Podcast appearances and mentions of Liz Lerman

In episode 87, Kathryn and Theresa dive into the Critical Response Process (CRP) with Mallory Alekna, Assistant Professor of Music, Human Development, and Learning at Augsburg University. Mallory shares how this four-step feedback framework, developed by choreographer Liz Lerman, can transform music classrooms by fostering meaningful dialogue and empowering students to take ownership of their learning. Through CRP, students learn to articulate their observations, ask thoughtful questions, and engage in constructive, permission-based feedback. By integrating this process into music education, teachers can create more equitable, student-centered environments that encourage creativity, agency, and collaborative learning.Music teachers will leave this episode with practical strategies for implementing CRP in their classrooms, whether through peer feedback on student compositions, discussions about performance techniques, or even broader conversations about musicianship as an ongoing journey. If you're looking for ways to shift from a traditional top-down approach to one where students feel truly heard and valued, this episode is packed with insights and actionable takeaways to help you get started.Connect with Mallory and learn more: Contact MalloryLearn about the Critical Response Process Connect with an Expert Facilitator More about Pass the Baton:Website Join the Coffee Club Support Pass the Baton Amplify student voice with Exit Tickets for Self Reflection

Naomi Cohn joins Let's Talk Memoir becoming legally blind in mid-life and how that changed her writing process, going from poetry to lyric essay, falling in love with Braille, being sure something is done and also realizing there's more, reading our work aloud, privacy and what's ours to tell, the perceptual richness of having altered sight, tapping into our senses, Liz Lerman's Critical Response Process, nonlinear logic, writing in small chunks, being curious, trusted readers, and her new book The Braille Encyclopedia. Also in this episode: -prose poems  -tapping into the nonlinear -ableism   Books mentioned in this episode: What It Is by Lynda Barry Pain Woman Takes Your Keys by Sonya Huber Safekeeping by Abigail Thomas In the Dream House by Carmen Maria Machado The Periodic Table by Primo Levi   Naomi Cohn, author of the debut memoir THE BRAILLE ENCYCLOPEDIA, is a writer and teaching artist who works with older adults and people living with disabilities. Her past includes a childhood among Chicago academics; art-making: editing Disclosure, a national publication on community organizing; involvement in a guerrilla feminist art collective; and work as an encyclopedia copy editor, community organizer, fundraiser, nonprofit consultant, and therapist. Red Dragonfly Press published her chapbook, Between Nectar & Eternity, in 2013. Her poetry and essays have also appeared in Baltimore Review, Hippocampus, Nimrod, Poetry and, Terrain, among other places. She makes her home in Saint Paul, Minnesota. Connect with Naomi: https://naomi-cohn.com/ Order Naomi's Book: https://rosemetalpress.com/books/the-braille-encyclopedia/ Attend Naomi's Reading Events: https://rosemetalpress.com/readings-events/ – Ronit's writing has appeared in The Atlantic, The Rumpus, The New York Times, The Iowa Review, Hippocampus, The Washington Post, Writer's Digest, American Literary Review, and elsewhere. Her memoir WHEN SHE COMES BACK about the loss of her mother to the guru Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh and their eventual reconciliation was named Finalist in the 2021 Housatonic Awards Awards, the 2021 Indie Excellence Awards, and was a 2021 Book Riot Best True Crime Book. Her short story collection HOME IS A MADE-UP PLACE won Hidden River Arts' 2020 Eludia Award and the 2023 Page Turner Awards for Short Stories. She earned an MFA in Nonfiction Writing at Pacific University, is Creative Nonfiction Editor at The Citron Review, and lives in Seattle with her family where she teaches memoir workshops and is working on her next book. More about Ronit: https://ronitplank.com Sign up for monthly podcast and writing updates: https://bit.ly/33nyTKd Substack: https://substack.com/@ronitplank Newsletter sign-up: https://ronitplank.com/#signup   Follow Ronit: https://www.instagram.com/ronitplank/ https://twitter.com/RonitPlank https://www.facebook.com/RonitPlank   Background photo credit: Photo by Patrick Tomasso on Unsplash Headshot photo credit: Sarah Anne Photography Theme music: Isaac Joel, Dead Moll's Fingers

In this episode of DanceCast, Silva interviews dance artist Devin Hill. Devin describes their experience growing up with a rare eye condition and how it affected their motor skills. Their mother put them in dance to help with balance and coordination. Devin shares their experience pursuing dance in college and learning to be an advocate for themself as a dancer with a disability by communicating their needs. They share how change often starts with just having people with disabilities be in the room. Devin reflects on their undergraduate experience and how institutions need to start taking responsibility for making their dance programs accessible and available to students with disabilities. As Devin has become a teacher and taken on leadership roles, they have been empowered by breaking down ableism in dance and giving others an opportunity to directly express what they need.This episode is part of a series interviewing institutions with inclusive dance programs and individuals who identify as disabled and have experienced formal dance education as either students or teachers. This series is part of Silva's ongoing work as the director of Art Spark Texas' dance program. This year, she is continuing the multi-year community-engaged research project, funded in part by the National Endowment for the Arts, that explores disability-centered accessibility in dance education and how we can create barrier-free dance education for students with disabilities in the US.Devin Hill is a graduate from the University of Central Oklahoma with a BFA in Dance Performance. Their love of dance began at the age of three and has lasted more than 20 years. Devin set sights on dance as a career during their time at Collin College in Plano, TX.  While at Collin College, they were exposed to jazz, ballet, modern, hip hop, tap, African, improvisation, and Latin ballroom. Devin has had the opportunity of working with Christopher K. Morgan, William “Bill” Evans, Clarence Brooks, Brandon Fink, Hannah Baumgarden, Jeremy Duvall, Gregg Russell, Lachlan McCarthy, Kristin McQuaid, and Cat Cogliandro. They were a member of the 2015-2016 award-winning Kaleidoscope Dance Company. Since graduating from UCO, they have continued to further their knowledge of dance by performing, choreographing, teaching, and participating in intensives and workshops across the US. In 2018, Devin had the honor of performing with Liz Lerman's Dance Exchange at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. They were also a cast member on the hit Facebook Watch series “Dance with Nia.” Devin currently resides in Washington D.C. and New York City, where they perform and educate as a member of catastrophe! Dance Company, ReVision Dance Company, and Kinetic Light. Devin also serves as a board member for Feel The Beat and is an educational specialist for Bodywise Dance. Devin strives to use their artistry to create a more safe, equitable, and accessible dance industry for everyone.

Liz Lerman is a choreographer and educator who has spent a lot of time investigating how to give and receive meaningful feedback. A very important skill in all kinds of work – not least in the arts and in pedagogy. Liz has created a method that helps students and teachers see their work from new perspectives. A method that is especially useful in artistic education. It is called Critical Response Process, CRP. Her work with CRP has influenced instruction at many artistic academies around the world, among these is the Academy of Music and Drama in Gothenburg. And this is why Liz Lerman was appointed an Honorary Doctor at the Artistic Faculty of the University of Gothenburg. In this episode you will meet Liz Lerman and Professor Jonas Simonson, a musician and teacher at the Academy of Music and Drama. This episode is hosted by Carina Borgström Källén, Senior Lecturer and leader of the platform Educational Research in the Arts. DETTA AVSNITT ÄR PÅ ENGELSKA Liz Lerman är en koreograf och pedagog som ägnat mycket tid åt att undersöka hur meningsfull feedback kan ges och tas emot. En mycket viktig färdighet i alla typer av arbete – inte minst inom konst och pedagogik. Liz har skapat en metod som hjälper studenter och lärare att se sitt arbete ur nya perspektiv. En metod som är särskilt användbar inom konstnärlig utbildning. Den kallas Critical Response Process, CRP. Hennes arbete med CRP har påverkat undervisningen vid många konstnärliga akademier runt om i världen. Bland dessa finns Högskolan för scen och musik i Göteborg. Som en följd av detta har Liz Lerman utsetts till hedersdoktor vid den konstnärliga fakulteten vid Göteborgs universitet. I det här avsnittet möter du Liz Lerman och professor Jonas Simonson, musiker och lärare vid Högskolan för scen och musik. Programledare för avsnittet är Carina Borgström Källén, universitetslektor och ledare för plattformen Educational Research in the Arts.

Kathryn (Thern) Anderson started her dance training at the U of M in 1968 with Margret Dietz, Heidi Hauser and Judith Mirus.  In 1971 she joined Margret's Company, Choreogram ,and danced there until 1976.  She then moved to Port Townsend, WA to work with Meg Robson, then to Portland Oregon to dance with Spira, and started Oregon Dance Consort with other dancers from the Wigman tradition. She was in New York from 1980 to 1987, studying at the Erick Hawkins studio, Floor Barre with Zena Rommet, Bartenieff Fundamentals, Anatomy and Kinesiology, Ideokinesis at NYU, Subtle Self with Judith Blackstone and Klein technique with Barbara Mahler.In Washington D.C. from 1987until  1993 she taught through Liz Lerman's Dnce Exchange, working with senior adults, psychiatric outpatients and hospitalized children.  In addition, she taught many children's Creative Movement classes at Jane Bittner Dnce Studio in Olbey MD.Back to Minnesota since 1993,  she has performed with Sharon Varosh, Maureen Koelsch, a children;s show with Linda Aus,”Seca” by Marciano Silva dos Santos, “Orphans” with Off leash Area, Pam Gleason,, “Invisible” with Paula Mann and as a guest artist with Christopher Watson Dance  Co.In the Twin Cities, she has taught at Zenon, TU Dance, “Dancing your Story” with Mary Waster through TU Dance and Aroha Philanthropies, Patrick's Cabaret and currently teaches Modern Dance at Tapestry.

Poet and dance writer Karen Hildebrand hosts this episode focusing on how text and spoken word are used in dance. Included are examples from works by Liz Lerman, Joe Goode, and Carmen de Lavallade. Hildebrand is the former editorial director for Dance Magazine, and a past editor in chief of Dance Teacher magazine.

The Independent Thinker, Liz Lerman Liz is a choreographer, performer, writer, teacher, and speaker. For the past forty years, she has infused her artistic exploration with a personal touch, humor, intellectual vibrancy, and a contemporary edge. Her choreography has delved into a wide spectrum of topics, ranging from her experiences as a go-go dancer to an exploration of the intricacies of choreography and connections with community. Today, she shares with us insights into what ignited her love for dancing and reflects on the abundant influences that have affected both her life and artistic career. She talks about the importance and complexities of our feelings and how she rode the wild waves of her 20s to discover, for herself, what dance could mean for her. We hear about the impact of her mother's life and death on her stubbornness to figure life out for herself, why rehearsals should always matter, and the unfolding of events that surround the founding of The Dance Exchange. She expresses and reflects on how she views herself as more of an interdisciplinary artist and her eagerness to be generous about spreading her wealth of knowledge. She then details her passion for the Critical Response Process (CRP) and how that was formed over the years. Join in as we delve into the chronicles of her life and her pursuit of understanding. Tune in now! “One of my deep interests is the way we tell stories and what stories, and whose stories, and how they come across, and who's listening, and all those kinds of questions.” – Liz Lerman Key Points From This Episode: ·       Liz offers insight into where she comes from and what ignited her love for dancing. ·       She reflects on the myriad of influences that have affected her life and dance journey. ·       A wild ride in her 20s: riding the waves of figuring out what dance could be for her.  ·       The impact of her mother's life and death on her stubbornness to figure life out for herself. ·       How working intergenerationally moved and shifted her mindset. ·       The response she experienced when she started making work/performances. ·       Making rehearsals matter.  ·       More about the founding of The Dance Exchange.  ·       She goes into detail about how her different works unfolded uniquely. ·       Her thoughts on the nomadic life and being an ethical visitor.  ·       How she began to extract herself from The Dance Exchange: composting Liz.  ·       Reflections on how she views herself as more of an interdisciplinary artist.  ·       She talks about the Critical Response Process (CRP). ·       Liz delves further into her current projects and pursuits. “There is so much pain and rudeness in the world of critique and what I have come to believe is that a lot of critique is just power. And if you actually want to – change the way power is absorbed and reignited in a different way in a circle then you should use CRP” — Liz Lerman Liz Lerman uses dance to understand and change the world. Her relentless curiosity has transformed the field of contemporary dance with subject matter including aging, genetics, history, the ethics of justice, and the origins of the universe. For Show Notes and Link: Movers & Shapers: A Dance Podcast Follow us on Facebook & Instagram

In this episode Adam and Budi discuss their sixth choice for the Theatre of Others Book Club, Critical Response Process by Liz Lerman. Liz has spent the past four decades making her artistic research personal, funny, intellectually vivid, and up to the minute. Her choreography has examined everything from her days as a go-go dancer in 1974 to investigating the matters of our origins by putting dancers in the tunnels of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN.A key aspect of her artistry is opening her process to everyone from shipbuilders to physicists, construction workers to ballerinas, resulting in both research and experiences that are participatory, relevant, urgent, and usable by others.She founded Liz Lerman Dance Exchange in 1976 and cultivated the company's unique multi-generational ensemble into a leading force in contemporary dance until 2011, when she handed the artistic leadership of the company over to the next generation of Dance Exchange artists.On Critical Response Process: Through the supportive structure of its four core steps, Critical Response Process combines the power of questions with the focus and challenge of informed dialogue. The Process offers makers an active role in the critique of their own work. It gives makers a way to rehearse the connections they seek when art meets it audience or a product meets its purpose.Critical Response Process instills ways of thinking, communicating and being that enhance all kinds of human interactions, from coaching to community dialogue, from artistic collaboration to family conversations.In use for over 25 years, Critical Response Process has been embraced by art makers, educators, scientists, and theater companies, dance departments, orchestras, laboratories, conservatories, museums, universities, corporations, and kindergartens.Support the showIf you enjoyed this week´s podcast, please leave a review on Apple Podcasts. To submit a question: Voice- http://www.speakpipe.com/theatreofothers Email- podcast@theatreofothers.com Support the Theatre of Others - Check out our Merch!Show Credits Co-Hosts: Adam Marple & Budi MillerProducer: Jack BurmeisterMusic: https://www.purple-planet.comAdditional compositions by @jack_burmeister

I always find something to learn in an episode of Playwright's Spotlight. However, Bernardo Cubria's insight to playwriting was nonstop. Every minute turned another corner of knowledge. His approach and insight to playwriting was intimidating that I'm not sure I could keep up - from a naivety to submitting plays that could lead to success to paying for opportunities to extracting knowledge from workshops. Bernardo shares his steps from completing the first draft, what consists of smart, intelligent feedback, Liz Lerman's critical approach to feedback, and hitting the flow state of creativity. We also tackle telling the best story, staying the course, how to approach rewrites, and the benefits of Clown School as well as "staying in the shit," not to mention compensation outside of money and what makes a brilliant director. It's only a small sample of topics that could have gone for much longer. As with playwriting, I encourage you to stay the course and listen to the entirety of this episode. You won't walk away empty handed, or headed, and will hopefully be a much better playwright by the episode's end. Either way, I hope you enjoy my conversation with Bernardo as much as I did. His energy and humor is contagious. Enjoy!!! Bernardo Cubría is a Mexican playwright and screenwriter based in Los Angeles. He is the winner of the 2021 Smith Prize for Political Theatre. His play, The Play You Want won the 2020 BETC Generations Award and was also a finalist for the 2020 Ingenio Play Festival. His play The Giant Void in my Soul was nominated for Best Playwright at the 2018 Ovation Awards, Los Angeles Drama critics Circle Awards, and The Stage Raw Awards. His play Neighbors: A Fair Trade Agreement will be receiving it's world premier at INTAR in NYC in the fall of 2017. It was a Semi-Finalist for the O'Neil in 2017, and his play The Judgment of Fools has received three critically acclaimed production in NYC, LA, and Houston, TX. His play The Redhead is Coming was a part of F*ckfest at The Brick in NYC in 2015. He is a proud member of Ammo Theatre Company in LA.To view the video format of this episode, visit the link below -https://youtu.be/ibY4478Fsb4Links to sites and resources mentioned in this episode - Crabs in a Bucket Play Info and Tickets -https://www.echotheatercompany.com/crabs-in-a-bucket/#:~:text=Crabs%20in%20a%20Bucket%20follows,who%20still%20live%20among%20themAmmo Theatre -https://www.ammunitiontheatre.comThe O'neill's -https://www.theoneill.org/npcPlay Submission Helper -https://playsubmissionshelper.com/category/play-submissions/LAByrinth Theatre Company -https://labtheater.orgCTG (Center Theatre Group) -https://www.centertheatregroup.orgWebsites and socials for James Elden, Punk Monkey Productions and Playwright's SpotlightPunk Monkey Productions - www.punkmonkeyproductions.comPLAY Noir -www.playnoir.comPLAY Noir Anthology –www.punkmonkeyproductions.com/contact.htmlJames Elden -Twitter - @jameseldensauerIG - @alakardrakeFB - fb.com/jameseldensauerPunk Monkey Productions and PLAY Noir - Twitter - @punkmonkeyprods                  - @playnoirla IG - @punkmonkeyprods       - @playnoir_la FB - fb.com/playnoir        - fb.com/punkmonkeyproductionsPlaywright's Spotlight -Twitter - @wrightlightpod IG - @playwrights_spotlightPlaywriting services through Los Angeles Collegiate Playwrights Festivalwww.losangelescollegiateplaywrightsfestival.com/services.htmlSupport the show

