I seen an egg metaphor before? Of course, they 
pulled it off much better than I did, and no one had to get a 
mop.
I have to restate my complaint from last week- giving what is 
truly only one piece more than one number in the order (no matter 
how many people collaborated on it) does not excuse taking more 
than five minutes to perform it.
This stopped being interesting when Justin, who was handing out 
eggs in my section of the audience, was clearly repeating 
himself, and Dan was onstage with nothing to do.

13. Betty and Immanuel, by Mose Hayward
5. Telephone, or Maybe something Else, by Jonathon Angel
I'm putting these two together because they both had the same 
problem. They were slow, dragging setups for punch lines that 
didn't really deliver.

16. Posting the Order Promptly, Not Waiting Until Halfway Through 
the Week or Losing it by Adam "That's Right, 'Adam', Not 'Joseph' 
or 'J.A.'" Burton
Mr. Burton, you are a prince 

Time: Sat, 26-Feb-2000 23:03:23 GMT     IP: 152.163.201.191

This page hates me.
End to last message:
"Mr. Burton, you are a prince among men."

Time: Sat, 26-Feb-2000 23:48:03 GMT     IP: 209.253.130.179

:This page hates me.

it's not the only one.

Time: Sat, 26-Feb-2000 23:49:22 GMT     IP: 209.253.130.179

:This page hates me.

it's not the only one.

Time: Sun, 27-Feb-2000 00:47:23 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.54

It was one of the better evenings I've had at No Shame. When I go 
skit-by-skit, I might sound crankier, because I sometimes focus 
on negatives in an effort to provide useful criticism.

Oreo: A nice premiere. The monologue was a loosely held together 
series of jokes and observations on being typed an "oreo." People 
do theme monologues a lot, and it usually works better if the 
"theme" can be distilled down to an incident or story that makes 
us "feel" whatever the realization is supposed to be. My favorite 
joke was the lynching one (nicely set up), and the "UI students 
are slaves" joke seemed a trite, ill-fitting metaphor.

Vomiting: Arlen's piece was very well done; I felt not only 
disgusted, but disgusted in every way Arlen intended; 
intellectually, emotionally and viscerally. If that was the 
point, he succeeded. However, I got the impression that this was 
a vague call to action, but what am I supposed to do? Not write 
witty jokes? Not watch trashy television? Not make or enjoy art?

Shakespeare Speech Impediment Theatre: Two performers shown in 
this; Mike Cassady and Aprille Clarke. It was all very funny. It 
was a terrible idea for a sketch, well-executed.

The Soup Sketch: This did not affect me, though I can't say it 
was bad. At least it was short.

Arlen is a Bad Lay: I thought this was stupid, but then, I didn't 
get the sketch it ripped off either.

Ben is an ongoing advertisement for a CD I heard was going to be 
released. When can I give him money for his music, huh?

Al is so sweet and na‹ve to think a No Shame audience capable of 
sitting still and intelligently participating in a complicated 
game. Neil is turning into a huge slut.

Sylvia Plath and the goofy gas leak: Chris put a lot of care into 
this monologue. It's a funny, bizarre, interesting story, very 
successfully delivered.

Grace: I felt this piece was a monument of successful performance 
and writing. A large part of the feeling generated came out of 
the real, as opposed to theatrical, context - it was incredible 
to conjecture the amount of time that must have gone into 
preparing it. Perhaps this relates to some of Dan's theories 
about the hazy line between theatre and reality: The performance 
itself was a real-life gift (not to mention the token physical 
gifts). My only very minor criticism of the piece is that Dan 
could have scaled back his explanation of just how much effort it 
takes to "blow out an egg;" after all, the performance made this 
obvious. The strongest story for me was Justin Rose's monologue; 
it was fascinating that he started it with the dad's beliefs in 
moral imperatives and then shifted to the hurt Dad had caused 
Mom. I was "in" the story; I felt Mom's hurt and relieved when 
Mom finally left to start her life.

