Why I teach Acting for the Camera

-->

People often ask me about teaching acting for camera. They often mistakenly ask me what technique or approach I use.

If anyone ever comes to you and says they have a technique they have developed for working in front of the camera run far, far away from them and don’t listen.

They are selling you snake oil.

There is no magic, no secret pill that will make you better in front of the camera other than being a good actor.

Yes, it’s true you have to adjust things for working in recorded media be it in film, television, commercials, or new media. You need knowledge about sets, the language, the people, how things are shot and the workflow. But there is no replacement for good acting.

There are only two things I am concerned with when working with students, Truth and No Truth; and I call the camera The Great Barometer of Truth.

When the camera is recording there is no place to hide, you are either in the moment being spontaneous and truthful or you are schmacting. Believe me there is nothing worse than watching yourself schmact. When it’s on a big screen in a movie theatre, it’s humiliating.

99% of working in front of the camera is being comfortable and confident there. Feeling like you are free to do your job and god forbid, be an artist.

Most students of acting spend years on stage and back stage, in acting classes and in scene studies where the focus is about being on stage. You spend years working on your voice and speech to be clear, heard, and resonant. Think of how many plays or musicals a student actor has been in or been involved with and compare it to how many live sets the same student actor has been on. See the discrepancy?

I remember my first time working on set as an actor. It was disorienting. I felt stupid. I felt like I didn’t know what I was doing and much of what was going on around me was foreign and strange (even though I was more prepared than most). I never want a single student to feel as dumb and useless as I felt that day. I think back to early jobs and say, “Oh, my gosh! If only I could have felt like I was free enough on set to act.”

That’s my job, that’s my technique, and that’s my point of view as an educator. To remove that fear, and make sure you have the knowledge and the skills to feel confident and competent so that way, when you hear the word, “Action,” you can actually be free to act, be creative, and be brilliant.

What’s wild is that as actor’s we have a limitless amount of accessibility towards watching recorded media from network television, to cable, to the Internet, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, YouTube, and Vimeo; programs are all around us. As actors we can watch all of the work on-camera that we want, but we get little experience doing it, whereas with theatre, most of us, once we get the bug, have spent more time in front of an audience on stage than being in the audience. Weird huh?

What’s even weirder is when one thinks about how much money one earns in front of the camera versus being on stage. The salary discrepancy is disgustingly large between the two. How strange is it then, that so many programs put their entire emphasis on theatre and make the camera the after thought?

Not that I am saying that we should stop training for the stage. On the contrary it is essential to the development of an actor. The roles, stepping out on stage night after night, the language, the sheer skill involved is amazing, but to ignore the camera as a performer seems like a terrible idea. It seems like an injustice and since we are solidly in the digital age, where web series can be shot on an iphone for very little money – I know it is time to rethink the tools we are sending our students out into the world with.

Theatre Program "Best of" lists and what we can learn from them.

Theatre Programs: Best of lists and what can we learn from them?

Lately I’ve been reading a lot lists about the “top,” or the “best,” theatre training programs for both BFA and BA students.

These lists make my stomach churn more than a little. I often wonder how a single writer can look at every program in the country? How solid is their research? How do they prepare their lists? Do schools that have excellent PR firms rank better? I have a lot of questions and they provide very little in the way of answers.

These lists get re-blogged and reposted all across the Internet. I freely admit my own complicity in this as I re-blog/tweet/Facebook post every one of these lists that comes my way.

What I love most about them is when a little known or little publicly appreciated program receives its moment in the sun and makes one of these lists. It makes one feel as if the underdog can win, that the little guy can take on a giant.

I decided to dig into these lists and see what makes them tick and it was interesting what I learned. I looked at the lists of these schools and asked myself what do all of these “best” programs have in common? I took each school and looked at what they themselves say about their own programs. Then I looked at the similarities or commonalities among the “top."

Well, this is what I learned . . .