In this episode I talk about how you can use Liz Lerman's Critical Response Process to encourage feedback and dialogue among students around the projects they create.Click here for this episode's show notes.How to support the free content I create.━━━━━━━━━━━━━ 00:00 Intro00:39 The three roles of the Critical Response Process01:14 The four steps of the Critical Response Process01:28 Step 102:06 Step 202:36 Step 303:13 Step 404:15 Quick summary of the Critical Response Process04:37 Another approach for feedback and assessment05:33 Using questions for feedback and assessment05:55 The importance of modeling feedback06:41 What questions do you have?07:14 Please consider sharing

Interdisciplinary artist Brett Cook's current exhibit, at The Yerba Buena Center for the Arts in San Francisco, is profound. In this episode, we talk about the history of some of the installations, including the stunning self-portrait that greets visitors as they enter. Brett explains in detail why and how the show, a collaboration with choreographer Liz Lerman, came to be what it is—the relationships built through interviews with family members of portrait subjects, the deliberate audience engagement. To be an artist in the world, he says, means creating time and space for contemplation and opening oneself to others' experiences. Join us.Cook has received numerous awards, including the Lehman Brady Visiting Professorship at Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and the Richard C. Diebenkorn Fellowship at the San Francisco Art Institute. Recognized for a history of socially relevant, community engaged projects, he was selected as a cultural ambassador to Nigeria as part of the U.S. Department of State's 2012 smARTpower Initiative and an inaugural A Blade of Grass Fellow for Socially Engaged Art in 2014. Cook's work has been featured in private and public collections including the Smithsonian/National Portrait Gallery, the Walker Art Center, and Harvard University.About the exhibit-At first glance, visual artist Brett Cook and choreographer Liz Lerman are an unlikely match. Although divergent in presentation and aesthetic, both have spent their careers guided by an intuitive desire to forge new paths, reshape their respective fields, and encourage the exploration of artistry as a catalyst for enacting change. This exhibition is the culmination of Cook and Lerman's three-year residency as senior fellows at YBCA, focusing on centering artists as leaders inside the organization and in the communities they serve. Their pairing asks the public to consider the role of an artist within an institution—and in the public sphere—as urgent and responsive.https://www.brett-cook.comhttps://ybca.org

In Episode 63 of Change the Story / Change the World, Liz Lerman shared stories about her early years and her creative path as a choreographer, teacher, and as a lifelong practicing heretic. In this Episode, (64) we hear about Wicked Bodies, her latest work, exploring the ugly, the beautiful, and the sublime embedded in the age-old story of witches. Special Thanks to the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts for their support of Liz Lerman's work and the use of an excerpt from the Wicked Bodies trailer. BIOLiz Lerman is a choreographer, performer, writer, teacher, and speaker. She has spent the past four decades making her artistic research personal, funny, intellectually vivid, and up to the minute. A key aspect of her artistry is opening her process to everyone from shipbuilders to physicists, construction workers to ballerinas, resulting in both research and experiences that are participatory, relevant, urgent, and usable by others.Called by the Washington Post “the source of an epochal revolution in the scope and purposes of dance art,”[4] she and her dancers have collaborated with shipbuilders, physicists, construction workers, and cancer researchers.[5] In 2002 she won the MacArthur Genius Grant;[6] in 2009, the Jack P. Blaney Award in Dialogue acknowledged her outstanding leadership, creativity, and dedication to melding dialogue with dance, and the 2017 Jacob's Pillow Dance Award.[7]She founded the Liz Lerman Dance Exchange in 1976 and led the company's multi-generational ensemble until July 2011, when Lerman passed the leadership of her company to Cassie Meador;[8] the company is now called simply Dance Exchange.[9] .[10]Under Lerman's leadership Dance Exchange appeared across the U.S. in locations as various as the National Cathedral,[11] Kennedy Center Opera House,[12] and Millennium Stage,[13] Lansburgh Theatre,[14] Clarice Smith Performing Arts Center,

Liz LermanIn chapter one of our conversation with Liz Lerman we'll talk about her early years, her career as a heretic, the critical response process, the Heisenberg Uncertainty, the power of the horizontal, and how dance can make the world a better place. BIOLiz Lerman is a choreographer, performer, writer, teacher, and speaker. She has spent the past four decades making her artistic research personal, funny, intellectually vivid, and up to the minute. A key aspect of her artistry is opening her process to everyone from shipbuilders to physicists, construction workers to ballerinas, resulting in both research and experiences that are participatory, relevant, urgent, and usable by others.Called by the Washington Post “the source of an epochal revolution in the scope and purposes of dance art,”[4] she and her dancers have collaborated with shipbuilders, physicists, construction workers, and cancer researchers.[5] In 2002 she won the MacArthur Genius Grant;[6] in 2009, the Jack P. Blaney Award in Dialogue acknowledged her outstanding leadership, creativity, and dedication to melding dialogue with dance;[citation needed] and the 2017 Jacob's Pillow Dance Award.[7]She founded the Liz Lerman Dance Exchange in 1976 and led the company's multi-generational ensemble until July 2011, when Lerman passed the leadership of her company to Cassie Meador;[8] the company is now called simply Dance Exchange.[9] .[10]Under Lerman's leadership Dance Exchange appeared across the U.S. in locations as various as the National Cathedral,[11] Kennedy Center Opera House,[12] and Millennium Stage,[13] Lansburgh Theatre,[14] Clarice Smith Performing Arts Center,[14][15]

Today I'm speaking about the benefits of hearing your script read aloud in a group environment and some methods for getting useful feedback on your play. I recently finished a polished first draft of a new play, and organising a table read with actors was a key part of moving the draft into its next iteration. I speak about:- The similarities between playwriting and music composition, and why we need to hear our words read aloud.- Methods for giving and receiving feedback in a group environment.- Knowing when you're ready to discuss your ideas and unpack aspects of your play in a group environment. - The concept of ‘works in progress' in your artistic pursuits as well as more broadly in your life.- Types of table reads and how they're used as a tool at different phases of the creative process. - Using table reads and development discussions to find those gemstone notes that will unlock that next iteration of your play.- Tips for making table reads run smoothly.- Prompts and questions to ask for areas of playwriting craft you might like to get feedback on.I reference:Episode 9 Dramaturgy, Feedback and Implementing Notes‘The Critical Response Process' by Liz Lerman and John Borstel‘The Director's Craft' by Katie MitchellThank you for listening! This is an independently produced podcast which means I do all of it, end-to-end, myself. Rating and reviewing is a really friendly way to show your support.If you're interested in working with me as your dramaturg then send me an email at emily@emilysheehan.info. You can learn more about my work on my website or say hi and ask me a question via @emilysheehan__ on Instagram. Special thanks today to Ashton Sly, Joshua Monaghan and Danny Carroll.

Happy Birthday to Liz Lerman, Eddie Rector, and Olga Moiseyeva! --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/dawn-davis-loring/support

A transcript of this episode is available here: thedanceedit.com/transcript-episode-138Liz Lerman's website: lizlerman.comMore information about Lerman's ongoing exhibition with Brett Cook, "Reflection and Action": ybca.org/event/brett-cook-liz-lerman-reflection-and-actionMore information about "Wicked Bodies": lizlerman.com/wicked-bodiesVisit/add to the Dance Media Events Calendar: dancemediacalendar.com/Get the latest dance news direct by subscribing to our free newsletters. Find the ones that match your interests: dancemagazine.com/subscribe

Selected WorkCritique Is Creative: The Critical Response Process in Theory & Practice (Wesleyan University Press, 2022), Liz Lerman and John BorstelHiking the Horizontal: Field Notes from a Choreographer (Wesleyan University Press, 2011), Liz LermanLiz Lerman's Critical Response Process (Liz Lerman Dance Exchange, 2003), Liz Lerman and John BorstelAlso ReferencedErika MeitnerJason SchneidermanWashington PostCristóbal MartínezPostcommodityColorado Dance FestivalAlternative RoutesNew York Theater WorkshopYale UniversityIowa Writers WorkshopDoulas of North AmericaErika R. MooreIsaac GomezCommonplace has no institutional or corporate affiliation and is made possible by you, our listeners! Support Commonplace by joining the Commonplace Book Club: https://www.patreon.com/commonplacepodcast

Isabel O'Hara Walsh leads writing workshops through thehttps://www.redbudwriting.org ( Redbud Writing Project). Redbud offers classes virtually and around the Triangle on topics like Writing the Novel, Experimental Fiction, and one that Isabel and I talk about, Joyful Creation – how to get your writing juices flowing when staring at that blank page. Isabel shares about their experience incorporating anti-racist practices into the workshop and feedback processes. An important resource in helping to shape this framework is the book The Anti-Racist Writer's Workshop: How to Decolonize the Creative Classroom by Felicia Rose Chavez. Chavez's book challenges, in her words, “art's politics of power and privilege” and lays bare the ways that traditional – read: white-supremacist – methods of running workshops work to silence the voices of writers of color and writers with other marginalized identities.  Isabel and Mara Thomas also discuss another Artist Soapbox favorite when it comes to rethinking the feedback process: Liz Lerman's Critical Response Process. Lerman's work helps tailor the feedback process to help the creator retain agency over their work and create an environment where they get the feedback they're actually looking for rather than an onslaught of unfiltered opinions. BIO: Isabel O'Hara Walsh (she/they) is a writer, teacher, and practicing witch. A graduate of the MFA program in fiction at North Carolina State University, Isabel teaches fiction writing at the Redbud Writing Project, has published short stories in Pastel Pastoral and The Metaworker, and is at work on her second novel. Through her business https://www.edgewisewitch.com/ (EdgeWise Witch), Isabel offers transformative 1-1 and group work sessions that incorporate Tarot, writing, and other ritual to clarify the right path forward for her clients. SOCIAL MEDIA: IG: @isabeloharawalsh  Website: redbudwriting.org | www.edgewisewitch.com MENTIONED IN THE EPISODE: https://www.antiracistworkshop.com/ (The Anti-Racist Writing Workshop: How to Decolonize the Creative Classroom by Felicia Rose Chavez) https://lizlerman.com/critical-response-process/ (Critical Response Process) by Liz Lerman LISTEN TO ASBX AUDIO DRAMAS:https://artistsoapbox.org/masterbuilder/ (Master Builder) https://www.thenewcolossuspodcast.com/ (The New Colossus) https://artistsoapbox.org/declaration-of-love/ (Declaration of Love audio anthology) https://artistsoapbox.org/audio-dramas/asbx-shorts/ (ASBX Shorts) CONNECT AND FOLLOW: Artist Soapbox on social media: Twitter: https://twitter.com/artist_soapbox (@artist_soapbox) Instagram: @https://www.instagram.com/artistsoapbox/ (artistsoapbox) Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/artistsoapboxpodcast/ (https://www.facebook.com/artistsoapboxpodcast/) CONTRIBUTE: Soapboxers are the official patrons of the Artist Soapbox podcast. http://www.patreon.com/artistsoapbox (Get on the Soapbox with us at Patreon )or make a one-time donation via Ko-fi at https://ko-fi.com/artistsoapbox (https://ko-fi.com/artistsoapbox) or via PayPal at https://www.paypal.me/artistsoapbox?ppid=PPC000628&cnac=US&rsta=en_US(en_US)&cust=A55YE26SQPDL8&unptid=bcec7a46-337d-11e8-9bbe-9c8e992da578&t=&cal=cb540804e2cda&calc=cb540804e2cda&calf=cb540804e2cda&unp_tpcid=ppme-social-user-profile-created&page=main:email&pgrp=main:email&e=op&mchn=em&s=ci&mail=sys (PayPal.Me/artistsoapbox.) If you would like to make a tax-deductible donation, please consider our non-profit https://fundraising.fracturedatlas.org/soapbox-audio-collective (Soapbox Audio Collective).

Ellen Chenoweth hosts this exploration into the work of influential dance artist Liz Lerman, including the voices of Jawole Willa Jo Zollar, James Frazier, and Pamela Tatge, as well as numerous passages in Lerman's own words.

