I have officially been diagnosed with ADD-Inattentive. It's a diagnosis that makes a lot of sense. Pleased with myself for having held down multiple steady jobs for this time, and for avoiding serious punctuality problems; it also explains the havoc wreaked on my writing schedule & feeling a lack of discipline these last three months. I may blog about ADD-I more, since it's very different from ADHD. Don't know yet. Have to decide how comfortable I am with revealing info the general public (beyond a facebook audience.)
Then again, it does give me a great excuse to write a memoir.
Thursday, first day of medication, was great. But at this point, Monday, I'm trying to avoid the obsessive thoughts that never happened when the medication wasn't present. At 2:15 AM. This is a bit much.
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Welcome back/a quick update
I am not a blogger.
I don't know if I'll ever be a blogger.
Sigh…
BUT! I have a website up! You should check it out:
http://www.gregmachlin.com
My producing partner Joe Luis Cedillo and I are conducting a fundraising campaign for two new shows, "Dreams from a Dead City" (watch our amazing trailer, edited by Alex Scott, here)
You can donate & learn about perks here: http://www.indiegogo.com/Company-of-Strangers-Season-One here. Yes, you get stuff if you donate!
All right, we'll see if I can make that blogging thing work.
take care for now,
Greg
I don't know if I'll ever be a blogger.
Sigh…
BUT! I have a website up! You should check it out:
http://www.gregmachlin.com
My producing partner Joe Luis Cedillo and I are conducting a fundraising campaign for two new shows, "Dreams from a Dead City" (watch our amazing trailer, edited by Alex Scott, here)
You can donate & learn about perks here: http://www.indiegogo.com/Company-of-Strangers-Season-One here. Yes, you get stuff if you donate!
All right, we'll see if I can make that blogging thing work.
take care for now,
Greg
Thursday, September 02, 2010
The Lords of Perth Beta-testing FAQ
This just went out to people, but you can still be on the list!
[Greetings all. At some point in the past, either in person or on facebook, you expressed interest in reading "The Lords Of Perth." For at least one of you, this was several months ago, and you may have forgotten--hopefully you haven't--but all the others are pretty recent.]
Well, The Lords of Perth, the best comic fantasy novel outside of the works of Terry Pratchett, is now ready to be read.
So, here's what I'm looking for:
Someone who can read LOP within five weeks of receipt, so by October 13th (six, ma--October 20th--as I'll need a few weeks after comments to let everything marinate). If you don't have the time now, but want to be part of the beta-testing process, there will probably be another beta-test, after I incorporate these comments. If you really think you'll need more time, I can give you till the end of October.)
I'm interested in general thoughts, and responses, but my specific areas of focus are:
1) Do you turn the pages? Are you interested--more than interested--to find out what happens next? Do you find yourself wanting to go back to it when you're away from it? If the answer changes, when are you more interested and at what specific points are less interested? Does the novel ever get boring or predictable? If so, when?
2) Are the characters believable and three-dimensional (with a particular focus on the female ones)? I've written compelling female characters in my plays, but this is a different format.
3) Are the rules of the world clear?
4) Is there a good balance between the different types of text--description, dialogue, action? (Or, less politely: "Wow, I can really tell Greg used to be a playwright. Where the f--- is his f---ing description?")
5) I've made a choice with this world to do something specific with how it relates to our world that one does not ordinarily find in fantasy novels. Without saying more, it'll become clear enough by the time you hit Chapter 17. Does the specific thing I'm doing work, or is it too distracting? Does the specific thing work in moderation, but is there too much of it in there now?
6) I'm attaching a sheet with the first page of The Lords of Perth in two different fonts. One is Times New Roman--square, sturdy. When they talk about Times New Roman, they say, "Yup, it's a font," much in the same way the infamous Car & Driver review of the Toyota Corolla said "Yup, it's a car."
Garamond (size 14) is sleek, sophisticated and elegant, but makes the book appear 46 pages longer--289 vs. 243. But it is purty.
Let me know if you want it in either of these fonts or a third, unnamed font, and I will oblige!
7) Would you buy this book in paperback if you didn't know me? Would you buy it in hardcover?
FAQ
Q: How long is your book?
A: It's 243 pages Times New Roman 12, single-spaced, or around 119,000 words.
Q: How many pages is that in book form?
A: I have no freaking idea, and neither does anyone else. It depends on the publisher. A very rough guesstimate would put this at 350 pages. It's about 5-10 pages longer than your average fantasy novel, but considerably shorter than anything by Robert Jordan, Terry Goodkind, or George R. R. Martin--and definitely not in that genre either. Terry Pratchett really is much closer.
Q: In addition to changing the font, can you double-space it for me?
A: Absolutely. Double-spacing it makes it look a lot longer, but I'm happy to do so.
Q: Can you get me a paper copy, or do I need to print it out myself?
A: Three paper copies of LOP and I have to buy a new laser printer cartridge. If, however, you think that reading an electronic copy will be detrimental to your reading--e.g. you know you'll read it on paper--and you're super-poor, poorer than me, too poor to print, than let's talk.
Q: Does your book come with maps?