1.) Nearly every top program has some sort of weekly meeting for the whole department. Some call it Drama Forum, others call it Theatre Lab but they all do it in some manner. They use it as a way to come together each week (some with less frequency but they still do it at least once a month) and showcase student work, make announcements, discuss new developments, present guest speakers, even professors can present work in progress, etc. Many of these programs also make it an open forum to discuss issues, policy changes; they create a space to truly have a dialogue with their student population and community.

I know there will be naysayers about this practice, “Student’s won’t show up, attendance was low, faculty don’t want to commit the time.” Tough, I don’t care. Trying to implement a new policy or practice once will never make it successful. Try it for a whole academic year. Make it the same time and the same day each week. I dare you. Invite student groups to makes announcements, bring in a speaker, and commit to some programming. Also always have a flyer up and make it clear that it’s a way for new members to the theatre community to introduce themselves and learn more.

Some people may say, “But we can’t afford speakers.” Wrong, if you look, they are there. Even if you don’t live near a major city there’s no reason you can’t bring in the stage manager of the big show coming through the local roadhouse. Offer to buy them dinner and a great cup of coffee and I bet they would love to speak with your students for half an hour to 45 minutes, all you have to do is ask. Doing things like that strengthens ties with the professional world and spreads through word of mouth great things about your department.

2.) Engagement in some form of new work - sometimes it’s ten-minute plays written by the students, sometimes it’s a new musical, others times it can be a guest artist brought in to develop a new piece, but they all do it in some manner.

3.) Bridges to the professional world - every “successful” program does this and some do it on multiple fronts. For some schools its internships and externships with casting directors, agents, managers, theatres, and production companies. Many of these schools have built relationships with these folks over the years so that way it’s easy to place their students, the professionals know what to expect and what the level of education is that these interns have.

Some schools go through a traditional showcase process. Some of the really successful programs have internships and a showcase. Or you could take the route of a school like Elon University. Instead of bringing 16-24 students to NYC and Los Angeles they bring industry professionals to North Carolina, have them watch a showcase, evaluate each of the students, provide feedback to each of them, and then teach workshops for a few days about the profession and working as an actor.

I found Elon’s approach interesting because of the savings it provides. If you are a program far from NYC or Los Angeles, or an airline hub, it’s much cheaper to bring a handful of professionals to your school. Especially after you factor in airfare, hotels and meals. There might even be funds present at your university or college to bring in guest speakers.

Of course, there is no substitute for traveling to and experiencing a city. I know of past students who would never have moved to Los Angeles unless they had visited it as part of the showcase process first.

Some programs build real world relationships by hiring working directors and designers to come in and direct their students and design their shows. Smart schools bring in directors and designers with strong ties to regional theatres. And remember, everybody likes to have an assistant.

And lastly, some schools have working ties with regional theatres. What you have to be careful about is students never getting to play leads and they spend their time in ensemble or background roles. One school, such as St. Edwards in Austin, uses an Equity theatre as the on-campus producing center. That means their BFA students get to earn equity points as EMC's while earning their degree. They also then have the opportunity to work alongside professionals from the Austin area. This allows them to grow even more as actors.

Not every school can afford working on an URTA contract. Nor should every program function like that. But there is no harm in reaching out to your local SPT (Small Professional Theatre) and seeing what you can do to help them engage in the Equity Memberships Candidate process and introduce them to your students. Hold a forum with your local AEA rep or SAG-AFTRA rep and educate everyone about how to operate on SPT or SAG ultra low budget contracts. I think everyone can agree that this is a business of relationships. (Heck, I bet your Dramatists Guild Area Liaison would love to speak with your playwriting students.)