Intro: Crypto bros, missing the great economic bubbles of the early 2000s. We may as well have cotton candy furniture, Severance on Apple TV, Bad Vegan. Let Me Run This By You: Stage Moms, kindergarten theatre.Interview: We talk to Joe Basile about Long Island accents, NYU Tisch, Bradley Walker, Ensemble Studio Theatre, Liz Lerman's Critical Response Process, Mary Zimmerman's Metamorphoses, the Neo-Futurists Too Much Light Makes the Baby Go Blind (The Infinite Wrench), perfectionism,  Roundabout Theatre Company,  A Bright Room Called Day, Suzan Lori Parks, Go Humphrey, sock puppet Showgirls, keeping the thread of community after college ends.FULL TRANSCRIPT (unedited):3 (10s):And I'm Gina Kalichi.1 (11s):We went to theater school together. We survived it, but we didn't quite understand it.3 (15s):20 years later, we're digging deep talking to our guests about their experiences and trying to make sense of it all.1 (21s):We survived theater school and you will too. Are we famous yet?2 (32s):Okay. I'm getting, I'm getting it together. I, Yeah, I woke up with this really interesting idea that I wanted to run by you, which was, cause I was really tired when I woke up and I thought, okay, everyone's tired when they wake up. And then I thought, well, and they always say like, Americans, you know, never get enough sleep. We're always tired. But like nobody ever investigates why really? Why that is that our system is really fucked up. So like, I don't know. I just was like, yeah, we always do all these like expos A's on like sleep or wellness. Right? Like Americans are the fattest and the most unhealthy. And I'm only speaking about Americans because that's where we live. I don't know shit about Madrid.2 (1m 13s):You know, I'm sure they're they have their own plethora of fucking problems. But I'm just saying like, we don't actually do the work to like, figure out what is wrong. We're just like, Americans are, this Americans are that nobody's getting enough sleep. And like, there's all these, you know, sort of headlines. Right. And we're not just like, well, why is nobody getting enough sleep? Like what is actually happening? So that was my grand thought upon waking up was like, yeah, like, I don't know. We just never dig deep in this case. We're not big on digging.4 (1m 46s):Probably not. I mean, I think our lifestyle overall is pretty unhealthy and it's because of our economic model.2 (1m 58s):What I was gonna say, it all boils down to see the thing is the more you talk to people, the more I do the angrier I get, especially like in my office, like slash co-working, like I gravitate towards the ladies and a lot of ladies of color. And we end up sitting around talking about how like capitalism and systematic racism and sexism are all tied together and how, and by the end, we're just so angry. We're like, okay, what can we do? And we're like, okay, well we need to stop putting money in the pockets of this old white man who owns the coworking. But like we have nowhere else to go. So we're like, now we're screwed. So anyway, it's interesting. It's like it all, every conversation I have of meaning with you or with my cousin and it all boils down to the same thing.2 (2m 43s):And then you end up thinking, I ended up thinking the really, the only way is mass extinction and starting over with a new species, fresh slate, fresh or revolution, right. Or some kind of bloody revolution, it's going to be bloody because you know, the, the, the, the people in power aren't going to let go as we see. So like, we're not, it's not good is all, but I don't feel necessarily like, and maybe it's because I took MTMA, but like, I don't necessarily feel terrible about it. I feel just like, oh yeah, like we're, we're headed towards this way, unless something drastic happens. And I'm not sure that's a terrible thing. Now I don't have children.2 (3m 23s):So I might feel totally different about my children and my children's children and their children, but I just don't, that's not my frame of mind. So anyway, that's what I was thinking as I was so tired, waking up.4 (3m 35s):Is there any world in which you and the other women in coworking can just put your, just rent and office?2 (3m 44s):So we're starting to organize to like, be like, okay, you know, like who would want to go in on a lease, you know? But the thing is, it's so interesting. It's like, well, maybe it's LA, but it's also the world. Like, people don't really trust it. Like we don't really know each other that well yet. So we'd have to like do credit checks and thank God. My credit is good. Thank God. Now it was terrible. But all this to say is that like also LA so transitory that people are like in and out and, and like my, you know, travel. It's just so it's such a weird existence, but we are talking and there's a guy, a black dude. Who's also like my financial guru guy who like, who works at co-working.2 (4m 28s):I met here, he's a mortgage guy. And he's just been like, talking to me all about fucking crypto bros and like how the crypto bros are like, he's like, it is insane. Now, Gina, did you know, now I'm just learning about this world. And he's like, it's all, make-believe basically we live in the matrix and that fucking, there is something called the virtual real estate. Did you know this? Okay, you can purchase virtual squares of real estate, like Snoop Dogg's house, like, like, and people are doing it. And the people who are, it's like a status thing and it's expensive. And the people who are becoming billionaires are the people who run the apps.2 (5m 9s):Right. Are the people who created the fucking program. We are in the matrix. And I was like, wait, what? And he showed me the site where you can buy any town. If you looked into your town, people are doing it. It is, it is consumerism mixed with people are buying things that don't exist.4 (5m 29s):Okay. Yeah. I feel like this is what happens when people with an unchecked power and privilege, it's like, okay, well, like literally we're just making it up. Let's just have cotton candy, be our furniture now. Like it's. So I tried to get into Bitcoin.2 (5m 50s):Oh yeah.4 (5m 51s):Like about five years ago, somebody that I went to high school with is rich from Bitcoin. And, and she was like one of the founders of one of these companies. And so the first problem I have is you shouldn't invest in anything that you don't understand. Right. So I tried to read about it and I'm just like, but what, I just kept reading and being like, yeah, but what is it? Right. You know, what's an NFT.2 (6m 20s):Oh my God. The NFTs. Oh my God. And his name is Lamont and I love him. And he was trying to teach me about those. And I was like, Lamont. I have to take some kind of drug to understand what you're saying. I don't,4 (6m 31s):I have, I, you know, I've read articles. I've had people explain it to me. I mean, I think what it is, is I do know what it is, but I'm just like, that can't be what people are spending that be that,2 (6m 43s):Yeah, because we're not stupid people. Like we can understand concepts of things.4 (6m 47s):The thing that got me off of cryptocurrency and, and FTS and all that is that it's so bad for the environment, blockchain, the amount of energy that's required to power blockchain is just like so destructive.2 (7m 3s):Okay. So this leads me to, so Lamont was like, you know, what's going on in the coworking row storage room. And I'm like, what? And of course me, I'm like, are there, is there like a torture chamber? That's why Was like, no, he's like one of the side businesses of the CEO of this place is to host these crypto machines that, that it's like credit card terminals, but for crypto. And so all the, all the crypto exchanges that go on need checks and balances, God, he's such a good teacher. He actually explained it to me. He's like, look, you, when you do a crypto exchange with somebody that has to be checked or else, how do you know you're actually getting shit, which is all like theoretical anyway.2 (7m 47s):But he's like, so then you have to create these machines that check the other machines. And those are some of those. And you get paid. It's just like having credit card terminals, right? It's like selling credit cards. You know, people that sell credit card terminals, like they make money off the, the things, the exchanges, the, the transactions, right? Transaction fees. It's like 10, 10 cents of whatever or something 4 cents. So we got machines in the fucking co-working that have nothing to do with coworking. And I re one day it was hotter than fuck over here. They take a lot of energy and Lamont Lamont goes to the guy, the crypto bro. Who's also the CEO of this coworking space who really wants to just be the crypto, bro.2 (8m 27s):He's like, listen, bro. Like, something's going to melt down. You got to have something to cool. These machines. I mean, it's a fucking disaster waiting to happen. We're all going to burn up because this motherfucker wants to do crypto. He's not even dude. He's just doing the terminals. They're called terminals. No wonder my motherfucking internet doesn't work. How much juice do these motherfuckers take? I got pissed. I got Lamont. And I got pissed. I said and Lamont so funny. He goes, yeah, I don't mind all this like virtual crypto shit, but I need some actual motherfucking green tee up in here. You haven't had green tea up in here for days.4 (9m 6s):This is what I'm going to say. This is a, like, when you all of this, when all of this starts swirling in my head and it's all overwhelming, I just go, oh, like, okay. But that's not for me. Like this whole ether, a world that's cotton candy furniture. Like that's not for me. I have to stick with what I know. I like go stick with your, with, with what's in your CTA, what's in your wheelhouse.2 (9m 30s):Right. She taught us. Catherine taught us that, right?4 (9m 33s):No, it was a2 (9m 35s):Catherine's job. Oh,4 (9m 38s):Josh. Yeah. Yeah. He was talking about, the programs are called the, your concentration is called dementia anyway, like in the same way that, you know, people create art that other people criticize. And then you say, well, it's not for you. Like, I just know that none of that is for me. So, you know, because here's the thing we Erin and I have had near misses on like a bunch of bubbles. Right? We lived in California, we lived in the bay area during the, what they used to call the.com. And all of our friends had these hundred thousand dollars a year jobs and worked at Google and places and got Friday night, beer parties and lunch catered, whatever, every single day.4 (10m 23s):And we were just like, oh my God, we're so dumb. We can't, we don't know how to work in tech. We don't, we can't get to me take advantage of this opportunity. Then it was the housing market. And in 2004, it's like, wow, you could get a house. Like we could buy a house. Somebody would give us a mortgage. When we have no money in so much debt, we thought we should buy a house. We looked into buying a house that didn't work out. That turned out to be a good thing. I think the crypto thing is another, like, I'm not saying it's a bubble. Although it probably is. Cause we have to be in a bubble. But I'm saying like, I put myself at ease about not being able to really grasp these things by just saying like, oh, that's not for me.4 (11m 10s):That's not what I'm, that's not what I'm really like here on this planet to eat, to do2 (11m 16s):It interests me. And also, yeah, it's so bad for the environment. And also I just don't give a fuck. Also give me my fuck. Oh, we haven't had creamer up in this bitch for like, and I started, I was like, I don't give a fuck what you do here, but I need creamer. So if you don't like it and they finally got it, you bet your ass when Lamont and I were like, okay, green tea, we need it. And they got it. Cause we were like, fuck you. Like we're not stupid. And then the other thing that I wanted to say about the whole Bitcoin, oh the minimalist movement that these, these kids that are in their thirties are doing okay, listen to this. This is insane.2 (11m 56s):So kids are having and kids. Yeah. They're like 30, right? They're buying Teslas. Okay. But great. They buy a Tesla. Teslas are now equipped with so much shit that you can basically live in it. As long as you have a charging, they fucking park their shit and their parents' house. I'm not kidding you. So a lot of them were living with their parents. Right. And they were like, well, this fucking sucks, but they're saving all this money. Right. Cause it's so expensive. So there's sock away, their money. They buy a Tesla, they park the Tesla in their parents' fucking driveway. And they do experiments where they plug in and then they see if they can live in it. Okay. This is like a real thing.2 (12m 37s):Right? So it has everything you need except a shower and the bed, or like you, your seats go down. It's actually an, a toilet shower and a toilet. And then they get, so they have a Tesla,4 (12m 48s):They get,2 (12m 49s):They get, they get, they get a gym membership. Okay. So they had a Tesla and a gym membership and that's all they need. And they fucking don't own shit except crypto currency in their Tesla and fucking go around to different cities. And there's like all these Airbnb hacks and, and rental car hacks that if they travel, they travel around the country. Like the guy who is the CEO of this place, doesn't live here. He lives kind of an Austin kind of here is a test. It is the weirdest thing.4 (13m 22s):Okay. Well, when the Russians send nuclear missiles and we ended up having hand to hand combat with the Chinese or whatever, well, these fighting people gonna to do nothing.2 (13m 32s):I don't know how to do nothing. There'll be dead. No, no. But you and I are scrappy. Like we could figure it out. They're dead. And that's fine.4 (13m 41s):I always think of, I just said, I think like people used to hunt, you know, like w w where if our world is predicated on so much pretend and like, and like also just like this very thin margin of, well, it's all fine and good until the power grid goes out. It's all fine. And good until like, suddenly for whatever reason, there is just no internet,2 (14m 3s):Like, or they get hacked. Right,4 (14m 6s):Right. Yeah. It's all fine. And good until like everything that we put our hope hopes and dreams and faith into just doesn't work one day, because that's what happens with machines is they just, sometimes they write2 (14m 17s):And Lamont was saying, and I kind of agree with him that like, what he thinks is happening. So frantically the government is scrambling to get into crypto. Right. Frantically our government is like, we're going to have a fucking stake in this. So what he thinks is going to happen and like agree with him is that they're going to figure out a way to sabotage the crypto system and say, we, we now run the cryptosystem. He's like, I know it's a conspiracy theory, that kind of thing. But of course it's money. Right. So they're going to say, okay, okay. Like you guys are going to get screwed because someone's going to hack, you, let the government take over, we'll run crypto. And then of course,4 (14m 54s):Which takes away the main draw of crypto, which is that it's this currency that cannot be traced to everything. So the second there's any type of regulation that, that, and it's like, well, you might as well just be talking about dollars. Right. Because you know,2 (15m 9s):That's what they're going to do. So it's going to be really interesting to see how this plays out. We'll probably be dead, but that's okay.4 (15m 14s):Yeah. We'll probably be done. I'm watching this television show called severance. Oh,2 (15m 19s):Everybody loves severance.4 (15m 21s):Wow. Wow. Wow. It's it's woo. It's really something else. But what I love about it is it's kind of hard to explain, so I won't try to explain it, but there's suffice it to say the company that these people work for, the job that they do is they sit at these computer terminals and they there's just a screen full of numbers. And they have to put these digits into the correct bins at the bottom.2 (15m 53s):Okay.4 (15m 54s):Based on their feeling about the numbers, like these numbers are scary and these numbers are half. Yeah. It's so weird. Right? When I, when I see them, they're putting the numbers into this little bins in the bottom and I go cut. This is like my daughters, you know, like educational games. She has to do something like this. Well, it gets to the end of the season. And the they've, all this little department has leveled. The there's all this pressure on getting a certain quota by the end of the quarter. And it's, we don't, we're not gonna make it and we're not gonna make it.4 (16m 35s):We're not gonna make it at the last minute. They make it. And what making it looks like for them is that a pixelated cartoon character comes on and says like, basically you leveled up. So really it, I dunno if this is the point that they're trying to make, but it really looks like they're just playing a video game.2 (16m 58s):This is insane. I love it. It's the same.4 (17m 2s):It's really, really good. And I, and I reached out to all of the actors on there and seeing if anybody wants to be on our show, I got one person who was like, oh, that sounds interesting. I'm like, is that a yes and no, I never, I never heard anything back from her, but yeah, listen, humans are designed to work. So when you don't have to literally like, grow your own food and cut down your own wood, you have to find something to do. That feels work, work ish. And I feel like a lot of our industries are kind of work adjacent2 (17m 43s):And like, and like a lot of sorting into bins. Yeah.4 (17m 50s):You2 (17m 50s):See fucking bad vegan.4 (17m 55s):No, I was wondering if I should watch it.2 (17m 57s):Okay. Watch it. And we'll talk about it because whoa. It is, the Myles was a very frustrated with this documentary based on,4 (18m 9s):Oh, it's a documentary. Oh, I thought it was a tele. I thought it was a fictional show.2 (18m 13s):Oh, it they'll make a fictional show out of it. But it's a documentary about a woman who started a vegan restaurant and so much more in New York city. And it comes down to what we always said. And I'll wait until you watch it. But I, it just reinforces what we always talk about, which is if you have an unfulfilled, inner need from childhood, that shit will play out. I could trace this, her whole demise, her whole demise. And it's a whole crazy ass fucking story about this woman. Her whole demise comes down to the fact that Alec Baldwin did not pick her to date. Okay. That's it.2 (18m 53s):Okay.4 (18m 54s):Completely plausible. I completely understand that.5 (19m 1s):Let me run this by you.4 (19m 9s):I know my son got this part in a movie. And so the thing we wanted to run by you is I, Hm. So many things I get, I get stage moms. I understand why stage moms is a thing. When my son started getting into acting, he was five years2 (19m 35s):Old. Yeah. It was really young.4 (19m 37s):And my thing was, I don't want to be a stage mom. I don't want to be a stage mom. I don't want to be a stage mum, which was reinforced by every time I've ever been on set. There's always at least one really out of control stage mom. And I think I told the story in the podcast before, but one time we, we were in a, he was doing Gotham that showed Bathum and there was like a gaggle of kids in this scene. And this one boy, I was just, you know, whatever. I was striking up a conversation with him and I said, oh, do you, do you really want to be an actor? And he said, no, my father makes me do this. I want to be at school.4 (20m 17s):And it was just so2 (20m 19s):Like,4 (20m 19s):God, and I met a lot of kids. This was back when he was doing all just all background stuff. I met a lot of that's where you find the most stage moms when the kids are like that, the stakes are just, couldn't be lower. Right. You know, they're just doing background, extra work, which is all just to say, though, I've had to be in dialogue with myself about what my aspirations are about working in film and television and my frustrated aspirations. And I, you know, I've had to just be constantly talking to myself about making sure that this is what he wants and not what I want. And in the classic thing that always happens is when he gets an audition, if he doesn't feel like doing it, it just, it becomes this thing.4 (21m 8s):And I always say, you don't have to be an actor. You don't have to have an agent, but if you're going to be an actor and you're going to have an agent, you have to do the audition.2 (21m 18s):That's true.4 (21m 19s):And you have to work at it and you have, you have to work hard at it. And that thing is actually really hard. And it takes a lot of work that we just kind of overcame this obstacle for the audition for this movie, because I made him put in maximum effort. Usually I don't usually, I'm just like, well, it's his career, you know, it's his life. If he doesn't want to work on it, why am I going to spend, you know, my whole time? But I'm really encouraged him to work on it. And he really did. And he did really well. And so now we're waiting to hear, you know, whether or not he's gotten it, but the first night that this was a thing, I couldn't sleep. I was awake. Like, I mean, part of it is thinking about the logistics.4 (22m 1s):Like how will I live in LA for a month when I have two other kids. Right. But the other part of it is just, what is this going to mean for him to, what's going to be what's next and what's next and what's next. And what's next. So I've talked a lot of shit about stage moms in the past. And I just want to say, if you're listening to this in your stage, mom, I get it. I get, I get, you know, because maybe this was your hope and dream, but also maybe just, you put a lot of effort into when you're the mom of the kid who wants to do this, it's so much work for the mom or the dad was the case may too much. It's, it's scheduling babysitters when you have other kids2 (22m 43s):Driving4 (22m 44s):Into the city for auditions paying for headshots every year, because they change so much every year communicating with doing the cell. I had to learn. This is actually how I learned how to do I moving because I had to, you know, work, learn how to edit his self-tapes and stuff like that. So, but have you encountered stage moms? Oh,2 (23m 7s):That's a great question. Yes. And I feel like I totally understand how moms and dads get and caretakers get to be that way. And I think also to remember for me is that it comes from this genuine usually place to want to help and protect your kid. And, and also, and then you mix that in with your own aspirations, which I would have to, if I had a child that I was shoveling around and also, yeah, I would encounter that. So I think I get it. And I also know that like when I worked at casting and at PR and I loved it, but they would occasionally be like moms that would bring in their kids or dads, but usually it's moms.2 (23m 57s):Right. Of course, who bring in their kids that were desperate to get the kid into the face of the casting directors. So they'd hang around. They didn't want to ingratiate themselves to casting at the audition. They'd come into the office and, and, you know, to their credit of my bosses, PR casting, they were lovely. Like they, but, but they also had work to do so. It was like, these kids are just sort of standing there smiling. And the mom is like pushing them and we all, it was very uncomfortable and it doesn't actually work like what works is being professional on set, doing a great job in the room, being a nice kid and being a nice parent, but it just feels like, and we know this from being actors.2 (24m 45s):It just feels like you have to like, sort of ingratiate and push yourself into the faces of the people with power in order to get anywhere. So then there's like these really uncomfortable moments of like talking about nothing while we're trying to get work done in the office, especially like, yeah, they have a lot of work to do. So it was just, it was just very, and you'll see when we go to PR like it's all glass. So like, you can see what the casting directors are doing in the office. So you want to be in there because it looks really fun.4 (25m 16s):Right. And2 (25m 18s):Actors who are like, quote, special, get to go in there and say, hi, like I'm friends with the, with the casting directors is the, is the idea. I'm not saying I'm like someone is, and then they get to go. It's just like a really weird thing. And it's also, it's very hard to navigate and I get it too. We, we, we want to be liked and loved and picked and chosen. And it is a universal thing.4 (25m 44s):I want the same thing for our kids. Yeah. Yeah. Totally.2 (25m 48s):I don't. I've had never had anyone that has been bonkers, you know, but maybe, yeah. I never, yeah, never.4 (25m 55s):Yeah. I think really they're bonkers behavior. I think actually, probably the kids are the ones who absorbed the brunt of it, which is, you know, and also it's really hard to teach a kid about acting because you're, as we've said many times, you're, you're trying to figure out how to play a character when you don't even know who you are. I mean, that's really true for a kid and trying to teach them, it's supposed to be it's. Yes. It's pretend, but you're supposed to be sincere and no, you're not the character, but yes, you have to be there. It's a lot of mental gymnastics,2 (26m 32s):Impossible. And like, if you don't know how to communicate that to a kid, let alone, the kid know how to do it. It's a mess. And then you're just, it's just kind of a crap shoot. Like, especially when you wouldn't see that were two and three years old.4 (26m 47s):Oh, see, now that I can't2 (26m 51s):Was like, yeah, some kids are, I mean, it's just to me, I thought it was amazing, but I also didn't have an agenda. I'm trying to get shit done. Like the directors and the producers on the, everyone is trying to get shit done in the room. And I have a kid doesn't, you know, whatever the kid is literally three years old. So like, I thought it was amazing, but I, they it's, it's a nightmare.4 (27m 15s):Yeah. Did I ever tell you the story of when I taught drama to kindergarten?2 (27m 21s):I know you did, but I don't know.4 (27m 24s):I had this job at this school called head Royce in the bay area. I got a job teaching after-school drama to kindergartners. It might've been my very first teaching thing. No, but it was early on and I hadn't taught, I certainly hadn't taught like my full-time teaching job that I eventually had at a middle school, but not having children and not having taught. I thought we were just going to do a play, you know, like They were going to memorize their lines. I seriously thought I seriously picked a play.2 (28m 5s):What was it? Do you remember? Was it like fucking, wouldn't it be funny if it was like, you know,4 (28m 10s):Romeo and Juliet2 (28m 11s):Steel Magnolias or something like just like totally amazing.4 (28m 15s):And it was age appropriate because it, it, it turned out to have whatever it was. I can't remember. But it was also a children's book, which I, oh, oh yeah. Oh, sorry. I adapted a children's book.2 (28m 29s):Oh my God. Okay.4 (28m 32s):And the entire time we were working on it, it never occurred to me that they couldn't memorize their lives. I just kept being like, well, maybe by next week, they'll know it. My next week they'll know it until it came time to do the performance and all the parents came and I shit, you not, it didn't occur to me until all the parents were walking in. Every single one of them had a video camera. This is before cell phones that, oh my God, they are expecting a show. And I guess I was too. And they don't know, we don't have a shell.2 (29m 7s):It look like my God, this is brilliant.4 (29m 10s):I got to the point for awhile. I was like doing the knee. I was the narrator. Right. And, and then they was supposed to be saying their lines, but then they would never say their lines. So then basically what it amounts to is I just read the entire book. Would2 (29m 26s):They do4 (29m 27s):Well, the kids just stood there. And the middle of it, when kid in the middle of my, and of course the more anxious and, and terrible, I felt like the more forced and forced, I must have looked crazy. I wish I could say videos. I bet I looked like a complete lunatic and in the middle of it as, and I'm also getting louder and louder. It's like, I would love to, I'm sure those parents are erased, taped over those tapes, but I would love to see just frantic me and I'm getting read By the time it was over, I just went to the headmaster's office.4 (30m 16s):And I was like, I did a terrible job. You should never hire me again. This was a complete disaster. And they were like, yeah, maybe this isn't your thing.3 (30m 39s):Today on the podcast, we were talking to Joe, the seal, Joe is an actor and a writer and a content creator and a former Neo futurist. He has got a going on and he is lovely and charming and personable and a marketing genius. He has his own company. Now. He is all that. And the bag of chips as the kids used to say five years ago. And I hope you really enjoy our conversation with Joseph.4 (31m 21s):You still have that fabulous smile.7 (31m 27s):You were so sweet. It's so good to see both. Oh my goodness.4 (31m 31s):What you, what you don't have. What I remember is big hair. Oh, Well, you're a handsome bald bald man. So you can play.7 (31m 42s):Oh, thank you. Go on. Go on.4 (31m 45s):I will. I will. I will. But I'll start by saying congratulations. JoBeth seal. You survived theater school.7 (31m 51s):I did.4 (31m 52s):Yes. And you survived it with us mostly with bod. You guys are graduated in the same year, I think.2 (31m 58s):Yeah.7 (31m 59s):Yeah, we did. Yeah. Do you remember that year? We were in the same section, Johnny.2 (32m 4s):Here's what I remember about you. We went to a Halloween party together with my roommate with a non theater school, like my best friend, Sasha, who Gina knows Sasha and Carsey. And we went to a freaking Halloween party in the suburbs and you had the best costume ever. It was a robot. And you remember any of this? You look,7 (32m 24s):Oh my God. I don't know2 (32m 25s):Brilliance.8 (32m 27s):It7 (32m 27s):Was like, I was a robot. Wow.2 (32m 29s):Like a whole situation. And it was like, we had the best time, but it was like, we didn't know anybody. It was like in the suburbs. It was my friend.4 (32m 37s):Did he make2 (32m 38s):That? Yeah, it was all made. It was so good. Anyway, that's what I remember. That's the main thing that I remember being like, oh my God. His costume. Brilliant. So anyway, I do remember. I mean, I remember, yeah. I mean, remember bits and pieces. I remember that, like I thought you were like super nice. And also, yeah, that we all just were trying to figure it out. Like nobody knew what the hell was going on.7 (33m 7s):Yeah, no, I remember when you joined our section, we were so excited that like someone new was going to like join and we all knew of you, but we didn't know. And I remember that year, you were just like a breath of fresh air. You were just so direct and funny. And you know, I think at that point we were just getting a little tired and you just brought a lot of really beautiful energy into our sections.2 (33m 36s):Oh, the other thing I want to say before I forget is that I, when I was doing research on you, like just to catch up on you and stuff, there's other people with your name that, that some, some before like wild, like one, one guy, like a couple like therapists, couple has Lisa and Joe have your name and, and are like infomercial kind of P anyway, I just thought it was hilarious. And then there's another actor.7 (34m 3s):Yes. There's another actor in what had actually happened one year. It was, I was put in the DePaul, the theater school, alumni newsletter that I was on six feet under and all of this stuff. So people started reaching out to me and it was the other job.4 (34m 20s):That's funny. That's funny. I wonder about those alumni. So it's just, I mean, I guess you've answered the question is somebody scouring the trains or whatever, looking for names that they2 (34m 32s):Used to be John Bridges. And then I think also people submit themselves, which is so, I mean, I get it, but it's also like, I don't have time for that. I mean, like, I mean, not that I'm doing anything that fancy, but like, I, there's something