Mon., Sept. 17 was a long day. Good, though, in that I was being an actor the whole time. I was exhausted at the end of it, partly because I hadn't had much sleep the two nights before.
7 am -- Video shoot for the Secret Service. Guess what? I can't tell you about the content of the script! Really! Can't you just hear the James Bond theme in your head right now? It wasn't all that exciting though, I mean, nothing you haven't already seen in Men In Black (I or II).
4pm -- rehearsal for the staged reading of Screen Play @ Rep.
7pm -- reading of Screen Play @ Rep. Went well, and fairly well received. Screen Play is pretty strongly political (A.R. Gurney is definitely no fan of GWB or neo-conservatives). In the post-show discussion with the audience, one thing we talked about was how different folks react to plays with political p.o.v.'s. One woman said that, while a person might not like a play like this, you don't learn anything if you don't keep an open mind. That's true, but . . . well, I didn't say it at the time (because usually it's the audience that asks and theatre reps and cast answering), but I wondered if the woman would have felt the same way if she disagreed with the play's p.o.v.
Would you? Easier said than done. I vaguely remember something from Frederick Douglass, I believe it was. He said that one should be able argue for the opposing point better than the opposition. Imagine that. If you can do that, not only can you understand their p.o.v., you'd be more able to counter it. Your own opinion would be strengthened or changed. That would require a lot of thought and a lot of listening, not strong points for a lot of people, it seems.