Going into the evening aware of the vomit plans, I didn't think 
anything would be able to get through the disgust. Justin, Dan, 
Bill, and Kevin gracefully trumped it; whether you consider it 
good performance or something more; it made a good theatrical 
experience. Incredibly, Arlen did the same thing in his piece; we 
were not bogged down in physical revulsion but rather made aware 
that this shared experience was grandly important. By selecting 
nearly opposite objectives, the two performances gave an 
intriguing dual view of human experience, all in one evening.

Fun.

Mose

Time: Mon, 28-Feb-2000 01:25:03 GMT     IP: 209.253.130.60

Well well.  I must say that I did have a fine night of NS.  And 
this is what I have to say about it.

1.  Frahnglth, by Jamal River
--Although I generally dislike No Shame sketches built around 
other No Shame sketches/happenings, and I did harbor a bit of 
this to this one, I rather enjoyed it.  It was silly and fun.  
Although I wondered what a first time audience member would have 
thought about it.

2. Three Stories Inspired by Daniil Kharms (or Why the Russians 
     Hate the French), by Aprille Clarke
--I can't remember this very clearly, but I do remember thinking 
that it was good, despite not being up to the high standards I 
have come to hold for Aprille.

3. Song, by Ben Schmidt
--I don't remember this very well, either.  But I think it was 
alright.  Not one of my favorite songs by Ben.

4. The Oreo, by Sabrina Taylor
--Was interesting and held my interest.  I didn't love it, but it 
was one of the better NS introductory pieces I have ever born 
witness to (including my own).
     
5. Telephone, or Maybe something Else, by Jonathan Angel
--Well, I told you that this might not be very funny, but at 
least should be fun, which I think it was.  I just wanted to see 
what would happen.  It was an experiment, and in terms of how 
badly I feared that it would be horrible and everyone would hate 
me for it, I think it went (and went over) rather well.  I 
learned several  good things from this.  And yes, those were the 
real "telephoned" responses I read.  Why do you people do these 
things to me?
     
6. A Truth about Me, by Jessica Ahrendt
--I feel ashamed about this, but I completely spaced out during 
this, and as a consequence didn't hear one word.  But I heard 
that it was good, and while I won't sing its praises, I will 
believe those people that it was.
     
7. Shakespeare: As Chewed, Swallowed, and Pooped Out into the 
Toilet by James Horak
--This was the second time in a month that Aprille has played a 
woman with tourette's.  I must say that she's pretty good at it 
(I could also follow Egg's suit and claimed James ripped me off 
by using "Aprille with tourette's," but I will not, because, 
unlike Egg, I realize that many things happen in life by sheer 
coincidence, and it does no good to bitter about the fact that 
somebody does something similar to what you have done just as 
well (James vs. me) or better (Arlen and Dan, Bill, Kevin and 
Justin vs. Egg).  All that aside, this was amusing, but I've seen 
James do much much better things.

8. Sylvia Plath and the Goofy Gas Leak, by Chris Stangl
--Wonderful.  My second favorite Stangl joint ever (the first 
favorite being the Turtle monologue, which was funny and 
beautiful).  Knew it had to be good from the title alone.  Loved 
it.

9. The Soup Sketch, by Mary Fons
--By this point I was sick with anxiety for Arlen's piece.  
However, I thought it was "cute" and funny.

10. The Windfall Syndrome, by Arlen Lawson
--I am extremely sensitive to vomiting.  It makes me very ill.  
In the past, I have thrown up solely for the reason that somebody 
right around me did.  I almost threw up TWICE.  But beyond that, 
I have only to words for this:  Disgusting.  Beautiful.  This is 
the best joint I've seen Arlen do, and I think he should do it at 
Best of.

