What is Immersive Theatre?

We can start by what we claim at Living Lucid Creative:

“Immersive theatre includes many different things.  From solving a murder and determining the ending of a show to one on one intimate experiences, the only thing you can expect is to expect the unexpected. In most of our everyday entertainment we are merely spectators.  With these experiences we tear down the wall between actors and the audience.  Here, you make the choices - you control the story and the experience.  Every experience is unique - like those old Choose Your Own Adventure books that we had as kids. Here too, now as adults you can book another experience to explore another path!

 

Stories range from phone calls where our actors do live improv within a chosen scenario with you guiding the cues to text/phone call/email rescue missions and escape rooms to live streaming events with groups guiding the story, to full scale environments that you can walk into and explore.  This new world of events creates alternative realities where you are a vital part of the experience - without you it just doesn’t work.  Our productions will ensnare your senses and capture your imagination.

 

Come join us, leave your expectations behind, allow us to introduce you to new realities and experiences and live lucidly.”

 

Immersion is a continuum.  On a typical stage show you are not really involved in the action, yet we ask you to allow yourself to believe in the world in the play.  If you see a stagehand onstage move something it is assumed that since they are in black they “disappear”.  And some plays break the 4^th wall and do engage you as the audience.  They may speak directly to you.  Or perhaps even drag you up onto stage.  But generally speaking it’s rather passive.

There are many types of role playing that are immersive and have been around for years.  From Dungeons and Dragons to Pirate Festivals and Renaissance Fairs.  These experiences vary in immersive levels – some get really into it, even dressing the parts, others enjoy more as spectators.  And beyond D&D, there are many more immersive styled games out there now than there ever were before.  They even have a name – COS play.  I think the next type of things I recall doing was attending a new murder mysteries where over snacks or a meal you would interact with the other audience members and the cast to discover who a murderer was.  And, you could even buy kits that allowed you to have your own murder mystery dinner parties (these still exist, and even have virtual download options – you can even do the virtually).  One can make a good deal of arguments about what really is an immersive experience verses what is a immersive theatrical experience.  Does it need to have a story line?  Or does it need to have live actors?  I found, in my search for connection many different types of things, different types of technology, some revolutionary companies, and in some ways a whole new world of opportunities.  While my experiences are not exhaustive, I will try to highlight some of what I have experienced so that later, we can eventually come back to what is immersive theatre, or at least what Living Lucid Creative is working towards.

One of the first moments which grabbed me was actually a Netflix Interactive Special called Black Mirror Bandersnatch.  It is essentially a choose your own adventure book, except you make you choices with your remote.  I was mesmerized.  I spend hours watching it, choosing different paths, googling paths – and even following one rare ending path that necessitated me making over 50 different decisions to get to that one ending – and if my choices were different at any point – I would not get to that alternative ending!  The choices were so seamless – the movie did not pause, it was very well crafted.  Netflix has others and some were entertaining, but not, in my opinion matched this one. 

One “event” that I did was called Textback.  It was entirely as you can assume via texts.  The premise was a guy had been kidnapped and I had to help save him.  To save him I have to do a little research, solve some puzzles, and make a few emails.  The story took place over about 2-3 days, but it differs for different people. It was in a way like an escape room except there was interaction.  The interaction was driving by the game though – I would have to wait for the next stage to begin, though I could wait to engage till I had time or pause it.   What is interesting is that the person texting you doesn’t exist.  Sorry for the spoiler – but it is a bot.   Once written, this thing can run forever as long as you pay for the server or whatever it runs off of.  There is nothing in theatre that even remotely exists as somewhat passive income – we work hard for every ticket.  I was engaged – and a bit sad when it was over. 

I have watched a large variety of virtual tours.  In the beginning when COVID first shut down everything everyone had a virtual tour.  I couldn’t keep track of them all.  And I found that I was often disappointed – that Frank Lloyd Wright house tour that I had never seen – was really only a 3 minute into to the house.  Too much work to find what was good.   I also very much did not like the 360 tours where you can move yourself incrementally through a location.  Perhaps it was that I did most of these with museums and you really could not look at the art or learn about the art – and the tours would have been better for either architecture or nature.  They also had no audio content (the ones I did), and they were just not very engaging.  A shame as though I suspect a lot of moment was spent on some of these.   Some were on zoom.  Some of these were okay – as long as the visual content of the tour was predominate.  Some companies managed this better than others.  Others were on Facebook Live or YouTube Live.  Generally the best ones give you good visuals and were knowledgeable about the content.  Not exactly theatre – more like attending a seminar.  But some were immersive in that they would ask trivia questions or otherwise try to engage the audience.  Unfortunately – these tours were often more immersive than some of the theatre I have seen on the same platforms. 

