Gratuitously, self-indulgent rant

[Steven Ragatz]

After writing an eight minute juggling act in my head five years ago, I am finally getting to the point where I can keep the tricks off of the floor. I had a chance to perform the first three minutes of the "new" act at a corporate show week before last, and it went very well considering how many firsts were represented, and considering the logistical difficulties of the show room. It's not yet practice perfect, but it is close enough that I can see my intended vision.

It's cool when it starts to come together, and I am amazed at how much I like it. Of course, it is wholly possible that nobody else will, but at least there is one person out there who digs it - namely me.

But, there are still a couple of rough spots that I continue to flub. My wife says to take out those tricks. She repeats my own words when she tells me "The audience won't know if something isn't there, but they will know if something is there, and it's wrong." Yeah, I know, I know… But I want ALL of the tricks that were in my head to be in the finished act dammit! It's been too long to be a wimp and back down from a stupid trick. For Pete's sake, I'm at the top of the food chain, and it's a toy rubber ball!

I've got a good contact for NBA half-time gigs. He wants to book me. I've only done a couple of basketball shows before, so in effect, it is a new venue for me. The only thing that I have been working on for the last few years is this one juggling act. It is supposed to be controlled, sophisticated and artsy, yet the baited line that has dropped in front of me are for athletic half times. Not what I had in mind. So, I will try to put this act up in front of a crowd, who would probably rather see someone and their Frisbee-catching dogs, and see if it flies. The hope is that if it works for one, it will net many other performing opportunities. I guess we take 'em when they come…

It sees as performer/artist/craftsman, we have differing responsibilities to our show. Yes, it should be entertaining, if “entertainment” is the goal, but there also needs to be a great commitment to your personal satisfaction in what you do. At this point in my development as a performer, I have discovered that it has become increasingly important for me to do things on stage that I like to do rather than simply do what I think the audience wants me to do. If I get a charge from it, then I hope that the audience will as well. The audience isn’t stupid, and they deserve something better than for me to get up on stage and tell them what I think they find entertaining. I should do what I like to do and let the audience make their own evaluation. If I’m lucky, we will agree, and there will be a positive, collective experience. If not, then at least I walk away with my pride intact.

Steven Ragatz

[Stephon]

Gratuitously Self-indulgent Reply

Some things occurred to me as I was reading your post–-thought I’d toss them out here, for whatever they are worth.

Lately, I’ve been noticing more performers wanting to be known by alternate labels, such as “artist” or “maestro” or, as one sideshow performer overstated it, a “shaman” for the “tribe” which is the audience.

What the hell is wrong with just being an “entertainer”? Didn’t we all get into this business originally in order to entertain people? Does our work have to be “art” or have a “message”? Those are noble endevors, to be sure, but so is just plain entertaining people.

Or course your work should satisfy you, otherwise find other work, because no one is going to want to sit and watch you do something you don’t believe in. However, if you’re getting in front of an audience and performing an act you enjoy, with no concern as to whether or not the audience is entertained, then that act is more appropriately performed in the privacy or your own home with a box of tissues nearby, please was your hands when you’re finished. If you’re not there for the benefit of the audience as well as yourself, then why bother with an audience at all, why not just perform in front of the mirror?

Sounds like you’re only allowing yourself 2 options: do things on stage that I like to do; or, simply do what I think the audience wants me to do. There are more choices–-surely, there is a common ground where you can perform work that fulfills and challenges you, and satisfies and challenges the audience. That way you each give something and you each get something. Ultimately, the audience will decide for themselves, and if you’re thinking you’re there only for you, and they can come along for the ride if they feel like it, they’ll know it.

The NBA gig sounds like a tough spot. You can pass up the opportunity for now and risk not getting called to do it again, or you can perform a show that the audience won’t appreciate (and therefore won’t like), and pretty well guarantee that you won’t get called again. I’ve never gotten to see you perform, but I’ve read your posts and visited you website, and I’m sure the show you’d give them would be very high quality; however, you may make the most tender, succulent, tasty pork roast on Earth, and it still ain't gonna go over too well at the B’nai Israel Passover Seder, if y'know what I mean. The audience will know if something’s there and it’s wrong (for them). Of course, you could create a mass-appeal show for events like this and keep the high-end work for high-end gigs. Just depends on how much you want to whore yourself out (and I really do mean that in the best possible way).