4.) Having a plan for your graduates – most schools simply don’t do this. It’s silly how easily this can be incorporated into your capstone courses. I’m not saying your students have to stick to it, but putting the thought into where to move, survival skills, software skills, how to budget and having a written plan in place about how they intend to accomplish their goals is a powerful tool. Hopefully as more schools comply with guidelines from regulatory bodies they will adopt this practice. It truly makes a difference in students, their success rates, and alumni relations and dollars. These plans could be anything, from moving to a new city, attending graduate school, or working in a year long/seasonal fellowship. (Have your students explore Arts Search every spring for opportunities.) The point is, any plan is better than no plan.

5.) Some form of company or class presented work - it seems to bring people together, create a sense of company and community, and allows you to claim you are producing more than you actually are. We all know that NYU Grad presents company shows for each year of the program. A school like Rutgers achieves this in several ways; the BFA’s present work that they have written and created themselves under the title of Performance Ensemble. They do it again by presenting a Shakespeare play as a company that they worked on while studying at The Globe in London. Some schools achieve it through other means; if you have a course in improvisation, present an evening or a weekend of improv before an audience. If you a studying clown, put on a clown show. If your school is finding ways to devise, then present what the class has produced for a weekend. (By the way if your school is not devising or teaching devising, then you are behind the times and that ship has already sailed far away from you.) Another great way to achieve this is presenting ten-minute plays by the directing students.

6.) Production and performance opportunities galore – outside of a few strict conservatories most of the top BA and BFA programs are all about producing as much as possible while maintaining quality. Most schools formally produce at least four productions a season. They build on that by adding in company and class produced work (see point #5), student improv groups, things like No Shame Theatre, a cabaret from their musical theatre students, and most of them have some sort of venue for students to produce and put up work written and directed by themselves. Successful schools create a “second stage” where student led work and classroom work can be presented to a public (and sometimes paying) audience.

What should be number seven, I will put down as an “honorable mention,” is studying abroad. Some programs have a summer, a full semester, even a full year abroad; others have several programs they will transfer all of the credits from. Year after year these schools place students in summer or semester abroad programs at places such as The Moscow Art Theatre, RADA, LAMDA, and BADA.  Some encourage their students to study at places like the O’Neil Theatre Center. Studying at the O’Neil, while not quite abroad, certainly has its advantages. 

There is no reason your program can't adopt some of these ideas and make them your own.

What I feel the need to point out is that much of this has nothing to do with location or money. I once heard a Department Chair tell a room full of educators that his program will never be a top program because it’s too far from an entertainment center such as NYC or Los Angeles. I would tell him that’s a terrible excuse and countless programs have proven him wrong.

I also want to point out that much of this costs little to nothing to implement. Many of the changes can be made with elbow grease and a little gumption. A little effort with your study abroad office and taking the Artistic Director from the local professional theatre can sometimes reap big rewards for your students. Also, little changes in thinking along with tweaking your best practices can go a long way towards building a community, a brand, the success of your students and your program.

Big 'Ol Sensual Pussycat

I had a realization today as I was teaching. Of course it wasn’t a new realization, it was one I’ve had many times before, the only thing that’s different today is that I’m writing about it and articulating my thoughts.

I am repeatedly stunned and amazed at how disconnected this generation of young actors are from their bodies.

I have to be clear and forthcoming in saying that I believe everything is connected (acting, movement, and voice) and that most things start with the body.

This point was driven home to me today in Meisner class. (At UAlbany I am teaching a section of Acting Two, which is Mesiner based.)

Two very lovely young people were working on a scene (yes, it’s final scene time) where they are playing two lovers who have never consummated their relationship. They are in relationships with other people, one of them is very religious and here they are, after three years of sneaking around, finally in a hotel room ready to consummate their affair.

The two lovely actors were like robots. They were in the scene, but behaving like an Amish couple in church.

They didn’t touch each other the whole time.

They also were on a bed they refused to use.

I love beds on stage. I kneel on them, lay on them, roll around on them, and hang off the edge of them. They are my favorite set piece/prop.

These two actors were talking heads of repression.