weird about being like, Hey John Bridges, can you put me in the alumni news? I don't know. I'd rather be4 (34m 55s):Except for like your, but that's what it is. Right. That's what you have to do. That's what it's all about the network. I mean, I haven't ever done it either, but2 (35m 6s):I mean, I did it when I had a solo show because I thought, okay, in Chicago, maybe people will come, so I have done it, but I, I just,7 (35m 14s):Yeah, for promo, I think it might be helpful in some instances, but2 (35m 19s):Whatever it is4 (35m 22s):Actually the beginning you're from long island7 (35m 25s):And you have4 (35m 26s):Zero long island accent. Was that very intentional?7 (35m 30s):Well, it's so funny. You mentioned that because I think that was such a big thing my first year. And it really kind of changed the way I speak, because I felt like I was a fast talking like long island kid. And my speech really slowed down that first and second year. Cause I was so conscious of it. So the, after that first year, I think, you know, yoga between yoga and all the voice and speech stuff, like I was like standing up straight and talking like standard American, like, you know, whatever that was that we learned.4 (36m 5s):Like you had to do that in your, not what, even when you weren't on stage.7 (36m 10s):I mean, that was, that was a thing I think back then, I didn't really understand the distinction. I felt like I, I, I had to speak that way on stage and then it just transferred over to my real life. Also, you know, looking back, I was like, oh, you know, I wish I would have been able to make the distinction in my real life that I don't have to speak like this, but it's hard to learn something and practice it. Like I couldn't just practice that in class. It would have just been too difficult, but I started speaking a lot slower just because I was really conscious of the all sounds I was making, like all the sounds and, and I, it was pretty thick. I don't know. I don't know if you all knew me back then, but it was, there were some words I had never heard pronounced.4 (36m 52s):Well, I don't recall you as, I mean, I was surprised to learn that you were from long island and looking at your history because yeah. It seemed, it seemed like you had erased it. So were you the only person from, from New York in your class?7 (37m 10s):No. There were a cup there. Ed Ryan was also from New York. Yeah, but he was from Scarsdale, I think. And then I w I might've been the only one from long island, at least in my class that I remember.4 (37m 23s):And did you have DePaul as your, I mean, is that, was that the school you wanted to go to or your safety?7 (37m 30s):Oh my God. I was all about NYU. I was all about it. And then even before I went to, you know, before I started applying for colleges, my senior year, I went to a summer program at NYU. And at the time there was something called musical theater, works conservatory. And I spent a whole summer doing like conservatory training and, you know, to earn college credit. And it was such a great program at the time too, because we took classes during the day. And then the evening we saw shows and did all this cultural stuff. So after that experience, I was, I just wanted to go to NYU and I just loved it. I loved the city and then I didn't get, I didn't get in.7 (38m 16s):And then I was deciding between DePaul and Emerson and I visited both schools. And when I went to visit DePaul, I know you all had Bradley Walker. And I stayed, he probably doesn't remember this, but I totally stayed with him in the dorms. And the other weird kind of quirky thing I remember was I, I went to his dorm room and he was eating dog food. Like he was eating out of a box2 (38m 44s):And wait,7 (38m 45s):Wait, yeah, hear me out here. So he's like, do you want some? And I was like, okay, sure. You know, peer pressure. So I ate the dog food, like out of the box, it was like dry dog food. And he's like, yeah, it's just, we like how it tastes and it's cheap. And then like, after he told me it was just like cereal and they just like, say like, they put this cereal in the dog food box anyway,4 (39m 9s):Like7 (39m 11s):Quirky things that I remember about that weekend.2 (39m 15s):So here's the thing as a 46 year old tired ass lady. I'm like, who the fuck has time to be switching foods into different modifiers. I can barely get my shoes on 18 year olds who are in college. Like the good quirky marketing. It reminds me of something they might've done. And say that movie with Janine Gruffalo and Ben Stiller, whatever that movie was that they did about gen X, whatever, like reminds me of something like, Hey, let's switch the food into the, but anyway. Okay. So was he nice to you?7 (39m 54s):Oh my God. He really sold me on the school and not, he wasn't trying to sell me on the school. He's like, this is where we do this. And he took me on a tour of the theater school and, you know, I loved that it was in an elementary school and I visited in June, which is like a beautiful time of being in Chicago. And I mean, after that experience, I was just completely sold and I, it was cool. Cause I went by myself like my mom, just let me just go to all these places to visit and like got off the, you know, I took the train, I took the L to the school and everything and, and it was, it was cool. I felt like it was a really good fit. So it worked out nicely.4 (40m 33s):You did a bunch of things though. After theater school, you moved back to New York and got very involved in theater. So tell us about that epoch.7 (40m 42s):Yeah, I mean, I think I did a couple of shows in Chicago and I had major FOMO of what was going on in New York and I felt like I was missing out. And I think, you know, I had audition for a lot of stuff in Chicago and I just didn't wasn't landing things. And then, you know, when I moved to New York, I wanted to focus more on directing and writing. And I did an intern. I did a couple of internships, but I did want to ensemble studio theater. And that was super helpful because as part of the internship, you were in an actor director writing lab and yeah, and it was, I think the first time I had been in a place where you can kind of cross over and do different things.7 (41m 27s):And also the, we had a, a lab director who really kind of just taught me, like how to like give feedback to myself and how to give feedback to others. Like the big thing that she would always ask is like, after we would present some kind of work, she would just say like, what do you need to know in order to move forward with the work? Like, what is important to you? And we really, you know, we had a small group and we really experimented within that. And then after the internship, some of us kind of like stuck together. And I mean, at the time too, there were, there were a ton of interns. There was like over 20 and they gave us the keys to the theater.7 (42m 7s):And we had like, there were a couple of theaters there. So we would do our shows like on the top floor of, of, of the theater there on 52nd street and, you know, hang out after and drink beer. And like, I mean, something that probably is not happening today, but it was, it was a really co like a good landing pad for me. So just to meet other people.2 (42m 28s):Okay. So if we take it back a little bit, like when you work, cause I'm curious about that. So like, you didn't have FOMO about LA, right? Like moving to LA when everyone moved to LA or did you like when you graduated from DePaul and I asked, because now you're here obviously in Southern California, but also because it sounds like New York to you based on you, the summer program you did and stuff was sort of the, like in your brain, like the utopia Mecca for actors, but you, so you felt a FOMO, but like showcase wise. Cause I love the good showcase story where you focused on New York, like, cause you did we, did we go to, no, we didn't go to New York, but we7 (43m 7s):Did know.2 (43m 8s):So how, how did you make the choice to go? Not to LA? Like how did that go down?7 (43m 13s):Yeah. I mean, we took a, that film class our last year with Gerard. I don't know if you remember him.2 (43m 20s):Fuck.7 (43m 21s):Yeah. We took a film class. Yeah. We all, we all did. I think that's what his name was and that2 (43m 29s):Class.7 (43m 30s):Yeah. We took a film class where we did a scene on camera and I, the it call experience was like horrific.2 (43m 39s):Oh, I remember it was bad for all of them.7 (43m 43s):I have like a little breakdown after, cause I was like, I don't, I just felt very, you know, self-conscious, I mean, we had spent like years doing theater and I never really looked at myself. And then I was not like a theater snob at all. Like I was willing to do anything. I would do voice or do film, but I just didn't feel comfortable with the camera at all. And I think by the last year or two, I really started to get more interested in like experimental theater and performance art. And I felt there was more of that in New York at the time or maybe I was just unaware of it in Chicago and I wanted to lean in that direction.7 (44m 25s):And that's another reason I kind of went to New York also.2 (44m 28s):Yeah.7 (44m 29s):Yeah. I wasn't seeing that as much. Like I remember there were some companies in Chicago that did some really beautiful pieces, like all the Mary Zimmerman pieces I loved. And I was like, Ugh, that was like, all those were like the Northwestern kids who were in those shows.2 (44m 45s):Oh, I remember what metamorphosis happened. And everyone was like, we all want it to be in metamorphosis. And none of us got in because she of course chose Northwestern kids because that's who she taught and that's where she went. Right. And so whatever.7 (44m 59s):Yeah. And I ended up seeing that in New York anyway, when it was there. So it was like anything like that would eventually go to New York to,4 (45m 6s):And you did a lot, you worked a lot in New York theater, you worked at roundabout and you, and you worked for the Neo futurists, which I love that. I mean, I, that show too much light makes the baby go blind, which is now called infinite infinite wrench, wrenches that it's called.7 (45m 23s):Yeah.4 (45m 24s):I love that show. Tell me everything about being a part of that.7 (45m 28s):Yeah. You know, at that I first saw that show in Chicago when I was like right outside of, no, I saw my first year when I was 17 and then someone from DePaul had like a friend of mine had brought me to it and I, I loved it and then kind of forgot about it. And then I auditioned in Chicago for it when I was 21 and I was just not ready for it. And then when I moved to New York, I was there for maybe two or three years. I discovered that they had had started the show there. And I mean, that really kind of shifted so much for me. I, well, for one thing, it was like, it was so great to meet a group of people who were passionate about the same thing, like the aesthetic, you know, passion about being ensemble.7 (46m 19s):And that show is like so challenging and fun and stressful, but also like super rewarding. And also at the same time, you know, it kind of changed the dynamic I had as an actor and artists with the audience, because it's so rare as an actor that you get to just like be yourself on stage. It's like rarely happens at all. So to on a weekly basis, just stand in front of an audience and like be yourself. And then, and then also think about like what you want to say and how you want to say it. And you know, like through movement or puppetry or through humor or through earnestness or do something concise conceptual or abstract or, you know, and I did some like crazy shit,2 (47m 10s):Like what was your, what was your favorite cause like what I'm noticing and what as you're talking, what I'm remembering about you is that yeah. Like literally you, you, my experience of you and when we knew each other back in the day, was that yet you did not, you, you, you wanted to sort of push the envelope and step outside of the bounds of what we were learning at the theater school. Like you just had an experimental, like heart about you. So I guess my question is like onstage. What do you remember about to my, about the Neo futurist that like really sticks to you? Like performance wise? Like what was so special? Like when did she7 (47m 48s):So many things? I mean, I think, well, the craziest thing I did was take a shit on stage with someone2 (47m 57s):I never heard about this.7 (47m 60s):It was actually a very like poignant play about like writing. It was with my mentor who was, and then you have you trust and we have the same name and we both, the play was actually called untitled number two. And we had this thing in common before we would perform, we would always like have to take a pill. So I just wrote this play about that experience. And to me, like he was, you know, offered me so much advice and so many, you know, really kind of mentored me through being a new, a futurist. And so I wrote this play in homage to him and, you know, as a gift and a sense. So at the end we like produced.7 (48m 41s):We like, we were actually, we put in a bucket and then at some point we, you know, we turned the bucket over and then, which was really hard to do. Cause I have to like, hold my poo in all day. And I was like, it was not sure what was going to come out at a certain, but I also did other2 (48m 54s):So. Yeah. Yeah. But I guess because, okay, so like the old summit stage fright I think is about being a failure for me on stage, like being embarrassed, being shamed, being all the things, right? Like that's what makes me panic on stage. Right? So this is an experience where you literally are like showing your insides, like take excrement, like on stage for the sake of art and for the sake of, but like, was it freeing?7 (49m 26s):Yeah. I mean, there was, I really never forget when I first run that I did my good friend, Erica, who I met during the new futurist and who I'm still really good friends with now. She said to me, she's like, if you fuck up, you have to let it go because you'll ruin the moment that you're in. And the next moment. So there are so many times, I mean, it was, we would learn things like the day before, the day of, and it was inevitable that we were going to fuck up. So all of that perfectionism, you had to kind of leave at the door. And, and that moment I remember sometimes like being on stage and being like, I have a line coming up. I don't even know what that line is.7 (50m 9s):And here you are. And then you just kind of like, say whatever comes out of your mouth and it's just becomes part of the show. So it was really freaky for me, who I felt like at school, I was not a perfectionist, but I did do a lot of homework to make things go. Right. I had to just let, I mean, another moment to, I, we did this like dance number where we had, we had these masks, there weren't masks. They were like plastic plates with smiling faces on them. And we didn't get a chance to rehearse the dance number before we went on. So I was beat backstage and someone was telling me like what the dancing2 (50m 48s):Score.7 (50m 52s):So I had my glasses on, like with this plate pressed against me and I hardly could see. And I was just like, all right, I'm just going to like follow the person in front of me and just see what happens. And then I think that's on YouTube somewhere of me like,4 (51m 7s):Oh, well, they wait. So I'm glad that you started to speak to being a perfectionist in undergrad because it wasn't until you use that word about perfectionism that I, that rung a bell. Oh yeah. You were perfectionists or, or maybe you were just one of these people that, you know, like we've talked to before who took theater school rarely, seriously, and maybe didn't care for people who didn't. I don't know if that's true about you or not, but how have you wrestled with your perfectionism as a performer and as a writer?7 (51m 42s):Yeah, I mean, I think what was school? I had like a very different experience. My first two years, compared to the second two years, I was certainly a big nerd my first two years. And I wish I had it cause when I knew this was coming up and I couldn't find it, I think it's at my sister's place someplace, but I have a journal that I kept used to write after every acting class. And I would write like what happened and then I'd give myself some like insights and recommendations for like next time I still have it. It's just, I have to find it. And when I do I'll, I'll, I'll send you. Cause I think I was, it was, I definitely documented everything that happened.7 (52m 25s):Like breakdowns, like being really angry, being really happy, like all that kind of stuff.2 (52m 32s): coffee table book, like, like, like acting notes from a teenager, like, like, or like, I don't know. I think it could be really great, but, and with pictures, cause you're an artist the whole, anyway,7 (52m 49s):I will, I will scan a good journal entry and I'll send it to both of you when I find it. But I think, you know, writing that really helped me, I think thrive the first two years was like the writing aspect of it and reflecting on it. And I think in terms of what I do now, like I need breaks and that's how I handle like dealing with perfectionism. Now I sometimes like I've just kind of started to develop a writing practice the past two years. And I know when it's time to stop. And usually it's when I stop, I know I need to like go for a walk and reflect or just let it go.7 (53m 29s):And then like,2 (53m 30s):'cause, that's what your friend Erica told you. It's like, you have to, we have to just let it go at a certain point in order to not because what happens right. As fear begets, fear, begets perfectionism. So on stage, if something goes awry, since we're all artists, we can relate, like if something goes awry and you stay stuck in the earth, wryness you really miss out on what's coming next. And also you're destined to fuck up. What's coming next. So that letting go for you, it sounds like it's really important in order to move on now, even not on stage. Like, and so you, you say like writing and walking helps you let go and you've realized that like to move on.2 (54m 10s):Yeah.7 (54m 11s):Yeah. And I it's so funny. We were talking about letting go. Cause when I auditioned for the Neos, we had to write a play about our biggest challenge. And to me it was letting go and I wrote this play, well, we didn't say any words, but we, there was a paper shredder on stage. And then I wrote out like a word or two on a piece of paper and then like put it through the shredder. And then we gave like, we held out pens or markers to the audience and then like the audience could come up and write something and then shred it. And it was like very powerful. Cause like some people would write like, you know, my, you know, my ex-boyfriend or like envy or, you know, last seasons, like fashion collection or whatever it is, you know, that they wanted to let go of.7 (54m 59s):But I think to me that is something that's still, you know, resonates of like how, how do I let go? You know, like through meditation, through like the walking for me is a meditation and that's, that's usually like, it's a big part of my process just to take the time, you know, to take the time between creation, I guess.4 (55m 20s):What have you learned that you've had to let go in terms of how you saw yourself as an artist when you started school, versus when you came out, like in the time that you've been able to reflect? What, what I mean? Cause we, we had lots of ideas about our spas and I had lots of ideas about ourselves and who we were as artists and whoever people. And most of those were all completely, they were wrong. So, so this podcast has been a process of letting go of some of those antidotes. What's it been like for you?7 (55m 53s):Yeah, I mean a big thing for me at school I remember was I know I've listened to a ton of episodes and I feel like I was really at war with myself. You know, I, the criticism from the teachers wasn't as big of a deal as the, as the criticism that I gave myself. Like I, I never, there was no self validation at all. Like even when I did something, well, I never told myself I, there was always something wrong. And I think that has been a big part of my adulthood is just learning to give myself a gold star and to self validate and then also to learn, to understand permission, to get feedback.7 (56m 44s):And you know, I think that was something that was always a little challenging at theater school too, was, you know, I like, you know, the, the lab director that I mentioned earlier at EST, who would say like, what do you need to know in order to move forward? So often at school we weren't in control of the feedback that we got. So I think sometimes it was really challenging for me when I was like, I'm not ready for all of this or I don't need to know that. Why are you telling me that now? Or, you know, we couldn't, I couldn't control any of that. And maybe I needed to let go of that. And I did have a little bit of a habit and, and a little reputation for walking out of class.7 (57m 32s):Yeah. And it was, it was something I had to address and something, a lot of teachers talk to me about. And I mean, often it was because I was bored or just like needed a break, or I was like, I didn't want to like watch someone or whatever it was. And2 (57m 46s):I think it's really bold. Like what the fuck, man? I wish the one time I did that, I, I like got in big trouble for it. And like, but like whatever the reason is you were on some level trying to take care of yourself. Right. And so good for you. Like, fuck that. I don't know. I like it. I probably would be like, oh, oh, that's awesome. And secretly I'm like, oh, the audacity, the amazing audacity of Joe to walk out and inside. I'm probably like, I wish I could do that. But anyway, so7 (58m 20s):Yeah, I mean, to me it was, it was self care in a way. And that was before we knew anything about that. And you know, when I think of like what I was going through at the time too, was it was such an emotional time for me, like for so many reasons. And, you know, like, you know, being away from home and coming out of the closet and like, you know, like all the money struggles I had and like, I, you know, it just kind of gave me, I was just learning how to take care of myself. And then on top of all those things, like studying drama, like, okay, this is the perfect time to study drama now, you know, and even like doing all the things that we did, like, especially the movement stuff always had kind of profound effect on me.7 (59m 8s):Cause we were like retraining how to the nervous system, that sense of like freeing our natural voice and doing all these things. So I was really emotional, like the first two years a lot. And I would just leave to kind of like collect my thoughts and not like have a major breakdown in class or dumb about something that yeah.4 (59m 25s):To modulate. Right. Because that's what you, what you definitely have no control over is modulating the flow of feedback because it's not just feedback from your teachers. We're getting feedback from our peers. And sometimes you'd get feedback from peers that you didn't really respect them. So you were like, I'm not sure what to, I'm not sure what to make of this.2 (59m 42s):What's becoming clear. Is that based on what you experienced after that with the lab is that we needed a feedback class. Like we needed a literal class of how to give and receive feedback at the theater school would have been fucking phenomenal.7 (59m 58s):Oh my God. I know it wasn't until years later when I was a Neo that we learn, the, the show was on, I think east fourth street and right next to his New York theater workshop. And they do the Liz Lurman feedback method, which I love. And I'm like, oh my God, that was really a beginning point for me because then it just to follow that structure is brilliant. Like, just start with what you were struck by. I don't need your opinion right away on what to change. Look, just tell me what you were struck by what moments did you enjoy? What, you know, what questions do you have and then, or asking questions yourself. And I mean, maybe the school does that now, but I think that was really, that was really big for me.7 (1h 0m 39s):I, for any artist, whether you're a dancer or2 (1h 0m 41s):No matter whether you're a child getting feedback from your parent or a spouse, getting feedback from your other spouse or whatever, it, it, it works in all levels. And I think that what it does though, is disrupts the hierarchy of the power in an institution. And so nobody likes that. I mean, really like teachers need to feel like they're in control, right. Instead of what struck me, let's stay curious, let's stay open. That's not how conservatories are made. Like that's not the whole goal of them. And then maybe I hope they're changing, but like, yeah. Oh, I just love that you haven't had that experience after school with both the, the, the work in New York and the, the ensemble work you did and the Neo futurists sort of sh it sounds like it's really shaped your work moving forward as an artist, right?7 (1h 1m 34s):Yeah. I mean, it was really, I have to say, I mean, after that moment of being a Neo futurists, I was like, I don't think I can play a character ever again. I don't really know it can happen cause I, it just didn't, I, it really changed the dynamic I had with an audience. And I, I guess I didn't want to go back to what it was before also being a Neo. I had to let go of really all the things I had learned at school, in a sense, I mean, all I could really use was like maybe some of the voice and speech work we had done, but I, I mean, yeah, it really kind of shifted things for me, but being in that ensemble was great.7 (1h 2m 14s):Cause I, I, you know, we really learned how you really need to learn how to give and take and to, and, but also be an advocate for your own work because every week, you know, you had to kind of bring in something and you had to pitch it. You had to sell it to the five or six people who were deciding what was in the show that week. So it was, I think it's an experience that I, they do workshops, but like, I think everyone should do a workshop in that way because the show itself is living newspaper. So you have to think of like, what is relevant right now? What's relevant to this audience what's relevant in this moment, you know? And how can I bring that on stage?4 (1h 2m 55s):So wait, so you had an interest young in musical theater, but did you follow that? Have you remained interested in musical theater?7 (1h 3m 6s):No. You know what? I know you all have talked about the brochure and so I completely read the brochure wrong when I chose DePaul. Well, a couple of things I had for musical theater, I wanted to get a BFA musical theater. And there aren't a lot of schools that offer that. So I, you know, when I didn't get into some NYU, I was like, okay, well, what other school? So I had to be flexible with that. But the brochure I remember for DePaul the last year we took ensemble class. And I actually thought that that meant that we were in a theater company.7 (1h 3m 48s):So I not only thought that the, like, after you graduated, you're part of an ensemble theater company. So I told everyone, I'm like, I'm going to DePaul. And then I'm in a theater company. And then I thought that like, that was one crazy thing. And then also the movement stuff, which was, I actually really loved, like all the movements that we did. Like, I'm a big, like I'm, I was a big fan of moving to music. Like that was my jam at school. So I thought I was going to be getting some dancing training there, but I kind of, I did let it go. Certainly like, as the years of the2 (1h 4m 26s):Rest of the school, were you in any7 (1h 4m 29s):I wasn't and I really wanted to be, I, we did like Peter pan one year. And Were you in that?2 (1h 4m 38s):No, but Eric was saying was Susan Lee and she talks about it on the podcast.7 (1h 4m 45s):I heard that one. Yeah, yeah, Yeah. But yeah, no, I didn't do any musical theater stuff. I did love all the, we learned like period dance, which I was a big fan of, like, that was2 (1h 4m 57s):Me too. There was a fucking structure and it was like slow. And like, there was a way to do it. I remember the Elizabethan situation maybe, or like there was like this dance with Romeo and Juliet situation. And I loved that. I felt like there were actual steps we could take, there was a pacing to it.4 (1h 5m 21s):And you knew if you got it or not. Right. Like it was, it wasn't nebulous. Like you either understood how to do it or you didn't.7 (1h 5m 27s):Yeah. I thought I was like, I love the ritual of it. And it was, it was great to learn about history in that way too. And I liked all the Labon stuff that we did with Betsy, I thought,2 (1h 5m 38s):Is that the buoyancy and the, this and the, that.7 (1h 5m 42s):Yeah. I loved all of that stuff.2 (1h 5m 44s):Yeah.7 (1h 5m 45s):I mean, it was, you know, it was physically challenging too. We, I remember that thing we did with it was called like chaos, where you had to like go crazy. And4 (1h 5m 55s):I don't remember that.7 (1h 5m 57s):Yeah.2 (1h 5m 57s):It was crazy. And I remember I got such a stiff neck. I had to go to the emergency Because we were going crazy. And the next day I was like, I think I broke my neck, but I didn't break my head. So I had to go to that. And they were like, what did you do where he's like at a headbanging concert? I was like, no, it's a theater school now.4 (1h 6m 23s):Oh, we got another one. We got another theater,2 (1h 6m 27s):Chaos lady. I was like, I can't move. Yeah.4 (1h 6m 31s):Okay. But wait, so tell us about Susan Laurie parks, 365 plays and 365 days.7 (1h 6m 39s):Yeah. So that was, we, the Neos were given a handful of S of days for our scripts from that. And then as an ensemble, we were tasked with like interpreting it in any way that we wanted to. So it was cool to like, do a show at the public. And I remember we did one piece called FedEx to my ex where we had, like, we used actual FedEx boxes, like maybe like 50 or 60 of them. And we, we had letters on them or words and like kind of configured them to, to give messages out to the audience on these boxes.7 (1h 7m 24s):So I love that experience just cause we, as an ensemble, get to LA to celebrate this playwright with other like theater companies from, I think it was from, from all over the place. And it felt, again, like another professional experience, something that we didn't really get a chance to do, because the show that we did on a weekly basis was like on knew sports street at like 11 o'clock at night, you know? And this was more of a, like, you know, a different audience for us, which wasn't,2 (1h 7m 53s):When did you stop working with, is it like once a Neil always said, Neil, can you stop pack in and do stuff? Or like, how does it work?7 (1h 8m 1s):You can. Yeah. So the, I was like a regularly scheduled Neo for about two years or so. And then I jumped in to do the show at other times. And like we did a pride show that I would do often, or I would come in and do a run. And then we also had primetime shows. So I was involved in like two or three prime time shows as either a performer or assistant director or a collaborator in some way. And I did that up until I did some marketing for the company. I did that up until I moved to LA. And even my first year in LA, I did a project at here art center with my, one of my theater heroes chucked me that I went back to to, to see.7 (1h 8m 50s):So, but yeah, when I moved here, I kind of just decided to let, let that go.2 (1h 8m 60s):They're always themes that emerged with people's lives when they come on the show. So for you then stop and starting, like ed Ryan's is being interrupted and yours is like letting things go. So when did you arrive in LA?7 (1h 9m 13s):I moved here. It's been five years. So 2017 or so. And you know, I finally feel like now I'm kind of getting settled. I mean, I'd go back to New York a lot just to hang out and spend time there. And I work remotely. So I'm able to like go there and like work for a couple of weeks. I've learned not to stay too, too long. Cause last summer I was there for six weeks and I was like, oh, I feel like I'm in my old life.4 (1h 9m 42s):How do you satisfy? If you still have a craving for performance, how do you set it? Because now you have your own company you're self-employed, which is awesome. How do yo