10.5. Egg 2.0, by Adam Hahn
--I knew this coming.  Predictable.  Boring.  Stupid (with due 
credit to Mose for saying that fist).  I did not like it at all. 
 However, it did serve as solid evidence that Adam Hahn is, 
indeed, a total fag.  That, I enjoyed.

11. When a Renowned Poet Was a Lonely Depressed Teenager, He Went 
     by "Angst'on Hughes," by that guy
--Funny.  Good.  I have been lead to understand that this, too, 
was an introductory joint.  If so, it is second only to Balls' as 
the best introductory joint ever.  I had fun.

12. Oi! Oi! Oi! Oi! Oi! Oi! Oi! by Michael Rothschild
--Maybe I'm just a silly fool, but I don't think that a Scottish 
dialect is intrinsically funny, and that a poor imitation isn't 
funny at all.  This is one of the many reasons I don't like Mike 
Myers, and being that this was the basis of the entire sketch, I 
didn't like this much, either.
     
13. Betty and Immanuel, by Mose Hayward
--This wasn't funny.  Nor did it seem like it was supposed to be. 
 It was touching and lovely.  Good writing and good acting.  I 
liked it a lot.  

Grace, by Dan Brooks, Bill Bungeroth, Justin 
     Rose, Kevin Wall
--Mostly great.  I loved everything about it except how Kevin and 
Justin said pretty words as they handed out the eggs.  This 
struck me as pretentious, and I didn't like it at all.  But, BUT, 
let that not detract from the fact that Dan, Kevin, Justin and 
Bill each had wonderful and beautiful monologues.  Let no one 
ever speak a bad word about these fellows ever.  Well, maybe just 
one.  No, just kidding.  Not one.

Goodness, I had forgotten how much energy it takes to do a full 
review.  I'm going to go right to bed and take a well earned 
NAP!!
--Al Jonathan "Livingston Seagull" Sawyer, Angel.

Time: Mon, 28-Feb-2000 08:31:38 GMT     IP: 205.217.148.65


3. Song, by Ben Schmidt
:
--I don't remember this very well, either.  But I think it was 
:
alright.  Not one of my favorite songs by Ben.

No, Al. No. You're just so wrong about that. It was one of MY all 
time favorite Ben Schmidt songs, so I can only assume it was one 
of yours, too. Al. You are wrong.

Time: Mon, 28-Feb-2000 19:50:02 GMT     IP: 128.255.106.179


:Grace, by Dan Brooks, Bill Bungeroth, Justin 
:     Rose, Kevin Wall
:--Mostly great.  I loved everything about it except how Kevin and 
:Justin said pretty words as they handed out the eggs.  This 
:struck me as pretentious, and I didn't like it at all.  But, BUT, 
:let that not detract from the fact that Dan, Kevin, Justin and 
:Bill each had wonderful and beautiful monologues.  Let no one 
:ever speak a bad word about these fellows ever.  Well, maybe just 
:one.  No, just kidding.  Not one.