So I cleared them of the bed and proceeded to roll around on it. I had the actress feed me her lines while he stood beside the bed. I asked the male actor if I could touch him, he consented and then I held his hand. He held mine. Then I asked if I could put my head on his chest, he said yes and he did a speech with my head on his chest. He opened up. The speech lit up. He went places and connected in a way he hadn’t before.

I turned to the class and asked,  “Was there anything we did that was sexual in any way?”

The class, “No.”

“What was it then?”

Silence mixed with looks of confusion on their faces.

“It was sensual.”

I could see light bulbs going off and realizations happening.

“Sensuality and sexuality are two different things. While it certainly helps if they go hand in hand they are not mutually exclusive. Being sensual means being tactile and connected to one’s partner and environment. It means being present in a larger way and being open. It means following impulses and being in your body.”

As I looked around the room at them, I felt sorry for them.

For the most part (and this is a gross generalization) they are a generation that is afraid to touch. Where everything can be construed as something else, everything can be misinterpreted. They are a generation  where everything is litigious and they fear being uncomfortable and they are detached from their bodies. They are a generation of file complaints and ask for it to be easier rather than problem solve and invent. They are a generation where empathy has been replaced by the tweet and they live a life connected to their devices instead of to each other.

So what am I going to do about it? I’m going to give them more assignments in their journals where they have to connect. (And yes I have them do their journals digitally online.)

I’m going to force them to interact with each other and with art. (They had very mixed responses when I had them go to the free art museum on campus and respond to a piece of art that “struck them.”)

In Acting One (which I teach every semester), I am going to do more old school improvisation work and force them to interact physically. I’m going to make sure that every warm-up forces them to be PHYSICAL and IN CONTACT with each other.

We will see how this experiment pans out. At UAlbany we don’t have movement or voice classes. In the show I directed I did voice warm-ups with them. I’m also teaching Acting Three which is in essence a movement class since it is the outside-in, physical theatre class.

But these students don’t have the opportunity to roll around on the floor like a pepper grinder, tumble, paint the wall with their voices, or roll around on the floor with each other like big ‘ol sensual pussycats.

Perhaps in Acting One I will do a round of open scenes where I will set criteria such as, you have to touch each other at three different points in the opens scene in some fashion. We will see if it will make a difference. All I can do is keep chugging along and help them anyway I can.

I frequently say to me students, "It is the artists job to illuminate the humanity of life." I'm going to start following that line up with, "So let's go light up the sky."

Some thoughts on teaching acting . . .

Teaching at a university whose MFA program that is focused on pedagogy raises lots of interesting questions.

Without a doubt it makes me a better teacher as I have to constantly and consistently answer “why” and “how” in relation to every conversation I have with my graduate students.

Every day is a new examination of the actor training process.

I realize there are three kinds of programs:

1.) Those that teach a technique, adhere to that technique and live in the philosophical world of that technique.

2.) Then there are those programs that teach outcomes. After semester X you will be able to do Y. They don’t care how you get there as a teacher, simply that you get the students there.

3.) And lastly, we have what I call “patchwork” or “hodgepodge.” They teach a bunch of different techniques and approaches and the connective tissue is the performance opportunities and the faculty.

After having been educated in or taught in all three kinds I’m not sure which I prefer.

There are pros and cons to all three.

I will say that having a “technique” allows one the safety of working inside a philosophy or values system that one can always go back to when in doubt about a situation. It shapes an aesthetic. It shapes the artist not only as a student but also as a teacher.

When I was younger I refused to adhere to the aesthetic or philosophy of my teachers and over time I now cling to it. After a decade and a half as a theatre practitioner I have found myself coming back to my roots, embracing the amazing master teachers I have worked with and I have fully realized my value system as an actor and educator.

I was listening to Anne Bogart speak the other night and she said something that stuck with me.  “Actor training in this country has become too easy. It needs to be hard, it needs to take work. It doesn’t matter what you study as long you study it in depth, takes effort to learn it and is hard.”