The Sword Guy Podcast episode 87 Anna Beard is a historical dancing and ballet and historical fencing instructor at Austin Historical Weapons Guild. She has been dancing since she was four and went on to get her Bachelor of Fine Arts and Dance from the University of Michigan, followed by teaching in studios, and running her own projects, performances and small dance companies. A move to Texas in 2018 ignited a passion for HEMA that has led to her becoming a co-owner of the Austin Historical Weapons Guild. Anna's 20 years of teaching dance have given her a love and deep understanding of pedagogy and in our conversation we talk about training teachers and how to teach children or adults. She has taught workshops at events like Swordsquatch on ballet for swordfighters, renaissance dance, and exploring teaching methods. Whether she manages to change Guy's mind on his dislike of ballet remains to be seen… Useful Links: The teacher that Anna mentioned as being a huge influence on her is Liz Lerman. Austin Historical Weapons Guild is on Twitter and Facebook, as well as other social media platforms. For more information about the host Guy Windsor and his work, as well as transcriptions of all the episodes, check out his website at https://guywindsor.net/ And to support the show, come join the Patrons at  https://www.patreon.com/theswordguy      

Notes:The Verbivore references the Critical Response Process created by dance professor Liz Lerman from ASU as a method to use when receiving feedback in any type of creative project. This method was touched on briefly in Episode 37: Pixar Storytelling Part 1. https://fableandtheverbivore.com/podcast/episode-37-pixar-storytelling-part-1 Fable references the Author Answers response from writer Erica Wynters where she talks about needing cheerleader feedback at a specific time in her writing process. That episode is Episode 36: Author Answers with Erica Wynters.https://fableandtheverbivore.com/podcast/episode-36-author-answers-with-erica-wynters The Verbivore references the open door writing process of author Victoria McCombs who we spoke to in Episode 39. https://fableandtheverbivore.com/podcast/episode-39-interview-with-victoria-mccombs After this episode was recorded, Fable and the Verbivore came across the BAP method for identifying the level of feedback you want from your beta readers, as explained by book coach Ann Kroeker. We wish that we’d had this information to include as part of the discussion. We’ll be discussing it during our interview with Ann in early April, but here is the link to this information on her website: http://annkroeker.com/2015/09/21/the-writing-life-podcast-bless-assess-or-press/ Books Mentioned:Liz Lerman's critical response process: A method for getting useful feedback on anything you make, from dance to dessert by Liz Lerman and John BorstelMusic from: https://filmmusic.io ’Friendly day’ by Kevin MacLeod (https://incompetech.com) Licence: CC BY (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

In part 1 of this several-part series, we explore how some artists and thought leaders position the role and influence of governmental programs and political figures on the arts, as well as how artists excavate politics and socio-political content for creative inspiration. Drawing from the work of Liz Lerman and Mark Dendy, we explore how some artists make such work. We also experience a conversation between political commentator Rachel Maddow and Pillow Scholar Suzanne Carbonneau as they discuss the role of government, and government funding, in the arts.

Keturah sits down with Lawrence Edelson, founder of the American Lyric Theater, and Artistic Director of Opera Saratoga. They discuss the Composer Librettist Development Program (CLDP), what makes a good librettist, the art of dramaturgy, and creating new opera in America.

