My budget is tight and I'm thinking:
Should I see "Rumplestilskin" at BHCT next weekend, or save it to see "Hair" at TCR the following weekend?
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Hi-Line Redeems Itself
After I tore apart the Hi-Line last week, they seem to have redeemed themselves and this is why:
1). Alex Entz articles are well written and researched. He spoke to the big people with the Black Hawk County Republicans. Good work.
2). Monica Reida says what we've all been thinking. Again. This time she says that Day of Silence is ineffective. Thank you. According to her blog she's been under fire for this, but screw them. She's a voice for the homos. Also, I noticed that she's wearing a suit in the now un-hilarious photo accompanying her columns.
3). Katie Dexter has two amusing cartoons.
4). Although the Feature section is a bit shrug-inducing for me, I thought the whole let's-have-a-student-observe-another-school thing is interesting.
5). Philanthropy is endorsed in the "Our View." Also, Monica Reida clearly didn't write this one.
6). None of my least favorite writers wrote anything.
The only downside is an article on the school budget, which I feel goes on for too long, but that's just me. My problem is that it doesn't seem like that big of an issue.
I love that there's a picture of busses with the article, though.
Well done.
I should tell the advisor this, I think.
1). Alex Entz articles are well written and researched. He spoke to the big people with the Black Hawk County Republicans. Good work.
2). Monica Reida says what we've all been thinking. Again. This time she says that Day of Silence is ineffective. Thank you. According to her blog she's been under fire for this, but screw them. She's a voice for the homos. Also, I noticed that she's wearing a suit in the now un-hilarious photo accompanying her columns.
3). Katie Dexter has two amusing cartoons.
4). Although the Feature section is a bit shrug-inducing for me, I thought the whole let's-have-a-student-observe-another-school thing is interesting.
5). Philanthropy is endorsed in the "Our View." Also, Monica Reida clearly didn't write this one.
6). None of my least favorite writers wrote anything.
The only downside is an article on the school budget, which I feel goes on for too long, but that's just me. My problem is that it doesn't seem like that big of an issue.
I love that there's a picture of busses with the article, though.
Well done.
I should tell the advisor this, I think.
So Sorry
My computer was broken.
Anyway, Rabbit Hole at City Center was stunning. That's all I can say.
Well, I'm also thinking that maybe I should have moved to Cedar Rapids or Iowa City.
Anyway, Rabbit Hole at City Center was stunning. That's all I can say.
Well, I'm also thinking that maybe I should have moved to Cedar Rapids or Iowa City.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Hi-Line Now Only Marginally Better Than Courier
Someone was nice enough to leave a copy of this week's Hi-Line laying around at a coffee shop the other day, so I read it.
Here are my two big problems with it:
1). There are three news stories in this week's issue. One is on an art show at the Hearst Center. Another is on a Renaissance Program that I'm guessing is to reward students for having a 3.0 or higher. (What is that, a B, B-?) The third one is on gay marriage being legalized and is written by Monica Reida, who wrote a great article that someone fucked up. But since gay marriage being legal is something that newspapers across the country were talking about, shouldn't that be on the front page? Why is some student rewards program that is like Book It, but less sensical be on the front page? On another note, the article on the Renaissance program sucks. First of all, it makes no sense. Second of all, this quote is terrible:
The gift certificates are cool. Great. Teenage apathy, magnified.
Maybe I'm looking at this wrong. Maybe because some of the writers (I think it's obvious which one's they are) are so much better than everyone else, it really makes the poor writing and reporting of everyone else really obvious. Especially if you're sharing a section with a certain theater critic.
Which brings me to my second point.
2). Do any of the editors look at that newspaper before it goes to print? Because there is a pretty obvious error that the writer did not make with the article.
This is how the end of the first and the beginning of the second column reads in the print edition:
What? Does that sentence make no sense to anyone other than me?
Then the end of the second column and the beginning of the third column reads like this:
As awesome as it is that she used "ebullience" to describe something, I have no clue what a "surprise nation" is. Other than maybe a new country in Africa.
Judging from what is in the columns, I thought that maybe if you switched around the second and the third column, the article might make a bit of sense. If not, Monica Reida went nuts after seeing a terrible play.
So, this is how the first and second columns read after I switched them.
And the second and third columns:
Don't they make so much more sense?
This is how the article appears on the online version. It flows very nicely and because I've been reading what Monica Reida's been writing since August, I think it's safe to say that that is not her mistake, it's the editors.
