Hump Day Hullabaloo!

Today was crazy with high emotions concerning One Act Play tryout results. Alright, I know you've heard opposing viewpoints, but I must publish my official opinion on the subject (with as much factual evidence as I can provide). I do feel a little uncomfortable with the decisions made by the judges. If this sounds conceited, I am sorry (esp. if either one of you reads this), but I think that I am a better actor than Adam T. And that Adam T. Is a better actor than CJ, but that's apparently just my opinion. I believe that they did not do what was in the best interests of the performers, but by saying this, I don't mean that we have to do The Crucible. If the whole cast feels that we should try and give another play a shot, then we should be able to voice this desire. If permission is given by the publisher of a play, then "role reversal" is acceptable. This means that if we had permission (which I believe would be readily granted for such an interesting concept) for a role reversal, then males could play female roles and females, males. In this case, we would have plenty of parts for, say, The Crucible. In addition, I have never heard "A Young Lady of Property" and, without seeing it performed, am not confident in our ability to perform to the best of our abilities because of a lack enthusiasm or its win ability. I do feel that a petition, while well within our constitutional rights, is a bit inappropriate. For example, we have the right to say fuck you to somebody, but it is not always tactful or appropriate. Since several individuals tried to present a case to a judge unsuccessfully, it seem that there is no way to have the decisions retracted. I feel disappointed that two actresses who made the play have to undergo ridicule because it is believed that their parent's were the reason for their being chosen,whether it be true or not. I also extend my condolences to those who did not make the play, just remember that it is just a UIL event and (for most) there is always next year. Mrs. Reed and Mrs. Hewett are very decisive and resolute individuals with classical values that do not include giving the rights of an adult to children; they will not give from their positions unless it behooves them. To those who believe we should recruit more males: While the judges don't want to compromise the integrity of the play by having another audition, I think that it is possible to have a male recruitment that is very hasty and informal and would not jeopardize the OAP's reputation. The only thing wrong is: since we've addressed the issue and they say their decision is final, they cannot change our play without disappointing more people. Look forward (most of you) to performing The Crucible next year (maybe I'll have a larger part). Ultimately, we should support the decisions of the director(s) and not act like petulant children. Let's put on a good play this year and let's drop the issue of what is wrong with this year (even if it seems as if it will suck). To those who made the troupe this year, I give you my congratulations.
--Publius
P.S.: Concerning the iron fisted running of rehearsals: I'm all for having efficient and effective rehearsing, but it is my contention that this involves a certain degree of informality where the individuals cannot and should not be stifled. I do feel that it is unlikely they will keep us fixed to such a tight disciplinary system all year. There abrasiveness in addressing the issue of how stationary rehearsal time should appropriately be spent is slightly offensive to me. It makes me feel as if I should do something, anything, to undermine authority. While I am not totally in favor of causing trouble over the play decision, I feel no remorse for giving the directors hell.