Notes:The Verbivore discusses the changes that were made to Finding Nemo to make Marlin more empathetic as a character, by moving his backstory to the beggining of the narrative rather than have flashbacks throughout the movie. Those details came from the “Pixar in a Box: The Art of Storytelling” free class available on Khanacademy.org. Here is the link:Introduction to Structure - https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/hass-storytelling/storytelling-pixar-in-a-box/ah-piab-story-structure/v/piab-storystructureBoth Fable and the Verbivore talk throughout the episode about Pixar’s 22 Rules of Storytelling. This list is located in many places online, but here us one link to one copy of the list. Here are the rules they mentioned:6. What is your character good at, comfortable with? Throw the polar opposite at them. Challenge them. How do they deal?12. Discount the 1st thing that comes to mind. And the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th – get the obvious out of the way. Surprise yourself.15. If you were your character, in this situation, how would you feel? Honesty lends credibility to unbelievable situations.18. You have to know yourself: the difference between doing your best & fussing. Story is testing, not refining.The Verbivore references the Ted Talk “Andrew Stanton: The clues to a great story”. The sequence about Woody and the conditions that he has for himself start at timestamp 12:23.The Verbivore references a book that she read as part of her work about how to give critical feedback. That book is called Liz Lerman's Critical Response Process - A Method for Getting Useful Feedback on Anything You Make, from Dance to Dessert.Fable mentions the Pixar concept of Good Notes. Here is a synopsis of the good note process as defined in the book Creativity Inc.:Good notes say what is wrong, what is missing, what isn’t clear and what makes sense. They do not make demands or necessarily propose a fix. Most of all, they are specific.Focus on the problem, not the person: When criticizing an idea, shift the emphasis away from the source and onto the idea itself.Set up a healthy feedback system by removing power dynamics from the equation. Any successful feedback system is built on empathy.Success = put smart, passionate people in a room, charge them with identifying and solving problems, and encourage them to be candid.Fable mentions a quote about writing emotion from a place of authenticity. Here is the full quote:“No tears in the writer, no tears in the reader. No surprise in the writer, no surprise in the reader.” – Robert FrostBooks Mentioned:Pixar Storytelling: Rules for Effective Storytelling Based on Pixar's Greatest Films 1st Edition by Dean MovshovitzCreativity, Inc.: Overcoming the Unseen Forces That Stand in the Way of True Inspiration by Ed Catmull, Amy Wallace, et al.Liz Lerman's Critical Response Process - A Method for Getting Useful Feedback on Anything You Make, from Dance to Dessert by Liz LermanMusic from: https://filmmusic.io’Friendly day’ by Kevin MacLeod (https://incompetech.com) Licence: CC BY (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

photo by Jonathan Hsu Christal Brown has the distinction of being many things. She endorses a short list of these attributes that includes the titles mother, artist, educator, disciple and coach. Brown is most well known as a dancer and choreographer due to her 20+ year career as a performer and artistic director. Brown describes herself as a person with a servant heart and a workaholic mind, who has used dance to touch and be touched by others. Brown grew up in a small, Eastern North Carolina town, where she frequently accompanied her mother to NAACP, Black Caucus, and community board meetings. This early exposure to social movements and communal responsibility undoubtedly has influenced Brown’s work both on and off stage. As an undergraduate, Brown studied Dance and Business at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. Upon graduation, she went on to tour nationally and internationally with companies such as Urban Bush Women, Bill T. Jones, Chuck Davis, and Liz Lerman before founding her own company, INSPIRIT. Brown has served as the Founding Artistic Director of INSPIRIT for 16 years. During her tenure Brown developed curriculum for the New York Department of Education, choreographed over 75 performance works, created the Liquid Strength training module for dance, and the Project: BECOMING, self-development program for women and girls.  While developing INSPIRIT Brown completed her MFA in New Media Art and Technology at Long Island University and joined the faculty of Middlebury College in 2008. At Middlebury, Brown serves as an Associate professor  of dance, the current chair of the Dance Program and former Faculty Director of MiddCORE. Her dance career has continued to thrive in performances with the Bebe Miller Company, and her most recent choreographic works; The Opulence of Integrity and What We Ask of Flesh. Brown’s newest manifestation of love is Steps and Stages Coaching, LLC; where as a Life Mastery™ Consultant, certified by the BraveThinking Institute, Brown is able to coach, facilitate, and inspire other to pursue their dreams and create a life they truly love living. photo by Maranie What We Ask of Flesh, Kelly Strayhorn Theater photo by: Tayler Goodwin, The Project: BECOMING Box, available at www.christal brown.com.shop

Donna Peters interviews Professional Actor and Communications Coach, Connan Morrissey.  Connan has performed on stage across the US in leading roles and coaches executives and next-generation leaders on executive presence and how to have impactful communications.  She has an MFA in Acting from UNC-Chapel Hill.  HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE EPISODECommunication skills are just like any skill--you need to practice to build the muscleGOOD communication is clear, intentional, knowledgeable.   EXCELLENT communication transforms the audience, is confident, humorous and uniquely YOURehearse literally means "to re-hear."  Rehearse your story.  In high stake situations.  Don't memorize it.How to give and receive feedback on Communication skillsAdd someone to your personal Board of Directors when you're ready to work your Communications skills.  Think of your audience as your customer.  Be customer-centric as you prep.Tips for taking the focus off of yourself and worrying "what do I do with my hands"All this video time is good and forces us to be more succinct and directConnan's Core Values: Curiosity, Connection and AdventureConnan recommends the following resources to watch and learn from EXCELLENT communication and storytelling:@sirpatstew  - SIr Patrick Stewart Reads Shakespeare's Sonnets on TwitterLiz Lerman - www.lizlerman.com  - Liz Lerman's Critical ResponseFather Greg Boyle - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipR0kWt1Fkc.   His book is Tattoos on the Heart https://www.amazon.com/Tattoos-Heart-Power-Boundless-Compassion/dp/1439153159Check out other episodes such as:Perseverance: Embracing the Cards You're DealtDon't Mistake Kindness for WeaknessManaging Your Personal FearEmbrace the Hard ThingsServant LeadershipThe Innovation Ninja Shares His PowersStorytelling with a C-Suite LeaderThink Like a CFO: Dollar Scholar Shines a Lights at a Dark TimeImprov Can Improve Your Work and PlayHow to Have a Growth MindsetDo You Know Your Core Values?Build Your Personal Board of DirectorsA CEO Gets Real About Real LifeCreating the Culture You Want to Live InShape the Future You WantOptions Are PowerThank you for joining us in The Me-Suite: a source of power for the life-minded.  Subscribe to the podcast.  Visit our blog and career coaching services.  Everyone needs a coach, especially at times like these.www.the-me-suite.comFB: @mesuiteLinkedIn: The Me-Suite

Our art is personal so sometimes receiving feedback can feel overwhelming. In this episode, Jeffrey and Joseph talk about how to give and receive comments beyond “it was good,” or “it was bad.” They outline four steps to help get and give useful responses: give permission, set specific parameters, have a limit, and evaluate what was helpful. Consume: Read up on Liz Lerman’s Critical Response Process Create: Write (and record if you’re a podcaster) a 2-minute piece (that’s about 200-250 words) about a fight between two people. Don’t work it too much. When you post it: 1. Ask for feedback 2. Set parameters for what feedback you want 3. Limit the feedback to an exact number of responses 4. Thank your responders once you’ve reached that number Then go and give feedback to someone else who’s given permission for responses. Be respectful of your own and other people’s limits. Join the SWT Membership community to see what other listeners are making: https://www.patreon.com/startwiththis Brand new logo t-shirts available now: https://topatoco.com/collections/startwiththis Follow us on Facebook and Twitter. Credits: Jeffrey Cranor (host) & Joseph Fink (host), Julia Melfi (producer), Grant Stewart (editor), Vincent Cacchione (mixer). Rob Wilson (logo). Produced by Night Vale Presents. http://www.startwiththispodcast.com http://www.nightvalepresents.com