I couldn’t agree with her more.

That thought should be applied to all of higher education, not simply theatre or actor training. We must stop inflating grades and hold them to a measure of perfection or success. And we must stand by that measure, stand our ground and know that we are serving them.

It’s why I talk to my students about “being excellent.” Excellence is a habit that must be cultivated like love, kindness or compassion. It takes effort to be excellent and it must be practiced.

I challenge them with the idea that why would one choose to be mediocre? Who aims for that? Who wants to simply get by? Why would one choose to be an artist and then aim for enough, aim for passable? That makes no sense to me. I want my students to aspire to be brilliant, to be hungry for it and to never be satisfied with just ok.

Dammit Mamet, You Are Right.

I know this is going to be a strange post after a long lay-off. But in my defense I have been busy. I recently had two of my plays go up Off-off Broadway here in NYC. In addition to writing them I also had a cameo in one and the other play was a two-hander. (I was one of the two hands.) Lights go up, forty-two minutes later the lights come down, two actors.
I hadn't been on stage that much since I played Petruchio.

But now that the dust has settled and I've had some time to think and reflect on this recent experience and I have an important observation . . . David Mamet is right.

I want to make it clear, I am not someone who thinks everything Mamet writes is brilliant, quite the opposite actually. Do I like his plays? Sure, some of them. His movies? Some, I will watch UNTOUCHABLES or RED BELT any day. What about his essays? Actually, yes, I admit I am a nonfiction junkie and reading a Mamet essay about pocketknives is a great joy of mine. In regards to his theatre essays . . . I almost always walk away angry at his oversimplification of everyone's craft. Specifically the actor's craft and process.

This brings me to the point of this post.

I stand corrected and Mr. Mamet, Sir, you are right.

I hang my head in shame over the years I've spent saying, "Read, TRUE AND FALSE, but be careful, it can be dangerous for a young actor to read."
Well, I'm wrong.
After working on two of my plays at the same time, with a diverse group of actors and yes, I even had to direct a bit on one of them. I have walked away from the experience with this . . .

What is the actor's job?

Learn your lines, learn your blocking, find an appropriate action and speak out clearly even though frightened, scared, insecure etc. That is true bravery in one's art and that is the actor's job.

Some actor's never got their lines right. Now let me be clear. It's one thing to do what I call kerfuffle the line. Sometimes as an actor you learn something wrong and it just sticks in your mouth and brain. That's not what I'm talking about. That would be consistency. While Emerson may call that the, "hobgoblin of little minds," I call it an actor doing their job and what they need to do.

No, some of these actors felt the need to embellish, to add, paraphrase to which I say, "I'm the dramatist can we please at least try it my way? Just once?"
Nope, they never did. Not even at the table with no pressure to perform and the script in front of them.

In performance their embellishments, their insecurity and hubris grew to such epic proportions that they felt they needed to make it better or they needed to get a laugh. (Again, without ever trying it as written.)
They did this at the expense of other actors onstage. They did this at the expense of scripted jokes and laugh lines that belonged to other people. (These same actors never learned their blocking and couldn't physically do the same things night to night.)
In short, they were not serving the play. They were selfish and are unable to work simply, truthfully and as asked by the playwright and director.

I wonder to myself if they had actually learned the lines as written and performed them as such what would have happened?
I think their work would have been like the actors who did their job. It would have grown every night and deepened. They would have been considered giving by their fellow actors and they would have served the play and the production.

I'm not perfect. But between educational and professional theatre I've worked on well over 200 plays and I work enough to be in and maintain membership in all three actor unions, so I do feel like I know what I am talking about. Whenever this has happened to me (lines jumbled or a jump in the script) I am horrified and I immediately go to my script to uncover what went wrong and then I work to correct it and make sure it never happens again. What I don't do is walk off-stage and blame other people in the dressing room. If it's a huge issue I go to the other actor and ask we run lines on that section because I think I messed something up. (I find that works best, blame yourself and not get defensive.)

