But what about the WOMEN? GTTP's REAL purpose

So, there is some confusion about GTTP and Women...Let me explain.

When I started the company (read here and here and here) you'll notice that it was a little, uh, how shall I say this...chaotic? disorganized? (unorganized isn't a word, right? - my mom and John are both reading this and muttering, "can't she look it up in a dictionary? How does she not know that 'unorganized' isn't a word?" - actually I did just look it up and it is a word so forget I said anything - but I digress) anyway, the decision to start a company was completely lacking in organization and it was, how shall we say - unfocused?

Basically, I knew I wanted to start a theater but other than, "because I want to direct" I didn't really have a purpose - a mission statement, if you will. And, one of the first things I discovered in my earliest research, is that you can't start a theater company - especially one that may ultimately be its own nonprofit company - without a purpose, nay, a greater purpose that hopes to help mankind. So I started to think about what my directing means to me. What are some of the themes I keep exploring and could conceivably continue to explore throughout my career and I kept coming back to the women - ironic really what with the "help mankind" thing above (perhaps I should have said "to help womankind"), but, anyway, you get the picture.

It may be that I try to direct shows by people that I know and most of the writers I know are women and so they write about women. Or it could be that I can't help exploring what it means to be a woman in today's day and age. Or it could be that sexism is SO NOT dead and it pisses me off beyond belief. Or it could be that I'm a woman. Or it could be that WOMEN ARE MORE THAN 50% of the world's population and yet they are STILL woefully underrepresented in the arts...and in just about every other field as well, but I can only do so much. So I decided that I wanted my company to focus on women...

And by focus on women, I do not mean some militant, no men allowed, mentality. This ain't a reverse little rascals clubhouse with a sign on the door that says "No BOYS allowed". In fact, I believe that a fair portion of being a woman has to do with how women interact with men (the same way that a fair portion of being a man has to do with how men interact with women). Basically, I just mean that my purpose and GTTP's purpose is to try to give women a little more representation at least in my small corner of the theater world. So whether that means shows written by women, or directed by women, or starring women, or being designed by women, or generally about women, and/or all of the above, the focus of the company is definitely women.

In fact, the debut show is all about women (and by "all about women" I mean that the lead characters are women) but more then being all about women, I believe that, though the show will appeal to anyone who likes interesting characters and great writing, it will particularly resonate with women. The fears the main characters have (and the show is all about fear) are fears that I think are ever present in women's minds (and, not to scare the guys or anything, but I mean right up in the very front of women's minds - just below the surface something like 98% of the time) - or perhaps it's just that my female friends will discuss those fears while my male friends won't admit they have them - whichever it is, I feel like the show really explores these fears from a female perspective.

So, though the company is named in honor of a man (that you can read about here: Going To Tahiti Productions: What's in a Name?), it's also named for the possibilities that await around every corner - and those possibilities see no gender.

Sunday In The Park With George

The blog review:

So, I saw Sunday in the Park With George a few weeks ago and have been meaning to write my review...but I realized that I needed to let it sit for awhile until I figured out what I wanted to say. Don't get me wrong I LOVED the show. I thought it was beautiful and moving and everything I want out of a theatrical experience. But there was more to it than that. This was my first encounter with this particular Sondheim show and, (as often happens the first time I'm exposed to Sondheim), I needed to digest my reaction to it and let the show percolate in my mind for awhile before I can talk intelligently about it...and, to be completely honest, I'm not sure that my reaction will be intelligently conveyed, but I'll give it the old college try.

For those of you not familiar with the show, the first act follows a fictionalized Georges Seurat as he creates the painting "A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte" (The painting is above and is probably familiar to many - and, I'm totally dating myself with this statement, but if you're of a certain generation, it inspires a memory of Alan Ruck singing, "When Cameron was in Egypt's Land...let my Cameron gooooo," because, if you saw Ferris Beuller's Day Off you remember Cameron staring at this painting in the Art Museum they visit...but I digress).

Anywho, as I was saying, the first act of SitPWG follows a fictionalized Georges Seurat and his model/lover, Dot, as they create the painting. Highlighted throughout the first act are Seurat's drive and intensity as he focuses entirely on perfecting the painting and lets everything around him drift away. The second act, which takes place 100 years later centers on Georges' and Dot's (again fictionalized) great grandson, George, an artist displaying his latest art work - a light presentation/installation - inspired by the painting. The second act is particularly sneaky as it starts out seemingly about art and ends up making a profound statement about life - about legacy, life, hope and the possibilities of a blank canvas.