A: Yes! It comes with two maps, and a third is in the works. The two existing maps will be emailed out along with the document.
Q: I like maps.
A: Yeah, maps are cool.
Q: Maps! They don't love you like I love you.
A: Yes, that is a catchy song.
Q: Maps! They don't love you like I love you.
A: Please stop now.
Q: If I say I don't like it, and can't even finish it, will you hate me forever, and make little effigy dolls of me, and sneak into my room, watching me sleep, trying to send me horrible dream nightmares, so that I awake with no knowledge of your presence, except the window is open and I feel a strange tingle on the back of my neck?
A: Haha! Hahahahaha! Not at all! (hurriedly puts voodo-doll-making material away)
No, but seriously. They put us through the wringer at Iowa, and I've been through several critiques of my plays, so feel free to be critical with regards to things that are not working; the point of the beta-test is to improve it so that agents will be crawling over themselves to get it to. Obviously, it's great to know things that *are* working too, but the most important part is the stuff that's not, and whether those are big or small problems.
Q: What do I get in exchange for this?
A: A big thank you in the acknowledgements. Yes, if this is published, your name will be in it, featured prominently of the acknowledgements page. Did you know Douglas Coupland got a thank-you in William Gibson's Pattern Recognition? It's true! He really did!
Q: What if your crazy fans try to stalk me after they read my name and go insane with jealousy that they were not chosen to beta-test?
A: I don't have any crazy fans.
Q: Are you sure? I could be a crazy fan. I have a copy of your play Wilmer McClean that I bought off eBay for $702.
A: Can I get a cut of that?
Q: No.
A (disappointed): Oh.
In addition, aside from the sheer joy and excitement that only reading "The Lords of Perth" can provide, I can buy you a beer, or some other beverage, or appetizer, or read your novel or two screenplays (novels are longer than screenplays) in exchange. Or do something else--feel free to be creative with your request.
Q: How creative?
A: Um…
[Greetings all. At some point in the past, either in person or on facebook, you expressed interest in reading "The Lords Of Perth." For at least one of you, this was several months ago, and you may have forgotten--hopefully you haven't--but all the others are pretty recent.]
Well, The Lords of Perth, the best comic fantasy novel outside of the works of Terry Pratchett, is now ready to be read.
So, here's what I'm looking for:
Someone who can read LOP within five weeks of receipt, so by October 13th (six, ma--October 20th--as I'll need a few weeks after comments to let everything marinate). If you don't have the time now, but want to be part of the beta-testing process, there will probably be another beta-test, after I incorporate these comments. If you really think you'll need more time, I can give you till the end of October.)
I'm interested in general thoughts, and responses, but my specific areas of focus are:
1) Do you turn the pages? Are you interested--more than interested--to find out what happens next? Do you find yourself wanting to go back to it when you're away from it? If the answer changes, when are you more interested and at what specific points are less interested? Does the novel ever get boring or predictable? If so, when?
2) Are the characters believable and three-dimensional (with a particular focus on the female ones)? I've written compelling female characters in my plays, but this is a different format.
3) Are the rules of the world clear?
4) Is there a good balance between the different types of text--description, dialogue, action? (Or, less politely: "Wow, I can really tell Greg used to be a playwright. Where the f--- is his f---ing description?")
5) I've made a choice with this world to do something specific with how it relates to our world that one does not ordinarily find in fantasy novels. Without saying more, it'll become clear enough by the time you hit Chapter 17. Does the specific thing I'm doing work, or is it too distracting? Does the specific thing work in moderation, but is there too much of it in there now?
6) I'm attaching a sheet with the first page of The Lords of Perth in two different fonts. One is Times New Roman--square, sturdy. When they talk about Times New Roman, they say, "Yup, it's a font," much in the same way the infamous Car & Driver review of the Toyota Corolla said "Yup, it's a car."
Garamond (size 14) is sleek, sophisticated and elegant, but makes the book appear 46 pages longer--289 vs. 243. But it is purty.
Let me know if you want it in either of these fonts or a third, unnamed font, and I will oblige!
7) Would you buy this book in paperback if you didn't know me? Would you buy it in hardcover?
FAQ
Q: How long is your book?
A: It's 243 pages Times New Roman 12, single-spaced, or around 119,000 words.
Q: How many pages is that in book form?
A: I have no freaking idea, and neither does anyone else. It depends on the publisher. A very rough guesstimate would put this at 350 pages. It's about 5-10 pages longer than your average fantasy novel, but considerably shorter than anything by Robert Jordan, Terry Goodkind, or George R. R. Martin--and definitely not in that genre either. Terry Pratchett really is much closer.
Q: In addition to changing the font, can you double-space it for me?
A: Absolutely. Double-spacing it makes it look a lot longer, but I'm happy to do so.
Q: Can you get me a paper copy, or do I need to print it out myself?
A: Three paper copies of LOP and I have to buy a new laser printer cartridge. If, however, you think that reading an electronic copy will be detrimental to your reading--e.g. you know you'll read it on paper--and you're super-poor, poorer than me, too poor to print, than let's talk.
Q: Does your book come with maps?
A: Yes! It comes with two maps, and a third is in the works. The two existing maps will be emailed out along with the document.