Jacob joins the panelists to talk about team collaboration based on his RubyConf 2017 talk, Code Reviews: Honesty, Kindness, Inspiration: Pick Three. Jacob Stoebel is a software developer living in Berea, KY. He spends his days writing web applications in Ruby, JavaScript, and Python, working with data, and leveling up as a software engineer. He works and studies at Berea College. You can find out more about Jacob at jstoebel.com. Please join us in these conversations! If you or someone you know would be a perfect guest, please get in touch with us at contact@frontside.io. Our goal is to get people thinking on the platform level which includes tooling, internalization, state management, routing, upgrade, and the data layer. This show was produced by Mandy Moore, aka @therubyrep of DevReps, LLC. TRANSCRIPT: CHARLES: Hello and welcome to The Frontside Podcast, the place where we talk about user interfaces and everything that you need to know to build it right. My name is Charles Lowell, a developer at the Frontside. With me today from Frontside also, is Taras Mankovski. TARAS: Hello, hello. CHARLES: Hello, Taras and today, we're going to be talking like we do every time about a piece of the platform that you used to develop user interfaces frontside at your company or organization or wherever it is that you build software. Today we're going to be talking about a piece of the platform that's very, very critical that often gets short shrift or is excluded entirely from what people think of when they think about their tech stack and that's how we as teams collaborate to build and maintain and produce the quality software that we can. With us today is Jacob Stoebel. Welcome, Jacob. JACOB: Hello. CHARLES: Now, what is it that you do, in your day-to-day? JACOB: I'm a full-stack developer for a little company called ePublishing and I mostly work in Rails and React. CHARLES: Rails and React and so, when we were searching for people to talk about how we collaborate these teams, Mandy suggested you because of a talk that you've given at a RubyConf, specifically about code reviews, which I think are actually a huge piece of the collaboration process because it's a major forum where team members get to interact with each other and it's the gateway for making sure code quality is maintained but more than that, I think it's a learning -- a place where we learn. I learned so much both as a reviewer and as someone who is submitting my work and so, it's actually a very important part of the software development process. You have a lot of great examples of how to not do code reviews. JACOB: Yeah, I think I may have been a little bit too indulgent in that talk. I had a lot of fun. I did some research from other people, mainly from anecdotes. I had research from talking to people about really, all the anti-patterns that come out of code reviews. It seems like every few weeks, I'll see a tweet that says something along the lines about how code reviews are broken. I don't really know about that and I have to say, I think I'm kind of lucky at my job that I think they're done in a way that really leaves me feeling pretty positive and that's certainly a good thing but I think what it comes down to -- I'm going to sort of talk about where these ideas come from in a minute -- is that we often have code reviews that for one -- and you can tell me how this is for you too -- often the code review is happening at a point so late in the process, where the feedback that you get may not be actionable. Have you experienced that? JACOB: Before I answer that question, just to kind of echo the sentiment and maybe I'm being presumptuous, I feel like the code reviews that we do are actually very positive, so I haven't got to experience firsthand. Although I have seen conversations on GitHub where it looks kind of like a Celebrity Chef, where you have someone doing the code reviews like Gordon Ramsay up there just screaming and someone has put this plate of food in front of them and kind of picking it apart. That one is extreme but this is actually something that I struggle with, what you were talking about, what is the appropriate point at which to get feedback. I agree that you want to get feedback as soon as possible and sometimes, when you've invested weeks and weeks into something or you're like at Mile 100 and they're like, "You know, at Mile 2, you were supposed to turn right," and now, you're off in the forest and you've been tracking 98 miles in the wrong direction. JACOB: Yeah and the work is due, right? This needs to get ships tomorrow. CHARLES: Right, so you've got massive pressure. This is something that I struggle with myself is when is an appropriate time to really try and be public about what it is that you're doing. JACOB: Yeah. I think that is a really good question and I think what you're getting at and I would agree is that, the sooner, the better and when you can tighten the intervals between feedback is probably better. I'll just take a step back and I'm going to take a longer route to go and get to my point. I am a career changer and before I was in this career, I was a high school theater teacher, so it was really different and I won't give answer why I changed other than this is the greatest [inaudible]. But one thing that I really struggled with is I was working with teenagers and I really wanted to see them grow and improve but at the same time, these were kids and they have fragile egos and I don't want to tear them down, so I came across this really interesting framework for feedback. It is called the Liz Lerman's Critical Response Process and I give credit to her in the talk. This comes out of the dance world. Liz Lerman is a pretty accomplished dancer and choreographer and what she found is that in the dance world and I think it's not too dissimilar from our industry is that the feedback received was often given in a way that was leaving people feel really torn down and mostly, not feeling inspired to go back to their work and make it better. It really felt like feedback is about giving you a grade. It's like, "I'm going to tell you how good of a job you do," and there's certainly a time and place for that but the inspiring question -- I guess the rhetorical question -- that she made is, "Shouldn't the big point about feedback be that it makes you so excited about the work you're doing that you just can't wait to go back to your keyboard and keep working on it," and she found or in the case, back to the dance studio, it really sort of structures this framework for how people can give feedback to a creator and that could be a creator of anything. You mentioned cooking. This could be about food as well that sort of set some guardrails for how we can give feedback that is useful, it's inspiring and it's kind. I'm going to really distinguish between kind and nice. Nice would be, here I'm going to say things that are only pleasant about your work but what I mean by kind is feedback that is really taking care of your team and making them feel like they are respected and cared for as human beings so they don't go home every Friday afternoon and cry on their couch and just drag and coming back on a Monday. That's kind of the basic idea of why we need, maybe a kind of a framework for getting feedback. CHARLES: I agree totally. It's almost like you need to conceive of your feedback is not a gate to quality but a gift to embolden somebody. It's like they've just been doing battle with this code, with this problem, they've been grappling with it and it needs someone to wipe their brow and maybe give them a stiff drink, so that they can get back into the ring and be invigorated. JACOB: Yeah. TARAS: What I'm hearing in this conversation so far is it's kind of like a tone or way of communicating to the person receiving the feedback but sometimes, no matter what your tone is, depending on how your team is set up, depending on the context of your actual code review, it can still kind of land in the wrong place? Have you experienced that where the team conditions impact your ability to actually provide feedback? JACOB: I think I know what you mean. I think what you're talking about is this sort of the organizational structures that are set up are sort of lend themselves to certain modes of feedback and discourage others. I will give this example that I've heard from numerous people and I think this is what you're getting at is feedback that's given at the end. Just like I said, feedback that is given the day before, it has to be shared. Or feedback that it's almost like if we work in an environment where sort of like the hair on fire environment where it's like everything was due yesterday, that's not an environment that's going to be conducive to slowing down, taking a step back and saying like, "Let's point out what we think this work is doing? What questions we have about it? Who has opinions about the direction that's being taken on it?" And really zoom out a little bit more. CHARLES: Do you have any concrete examples of how that early stage feedback has taken place at your work? Is it just over Slack? Maybe, the whole people need to step back from the idea that working on one-week iterations or two-week iterations and at the end of the iteration, everything is due and everything will get merged at that point. How do you kind of break up that structure to say, "No, we're going to try and have checkpoints and milestones?" What are deliverables that you can decompose the work into that fit inside the framework, that are inside the big deliverables, which is sensibly, the feature that you're working on? JACOB: I think first of all, it's the way this thing goes about. I don't think this framework works over Slack. I think it has to be immediate, I think it has to be either in personal or on Skype or Hangouts or something. One of the points of this type of feedback is really about checking in with each other as a team and I think what's great about Slack is that it lets you leave a message and walk away and the unfortunate thing about Slack is it's not meant for sort of attaching how people feel about things or what people's reactions were to them. I think you all have to be in the same space, hopefully with your camera on, if possible and really, just sort of checking in with each other as a team. I can point to times with my team that I think that's really worked out. I think you made a good point when it comes to really getting started with a project because there are times where I made the mistake of not trying to get feedback from my team early on when I was going to start a project and as you can imagine, did that really cost me? It's really getting feedback from my team and my supervisor about the direction this is going to want to go and I'll say from experience, I work on legacy codebases and as you can probably imagine, it's easy to paint yourself into a corner and what the thing about legacy code is that you don't know what pitfalls you're working into. You can get started and you can sort of find into the process, there is some reality about this code that you didn't know and it is really getting in the way of your work that had you known about it, it would have saved you a lot of trouble because you could have planned your way around it. Then the fortunate thing is drawing on the wisdom from people who they know about it because they struggled with it already if they've been around longer than I have. I think that's a really good point. This is a good thing to do. As you're getting started and you can be sharing this is my just initial idea of how I'm going to go about this. What my tech stack is or my understanding of the problem space, all of the above and to really sort of check your assumptions and see if they really check out. CHARLES: I want to circle back a little bit to something you'd mentioned before and that is you want to be kind in a code review and I would say, you probably want to be kind anytime you're giving feedback or interacting with your teammates but what's the process that you can go through if you find yourself struggling? How can I deliver this message that I want to deliver and have it come across this kind? What's a process or checklist that I can go so that I don't open my mouth up and say something that I can't take back or that is going to land wrong? JACOB: I'm glad you asked that and I think that this is a great way to introduce the guidelines for the critical response process. There's basically four steps to it and the way it's structured is you have the person who has created the thing. It could be the person or the team that has created the feature. You have other people who are responders to it. They could be people within your team or they could be others in the organization who are invested in your success. They're not here to tear you down or give you a grade. They're here because they want to see the project do well and then, there's going to be someone who is a facilitator. The way it works and I think this is directly addressing your question is there are guardrails that are going to help you not steer into territory that is going to leave someone feeling torn down. The first step to this process is all the responders are going to say statements of meaning about the work and what I mean by that is you're going to make things that stand out to you that are not attached with an opinion. You could say, for example, "This project is using React hooks. That's something I noticed." You're not going to say, "I think that's a good idea or a bad idea," but you're going to say, "This is what I'm noticing," and that is something that can get jotted down because that's going to be fodder for discussion later on like, "Let's talk about this new feature in React," and let's talk about it later. We can talk about if we think that's a good thing or not or what the implications are for that. The next step after that is that the person who has made the work of the team, they get a chance to ask questions of everybody else about what they thought. You've probably noticed that in a lot of pull requests, someone puts their work out there and then, the next thing that happens is everybody starts commenting on the work and saying what they think about it. This flips it. At first, you as the creator, start asking questions or you can say, "This thing over here, I think it's maybe a little wonky or it's a little hacky but I couldn't think of a better way to do it. What do you think? Do you think it's right? Do you think it's a bad idea?" Or this bit over here, "I'm pulling in the third party library. I think maybe, it's worth it but what do you think? Is it not worth it?" CHARLES: I like that because ultimately, the people who have created the thing are the most familiar with the problem space. They've spent a lot of time thinking about it and so, they can actually direct the conversation to the parts of the implementation that really are the most iffy and the most unknown because everybody is going to feel this need to comment but it's the classic case of bikeshedding really, the true experts or the people who've just been spent all this time implementing and so, people will comment up to their greatest point of familiarity with the problem, which could actually be not that great. Can you say like, "Can you really focus your mental energy on this?" I like that a lot. JACOB: Yeah and really, it sets a good tone. The assumption behind all of this is that the creator, like you said knows the work best and really ought to be in the driver seat when it comes to feedback, so it really sets the tone there and say like, "The creator knows what's most important. Let's give them the first opportunity to frame that," and I know plenty of times like if I'm asked to review a PR and I'm not given any kind of prompt or direction, I will probably scroll to the file. Maybe I'll find the file in that PR that I'm actually familiar with or I'll look for some pattern that's something that's like, "I understand what's going on here. I can give feedback," and if it's all that other thing over there, I'm completely confused, I'm going to ignore it. But the creator could illuminate me a little bit, then I would understand a little bit more and then, I'm in a position to comment on that thing that I otherwise wouldn't have understood. That's the second step. The third step is now the responders get a chance to ask their questions but the important thing about that is that there are neutral questions. The assumption here is that the responders need to better understand the context from which this code was written in order to be able to give their opinion. Here's an example coming from the Rails world. I could say, "Tell me your thought process for using Factory Bot," in this example. If anyone doesn't know that is somewhat of a contentious issue in the Rails community, rather than just coming out guns blazing and say like, "I think this was a bad idea." It's like, "Tell me your process because I want to understand the context you came from and then we can together evaluate if coming from that context makes sense or if it doesn't," so neutral question. They have to be neutral questions. By the way and we've probably all heard this before, this is not a neutral question, "What were you thinking when you decided to do blah-blah-blah-blah-blah." Everyone knows what that means. CHARLES: Right. I was going to say, you can be very, very passive-aggressive with questions. JACOB: Yeah, exactly and this is a place where having a facilitator can really help -- facilitator who is not one of the creators. Someone can just say, "Let's back up. Can you rephrase that without the opinion embedded? Can you just say that again?" and with that again, those are some of the guardrails that keep us on track. After the responders have been able to ask their questions how hopefully everyone has a better understanding of the context from which the code was written, then it's time for opinions with consent of the creators. The way it works is the responders can say, "I have an opinion about using React hooks in this codebase. Would you like to hear it?" The responders can say, "Yes, please. Let me know," or they can say, "No, thank you," because the responders, having the best knowledge of the context, might know that that feedback is not useful. Maybe, they have a really good reason for using React hooks or maybe, they know what's coming in the future or maybe, they know if there's no time to fix it now or it's not worth fixing now. They know the tradeoffs best and so again, those are guardrails and it puts the creator in the place of saying, "That's actually not useful feedback right now. Let's just not use it." They can say, "Yes, please tell me," or they can say, "No, thank you. Let's not talk about that." CHARLES: In the context of a pull request, the process you're describing could be played out in any number of media but in the context of a pull request, the creator is the person actually submitting the code, how do you handle the issue of who pushes the merge button if there's still some opinions that haven't been voiced? For example, a creator says, "No, I don't think that's helpful feedback," is the assumption of then the creator can go ahead and just push the merge button? Or is it basically saying, "I don't want to hear your opinion," relatively rare? JACOB: That is a great question. I think I tried to get at this in the talk. Before one thing, I am probably, like most people don't have the option to just say to my manager, "No, I don't want to hear your opinion." I get that. There is a contrast between the pure version of the feedback process and then reality. They have to balance. But teams can sort of work out the way they give feedback. I have example of an anecdote that someone shared with me once, when I was doing research for this talk. There was this sort of agreement with the manager that their manager wouldn't give feedback on Friday afternoon. They just wouldn't. Everyone preferred that. Everyone sort of wanted, say on Friday afternoons, I'm really going to be just focusing on winding down for the week and I don't want to get dumped on a bunch of feedback. The point being, even though you can't just blanket-ignore feedback, you can work out circumstances with your team for the best way that feedback can be given and circumstances under which, it can be politely declined. CHARLES: I see. TARAS: I'm curious about a different part of this because a lot of this is how to give feedback but I'm really curious about the why part. I think many of us take it for granted that good code reviews are very valuable because a lot of teams that I've encountered that are taking on really big challenges but didn't have a code review process and so, one of things I'm kind of curious is for people or for teams that don't have it in place, what kind of symptoms can they observe in their daily operations that would suggest that maybe code review is something that they need to put in place. CHARLES: Taras, you're talking about kind of the places where we've seen where the culture is just push everything to a branch, there's a 1000 commits there, open up a pull request and no description, no name. It's like, "Here's this thing. I'm taking comments for the next three hours and if everything goes well, let just merge." Are you talking about those kind of situations where really a big culture of pull request or just feedback around change is very, very nascent.? TARAS: Yeah, a lot of times, it's the 'ship it' culture, like this is getting in the way of shipping it. CHARLES: So you're saying like how you sell the entire idea? TARAS: Yeah and if someone is listening who is noticing that, a lot of people would know that we're not really doing code reviews but what are the symptoms that they could be observing that could say like really, this is we need to change, like this can't continue. JACOB: Yeah. One thing that occurs to me as if there's all high level of surprise when you read it, when pull requests are read, it's like, "Oh, you went in that direction." I think that could be an indication that maybe, we could have checked in at the halfway point or even sooner because there seems to be differences of perspective on where this is going or where it should end up that's why [inaudible]. TARAS: At what point do you think people would see this? Is this something that would happen kind of way down the road? Like actually, "How did this end up in the codebase?" CHARLES: That's surprising except deferred even further, right? JACOB: Yeah, who wrote this last few. In having that kind of feedback process, let's sort of take a look at where this project has come in the last few months and see if we can sort of learn from what went well and what didn't. CHARLES: This is related to the concept of surprise, if you see a proliferation of many different patterns to accomplish the same thing, that means the communication is not there. People are not learning from each other and not kind of creating their own code culture together. If that's missing and that manifests itself in all kinds of ways, in bugs, in weird development set up that takes me two hours to get this local environment set up and things like that, if you're seeing those things, chances are you need some way to come together in a code review culture is really, really good for that. JACOB: Yeah and I think in the ideal code review culture, everyone that's sort of brought on board is saying, "I am going to share responsibility in this patch, doing what it's supposed to do and not breaking anything or not burning down the world." You mentioned the 'ship it' culture, I could imagine toxic cultures where the person who shipped it, if it broke everything, it's on them to fix it and they have to get woken up or whatever and the idea about feedback is now we're sort of forming a community around what was done, so it's like the person that push the merge button isn't the only person involved. It's like if we have a culture where we say everyone that participated in the PR is collectively sharing the consequences and that will happen eventually and say like, everyone who's on this thread, it's on all of us if something goes wrong to fix it. I think that is certainly something that one would hope you'd see. TARAS: I'm curious, where do you see this kind of observations usually come from because sometimes, I can imagine there, being a developer, coming on the team and they're like, "Why wouldn't I do code reviews?" and they're like, "Well, we have always not done code reviews," but then there could be someone like a product manager or somebody who's like, "Why wouldn't I do code reviews? We should start code reviews." Have you seen ways of introducing these ideas to teams that have worked out well? JACOB: Yeah and I should probably say that, I'm not a manager, I'm certainly not an expert in how this works so I actually don't have a really great example, personally. I can churn example from working in a previous team, where everyone secretly wanted to be more collaborative but didn't know how to do it because if I'm the first person that puts myself out there and no one knows else knows how to collaborate with me, how to reciprocate, then what was the point? For the top 5% of teams that are just really have great energy together, they don't need a framework to do this sort of thing. They're just doing it naturally. I think for everybody else, we need some kind of guidelines to do this because for better or worse, this is the industry that we're in right now. It isn't built around us. We don't know how to function this way and it's no one's fault. It's just sort of that's the way we've all sort of learn to work in this industry and I suspect we're not the only industry like this but we need some kind of guidelines to do it. TARAS: Maybe it's a difficult question to answer. It varies probably from team-to-team. JACOB: Yeah. CHARLES: Yeah and maybe, we can kind of shift the question just a little bit because I have one that sits alongside not quite the same question but I think related and can bridge it and maybe we can find the answer there. We've talked about a little bit and there's definitely more to unpack there, how to give feedback that's kind and honest and I think to... What was the third? JACOB: Inspiring. CHARLES: Inspiring, that's right. What about from the flip side? This is something that actually comes up with us as consultants but I think it's something that other people will encounter in their jobs too, is what do you do when you are the creator and you're trying to present or share and ultimately solicit feedback from a stakeholder, the CEO of your company, one of your clients, one of your customers and you see them engaging in kind of a mode of feedback that's less than constructive. They're nitpicking on things that aren't really important and maybe, this could be completely and totally inadvertent. Their intention could be that they're trying to help you out but it's really not being helping at all and it's kind of like either tearing you down or just not being productive and it makes you feel... What's the word I'm looking for? Just brings an air of contention to the conversation that's not really helpful to producing the best result for everybody involved. How do you, as the creator actually engage with those people in a positive way and kind of help establish the guardrails and be that agent of change when those guardrails don't exist in their minds yet? JACOB: Yeah, how do you do it, right? It's probably rare that there's going to be an environment where someone's going to say, "We're going to do this framework for feedback," and everyone are onboard from Day 1. I think one of the things that you're probably getting at is the frustration that happens when people start giving feedback. You have this perception that they're giving you feedback that's unuseful and they're only giving it because that's the only thing they can think of or -- CHARLES: Exactly. They got to say something, they need to contribute their two cents to the conversation and some people are trying to be helpful and just aren't. Some people are just trying to appear smart. JACOB: Yeah and it's like, "Oh, boy. They're just really off." CHARLES: But you can derail the main narrative that you're trying to establish and get off in the weeds, kind of skirmishing with these people and after that happens, you're like, "Wait, no. I don't want to end up over there. I was trying to tell a story." JACOB: When I gave this talk once, one idea that someone threw out was when you make a PR, mark up your own code first with everything that you want to draw people's attention to. I think you were getting at this as like, "One frustrating thing is when people getting feedback seem to have less invested than you do." They sort of just flying by and dumping on you and they probably, actually couldn't care less and that can be frustrating. When you're engaging with people that maybe don't know how to get deeply involved in it yet or maybe don't have the time to, you can sort of gently nudge them to sort of like, "I want to talk about this part of it." It's almost like you're giving the answers to the test, which was like, "If you want to be part of the smart conversation, comment over here," and I think from the responders perspective, just speaking personally, I would appreciate that. It gives me an opportunity to feel like I'm actually being useful. We can all probably point to times where all the code review we have to do feels like homework that isn't the best use for our time. It's like, maybe the responder can make us feel like our opinions matter and they will be put to good use when you tell them, "If you comment here, it will probably be put to good use." I think the sort of the way to get started is the responder can just say, "I would really like feedback over here," and I can't speak for everybody but I would suspect that more people than you think would be more than happy to be gently guided in what feedback they should get. CHARLES: Right. I'm thinking how you would do this, for example in the context of a demo that you're giving to stakeholders because there's maybe the inkling of the idea to do that but it's often presented as an apology like, "This screen doesn't work," or, "Your handling isn't quite right. Sorry we're going to fix that." Look at the stuff that's over here and maybe, the way to frame that is a really hard problem based on the legacy architecture that we have for displaying errors and I'm not quite sure how to do it in a robust way and I could really use some feedback there. It's an area of exploration or something that we really need to focus on. You put that out there as I'm demoing this main functionality right now. JACOB: Yes. You sort of say like, "Here's something to watch out for and please, let us know what you think," and then after you could say like, "As a team, we thought up these three possible solutions but we didn't want to move on them because we wanted to get your feedback first, so please impart on us what is the right way to do it." You know, flattery goes a long way. TARAS: I have this imagery coming up in my mind as I'm hearing you guys talk about this that I keep seeing this kind of difference between a line and a triangle, where a line is kind of a tug and pull between, "Did I do this right? No, I didn't do this right." I think those are kind of a bad code review because it's very personal. It's not really where you kind of want to go and then the other way is like a triangle where the end goal that you're trying to get to is somewhere that is beyond both places where you let two people: the recipient of the code review and the giver of the feedback, the end goal that you want to get to is actually someplace else. When we deliver the code and we say, "My code is done," then it invites this kind of linear feedback where it's like, "No, you didn't do it right," but in the other way, "This is where I got to so far. Tell me where you think we could take it next. If you don't think we need to change anything, then we're done. We can merge this." JACOB: Yes. The very intelligent Jessica Kerr said recently on another podcast, there's no such thing as done but you can always make it better. I think you're getting at that point. That's a great question, by the way to ask of your responders -- where should we go next? Where do you see this going next? What will make it better? What would make it more robust? What would make us happier six months down the line when we're looking back on this? But I think of it as the firing range. That's the analogy I gave where it was like, "You put a pull request out and you assert that it is done and if no one can find fault with it, then it's done," and I just don't think that that makes sense. I don't think, really most people actually want to work that way. It's maybe not necessarily even healthy but I think everyone can find, at least I hope, a process that invites them to come into the process and share the way they see things. It can hopefully be enriching and just make everyone feel better along the way. TARAS: This sounds to me like the inspiration part of this conversation because one thing I really like about working at Frontside, I'm an to experienced developer but I know that Frontside is dedicated to doing something much greater than I can do as an individual. When I ask, "What do you think about this?" then I know the feedback is going to be because there something always that is just beyond the reach that could be a little bit better than what we have right now and it's not until I can actually get the feedback from Charles, from Jeffrey and hear, "What do you guys think? Is this it?" and they're like, "What about this?" and I know that the next step is going to be a little bit or maybe even a lot better than what I have right now. I think that's the part that inspires me. I know I have actually gone a little bit further beyond my personal ability to get us to that vision of like this being much better than we could do as individuals. JACOB: Yes and as opposed, "Oh, I screw it up and now, I have to fix it." The framework of find all the errors that I made, even though there may be errors. Let's be honest, there could be things that would be really bad, that would be a security problem but for a growth mindset, to think about it, it's like, "This is a way to make it better." CHARLES: One of the things that you can do to help that is try and find inside every change, try and see the potential that hasn't yet been realized but is enabled by this change, like what exciting paths does this change unlock in your mind, right? And then you can share that. That's a great way to 'inspiration is infectious,' so if you can find inspiration to change, then you might be able to share that with the creators. If something is very personally exciting to you when you see something, maybe spend a little time searching for what you find to be exciting about it. JACOB: Yeah, nice. That's great. CHARLES: Yeah, we might have touched on that. I just bring that up because so often, I'll see the changes that people on my team are submitting and sometimes, it can feel like a cloud burst of like, "We could do this or we could do this or we could do this," and it's great to get excited. JACOB: Yeah. I can share -- recently, there was an example. My coworker opened a pull request and it unlocked something for me where I said like, "You know what? This is making me think about this other thing that I've always hated doing with our legacy codebase. We should do that thing you're doing more because boy, would it make life easier?" and I wonder if it would be worth the time in refactoring X, Y, Z because then I would never ask you A, B, C again and I would be so much happier. TARAS: It makes me think that we need to revisit our pull request template like what would that like? What would be the sections on a pull request template that would facilitate this kind of way? CHARLES: I don't know. I know we're almost a time but before we even get into that, this is a question I have because we talk about pull requests templates, how do you match the amount of process with the scope of the change? Because it's probably a little bit heavy weight if I want to fix a typo and say, "Now we're going to have the creators lay out their case that they're going to ask questions of the reviewers and then the reviewers are going to ask questions and once everybody's been able to write down things that they observe the questions that they have, completely and totally divorced from opinion, now we can talk about opinion that is welcomed." If you're capitalizing one letter, that's probably a little bit heavy weight but on the flip side, it's probably absolutely warranted if it's a major feature that's going to be affecting a huge portions of your revenue stream and so, this is one of the problems I have with pull requests templates is they are one-size, fits-all. Sometimes, a pull request template feels like it's supporting you and sometimes, it feels like the epitome of busy work and I have to spend all this time deleting the sections for the pull requests template. I wish there were ways you could choose different pull requests templates. Maybe, there are. JACOB: So do I. CHARLES: That's a little bit of a quibble that I have is the amount of ritual and ceremony that you have to go through is fixed with a pull request template but it seems like you want to match the amount of process to the scope of the change. JACOB: Yeah, you do and the flipside is also joy. You don't want to give someone too little homework when you really needed the same work. Maybe there's a way to say, when a pull request is opened, the person who opened it or the manager or maybe someone else, has the option to sort of tag the pull request as saying, "This is going to be a bigger conversation. We cannot merge it until we have a face-to-face conversation first with these various stakeholders." Maybe, one of the questions, the first form that everyone gets for every PR gets is what level of PR is this? Is this a quick change? And what people that you just need some quick feedback on? Or is this the long form that you need where there needs to be a sit down with these people? TARAS: Actually, I was thinking what's the adjustment that could be made for pull request is to say, "Here's what a complete pull request looks like. You can opt into whatever section you want," so you decide based on your pull request, what the actual sections of this template are appropriate but then someone can, on the flip side say, "Look, I would really like to learn about the motivations of this pull request. Can you add motivation section?" and understand that from your pull requests. JACOB: Absolutely. You filled out Section A, please answer Section B and C. Yeah, cool. TARAS: Yeah. Because I think what part of the challenge is that we have people look to us, especially people who have a lot of experience, or developers look to us to know what is the right thing to do sometimes or often and I think it's helpful to be a little bit more gentle and saying, "You can decide what is the right amount of detail to set the right conditions for this code review but I will give you some directions for what are things you can consider in including. JACOB: Absolutely. CHARLES: All right. We're a little bit over time, so we should probably go ahead and wrap it up. You are absolutely right, Jacob. This is a topic that keeps on giving. We didn't really move much beyond the pull request and feedback and stuff but we moved a lot around within that topic because it's a big one. Jacob, is there anything that we should mention? Any upcoming talks, meetups? JACOB: No, I have a one-year old and it's all about work and family in this part of the life, so I have nothing to speak of at this point. You can come find me on Twitter as JStoebel. CHARLES: Okay, awesome. Well, thank you so much, Jacob for coming and talking to us. This is a very rich topic. We only really scratched the surface. That's it for our episode today and we'll see you next time. Thank you for listening. If you or someone you know has something to say about building user interfaces that simply must be heard, please get in touch with us. We can be found on Twitter at @TheFrontside or over just plain old email at Contact@Frontside.io Thanks and see you next time.

