Joe Patti

I have been writing Butts in the Seats (BitS) on topics of arts and cultural administration since 2004 (yikes!). Given the ever evolving concerns facing the sector, I have yet to exhaust the available subject matter. In addition to BitS, I am a founding contributor to the ArtsHacker (artshacker.com) website where I focus on topics related to boards, law, governance, policy and practice. I am also an evangelist for the effort to Build Public Will For Arts and Culture being helmed by Arts Midwest and the Metropolitan Group. (http://www.creatingconnection.org/about/) My most recent role was as Executive Director of the Grand Opera House in Macon, GA. Among the things I am most proud are having produced an opera in the Hawaiian language and a dance drama about Hawaii's snow goddess Poli'ahu while working as a Theater Manager in Hawaii. Though there are many more highlights than there is space here to list.

CONNECT WITH JOE

[novashare_follow button_size="medium" button_shape="square" networks="twitter=https://twitter.com/buttsintheseats,linkedin=https://www.linkedin.com/in/joe-patti-14aa666/,subscribe=https://insidethearts.com/buttsintheseats/subscribe/"]

In A World of Sameness, This Movie Stands Out (Just Like The 1000 Before)

by

For the next week and a half or so I am enjoying films at the Hawaii International Film Festival. I write a little bit about my experiences every year, but what has struck me this year is a realization about just how hard it is to make a film/performance/whatever sound distinctive in a short space.

It doesn’t matter whether you are writing for the limits of a brochure or have the relative freedom of a web page, peoples’ attention spans dictate that you make your point quickly, succinctly and compellingly.

Now that I have been attending for a few years, I have started to recognize that movie about the quirky characters in the fashionable district of Taipei sounds a lot like the movie last year about the quirky characters gathered in the night market of Taipei.

I wonder if there is enough difference between the documentary about the 60 year old guy trying to find a Chinese wife and the fictional account of the 38 year old Danish bodybuilder who goes to Thailand to find a wife, that I will want to see both of them.

Part of the problem is, regardless of how good a writer you are, people bring certain assumptions to new experiences which they used to place the new thing into a context they can process. Just like the person describing food that someone else has never eaten, the description writer also has to provide some touchstones that will help people decide whether they will enjoy the experience.

Being able to post video on YouTube helps to provide some of the additional information people need to make a decision, but still it is difficult. The aforementioned movies about finding Asian brides for example, there is clearly a lot of authenticity and sincerity present in both the documentary, Seeking Asian Female and the Danish movie, Teddy Bear, but we all know that movie trailers don’t always give the best indication.

How many times have you realized all the best moments of a film were in the trailer? How many times have you recognized the restrictions of a movie trailer didn’t adequately prepare you for just how good the movie would be. I haven’t seen Seeking Asian Female yet, but let me tell you, the Teddy Bear trailer doesn’t do the movie justice. Bodybuilder/actor Kim Kold did a great job portraying the subtleties of the Dennis character.

I am not sure there is any clear cut instructions to give about how to make every experience seem distinct, both due to the way the information is received and because there are really only so many basic plots in the world.

Creating a history of trust with your audiences is one solution. One of the most gratifying comments I get from audiences is that they weren’t sure about the show but they came because they knew we always do great stuff.

It takes a lot of honesty to earn that trust. You can’t barrage people with quotes and language that basically promises a sublime, life changing experience every single time. Not all experiences are equally sublime and people will quickly realize their lives haven’t really changed all that much.

And ultimately most audiences, including mine, are comprised of people who attend too infrequently for us to have developed that degree of trust.

So my conclusion at this juncture is that we must labor on making everything sound interesting in the short space of time we have been allowed and hope we can improve our ability make a compelling case.

By the way, this post title is a reference to the sentiments expressed by these guys:

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQRtuxdfQHw&w=420&h=315]

Will Typecasting Ruin New Zealand’s Career?

by

I was reading today that the New Zealand post will be issuing legal tender coins commemorative coins for the upcoming Hobbit movie. This appears to be the first issue of coins associated with a popular culture icon (unless you count those issued for the All Blacks rugby team whose haka performance is iconic of itself).

I was both filled with a sense of amazement and concern about this. The amazement was based on the concept that an entire country could find itself identified so closely with a non-native cultural icon. The built in fan base of millions of Tolkien enthusiasts is proving something of a boon to the country which hosts tours of the many sites that appeared in the Lord of the Rings movies. While there was some digital enhancement involved in many parts of the movie, the inspiring natural beauty of the country depicted in the movies is there to be experienced.

I am sure there are many New Zealanders who are tired of foreigners trampling about looking for movie locations and reciting dialogue from the movies, but on the whole from what I have read, the country has a general sense of pride in the attention the movies have brought them.