One of the things I love about Sondheim, and it was particularly apparent in this show in general, and in this production in particular, is that the place you think he's going at the end of the first act, is never the place he ends up. From what I understand, in the past, this show has been criticized for being cold and distant, and I can see why one would think that at intermission. The first act, though visually beautiful (more on that later) seems to be just about an obsessive artist. As my dad said at intermission when I asked how he was enjoying it, "Jess, it strikes me that artists of the 19th century were like rock stars are today...and I care as little about them." I didn't feel quite that detached, and in fact the last scene of the first act which SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT is a creation of the painting itself - Georges moves around the stage positioning the rest of the cast into the tableau of the painting and until he began to position them, despite the fact that they'd been in their recognizable-from-the-painting outfits for the entire first act, I didn't see it coming. And the power of that moment, when the cast suddenly becomes a living representation of this painting I have seen a gazillion times before, well, I'll admit, it brought me to tears. The act of creation, in whatever form it takes, is powerful to me...so, yeah, Sondheim, and this particular production, had me from the start but my dad, yeah, not so much.

...and then came the second act. The second act again starts out seeming to be about an obsessive, temperamental artist; but as it continues you realize that it's about love and loss and connections we try to make and connections we lose. It's about wanting to leave something behind and it's about the possibilities that are around us if we only choose to see them. As affecting as I found the first act, I felt that the single most moving moment of the piece, and I don't know if it was a director's choice (in which case, well played Sam Buntrock, well played) or if it's in the script, was the last moment of the piece. SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT (I should make a macro for that). The last moment of the show the stage goes completely blank - no set, no projections (more on that later), clear light, and George turns his back to the audience to see this blank canvas and reacts with a gasp of surprise and utter delight at the possibilities...It is beautifully played by Daniel Evans and was so moving to me, I can't even describe why, that the tears started to flow again.

I guess I was so moved because I love that moment. That moment when you know that anything is possible. That moment when all avenues are open to you. That moment before the doubt creeps in and before the choices are made when the potential for joy and novelty and excitement is around every corner. It's the moment that Going To Tahiti Productions was created for (forgive the plug) and it is the thing I love about theater, about directing, about art, and yeah, about life too. I wonder if it is as affecting a piece of theater to non artists. I've read that it is considered one of Sondheim's most personal shows, and I can definitely see how it can be seen that way, but I wonder if the non-artists in the crowd were as excited and moved by the show as I was. What I do know is that my dad's reaction after the first show was a 180 compared to his intermission reaction. After it was over, I turned to him to see what he thought about the show and he said, "I forgot about Sondheim and his f**king second acts." So, I guess some of the non artists were effected by the show too. My Mom, a Sondheim fanatic, and the reason we were at the show to begin with, was kinda like me - with Sondheim from the second the lights went up.

Which brings me to some comments about this production specifically. It was absoLUTEly beautiful. They achieved so much with projections that it truly looked like there was a big brush painting the stage. I've never seen anything like it. One review I read said that it was like CGI, (computer generated imagery) on stage and I would have to agree with that. But it was so beautiful. I absolutely loved it. It was one of those times when a technique really added to, supported, and enhanced the work that the actors were doing. It was really wonderful. And I don't know why I'm so surprised. I mean I've been watching CGI in movies for years and yet I'm just not expecting to see it on stage. I know the power of a brilliant performer with brilliant material doing his or her thing. But this was a testament to what can be done with more, with multimedia, with design...oh, and with money. And this was a show that particularly lent itself to the use of projection. It's a show that needs paintings to be painted and come alive in front of the audiences eyes, so it's a perfect medium for the kind of projection work they used.

So, yeah, all in all, I liked it. Good show, old chap, good show...

Where are we now?

So here's the current status:

I launched the company last year and started fundraising by sending emails to everyone I knew (and had email addresses for). That brought in the first round of dough.

After that I got the website up and running and I sent out a winter newsletter announcing the website and some other initiatives and that brought in the second round of dough.

In February I sent out a snail mail mailing to fellow Waterford High School alums and the amazing crew of drivers I had worked with at OZOcar...and wouldn't you know it (and, if you knew these folks, this would come as no surprise to you) both the Lancers and the drivers really stepped up to the plate to bring in another round of dough.

Currently we're at about $4500 - which is not bad at all for a few months work, but seeing as the goal is $20,000 we still have a ways to go. Now, I may get to a point when I can afford to rent the theater and not much else - a point where I just pull the trigger and we have a show - come hell or high water. Honestly, I'd rather have the whole budget in the bank and ready to spend before I spend a dime, but the clock is ticking (for tax reasons I MUST have the show during this tax year) and if I can't have the perfect big budget production, maybe a smaller budget show will still be worth it. Honestly, if I can afford a performance space for a 3-4 week run, then the smaller budget thing will be fine with me...Besides, I need to be directing. It's killing me that it's been so long since I've worked with actors and really crafted a production, so, yeah, that "come hell or high water" thing, looking very appealing right now. I have gotten to the point where I'm directing my fiance around the apartment and really, that's just bossy and naggy (two things I'd really rather not be)...but I digress...