Q: I like maps.
A: Yeah, maps are cool.
Q: Maps! They don't love you like I love you.
A: Yes, that is a catchy song.
Q: Maps! They don't love you like I love you.
A: Please stop now.
Q: If I say I don't like it, and can't even finish it, will you hate me forever, and make little effigy dolls of me, and sneak into my room, watching me sleep, trying to send me horrible dream nightmares, so that I awake with no knowledge of your presence, except the window is open and I feel a strange tingle on the back of my neck?
A: Haha! Hahahahaha! Not at all! (hurriedly puts voodo-doll-making material away)
No, but seriously. They put us through the wringer at Iowa, and I've been through several critiques of my plays, so feel free to be critical with regards to things that are not working; the point of the beta-test is to improve it so that agents will be crawling over themselves to get it to. Obviously, it's great to know things that *are* working too, but the most important part is the stuff that's not, and whether those are big or small problems.
Q: What do I get in exchange for this?
A: A big thank you in the acknowledgements. Yes, if this is published, your name will be in it, featured prominently of the acknowledgements page. Did you know Douglas Coupland got a thank-you in William Gibson's Pattern Recognition? It's true! He really did!
Q: What if your crazy fans try to stalk me after they read my name and go insane with jealousy that they were not chosen to beta-test?
A: I don't have any crazy fans.
Q: Are you sure? I could be a crazy fan. I have a copy of your play Wilmer McClean that I bought off eBay for $702.
A: Can I get a cut of that?
Q: No.
A (disappointed): Oh.
In addition, aside from the sheer joy and excitement that only reading "The Lords of Perth" can provide, I can buy you a beer, or some other beverage, or appetizer, or read your novel or two screenplays (novels are longer than screenplays) in exchange. Or do something else--feel free to be creative with your request.
Q: How creative?
A: Um…
Friday, August 27, 2010
For those who like "Sushi!"
Hello, everyone! A quick note--"Sushi" has a return engagement at Turtle Shell Productions in Manhattan (300 W 43rd St., 6th floor, between 8th and 9th Aves., very close to 8th). Five performances remaining, with two different casts!
http://www.turtleshellproductions.com/Summer%20Shorties%20Summar%20Not%202010%20MAIN.htm
Remaining Group B performances:
Saturday, August 28th, 4 PM
Sunday, August 29th, 2 PM
Remaining Group C performances:
Friday, August 27th 5 PM
Saturday, August 28th 1 PM
Sunday, August 29th 11 AM
There are eight other great one-acts in the lineup, and John Cooper did a great job last year as producer of the festival and stepping in as director for "Sushi."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
More updates on writing (33 pages away from the end of this draft of "The Lords of Perth"! Working with David on "Warehouse-Five"! "Yo, Let's Save Jesus" is being de-bugged by Joel as we speak! We're not actually speaking, though! I'm using too many exclamation points!
http://www.turtleshellproductions.com/Summer%20Shorties%20Summar%20Not%202010%20MAIN.htm
Remaining Group B performances:
Saturday, August 28th, 4 PM
Sunday, August 29th, 2 PM
Remaining Group C performances:
Friday, August 27th 5 PM
Saturday, August 28th 1 PM
Sunday, August 29th 11 AM
There are eight other great one-acts in the lineup, and John Cooper did a great job last year as producer of the festival and stepping in as director for "Sushi."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
More updates on writing (33 pages away from the end of this draft of "The Lords of Perth"! Working with David on "Warehouse-Five"! "Yo, Let's Save Jesus" is being de-bugged by Joel as we speak! We're not actually speaking, though! I'm using too many exclamation points!
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Inspired by my roommate's killing of a guard in Assassin's Creed 2
(Rene, as the Assassin, kills a guard on a roof by hurling a knife into him.)
GREG: Dude, you just killed an innocent guard!
RENE: He wasn't innocent.
GREG: "I wasn't even supposed to be here today!" What if he was on ground duty, huh?
INT. ITALIAN RENAISSANCE HUT - DAY
GUARD: Good news, honey! I just got that promotion! I don't have to stand guard on the dirty ground anymore--they're moving me up to the roof!
BEAUTIFUL ITALIAN WIFE: That's great news, sweetie. Just be careful up there.
CUTE ITALIAN MOPPET (FEMALE): Yay, daddy! Now you'll have enough florins to send me to Italian college and I shall be a great artist like Leonardo da Vinci!
CUTE ITALIAN MOPPET (MALE): I wuv you Daddy.
EXT. ROOFTOP - DAY
The GUARD sees a man in RED running towards him.
GUARD: Oh no, a man running on a roof! He may fall and injure himself. As a Guard, it is my duty to warn him!
(to the ASSASSIN)
Sir! Be careful up here--
THWACK! The assassin hurls a knife into him.
GUARD: Alas, for my poor little Italian moppets. How will they survive the winter?
GUARD DIES.
The Heartless Assassin, whose name is RENE, keeps running.
GREG: Dude, you just killed an innocent guard!
RENE: He wasn't innocent.
GREG: "I wasn't even supposed to be here today!" What if he was on ground duty, huh?