Unless she's now an editor because judging from her blog and how the "Our View" reads, she wrote something the editorial staff is supposed to write. I don't think anyone else would end something with "We hope that as time goes on, the opponents of the ruling will see that allowing same-sex marriage to occur does not result in the end of the world."
But this isn't the first time the editors of the Hi-Line have made it very obvious that they don't proofread. For example, in Monica Reida's article on plays in Eastern Iowa, one section reads like this:
What did Stage Left do that she thought was brilliant? We don't know. Maybe it's The Flu Season or maybe it's Betrayal or maybe it's something else they did.
And then there is "Ban-Rays", but I can't harp on that forever. Actually, I could. I just don't feel like it.
But what's happened with the article on the Supreme Court's ruling is ridiculous. Do they put together that newspaper by hand? Because then I could understand it. Other wise, that shouldn't be happening. Hell, I don't even think that the Courier has done that before.
I wonder if Monica Reida is angry over this. She should be. She has every right to be angry.
Here are my two big problems with it:
1). There are three news stories in this week's issue. One is on an art show at the Hearst Center. Another is on a Renaissance Program that I'm guessing is to reward students for having a 3.0 or higher. (What is that, a B, B-?) The third one is on gay marriage being legalized and is written by Monica Reida, who wrote a great article that someone fucked up. But since gay marriage being legal is something that newspapers across the country were talking about, shouldn't that be on the front page? Why is some student rewards program that is like Book It, but less sensical be on the front page? On another note, the article on the Renaissance program sucks. First of all, it makes no sense. Second of all, this quote is terrible:
Senior Michael Rogers disagrees with the program’s discontinuation. “That’s really lame. If I’d worked so hard to get good grades, I’d be pretty mad if they got rid of the reward. If you’re doing that good, there’s no real point in taking the final anyway,” Rogers said. “I guess the gift certificates and stuff are cool, though.”
The gift certificates are cool. Great. Teenage apathy, magnified.
Maybe I'm looking at this wrong. Maybe because some of the writers (I think it's obvious which one's they are) are so much better than everyone else, it really makes the poor writing and reporting of everyone else really obvious. Especially if you're sharing a section with a certain theater critic.
Which brings me to my second point.
2). Do any of the editors look at that newspaper before it goes to print? Because there is a pretty obvious error that the writer did not make with the article.
This is how the end of the first and the beginning of the second column reads in the print edition:
After the ruling was announced, there was celebration among gays, lesbians, bisexuals and their allies throughout the state as well as the according to UNI Proud the turn out for the first rally was very large.
What? Does that sentence make no sense to anyone other than me?
Then the end of the second column and the beginning of the third column reads like this:
The mood at the rally was that of ebullience along with some surprise nation.
As awesome as it is that she used "ebullience" to describe something, I have no clue what a "surprise nation" is. Other than maybe a new country in Africa.
Judging from what is in the columns, I thought that maybe if you switched around the second and the third column, the article might make a bit of sense. If not, Monica Reida went nuts after seeing a terrible play.
So, this is how the first and second columns read after I switched them.
After the ruling was announced, there was celebration among gays, lesbians, bisexuals and their allies throughout the state as well as the nation.
And the second and third columns:
The turnout for the later rally was of a nice size, but according to UNI Proud the turn out for the first rally was very large.
Don't they make so much more sense?
This is how the article appears on the online version. It flows very nicely and because I've been reading what Monica Reida's been writing since August, I think it's safe to say that that is not her mistake, it's the editors.
Unless she's now an editor because judging from her blog and how the "Our View" reads, she wrote something the editorial staff is supposed to write. I don't think anyone else would end something with "We hope that as time goes on, the opponents of the ruling will see that allowing same-sex marriage to occur does not result in the end of the world."
But this isn't the first time the editors of the Hi-Line have made it very obvious that they don't proofread. For example, in Monica Reida's article on plays in Eastern Iowa, one section reads like this:
The company, which is still fairly new, has done The Flu Season by Will Eno, and Betrayal by Nobel laureate Harold Pinter, among others. Stage Left Productions did this in a poorly heated room in Cedar Rapids but presently it is one of the finest productions I have ever seen in my 12 years of attending live theater.
What did Stage Left do that she thought was brilliant? We don't know. Maybe it's The Flu Season or maybe it's Betrayal or maybe it's something else they did.
And then there is "Ban-Rays", but I can't harp on that forever. Actually, I could. I just don't feel like it.