The next step which is happening even as I write this, is the prep and distribution of the Spring 2008 newsletter (which some of you have already received and others will be receiving) - announcing this blog and getting people prepped for some spring/summer fundraisers that are in the planning stage. The hope is that people, after reading the newsletter and the blog, will want to get involved and want to be a part of GTTP's future.

So that's where we are now - $4500 and counting. My aim is to have at least two fundraisers in the next couple of months and the show this summer... I will keep everyone posted.

So what's this show you've mentioned?

So I got the fiscal sponsorship and I got the website up and running (have I mentioned it? It can be found here www.goingtotahitiproductions.com. And now I'm trying to raise money...but for what, you ask. Very good question.


Ok, for those of you who don't know this, I am a sci-fi fan. This is important because, as a sci-fi fan, I'm particularly sensitive to spoilers. "Nice non-sequiter, Jess," you say. Actually it's not a non-sequiter. As someone who is sensitive to spoilers (like don't want to even know if you liked it or hated it before I see it because if I know you well enough I'll be able to tell from your like/dislike, what happens in the movie and then I'll be bummed sensitive to spoilers), I would absolutely hate the idea that in discussing my shows, I ruined something for a potential audience member. So, dear readers, for those of you who are as sensitive to spoilers as I, skip the rest of this post if you don't want to know anything about In The Ebb until the curtain goes up and you're butt is in a seat in the theater. That is my big

SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT!!!

For everyone else who wants to know what the shows are about, here you go:

In The Ebb is a trio of one acts: I Like You To Marlowe, The Ebb, and St. James in the Field of Stars. They are based on short stories that my sister, Camilla wrote a few years ago. Each story has at it's core a woman who is trying to deal with whatever life throws at her. Each protagonist is technically a different woman but they could conceivably be the same woman who has just had different life experiences. The main characters of each are archetypes of the modern American woman.

But what are the plays about, Jess?

I Like You To Marlowe is about fear. Fear of death and never becoming the person you were meant to be. Fear of turning from a normal girl into a bitter woman. Fear of losing, or of already having lost, who you are as a person. Before the events of the play two college age twin sisters (yes I said twins and don't think for a second that that doesn't give me a little thrill of fear about the casting process), Stella and Luna, are in a car accident and though both lived, Luna was left with a disfiguring scar (and there are the palpitations about the make-up process). For Luna, the injuries have meant a retreat even further into herself. On the eve of the millennium, when the world could possibly end, the sisters and their significant others brave the crowds (and Dick Clark) in Times Square and try to celebrate another year gone by. For Luna, celebrating the year gone by is more difficult - she would prefer to hide from the world, from her own face which she sees on Stella every day, from the guilt of feeling sorry for herself and being angry with her sister and from the fear of knowing - really knowing - that this life can end in an instant. Luna would prefer to pull away and wait for life to quietly pass her by.

The Ebb is about fear. (Are you sensing a theme here, people?) Emily is a normal young American woman. Recently married and fixing up her dream house with her dream husband and living her dream life...A life she can't seem to enjoy because she is absolutely terrified that it is going to be taken away from her. Despite the gifts life has bestowed on her, Emily can't settle in to her own happiness because the love she feels for those around her is so overwhelming that she is paralyzed with the fear that it will end and she will be left all alone, again. Emily fears that truly enjoying her life will be a flag to the universe and will bring the wrath of the fates upon her...and as much as she knows in her head that this is something she needs to get past, she can't seem to move forward. She's stuck in this transitional zone between fear and contentment, between love and loss and no matter how she tries she can't seem to reconcile the contradictions. As her new husband and she fix up their dream house, she pulls away from him and waits for life to quietly pass her by.

St. James in the Field of Stars is about fear. (yup, I think you figured out the theme.) When Alicia's father was lost at sea, she moved to Europe and basically ran away from everything in her life that was familiar to her. When Joel, her "Never," tracks her down and invites her from the cold, wet and dark of Scotland to the sunny, dry and warmth of Spain, she goes more because she needs to keep running than because she actually wants to see him or Spain. Alicia is so frightened that she will connect with someone again and lose another person that she loves - a loss she has never gotten over - that she, like Luna, like Emily pulls away from everyone and tries to build this protected little bubble around herself so that no one can get in...and she can wait for life to quietly pass her by.

Luna, Emily, and Alicia are all three paralyzed by fear...and all three need to find a way to face that fear, embrace their lives and those around them and live, if not without fear, at least in spite of it.