INT. ITALIAN RENAISSANCE HUT - DAY
GUARD: Good news, honey! I just got that promotion! I don't have to stand guard on the dirty ground anymore--they're moving me up to the roof!
BEAUTIFUL ITALIAN WIFE: That's great news, sweetie. Just be careful up there.
CUTE ITALIAN MOPPET (FEMALE): Yay, daddy! Now you'll have enough florins to send me to Italian college and I shall be a great artist like Leonardo da Vinci!
CUTE ITALIAN MOPPET (MALE): I wuv you Daddy.
EXT. ROOFTOP - DAY
The GUARD sees a man in RED running towards him.
GUARD: Oh no, a man running on a roof! He may fall and injure himself. As a Guard, it is my duty to warn him!
(to the ASSASSIN)
Sir! Be careful up here--
THWACK! The assassin hurls a knife into him.
GUARD: Alas, for my poor little Italian moppets. How will they survive the winter?
GUARD DIES.
The Heartless Assassin, whose name is RENE, keeps running.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Updated Doollee entry!
http://www.doollee.com/PlaywrightsM/machlin-greg.html
I've got 90% of my plays listed; trunk plays that aren't ready ("Fond Childhood Memories," "American Patriot: The Oliver North Story," "Wilmer McClean") aren't up yet. ("i hear the loveliest music," the world's best play about a talking laundry room that may or may not be evil, and the young man trapped in it, *is* ready for production, but hasn't gone up yet. (Hint to all the directors out there…)
Doollee is, as far as I know, the best site for information about playwrights on the web. Period.
I've got 90% of my plays listed; trunk plays that aren't ready ("Fond Childhood Memories," "American Patriot: The Oliver North Story," "Wilmer McClean") aren't up yet. ("i hear the loveliest music," the world's best play about a talking laundry room that may or may not be evil, and the young man trapped in it, *is* ready for production, but hasn't gone up yet. (Hint to all the directors out there…)
Doollee is, as far as I know, the best site for information about playwrights on the web. Period.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Glad I didn't go to law school…
The New York Times says life is getting increasingly difficult for what was once the most stable profession:
and introduces me to a fun new blog, Sweet Hot Justice.
I used to fantasize about wanting to be a lawyer. Yes, that's right. I didn't fantasize about being a lawyer, I fantasized about *wanting* to be a lawyer, because if I'd *wanted* to be a lawyer, I'd be one right now. (And there's some stuff about being a lawyer that might have been up my alley… trial lawyers need acting skills; there's a fair amount of legal work that's problem-solving or creative solution-finding, etc.)
Which would mean job security + health insurance + financial stability. I can now safely amend that fantasy.
Of course, it's even worse for those who make unsolicited submissions.
Then again, if you're a writer, it's very easy for you to approach agents directly (I did so when submitting Absurdities as a short story/short play collection), and there are at least 300 literary agents who accept at least unsolicited queries, so there's no excuse there not to go through an agent first. The issue for screenplays and TV writing is that there's no defined way to *get* an agent here…
As always, we'll see what happens.
and introduces me to a fun new blog, Sweet Hot Justice.
I used to fantasize about wanting to be a lawyer. Yes, that's right. I didn't fantasize about being a lawyer, I fantasized about *wanting* to be a lawyer, because if I'd *wanted* to be a lawyer, I'd be one right now. (And there's some stuff about being a lawyer that might have been up my alley… trial lawyers need acting skills; there's a fair amount of legal work that's problem-solving or creative solution-finding, etc.)
Which would mean job security + health insurance + financial stability. I can now safely amend that fantasy.
Of course, it's even worse for those who make unsolicited submissions.
Then again, if you're a writer, it's very easy for you to approach agents directly (I did so when submitting Absurdities as a short story/short play collection), and there are at least 300 literary agents who accept at least unsolicited queries, so there's no excuse there not to go through an agent first. The issue for screenplays and TV writing is that there's no defined way to *get* an agent here…
As always, we'll see what happens.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
ScriptShadow controversy
John August and Craig Mazin, two of the better-known blogging screenwriters, have weighed in the website ScriptShadow, which reviews sold spec screenplays, unsold spec screenplays, and movies in development.
While "Carson Reeves" seems to be a decent writer and reviewer, and while he does have a "top 25" script list of scripts he'd like to see get made, the fact remains that he's reviewing drafts-in-process without writers' permission. Lord knows "The Lords of Perth" has changed enough from draft 1 to draft 2 that I wouldn't want the first draft reviewed *anywhere.* And, indeed, ScriptShadow seems to be actively damaging at least a few writers' chances to make sales, and made it far more inconvenient for many others.
A number of comments from aspiring writers seem dangerously naive, several claiming that ScriptShadow couldn't possibly have made the difference in a buyer choosing to buy or not to buy, or that "any criticism will make the script better." Yes, it could have. Hollywood looks for reasons to say no, even to very good scripts. And no, random criticism from people who may not necessarily know *how* to read a screenplay will not make the script better.
There's not some platonic ideal. This is a business. Things sell randomly, for random reasons. It is very, very difficult to sell a script, and Reeves' insistence on reviewing in-process drafts without writers' permission is disrespectful to the writer and costly. He needs to get writers' permission.