I am an open-minded writer. If a line doesn't work, let's talk about it. Let's change it. Especially on a new play. But the time for that is in rehearsal. Not performance.

This idea of what are the basics, the bare minimum of an actor's job has been sticking in my brain for weeks and I need to get it out.

So what are the basics of an actor's job? To learn their lines, learn their blocking, find an appropriate action and speak out even though frightened.
Dammit Mamet, you are right.

Cowboys vs Aliens or Agents vs Managers?

I’ve decided that I need to sit down and finally answer a question that seems to be on many people’s minds. What’s the difference between agents and managers?

Its no secret that I have a manager and I find working with her to be one of the smartest decisions I’ve ever made.

My day job is at an acting school, and every day a different student asks me the agent vs manager question.

The best response I can come up with is, “Agents help you get jobs; managers make careers happen.”

Now, this statement isn’t entirely true and I’m sure my manger would look at me funny if she read it. But for the most part I find this an accurate description.

Does this mean that everyone young person who wants to work in this business should run out there and get a manager?

Not all managers are created equal.

In the last ten years we’ve seen an explosion of managers pop up. They are highly unregulated and now just about any Tom, Dick or Harry can claim they are a manager.

We are seeing agents from top tier super agencies like CAA & ICM leave to become mangers.

These days’ manger and producer are almost synonymous. (At least with most of the good ones.)

But a word to the wise, there are a lot of people out here who claim to be managers and won't really do anything for you.

There are folks who are mangers where all they do is place their clients with agencies (their friends) and then they collect their 10 percent. (I find that mangers 5 years ago were still asking for 20 percent, but in the last few years that number has gone down to 10.)

Then there are those managers who will hold your hand and be your biggest cheerleader, supportive in your darkest hour.

Finally there are those mangers that produce and really should be viewed as business partners in the company of you.

Also, any manger worth their salt realizes that some clients will be powerhouses if given the opportunity to develop. That takes vision, drive and planning on their part. Developing a client is an investment and some managers are willing to do that.

One has to keep in mind just how much the business has changed. 10-15 years ago I think there were still a lot of agents who had a larger personal investment in their clients. There were still a lot of agents who would take on developmental clients and weren’t afraid of the risk.

Now managers are taking on that risk.

The business has been shrinking. Boutique agencies have been closing and I remember 2-3 years ago when a lot of the top tier agencies were cleaning out their client lists. It was pretty brutal. But it did allow boutiques to then snatch up some bigger name clients.

As more boutiques close, other boutiques take on clients and so on and so forth. You get the picture. Now we have some small agencies with hefty client lists and at least every small agency has a couple of series regulars.

Where does that leave the developmental actor?

It means that 9 times out of 10 they are searching for a manager that is a right fit.

For the record I love my manager.

Best decision I ever made.

Cyd is a business partner and an advisor.

She has a smaller client list than any agency I’ve ever been with and she is invested in the business of me.

I frequently think of my fellow clients in her company as a team, and if one of us does well, that opens doors for the rest of us.

She is helping me to attain my bigger picture.

I do feel I need to very clear, I might be a bit different than a lot of people. I started writing again a few years ago and I am now sitting on a lot of literary property. I also have my own theatre company. I have plays, TV Pilots, a few film properties, some ideas for a young adult series of books along with other ideas for properties.

In addition to my legit career I also have a lucrative commercial career.

In short, I have stuff to manage. (After this last tax season I'm finally thinking about incorporating and opening up my own production shingle . . . crazy I know.)

I need help navigating these waters and keeping my eye on the prize.

One of the greatest things about my manager is that she is my friend as well as my business partner and we are invested in each other - both personally and in business. When I run the ING New York Marathon she's going to be there. When I get married she's going to be there. (She better be or I'll kill her.) And when I'm finally a show runner, she'll be there. (I'll need someone to tell me what to do.) In turn I care and want to know what her kids are up to, who the dog has peed on today, seriously critique her vacation itineraries and mock her taste in bad movies.(I have to be careful on that last point, my taste isn't so hot itself.)