...so, yeah, that's what the show is about.

The Joys of Fiscal Sponsorship

So, what is this "Fiscal Sponsorship" you speak of, Jessica? Well, for those of you who don't know, it is this amazing thing where a nonprofit organization sponsors a smaller organization. If you are an individual, or a small company, particularly in the arts (I only know about it in the arts, though there may be other organizations in other fields that offer it) you can become sponsored by a larger, more established company. In my case, I went with The Field. By being sponsored I am able to have the benefits of being a non-profit company, without having to go through the process of selecting a board, writing bylaws and applying for my own 501(c)(3). What's more, if down the line, I'm interested in establishing an LLC or LLP instead of a non-profit, then I don't have to reverse anything. I can just go from Sole Proprietorship, to whatever corporate structure I wish without having to dissolve something I already established.

By being sponsored, donations made to my company are tax deductible to the donor. Additionally, I can apply for grants that are available only to non-profit companies, and I can use resources that are for non-profit companies. And, if someone wants to donate to my company by credit card, they can do so on The Field's website without me having to set up some sort of online payment system. It's remarkably freeing - allowing me to have the benefits of a non-profit company without having to set it up and run it. It allows me the opportunity to focus on the art.

Now comes my PSA - If you are an artist in the New York area and you're interested in becoming fiscally sponsored, there are a couple of organizations which can help you. The two I am most familiar with are The Field www.thefield.org and Fractured Atlas www.fracturedatlas.org.

Both organizations are wonderful and provide many more resources than just fiscal sponsorship. I believe The Field started by being a dance support system whereas Fractured Atlas was really more focused on theater (but don't quote me on that). Now they both are really active in supporting all performing arts. I absolutely can not say enough good things about The Field (I have no personal experience with Fractured Atlas but from what I understand from people I've spoken to, they are also a wonderful organization.) Everyone at The Field is helpful and knowledgeable and just all around terrific. As you can see, I'm a bit of a fan.

Why I Snapped and What I Decided to Do About It

So last Easter (2007), I finally just got fed up...Fed up with the day job thing, fed up with the still not having a career I enjoy or am meant to do thing, just generally fed up. A few years ago I directed a short film, a short film I still hope to return to one day, and it went really well and the end product is great, but I don't know how to go from a short film that I paid for with my credit card to a full length movie that I somehow raise a million dollars for. And, for years in New York, as I mentioned, I have directed these shows, which usually had a 4 night run and which only friends and family came to see. So when I snapped, I decided it was time to move it up a level, make this directing thing happen once and for all or give it up.

So I picked a project, a GREAT project - a series of one acts that my sister, Camilla, wrote and actually put together an actual budget and decided to try to raise some money, have a long run (at least three weeks), and try to get reviewed - try to get some buzz and end up parlaying this into a career. And, the more I thought of it, the more sense it made to start an actual company, get a federal tax id number, and have a base, from which to really launch the rest of my professional life. Forget that I had no IDEA how to do that. As the Nike commercials say, the best way to figure something out is to just do it, right? I knew I'd still need a day job, probably for a couple of years. But at least I wouldn't be devoting all of this time to something that is there for a weekend, and then is over and goes nowhere.

So, through much bumbling around, I figured it out, registered the business name, applied to the IRS for a Federal Tax ID Number, opened a business bank account and figured it out. Hell, I even figured out how to get a website up and running. See it here at www.goingtotahitiproductions.com. And then I found a fiscal sponsor...

How I got here...cont. (ok, so maybe you will need can goods for this story)

You see, I have been really spoiled by my family in this realm. My parents are both college professors and they both love their work. They love the atmospheres they work in. They love teaching. They're really good at it. And, for better or worse, I don't think either of them have any idea what it is like to get to that Sunday night before heading to the day job and think to yourself, I would honestly rather stick a pen in my eye than have to go to work tomorrow - I mean, pen-in-the-eye is a legitimate reason to miss work, right? ...all I mean to say by all of this is that I grew up thinking it was perfectly right and good to love what you do for a living. In fact, I grew up believing that you should aim for that - love what you do. And my parents, god love 'em, have absolutely supported my pursuit of this dream.

So I came to NY and started directing. I have had many day jobs - waitress, receptionist, admin asst., executive asst., office manager, massage therapist - and all the while I have been directing. Lots of little shows - most original works - at all different theaters around the city. And they'd gone pretty well. My family and friends have come to see them, and if they are to believed, I really am a rather good director. But I never wanted to produce. It's just not something I ever wanted to do. The questions a producer has to deal with - the logistics of raising money and mounting a production - hold no interest to me. It's not creative enough for me. So for years I have resisted producing my own productions. And then I snapped...