Panel: Charles Max Wood Dave Kimura Eric Berry David Richards Special Guests: Jacob Stoebel In this episode of Ruby Rogues, the panel discusses code reviews with Jacob Stoebel. Jacob is a Rails and JavaScript developer and works for ePublishing where he does mostly front-end programming. He talks about how he believes that code reviews can be both honest and nice, and that they should inspire the programmer to want to go back and make his/her code better, not tear him/her down. He also gives fours steps to the response process for giving positive and helpful code reviews. In particular, we dive pretty deep on: Jacob intro Rails and JavaScript Are there other places beside code reviews that we give this kind of feedback? Talking about code reviews is a great ice-breaker at conferences Developing is a creative profession Trust must be present for creativity to flow What led you to this topic? Used to be a high school drama teacher It’s possible to give honest and positive feedback Code reviews CAN be honest and nice Code reviews should be inspiring Code review role play Example if a good code review vs a bad code review Four steps to response process Put the author in the driver’s seat as first The opinion has to be consented Keep the conversation civil and collaborative Rule out passive aggressive comments in the future And much, much more! Links: React Dev Summit JS Dev Summit ePublishing Rails JavaScript @JStoebel Jacob’s GitHub Jacob’s Website Picks: Charles 12 Rules for Life by Jordan Peterson The Whole Brain Child by Daniel Siegal Dave Humane Development DEWALT 18-Gauge Pneumatic Brad Nailer Eric Phoenix Framework on Elixir David Thought as a System by David Bohm Radical Candor by Kim Scott Jacob Liz Lerman's Critical Response Process: A method for getting useful feedback on anything you make, from dance to dessert Growing Old by Chad Fowler talk

Panel: Charles Max Wood Dave Kimura Eric Berry David Richards Special Guests: Jacob Stoebel In this episode of Ruby Rogues, the panel discusses code reviews with Jacob Stoebel. Jacob is a Rails and JavaScript developer and works for ePublishing where he does mostly front-end programming. He talks about how he believes that code reviews can be both honest and nice, and that they should inspire the programmer to want to go back and make his/her code better, not tear him/her down. He also gives fours steps to the response process for giving positive and helpful code reviews. In particular, we dive pretty deep on: Jacob intro Rails and JavaScript Are there other places beside code reviews that we give this kind of feedback? Talking about code reviews is a great ice-breaker at conferences Developing is a creative profession Trust must be present for creativity to flow What led you to this topic? Used to be a high school drama teacher It’s possible to give honest and positive feedback Code reviews CAN be honest and nice Code reviews should be inspiring Code review role play Example if a good code review vs a bad code review Four steps to response process Put the author in the driver’s seat as first The opinion has to be consented Keep the conversation civil and collaborative Rule out passive aggressive comments in the future And much, much more! Links: React Dev Summit JS Dev Summit ePublishing Rails JavaScript @JStoebel Jacob’s GitHub Jacob’s Website Picks: Charles 12 Rules for Life by Jordan Peterson The Whole Brain Child by Daniel Siegal Dave Humane Development DEWALT 18-Gauge Pneumatic Brad Nailer Eric Phoenix Framework on Elixir David Thought as a System by David Bohm Radical Candor by Kim Scott Jacob Liz Lerman's Critical Response Process: A method for getting useful feedback on anything you make, from dance to dessert Growing Old by Chad Fowler talk

Panel: Charles Max Wood Dave Kimura Eric Berry David Richards Special Guests: Jacob Stoebel In this episode of Ruby Rogues, the panel discusses code reviews with Jacob Stoebel. Jacob is a Rails and JavaScript developer and works for ePublishing where he does mostly front-end programming. He talks about how he believes that code reviews can be both honest and nice, and that they should inspire the programmer to want to go back and make his/her code better, not tear him/her down. He also gives fours steps to the response process for giving positive and helpful code reviews. In particular, we dive pretty deep on: Jacob intro Rails and JavaScript Are there other places beside code reviews that we give this kind of feedback? Talking about code reviews is a great ice-breaker at conferences Developing is a creative profession Trust must be present for creativity to flow What led you to this topic? Used to be a high school drama teacher It’s possible to give honest and positive feedback Code reviews CAN be honest and nice Code reviews should be inspiring Code review role play Example if a good code review vs a bad code review Four steps to response process Put the author in the driver’s seat as first The opinion has to be consented Keep the conversation civil and collaborative Rule out passive aggressive comments in the future And much, much more! Links: React Dev Summit JS Dev Summit ePublishing Rails JavaScript @JStoebel Jacob’s GitHub Jacob’s Website Picks: Charles 12 Rules for Life by Jordan Peterson The Whole Brain Child by Daniel Siegal Dave Humane Development DEWALT 18-Gauge Pneumatic Brad Nailer Eric Phoenix Framework on Elixir David Thought as a System by David Bohm Radical Candor by Kim Scott Jacob Liz Lerman's Critical Response Process: A method for getting useful feedback on anything you make, from dance to dessert Growing Old by Chad Fowler talk

Following her keynote lecture in the Stanley Cafe, MacArthur Fellow, choreographer, writer, educator, and Hancher favorite Liz Lerman stopped by the Hancher Presents studios to say a little more about the topic of Hiking the Horizontal: Trans-disciplinary Practices for Tackling Questions Big and Small. Lerman's lecture was part of "Me and We: Collective Acts Toward Sustainability" - a collaboration between the UI Department of Dance and the Obermann Center for Advanced Studies. Liz Lerman is a choreographer, performer, writer, teacher, and speaker. She has spent the past four decades making her artistic research personal, funny, intellectually vivid, and up to the minute. A key aspect of her artistry is opening her process to everyone from shipbuilders to physicists, construction workers to ballerinas, resulting in both research and experiences that are participatory, relevant, urgent, and usable by others. To learn more about her work, visit: https://lizlerman.com/.

Episode 7 - Liz Lerman - The Complexities Of Creativity by People Dancing

Liz Lerman , a MacArthur award winning dancer and choreographer joins Tom to discuss her new appointment as a Professor in the Herberger Institute of Design and the Arts at Arizona State University. Then, Donald Hicken , who retired from the theater department at the Baltimore School of the Arts in June, joins Tom to share his reflections after three and a half decades of changing young lives. And, Sharayna Christmas is a dancer, writer and the executive director of Muse 360 , an organization that works with youth to cultivate their interests in the arts. In July, Muse 360 took a group of young people from Baltimore City to Havana, Cuba where for two weeks they studied history, Spanish and dance. The trip was put together in conjunction with The African Diaspora Alliance and Frederick Douglass High School. This program originally aired on June 17, 2016.

How can a group of collaborators practice as individuals, create as a group, and answer to a director simultaneously? Liz Lerman actively describes herself as “agitator, instigator, and synthesizer”, and her work is fostered by a philosophy rooted in collaboration. This episode explores how Lerman’s work develops with a multi-disciplinary team, and examines other possible modes of collaboration.

Liz Lerman is a choreographer, performer, writer, and educator. We take a glance at her acclaimed career to better understand her working methods.

How does an author craft a work that speaks across the boundaries of dance studies, Jewish studies and gender studies? What does it mean for dance to function as a site for probing complex questions of racial, ethnic and cultural identity? How do choreographers respond to the prompt, “make a Jewish dance?” What does all of this have to tell us about the ways in which Jewish identities show up onstage both historically and contemporarily? I was grateful to engage these questions with dancer, choreographer and historian, Rebecca Rossen (pronounced “Ross – in”,) author of Dancing Jewish: Jewish Identity in American Modern and Postmodern Dance (Oxford University Press, 2014). Rebecca’s groundbreaking work probes the ways in which American Jewish choreographers use dance as a site to interrogate personal and collective identities while articulating social and political agendas and challenging stereotypes. Rossen critically engages with the work of Anna Sokolow, Pauline Koner, David Dorfman, Liz Lerman and others in examining how they use dance as a space for the creative construction, imagining and re-imagining of Jewish identities. Including over 50 photographs and a companion website with video clips, Dancing Jewish is a resource for dance educators and historians as well. Rebecca Rossen is Assistant Professor of Theatre and Dance at The University of Texas at Austin. A dance historian, performance scholar, and choreographer , her research interests include modern and postmodern dance, stagings of identity in physical performance, and the relationship between research and practice. Her own choreography has been presented in venues throughout her hometown of Chicago, as well as in Cleveland, Philadelphia, and Israel. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How does an author craft a work that speaks across the boundaries of dance studies, Jewish studies and gender studies? What does it mean for dance to function as a site for probing complex questions of racial, ethnic and cultural identity? How do choreographers respond to the prompt, “make a Jewish dance?” What does all of this have to tell us about the ways in which Jewish identities show up onstage both historically and contemporarily? I was grateful to engage these questions with dancer, choreographer and historian, Rebecca Rossen (pronounced “Ross – in”,) author of Dancing Jewish: Jewish Identity in American Modern and Postmodern Dance (Oxford University Press, 2014). Rebecca’s groundbreaking work probes the ways in which American Jewish choreographers use dance as a site to interrogate personal and collective identities while articulating social and political agendas and challenging stereotypes. Rossen critically engages with the work of Anna Sokolow, Pauline Koner, David Dorfman, Liz Lerman and others in examining how they use dance as a space for the creative construction, imagining and re-imagining of Jewish identities. Including over 50 photographs and a companion website with video clips, Dancing Jewish is a resource for dance educators and historians as well. Rebecca Rossen is Assistant Professor of Theatre and Dance at The University of Texas at Austin. A dance historian, performance scholar, and choreographer , her research interests include modern and postmodern dance, stagings of identity in physical performance, and the relationship between research and practice. Her own choreography has been presented in venues throughout her hometown of Chicago, as well as in Cleveland, Philadelphia, and Israel. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How does an author craft a work that speaks across the boundaries of dance studies, Jewish studies and gender studies? What does it mean for dance to function as a site for probing complex questions of racial, ethnic and cultural identity? How do choreographers respond to the prompt, “make a Jewish dance?” What does all of this have to tell us about the ways in which Jewish identities show up onstage both historically and contemporarily? I was grateful to engage these questions with dancer, choreographer and historian, Rebecca Rossen (pronounced “Ross – in”,) author of Dancing Jewish: Jewish Identity in American Modern and Postmodern Dance (Oxford University Press, 2014). Rebecca’s groundbreaking work probes the ways in which American Jewish choreographers use dance as a site to interrogate personal and collective identities while articulating social and political agendas and challenging stereotypes. Rossen critically engages with the work of Anna Sokolow, Pauline Koner, David Dorfman, Liz Lerman and others in examining how they use dance as a space for the creative construction, imagining and re-imagining of Jewish identities. Including over 50 photographs and a companion website with video clips, Dancing Jewish is a resource for dance educators and historians as well. Rebecca Rossen is Assistant Professor of Theatre and Dance at The University of Texas at Austin. A dance historian, performance scholar, and choreographer , her research interests include modern and postmodern dance, stagings of identity in physical performance, and the relationship between research and practice. Her own choreography has been presented in venues throughout her hometown of Chicago, as well as in Cleveland, Philadelphia, and Israel. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How does an author craft a work that speaks across the boundaries of dance studies, Jewish studies and gender studies? What does it mean for dance to function as a site for probing complex questions of racial, ethnic and cultural identity? How do choreographers respond to the prompt, “make a Jewish dance?” What does all of this have to tell us about the ways in which Jewish identities show up onstage both historically and contemporarily? I was grateful to engage these questions with dancer, choreographer and historian, Rebecca Rossen (pronounced “Ross – in”,) author of Dancing Jewish: Jewish Identity in American Modern and Postmodern Dance (Oxford University Press, 2014). Rebecca's groundbreaking work probes the ways in which American Jewish choreographers use dance as a site to interrogate personal and collective identities while articulating social and political agendas and challenging stereotypes. Rossen critically engages with the work of Anna Sokolow, Pauline Koner, David Dorfman, Liz Lerman and others in examining how they use dance as a space for the creative construction, imagining and re-imagining of Jewish identities. Including over 50 photographs and a companion website with video clips, Dancing Jewish is a resource for dance educators and historians as well. Rebecca Rossen is Assistant Professor of Theatre and Dance at The University of Texas at Austin. A dance historian, performance scholar, and choreographer , her research interests include modern and postmodern dance, stagings of identity in physical performance, and the relationship between research and practice. Her own choreography has been presented in venues throughout her hometown of Chicago, as well as in Cleveland, Philadelphia, and Israel.

How does an author craft a work that speaks across the boundaries of dance studies, Jewish studies and gender studies? What does it mean for dance to function as a site for probing complex questions of racial, ethnic and cultural identity? How do choreographers respond to the prompt, “make a Jewish dance?” What does all of this have to tell us about the ways in which Jewish identities show up onstage both historically and contemporarily? I was grateful to engage these questions with dancer, choreographer and historian, Rebecca Rossen (pronounced “Ross – in”,) author of Dancing Jewish: Jewish Identity in American Modern and Postmodern Dance (Oxford University Press, 2014). Rebecca’s groundbreaking work probes the ways in which American Jewish choreographers use dance as a site to interrogate personal and collective identities while articulating social and political agendas and challenging stereotypes. Rossen critically engages with the work of Anna Sokolow, Pauline Koner, David Dorfman, Liz Lerman and others in examining how they use dance as a space for the creative construction, imagining and re-imagining of Jewish identities. Including over 50 photographs and a companion website with video clips, Dancing Jewish is a resource for dance educators and historians as well. Rebecca Rossen is Assistant Professor of Theatre and Dance at The University of Texas at Austin. A dance historian, performance scholar, and choreographer , her research interests include modern and postmodern dance, stagings of identity in physical performance, and the relationship between research and practice. Her own choreography has been presented in venues throughout her hometown of Chicago, as well as in Cleveland, Philadelphia, and Israel. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How does an author craft a work that speaks across the boundaries of dance studies, Jewish studies and gender studies? What does it mean for dance to function as a site for probing complex questions of racial, ethnic and cultural identity? How do choreographers respond to the prompt, “make a Jewish dance?” What does all of this have to tell us about the ways in which Jewish identities show up onstage both historically and contemporarily? I was grateful to engage these questions with dancer, choreographer and historian, Rebecca Rossen (pronounced “Ross – in”,) author of Dancing Jewish: Jewish Identity in American Modern and Postmodern Dance (Oxford University Press, 2014). Rebecca’s groundbreaking work probes the ways in which American Jewish choreographers use dance as a site to interrogate personal and collective identities while articulating social and political agendas and challenging stereotypes. Rossen critically engages with the work of Anna Sokolow, Pauline Koner, David Dorfman, Liz Lerman and others in examining how they use dance as a space for the creative construction, imagining and re-imagining of Jewish identities. Including over 50 photographs and a companion website with video clips, Dancing Jewish is a resource for dance educators and historians as well. Rebecca Rossen is Assistant Professor of Theatre and Dance at The University of Texas at Austin. A dance historian, performance scholar, and choreographer , her research interests include modern and postmodern dance, stagings of identity in physical performance, and the relationship between research and practice. Her own choreography has been presented in venues throughout her hometown of Chicago, as well as in Cleveland, Philadelphia, and Israel. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

By David Dower, Liz Lerman. Today my guest is the inestimable Liz Lerman.

In part 2 of our conversation with Choreographer Liz Lerman, we explore false dichotomies, including the one that opposes art to science. 

In part 2 of our conversation with Choreographer Liz Lerman, we explore false dichotomies, including the one that opposes art to science. [25:11]

In part 2 of our conversation with Choreographer Liz Lerman, we explore false dichotomies, including the one that opposes art to science. [25:11]

In part 2 of our conversation with Choreographer Liz Lerman, we explore false dichotomies, including the one that opposes art to science. [25:11]

Liz Lerman: Conversing through dance. 

Liz Lerman: Conversing through dance. [23:50]

Liz Lerman: Conversing through dance. [23:50]

Liz Lerman: Conversing through dance. [23:50]