But what's happened with the article on the Supreme Court's ruling is ridiculous. Do they put together that newspaper by hand? Because then I could understand it. Other wise, that shouldn't be happening. Hell, I don't even think that the Courier has done that before.
I wonder if Monica Reida is angry over this. She should be. She has every right to be angry.
"Raising Medusa," "Rabbit Hole" and More
-CorridorBuzz.com has a review of "Raising Medusa."
-"Rabbit Hole" opens tomorrow in Coralville at the Iowa Realty/Wells Fargo Building. City Circle's doing it.
-SPT's "Tales of Two Cities" opens at the Cedar Rapids Museum of Art tomorrow.
-"Drowsy Chaperone" was okay. But has anyone ever seen anything at the Gallagher-Bluedorn that was outstanding? Because I haven't.
-"Rabbit Hole" opens tomorrow in Coralville at the Iowa Realty/Wells Fargo Building. City Circle's doing it.
-SPT's "Tales of Two Cities" opens at the Cedar Rapids Museum of Art tomorrow.
-"Drowsy Chaperone" was okay. But has anyone ever seen anything at the Gallagher-Bluedorn that was outstanding? Because I haven't.
Monday, April 6, 2009
I'd Hate to Be In This Acting Class
Monica is back and in full swing. Today, she takes aim at a student in her acting class who did a stand-up comedy routine for class that she says was "simply just ranting."
First of all, that would suck to be in an acting class with Monica Reida and she has to critique performances. I read her review of "The Importance of Being Earnest," I'd be pretty scared.
Second of all, she says that the student says all people over 65 should be placed in care. Most of the jackass old people in Iowa look to be much older. Like in their 80's.
But she says this:
She also says that in her comments, she listed several people over the age of 65 that contribute to society. ("...a bunch of current U.S. senators and congressmen (even if they’re doing nothing, they’re still contributing).")
Read the rampage here:
Why Forced Comedy Doesn't Work: Part II
First of all, that would suck to be in an acting class with Monica Reida and she has to critique performances. I read her review of "The Importance of Being Earnest," I'd be pretty scared.
Second of all, she says that the student says all people over 65 should be placed in care. Most of the jackass old people in Iowa look to be much older. Like in their 80's.
But she says this:
Judging from the responses of the other students, I would have to say that they weren’t to pleased with this rant. Neither was I; I was livid, to be precise and I read “New Yorker” cartoons after finishing up my comments on his performance just to calm down.
She also says that in her comments, she listed several people over the age of 65 that contribute to society. ("...a bunch of current U.S. senators and congressmen (even if they’re doing nothing, they’re still contributing).")
Read the rampage here:
Why Forced Comedy Doesn't Work: Part II
Sorry About the Delay
I was too busy seeing a play (and regretting it) and celebrating the Iowa Supreme Court's decision on Gay Marriage.
Anyway, I saw "Arms and the Man" and it sucked. There were three good or decent actors (Geoff Ehrendrich, John Mardis, and Michael Schlumbohm)and they weren't on as much as the actors that sucked.
I hope that the actors that got cast were the only people that auditioned. I also that WCP does a fundraiser that is a one-night only engagement where those three actors just talk. I think it would be epic.
The set was lovely. But, the set is usually lovely.
I wish I had seen "Raising Medusa" or "Picasso at the Lapine Agile." Especially when it started to snow on Sunday. I was pissed.
Anyway, Vicki Krajewski reviewed "Raising Medusa" on the Iowa Theatre Blog.
And Sharon Falduto reviewed "Picasso" for the same blog.
Where's Monica? Other than appearing to be losing her mind?
Also, my latte wasn't that great at Panera yesterday morning.
Anyway, I saw "Arms and the Man" and it sucked. There were three good or decent actors (Geoff Ehrendrich, John Mardis, and Michael Schlumbohm)and they weren't on as much as the actors that sucked.
I hope that the actors that got cast were the only people that auditioned. I also that WCP does a fundraiser that is a one-night only engagement where those three actors just talk. I think it would be epic.
The set was lovely. But, the set is usually lovely.
I wish I had seen "Raising Medusa" or "Picasso at the Lapine Agile." Especially when it started to snow on Sunday. I was pissed.
Anyway, Vicki Krajewski reviewed "Raising Medusa" on the Iowa Theatre Blog.
And Sharon Falduto reviewed "Picasso" for the same blog.
Where's Monica? Other than appearing to be losing her mind?
Also, my latte wasn't that great at Panera yesterday morning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)