     Agreed that Justin, Bill, Kevin and Dan are fine fellows and 
talented, having delivered touching monologues one and all, BUT, 
my view of Grace was mostly negtive.  My most obvious complaint is 
that it was too damn long, which is not something I complain about 
often, and not something I really felt troubled by since John 
Hague's Museum piece.  The idea of disguising it as two pieces was 
cheap and obvious, and shows disrespect to other writers by takng 
up an extra slot in addition to extra time.
     The eggs passed out to the audience were fun, but mostly I was 
thinking "are these guys eating omlettes for breakfast lunch and 
dinner, or did they just waste all that vital food protien in 
order to strain a metaphor to its breaking point and show off how 
much work went into some artsy-craftsy activity before the piece?"   
This is what went through my head.  Part of it is my own sense of 
food guilt - the horror that gets instilled by the kind of 
parents, teachers and camp councilors who ask how you can waste 
that when people are starving in Somalia, and the same reason that  
I cringe everytime that banana thing happens in my ten minute 
play.
     The eggs themselves did represent a huge investment of time on 
the part of the artists, but they were too obvious in that 
representation.  Starting out with the instructions and Kevin's 
monologue to point out the immense labor in emptying the shell was 
an excercise in self-flattery.  I'm sure these guys wanted to give 
the audience something after last week, but if they needed to tell 
us how much work each one was, and tell us that they were objects 
of beauty, I get the feeling the audience is having a pacifier 
rammed down its throat: "Don't be angry at us anymore, we worked 
hard to make a beautiful thing for each of you...  no, really, we 
worked HARD and it's BEAUTIFUL."
     The fact that it was easily seen as an apology for the 
previous week's fiasco made it seem like such an excercise in 
audience toadying.  The pathos of these four men grovelling before 
the audience for forgiveness and petending that eggshells are 
exotic jewells given to each of us was sickening.
     So those are my problems with the piece- pretentious, 
masturbatory (although all art persented to anyone else is 
masturbatory, so I should say 'more so'), long, obvious, pathetic.
     But at the time my only hard-core problem with it was length.  
I was flattered by the gift of an eggshell.  Mine was "sharing".  
I thought that I should remember that, because maybe it would help 
me to continue to appreciate the object, which I accidentally left 
in Al's car, and is probably shattered by now.
     This was a pretty negative review, so I certainly hope that 
Bill, Dan, Kevin and Justin don't take its negativity personally, 
since they put a lot of work and investment of very personal 
stories and emotions into it, and also because each of them is my 
friend.
     Anyway, that was a really good night of NoShame overall, and I 
am glad that I didn't corrupt it by writing a lousy piece at the 
last minute.
Aloha from Hawaiowa,
     Nick

Time: Tue, 29-Feb-2000 06:08:02 GMT     IP: 209.253.130.70

Starting out with the instructions and Kevin's 
monologue to point out the immense labor in emptying the shell 
was an excercise in self-flattery.
--Actually, I would agree with you, Nick.  Good point.  That did 
bother me a bit.

The fact that it was easily seen as an apology for the previous 
week's fiasco made it seem like such an excercise in audience 
toadying. 
--I really didn't see it that way at all, Nick.

pretentious, masturbatory 
--Yes, some of it was, Nick.

long
--True, Nick.

obvious, pathetic.
--obvious?  How so?  Pathetic?  Same question as with obvious?
Nick.

I thought that I should remember that, because maybe it would 
help me to continue to appreciate the object, which I accidentally 
left in Al's car, and is probably shattered by now.
--Actually, Nick, it is still in pristine condition, patiently 
awaiting your retreval.

By John, Al!!

Time: Tue, 29-Feb-2000 22:17:02 GMT     IP: 152.163.195.212

REMINDER: Hey, folks, don't forget this weekend is the ten-minute play festival. I really don't
think many people who post on the boardroom need this reminder, but I thought I'd do it anyway.
It's this Thursday, Friday and Saturday at 8pm in theatre B. So come, damn you!! I think that
maybe you will like it, wherever you are.

Time: Wed, 01-Mar-2000 06:59:41 GMT     IP: 166.62.37.200

:REMINDER: Hey, folks, don't forget this weekend is the ten-
minute play festival. I really don't think many people who post

A-so who is in this tenminplays?
B-i hear acters are good
A-but who are they??!!
B-it is secret

:on the boardroom need this reminder, but I thought I'd do it 
anyway. It's this Thursday, Friday and Saturday at 8pm in theatre 
B. So come, damn you!! I think that maybe you will like it, 

C-oh, so you think you know something!

:wherever you are.

G-i no want Arbee sue me!!

(this is joke)

Time: Wed, 01-Mar-2000 07:51:03 GMT     IP: 152.163.207.201

Forget about Arbee, we should worry about Athol Fugard...

I'm coming to the 10's on Wednesday for the dress rehearsal, 
since I'm in Chicago this weekend for an audition.

mike