While "Carson Reeves" seems to be a decent writer and reviewer, and while he does have a "top 25" script list of scripts he'd like to see get made, the fact remains that he's reviewing drafts-in-process without writers' permission. Lord knows "The Lords of Perth" has changed enough from draft 1 to draft 2 that I wouldn't want the first draft reviewed *anywhere.* And, indeed, ScriptShadow seems to be actively damaging at least a few writers' chances to make sales, and made it far more inconvenient for many others.
A number of comments from aspiring writers seem dangerously naive, several claiming that ScriptShadow couldn't possibly have made the difference in a buyer choosing to buy or not to buy, or that "any criticism will make the script better." Yes, it could have. Hollywood looks for reasons to say no, even to very good scripts. And no, random criticism from people who may not necessarily know *how* to read a screenplay will not make the script better.
There's not some platonic ideal. This is a business. Things sell randomly, for random reasons. It is very, very difficult to sell a script, and Reeves' insistence on reviewing in-process drafts without writers' permission is disrespectful to the writer and costly. He needs to get writers' permission.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Conversations with God, pt. 4
Me: Hey, God, check out this neat bookshelf I just built all by myself. It really goes well in the room, and helps to relieve the piles of stuff I had on my floor.
God: Good work, Greg. It is a nice bookshelf, and I can see it's full already. As long as you made sure that it's more soundly built than your last bookshelf.
Me: God, I don't know what you're talking about. This is the first bookshelf I've ever built, ever.
God: You didn't have a bookshelf you had in your room on the 2nd floor of that house in Astoria, New York, from July 2004 through July 2005? The one that kept leaning over and wobbling, constantly? Where the slightest push of one of my leaf-blowing winds could knock it over?
(pause)
Me: Nope.
God: Greg, it's against the Ten Commandments to lie.
Me: I don't follow your stupid commandments! I'm a Unitarian! We make our OWN commandments!
God: Greg, you're an insecure weirdo.
Me: I hate you too, God.
God: I love everyone.
Me: Shut up, God.
God: Good work, Greg. It is a nice bookshelf, and I can see it's full already. As long as you made sure that it's more soundly built than your last bookshelf.
Me: God, I don't know what you're talking about. This is the first bookshelf I've ever built, ever.
God: You didn't have a bookshelf you had in your room on the 2nd floor of that house in Astoria, New York, from July 2004 through July 2005? The one that kept leaning over and wobbling, constantly? Where the slightest push of one of my leaf-blowing winds could knock it over?
(pause)
Me: Nope.
God: Greg, it's against the Ten Commandments to lie.
Me: I don't follow your stupid commandments! I'm a Unitarian! We make our OWN commandments!
God: Greg, you're an insecure weirdo.
Me: I hate you too, God.
God: I love everyone.
Me: Shut up, God.
Wednesday, September 09, 2009
Equal rights
Tim Miller alerted me to a story out there about a new play inspired by angry, anti-gay comments on a newspaper's website. I'm a little dubious of the (as-yet-unproduced-but-soon-to-be-produced) play, based solely on the fact that it calls for people to wander around onstage with typewriters strapped to their chests, calling out the comments themselves, but it did prompt this piece of writing on equal rights for gays and lesbians.
There's an issue that strikes me as being something of a moral trump card for gay marriage: hospital rights. Which is to say, the right to sit next to your spouse while they're in the hospital in a coma, or just after they've undergone surgery, or are dying. Hetero husbands and wives have the unquestioned right to do this. Gays and lesbians do not, and are frequently denied that right. Those on the right-wing are often shocked to hear this or try to deny that it happens; here are three links to prove that yes, it really does happen:
http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t43285.html
http://www.examiner.com/x-4107-Gay--Lesbian-Issues-Examiner~y2009m6d2-EXCLUSIVE--California-lesbian-couple-allege-discrimination-at-Fresno-hospital
http://miamiherald.typepad.com/gaysouthflorida/2009/02/lesbian-fights-for-hospital-visitation-rights-in-miami-court.html
And then there's a remarkable, heartbreaking diary on dailykos.com about a diarist who was not permitted to sit next to his partner.
Now, one could pass a "hospital visitation rights bill" making civil unions legal in all the states that don't have them yet, but there would be court challenges galore, because civil unions do not have an already-in-place legal framework backed by precedent and because there are often parents who are angry enough at their son or daughter's orientation to sue. Oh, and they still get thrown out of hospitals, despite the fact that it's ILLEGAL:
http://sesw.blogspot.com/2009/04/oregon-man-thrown-out-of-partners.html
Easier, I think, to just grant gays & lesbians the right to marry.
So, the next time you encounter a conservative blathering on about "special rights" (although they've mostly dropped that one) or claiming they've got gay friends, ask them where they stand on hospital rights.