My concern is based on the exact same thing–that the country find itself identified so closely with the movies that everything else it has to offer becomes eclipsed. Believe me, where arts and culture is concerned, the country has plenty to offer. Of the last eight seasons in my theatre, easily half of them have featured artists whose appearance was due to support from Creative New Zealand.

Here in Hawaii you can tour the locations that appeared in Lost and Hawaii 5.0, but the state’s identity isn’t closely tied to those television shows. After the planes stopped flying on September 11, 2001 and tourism dropped during the economic downturn, there has been a sense that the state needs to be known for more than just tourism, too.

I am sure there is plenty of discussion in New Zealand along the same lines. Fame and reputation can be a double edged sword that enhances your life in the short term but can be detrimental in the long term. Actors run into the same problem when they play an iconic character and then find they are inevitably cast as that same type the rest of their career. Arts organizations cultivate an aura of prestige that attracts wealthy patrons but earns them the perception of being elitist.

Of course, one benefit of the Lord of the Rings and Hobbit movies is that New Zealand has a much stronger infrastructure for making and distributing films so perhaps the world will become more familiar with the creative and cultural richness of the country through movies and other digital media.

I think the country has enough diversity to offer it won’t face the danger of being typecast as Tolkien’s Middle Earth. The stereotypes other countries and racial groups have to face are bad enough, imagine people expecting everyone from New Zealand to either be an elf, dwarf or hobbit. (Kiwi are too nice to be uruk-hai.)

Note To Email Subscribers

by

Quick note to those who subscribe by email. Due to the uncertain future of Feedburner given Google’s waning support of the service, I have decided to use a WordPress based subscription process.

You can subscribe by entering your email address in the “Subscribe Via Email” box on the right side of the blog home page, hitting submit and following the instruction in a verification email that will be sent to you.

To those subscribers I emailed yesterday regarding this change, I apologize for sending your email addresses in the clear. I had created a group in my email program thinking it would suppress the individual email information. I didn’t realize it had not until after the email was sent.

I was dismayed that someone took immediate advantage of the situation to send a solicitation. Again, I apologize.

I will be monitoring the subscriber list for the next month or so and deactivating duplicate subscriptions on Feedburner so that you don’t receive double notifications of posts. Please let me know if I inadvertently miss your address.

Thanks to all of you for following me for so many years and I hope you will continue to do so in the future.

 

Fear of The Black Hat

by

I was intrigued last month by a post on the ArtsFWD website made by Liz Dreyer about Edward DeBono’s Six Thinking Hats group discussion and thinking process.

My first gut reaction that made this approach appeal to me was that it forces everyone in a discussion to act as a devil’s advocate and point out the problems with an idea. In many conversations either no one wants to appear pessimistic or there is that one guy who seems to revel in the role. With the Six Thinking Hats, everyone has to engage in that this type of thinking so that it isn’t avoided, nor is any individual resented for adopting that position.

In addition to taking a judgmental approach, Six Thinking Hats also requires the group to explore in turn: the straight facts of the situation; speak optimistically seeking the positive benefits; discuss feelings and hunches and creatively explore alternatives and new ideas. The whole process is bracketed by a “meta-thinking” hat that sets the rules about how the thinking will be done and evaluates the process when it is over.

Dreyer does a pretty good job of outlining how the group at EMCArts explored the Six Thinking Hats process so I don’t want to reiterate all the details.

As I mentioned, I liked that the process made everyone move between the different perspectives together which helps prevent a strong personality from dominating a conversation and consistently redirecting it toward their personal bias. I also suspect that participation would help each individual member strengthen their personal decision making abilities through practice and the example of others. If a person didn’t feel really confident about thinking creatively or trusting their hunches, contributing to a discussion where this type of thinking wasn’t suppressed and observing others more skilled at this type of thinking could help that person develop themselves.

If you are considering using this approach in meetings, I would suggest doing additional research on how to use it. Each hat isn’t used in equal measure. Some of the additional research I have done specifies that the Red Hat which embodies intuition and hunches only be used for 30 seconds in order to ensure the response is spontaneous and free of internal censoring (“Oh that is a stupid idea…”) There is also a warning, echoed by Dreyer’s post, not to let the critical devil’s advocate Black Hat get overused.

On the other hand, DeBono’s critics say that his approach emphasizes creativity and qualitative thinking rather than testing if empirical data actually bears the ideas out.

That said, if you are doing any grant writing at all in support of your programs you are probably being asked to provide enough empirical data to keep you grounded.

[hr]

By the way, the title of this post was pulled from the hilarious 90s hip-hop mockumentary, Fear of A Black Hat.  Entirely unrelated to the subject of the post but worth checking out, especially if you grew up in 1980s and 90s because you will recognize a lot of the groups they are making fun of.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqp-aSPqQYc]