Whatever you decide to do, good luck and I hope it works out well for you.

~Stephon
“My goal is to entertain”
(see, you’ve given me a new signature line.) [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[ 07-12-2002: Message edited by: Stephon ]</p>

[Steven Ragatz]

Of course it's gray without any black or white distinctions.

Don't misunderstand me, I don't label myself an "artist" - the term just gets used in a contractual sense - and I whole-heartedly agree that one should find a great pride in simply wishing to entertain. That is all I wish to do as well. I don't have any message that I am trying to deliver, or make commentary on the character in the act, blah, blah, blah. The character is simply dictated by costume, music, and some silly tricks with rubber balls that I think look cool.

But on the other hand, I feel that I have explored what I do to the point that I am the expert and the audience is naive (not stupid, but naive). Maybe it's just arrogance, but how can they possibly evaluate my work in a way that is meaningful to me? More to the point, am I not just feeding them tripe if I simply do what they say they want? Can you say c-h-a-i-n-s-a-w-s? If I bow to please the audience, then nothing new can evolve since their expectations will always be determined by their limited views of the craft.

At some point over the past years, applause has lost an emotional meaning to me. In some way it's an indication of an ambiguous approval rating, but ultimately I'm the one that passes any meaningful judgement on the performance. I know when it was good and when it was bad, and it seems more often than not, the audience's opinions and mine differ.

I don't do it (the juggling act) in front of a mirror. Anymore, I hate practicing, and unless I have a show that is breathing down my neck, I would rather sit on my ass than have to go work on juggling again. Your allusion to masturbation is noted, and valid, but so is the reference to whoring oneself. I guess it's a fine line between the two.

I know what you mean about labels. A while back, everyone I knew were "new vaudevillians" and were all "zany". Me, I'm just a juggler. I still use the word juggler in spite of the perceived stigma. Tried acting, dance, opera, but when it comes down to it, I'm still just doing a juggling act. So, I'm a juggler.

Steve

[Stretch]

Steve Wrote:

"But on the other hand, I feel that I have explored what I do to the point that I am the
expert and the audience is naive (not stupid, but naive). Maybe it's just arrogance, but
how can they possibly evaluate my work in a way that is meaningful to me?"

Perhaps you should poll them to see how many have watched 5 or more CdS shows? Or "don't sell your audience short". Perhaps you are selling your self short: A great challange would be to construct a show that would apeal to a WIDE range of tastes, not just highbrow, or
or just for the danger and mayhem crowd. Juggle chainsaws while knitting fine irish lace perhaps?! :&gt [img]wink.gif[/img]

Good luck in any case!

Walking tall, and stretching imaginations! (I hope!)

Bill "Stretch" Coleman
Home of Stretch the nine foot clown and his 18 foot tall giant puppets!

[Steven Ragatz]

[quote]A great challange would be to construct a show that would apeal to a WIDE range of tastes, not just highbrow, or
or just for the danger and mayhem crowd. <hr></blockquote>

I'm all ears if anyone has any specific ideas! Hell, I'm lucky to fill a few lousy minutes, let alone an entire show of mass appeal...

It's pretty hard to get juggling to grab a highbrow crowd. Michael Moschen does the best job of anyone that I know, and even he gets dragged down by the juggler stigma.

I don't think that it's about being above or below a crowd, but rather to be venue appropriate with the work. It seems that every time I shoot for a certain look/feel that I think would be appropriate for a venue, some other opportunity comes up instead that I never expected requiring a complete rework of the act to try to make it fit.

I'm just whining 'cause I'm tired of working this same routine over and over without getting it to the point where I can challenge the show butterflies enough to perform. C'est la vie.

Steve