There's an issue that strikes me as being something of a moral trump card for gay marriage: hospital rights. Which is to say, the right to sit next to your spouse while they're in the hospital in a coma, or just after they've undergone surgery, or are dying. Hetero husbands and wives have the unquestioned right to do this. Gays and lesbians do not, and are frequently denied that right. Those on the right-wing are often shocked to hear this or try to deny that it happens; here are three links to prove that yes, it really does happen:
http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t43285.html
http://www.examiner.com/x-4107-Gay--Lesbian-Issues-Examiner~y2009m6d2-EXCLUSIVE--California-lesbian-couple-allege-discrimination-at-Fresno-hospital
http://miamiherald.typepad.com/gaysouthflorida/2009/02/lesbian-fights-for-hospital-visitation-rights-in-miami-court.html
And then there's a remarkable, heartbreaking diary on dailykos.com about a diarist who was not permitted to sit next to his partner.
Now, one could pass a "hospital visitation rights bill" making civil unions legal in all the states that don't have them yet, but there would be court challenges galore, because civil unions do not have an already-in-place legal framework backed by precedent and because there are often parents who are angry enough at their son or daughter's orientation to sue. Oh, and they still get thrown out of hospitals, despite the fact that it's ILLEGAL:
http://sesw.blogspot.com/2009/04/oregon-man-thrown-out-of-partners.html
Easier, I think, to just grant gays & lesbians the right to marry.
So, the next time you encounter a conservative blathering on about "special rights" (although they've mostly dropped that one) or claiming they've got gay friends, ask them where they stand on hospital rights.
Tuesday, September 01, 2009
When your friends leave the biz
In the past two weeks, I've learned two of my friends (let's call them "A" and "B") have, respectively, stopped directing theatre to pursue teaching math/science (A) and are strongly considering leaving L.A. and pursuing something other than TV writing (B). C and D, a couple both involved in the entertainment industry in some aspect (one's a director, the other's an actor), pulled up stakes and moved out of L.A. to another city. And E, a fellow alumnus of my college who was editing on a prominent cable reality show, decided to end that and go to medical school.
I didn't want this to happen.
Don't get me wrong. They're all making the right choices in terms of their own happiness, I think. C&D were never fans of L.A., B. got screwed over by the show he was working on, and for A, and everyone else who does it, directing no-budget theatre for little to no reward is exhausting.
(*For the record, I have seen a new stage comedy A directed, and it was fantastic--A made excellent use with a small space and 8 actors to cover a sweeping historical tale of American history. It was great. B has actually directed what I consider to be the definitive edition of one of my short plays and wrote an excellent original TV script. (C and D look like they're still going to be pursuing the arts; they just won't be pursuing them here.) I haven't seen E's work in several years, but I liked what I saw and s/he always struck me as having the right sensibility for film.)
In my mind, back at Brown, when I dreamed of great exploits in the entertainment industry, I said to myself "I'll never quit!" (which is true, I won't quit writing. And I'm having a good enough time in L.A. that the very few things that could possibly lure me .) And in my mind, in my daydreams, all my enemies--those who had stood in my way, laughed at me, ignored my talents-- lay vanquished at the feat of the horrors of Hollywood and the tremors of New York, screaming about how they couldn't take it anymore, and I was left standing, along with all my friends & allies, who'd cheered me on along the way. It was never my *friends* who got frustrated and fed up with L.A./New York in my dreams.
Childish, immature, and self-centered of me. I always had dreams of hiring A and B and E to work on whatever projects of mine I was going to do (C and D, although newer, were floating around in the list of people-I'd-like-to-work-with; there's even a screenplay-in-progress somewhere out there with characters named after them). I had--and, to a certain extent still have--two intersecting beliefs:
1) That talented, hardworking people should have the ability to pursue their creative endeavors for as long as they see fit, and
2) That *I* am the person to provide them with this ability if all else fails.
2) is what we call magical thinking. It is noble to want to be able to help all of one's friends by hiring them all for your TV show, but that isn't the way the real world works. You can't just hire all your friends, even if they're qualified. (Okay, maybe you can if your name is Judd Apatow, but then he's Judd Apatow. See also Whedon, Joss.) And even you do, the show might never get on the air. Or get cancelled after seven episodes. And all this magical thinking is contingent on YOU GETTING YOUR OWN TV SHOW, which is kind of nuts. It's like lightning striking in the same place four times in a row.
These stories don't have morals: I hope A and B are happier with their new lives, and I suspect they will be. (E, as far as I know, is quite fulfilled in his new life, and C and D are *very* happy to be out of L.A.) Other people have other things they can do and be fulfilled. At the end of the day, you go back to writing, not because you have more persistence, or more endurance, as many of the above have been in this game longer than you. You go back to writing, as you always will, because for you, that's all there is.
I didn't want this to happen.
Don't get me wrong. They're all making the right choices in terms of their own happiness, I think. C&D were never fans of L.A., B. got screwed over by the show he was working on, and for A, and everyone else who does it, directing no-budget theatre for little to no reward is exhausting.
(*For the record, I have seen a new stage comedy A directed, and it was fantastic--A made excellent use with a small space and 8 actors to cover a sweeping historical tale of American history. It was great. B has actually directed what I consider to be the definitive edition of one of my short plays and wrote an excellent original TV script. (C and D look like they're still going to be pursuing the arts; they just won't be pursuing them here.) I haven't seen E's work in several years, but I liked what I saw and s/he always struck me as having the right sensibility for film.)