Is she this way with every client? I don't know and I don't care. The point is she's this way with me. If I were a boxer she'd be my trainer, my cut man and setting up my next fight. She's in my corner and I'm in her's.

I think that’s a key element of why I love my manager. I’m just as invested in her and her company as she is with me. I plan on being in business with her until she retires. (Or kills me, which ever comes first.)

Do we have fights?

You bet, but that’s what happens in creative endeavors. Whenever passionate people come together to do something great there are going to be strong, colliding points of view.

That's life in a creative business.

That's art.

In closing, are mangers for everyone?

That's depends upon you as a person and an artist.

I didn't think I would ever have a manager.

I thought they were silly and unnecessary.

I couldn't have been more wrong.

But I'm willing to admit my mistakes. I'm also willing to let my point of view change and reshape itself. In this business if you don't evolve and grow you end up in trouble. (Just look at the internet as a prime example). I'm glad I was willing to change my mind. Best thing I ever did.

Procrastination Nation . . .

This morning I didn't run off to Jiu Jitsu. My ankle is still really tetchy and I'm not sure what to do with it. I should have went to Jiu Jitsu, but I also had some news to deliver to a friend about a common acquaintance that passed away. I Used the phone call as an excuse not to head to the 9:30 am Jiu Jitsu class.

Fear over my ankle injury is getting me to make excuses not to train. I hate fear.

I think I'm teetering on that very fine knife's edge of over training.

I will however do a mid-distance run this afternoon before heading to rehearsal for Jihad The Musical. You heard me correctly, Jihad The Musical. By the way, I'm playing a character called Hussein. You do the math.

Feeling crappy and over my head about the musical since I'm not a musical theater person, I never have been, nor have I ever passed myself off as one. I'm doing it because they asked me and I think they need the warm body there for the composers to hear it before they head off to London for the production being done there.

As for running and the ankle . . . I did a short, 4.25 mile, run on Sunday. The ankle held up. It was strange and scary as running on it felt like I was running with a piece of wood attached to the end of my leg. But then am I being paranoid and hyper-aware?

I'm not going to lie to you, it did hurt. But it wasn't unbearable and it wasn't like the pain changed at all during the run.

The question still hangs in the air, can I run 13.1 miles on it without causing serious damage to myself?

It's also not healing as fast as I want it to. If it's a bone bruise it could take a long time to stop hurting.

I actually caught myself looking at the New York Road Runners Website and saw they have a half marathon coming up October 11th in Staten Island. I started thinking to myself that I could always do that one . . .

But these thoughts are like admitting failure . . . I hate failure.

Some of my loved ones don't understand why I would even consider running a half marathon while injured. They are obviously people that haven't trained for something. It would be a huge blow to my spirit if I spent all this time:doing long runs, sprints, speed drills etc. and not do the race that has been my goal. It would leave me with a sad and heavy heart.

On the upside my buddy Chris and I have decided to start working on a project together. In an effort to help his teaching I suggested he start a blog to help him refine his ideas and be pro-active about his own creativity. (I'm all for encouraging people to write, in a any way, shape or form. The only writers that piss me off are folks who claim to be writers but never write anything!)

In addition to his blog I suggested he start a pod cast to help support it. So, now we are. We are going to be interviewing folks connected to the business of acting and putting it out there into the void that is the world wide web. I think this should be fun. We are viewing ourselves as the Click and Clack, The Car-Talk of the acting world.

Anything is worth doing as long as I get a good story out of it and learn a little about something.

On the recipe front. I was feeling all Fall like again so I made a Sheperd's Pie. Or rather a variant on it. Mandy loves it. I haven't heard a verdict yet from Chris. But I'll post the recipe in a day or so.

Until next time True Believers.