In my mind, back at Brown, when I dreamed of great exploits in the entertainment industry, I said to myself "I'll never quit!" (which is true, I won't quit writing. And I'm having a good enough time in L.A. that the very few things that could possibly lure me .) And in my mind, in my daydreams, all my enemies--those who had stood in my way, laughed at me, ignored my talents-- lay vanquished at the feat of the horrors of Hollywood and the tremors of New York, screaming about how they couldn't take it anymore, and I was left standing, along with all my friends & allies, who'd cheered me on along the way. It was never my *friends* who got frustrated and fed up with L.A./New York in my dreams.
Childish, immature, and self-centered of me. I always had dreams of hiring A and B and E to work on whatever projects of mine I was going to do (C and D, although newer, were floating around in the list of people-I'd-like-to-work-with; there's even a screenplay-in-progress somewhere out there with characters named after them). I had--and, to a certain extent still have--two intersecting beliefs:
1) That talented, hardworking people should have the ability to pursue their creative endeavors for as long as they see fit, and
2) That *I* am the person to provide them with this ability if all else fails.
2) is what we call magical thinking. It is noble to want to be able to help all of one's friends by hiring them all for your TV show, but that isn't the way the real world works. You can't just hire all your friends, even if they're qualified. (Okay, maybe you can if your name is Judd Apatow, but then he's Judd Apatow. See also Whedon, Joss.) And even you do, the show might never get on the air. Or get cancelled after seven episodes. And all this magical thinking is contingent on YOU GETTING YOUR OWN TV SHOW, which is kind of nuts. It's like lightning striking in the same place four times in a row.
These stories don't have morals: I hope A and B are happier with their new lives, and I suspect they will be. (E, as far as I know, is quite fulfilled in his new life, and C and D are *very* happy to be out of L.A.) Other people have other things they can do and be fulfilled. At the end of the day, you go back to writing, not because you have more persistence, or more endurance, as many of the above have been in this game longer than you. You go back to writing, as you always will, because for you, that's all there is.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
GIBLETS IS ANGRY!
There's an excellent blog called Fafblog, written by a guy I may or may not know (he said cagily.) In the blog is Giblets, a character who makes Sean Hannity look like Russ Feingold. And Giblets is often angry. It's not updated very much, but the archives are hysterical and still worth reading.
Anyway, the Campaign for Change wanted to know if I had any questions about health care. I did! Let's see what questions Greg has!
Dear Pres. Obama, I'm a fan of the public option & a supporter of your plan and a strong supporter of the public option. My questions are related to your strategy, insofar as there is one, a point on which I am not at all sure.
1) There are several committees in the Senate the bill could go through. Why is Sen. Baucus, who is clearly in the pocket of the insurance industries, being allowed to sabotage the plan and water it down in Finance? Do you have any leverage at all with which to threaten him? Have you considered targeting Baucus, forcing him to announce support for a public option? Are you aware that Max Baucus is severely damaging the Democratic party's image, and making the proposed plan look weak and muddled? Have you considered the possibility that Sen. Baucus is doing this on purpose? (N.B. If you're stupid enough to say "I think Sen. Baucus is a good man" or some other such garbage, I'm going to be very frustrated with your naivete.)
2) Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa has just stated publicly that he is deliberately trying to delay the health care plan. Are you *aware* that the Republicans will suffer politically if your plan passes? Do you understand that they're deliberately trying to deny Americans care so they can sabotage your Presidency and regain power? Do you understand that continuing to compromise with Senator Grassley only makes you look weak and gullible? What exactly are the advantages to your behavior with Grassley? You aren't stupid enough to believe he's going to vote for anything you produce, is he? A GOOD HEALTH CARE BILL HURTS THE REPUBLICANS. SEN. GRASSLEY WILL NOT VOTE FOR ANYTHING THAT HURTS HIS PARTY. HE IS DELIBERATELY NEGOTIATING IN BAD FAITH, *JUST* LIKE HE WAS WITH THE STIMULUS. Subquestion: If a conservative Republican had announced in 1964 that he was deliberately attempting to delay the Civil Rights Act, do you think Lyndon B. Johnson would have "continued to negotiate with him"? Why or why not?
3) 18,000 Americans die every year due to lack of health insurance. Have you considered getting large, blown-up photos of these Americans, particularly those in Maine, Iowa, Montana, and other states with key Republicans, and asking the Republicans why they want good Americans to die? Subquestion: Would you agree in politics it's almost always better to be on the offense than the defensive? Do you agree that this would be a good way to reclaim the initiative? How many photos of dead Americans do you think LBJ would have displayed by now? (I'm guessing 30, one for each day since he proposed the plan. Which he would have passed by now, in case you're wondering.)
4) Do you understand that winning wars of ideas in the media is based on emotion, not reason? If yes, why aren't you doing item #3?
5) Could you respond to this post by Matt Taibbi: "Now, obviously (and this is will be explored in more detail in the forthcoming piece, which will be out this week), the public option was not a cure-all. In fact, the Democrats had in reality already managed to kill the public option by watering it down to the point of near-meaninglessness. But the notion that our president not only does not have any use anymore for a public option, but in fact “will be satisfied” if there is merely “choice and competition” in the market is, well, disgusting. I’ll say this for George Bush: you’d never have caught him frantically negotiating against himself to take the meat out of a signature legislative initiative just because his approval ratings had a bad summer. Can you imagine Bush and Karl Rove allowing themselves to be paraded through Washington on a leash by some dimwit Republican Senator of a state with six people in it the way the Obama White House this summer is allowing Max Baucus (favorite son of the mighty state of Montana) to frog-march them to a one-term presidency?"
6) George W. Bush, despite being massively unpopular, and having wildly unpopular positions, was able to largely pass his legislative agenda. You, despite being popular and having popular positions, are not, at least with this issue. Why do you think this is? Do you think it has something to do with George W. Bush understanding that politics is based on emotion, and not letting idiot Senators from small states run roughshod over him?
7) Sen. Baucus is attempting to sabotage your Presidency and hand control of the Senate and House back to the Republicans (weak health care = Democrats not inspired = Republicans more motivated in 2010 = more votes.) What are you going to do about it?
Sincerely,
Greg Machlin
who put in 20+ hours phonebanking for you.
I don't think they're going to pick my questions.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Brief items
1) Now they've gone too far!
Robots invade classic postcards.
2) I decided when twitter first came out that it was completely useless for real-life things (this was pre-Iranian-revolution) and could therefore only be used for fiction.
If you're not following me on twitter, you're missing the epic saga of me attempting to invade Antarctica, being intercepted by penguins somewhere in Mexico, being kidnapped by penguins, and being dragged through Central and South America en route to Antarctica.
Now I have Stockholm Syndrome and have graciously consented to be converted into a human-penguin hybrid, called a "huguin."
http://www.twitter.com/gregmachlin
3) I'm up to editing pg. 111 (single-spaced) in the novel out of 240 (again, single-spaced.) It's going well; I just encountered a brief passage that will have to be rewritten.
4) Conservatives gone wild: Rep. Mike Castle of Delaware, a solid Republican, gets yelled at by conservatives for not investigating Obama's birth certificate. No, I'm serious. They think he was secretly born in Kenya.
http://washingtonindependent.com/51489/birther-movement-picks-up-steam
Question for any Republicans who might actually believe Obama's not really a U.S. citizen: Why would conservative Supreme Court Justice agree to swear in a non-U.S.-citizen, and doesn't that mean Roberts is in on this conspiracy as well?
Also, some commenter is saying he wants there to be a "night of long knives" for the Democrats," and comes very close to wishing for Obama to be assassinated. Charming.
Robots invade classic postcards.
2) I decided when twitter first came out that it was completely useless for real-life things (this was pre-Iranian-revolution) and could therefore only be used for fiction.
If you're not following me on twitter, you're missing the epic saga of me attempting to invade Antarctica, being intercepted by penguins somewhere in Mexico, being kidnapped by penguins, and being dragged through Central and South America en route to Antarctica.
Now I have Stockholm Syndrome and have graciously consented to be converted into a human-penguin hybrid, called a "huguin."
http://www.twitter.com/gregmachlin
3) I'm up to editing pg. 111 (single-spaced) in the novel out of 240 (again, single-spaced.) It's going well; I just encountered a brief passage that will have to be rewritten.
4) Conservatives gone wild: Rep. Mike Castle of Delaware, a solid Republican, gets yelled at by conservatives for not investigating Obama's birth certificate. No, I'm serious. They think he was secretly born in Kenya.
http://washingtonindependent.com/51489/birther-movement-picks-up-steam
Question for any Republicans who might actually believe Obama's not really a U.S. citizen: Why would conservative Supreme Court Justice agree to swear in a non-U.S.-citizen, and doesn't that mean Roberts is in on this conspiracy as well?
Also, some commenter is saying he wants there to be a "night of long knives" for the Democrats," and comes very close to wishing for Obama to be assassinated. Charming.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Xtranormal update
There's an anonymous comment about how Xtranormal are " unscrupulous ba[s]terds," and unlike some anonymous stuff, you can actually trust this one, because it comes from someone I actually know personally.
Apparently Xtranormal didn't pay a bunch of their staff, and then laid them off, and still owes several people money, of whom this guy is one. So I guess I'm glad I stopped using that site. And yeah, xtranormal, pay my new friend the damn money you owe him.
Apparently Xtranormal didn't pay a bunch of their staff, and then laid them off, and still owes several people money, of whom this guy is one. So I guess I'm glad I stopped using that site. And yeah, xtranormal, pay my new friend the damn money you owe him.
Saturday, July 04, 2009
"AFTER an unequivocal experience…"
"AFTER an unequivocal experience on the inefficiency of the subsisting federal government, you are called upon to deliberate on a new Constitution for the United States of America."--Federalist #1.
The 2nd time a major marketing campaign was used as a force of good (the first being Common Sense, of course.)
Read the whole thing, as they say.
And happy 4th of July!
The 2nd time a major marketing campaign was used as a force of good (the first being Common Sense, of course.)
Read the whole thing, as they say.
And happy 4th of July!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