I have done a few shows on Discord – the events have themed themselves as immersive theatre, but are all based on role playing, where it is essential for you as an audience member to participate.  Never the same twice – very immersive.  Best when everyone can really engage with the story.  Not as easy for wall flowers to navigate. 

I have also tried a few escape rooms.  One on YouTube live had an actor moving the story along, there were filmed video segments, you needed to look virtually for clues and even send out an email, and we solved the puzzle with seconds on the clock.  It was very engaging, immersion was done through a chat box, and it had a story line…  I had not really previously considered escape rooms as part of a theatrical experience, but this has changed my perspective.  I also would not have said a haunted house was theatrical – but if it has a story line and actors, you are immersed in the event – it probably qualifies.  There was a couple of other immersive games, one on zoom and one with a created internet interface that just did not connect to me personally.  One seemed to easy (yet hard to understand) the other was way long and way to complex (it was about Sherlock Holmes). 

I have seen some on Instagram, one on twitter – one on a fake pizza website.   Intriguing.  Some take you one and adventure – some don’t.  It’s a bit like the Wild West – you don’t know what to expect. 

The other type that I have experienced were audio events.  You downloaded and listed to a track (play, story) while doing something.  These were intriguing ideas to me.  Immersive in a different way.

And I am sad to say but as of yet I have not seen a performance yet where I would say the format was as close to theatre as virtually possible that was good.  There was either no real interaction (you could chat but it didn’t effect the show) and one your input did alter the show but the show was not easy to understand – and it left me with a feeling that I just lost 2 hours of my life). 

By the way, I am open to experiencing as much as I can – so if you know of something let me know.  Somethings that I have come across are closed productions, and it is not always very easy to track down productions (and of course I have to be budget conscious). 

So this is the stew of thoughts and emotions and types of things that I was engaging in while searching for connection and something more.

In some cases those hosting virtual tours when right back to in person tours when their state opened up.  I felt that was perhaps short sighted as I would have still paid to see it virtually as often they were not places where I would have been conceivably able to go.  Not to mention that just because things are open – doesn’t mean all people feel comfortable going out – and some populations aren’t able to get out – virtual immersive content reaches audiences that live events can’t.

Also, it depending on what technology you were using these events could exist for as long as there is a potential audience for them.  Obviously there could be royalties or rights issues – but the Textback cell experience or the Lifeline App take virtually no support.  The recorded audio files are similar.  However, the immersive quality of these are different.  There is not a live actor.  You can change the story in some cases – in others you can’t. 

I was also surprised when some of the shows that were one on one phone experiences with actors closed.  Perhaps they were not doing well financially?  But there are many actors out there out of work. 

Immersive theatre means many things.  I have not even gone into some of the large scale live immersive events, which we will look to do in the future as well.  There are many different platforms to use.  There are many different levels of immersion.  And I think each person will find that certain levels of immersion feel right to them and that certain platforms are more comfortable and easier for them to navigate.  And Living Lucid Creative is here to help navigate these new worlds of options and ideas and bring you fresh, innovative and engaging content. 

Covid19 and Current Theatre Musings

It’s been quite a while since I have written.  Much has changed.  And then COVID19 happened.

I was busy being baffled by why everyone was obsessed with toilet paper.  Then schools started closing, then states.  I quickly found myself being primarily an elementary school teacher for my two daughters.  It definitely made me more thankful for their teacher’s skills and expertise.  And I realized how complicated logging in and out of 20 things can be for 2 kids for each assignment…  But everything is a learning experience right?

Broadway closing was a surreal moment.  Almost unbelievable.  It was temporary – to control the spread.  We knew that at the “end” it wouldn’t magically be over.  The virus would not be cured or a vaccine implemented – but in some ways expectations seemed to change and our understanding of things changed, and then changed again.  And of course there are many, many different views.  And the impact – emotionally and financially – personally and socially has been huge.  9/11 was my best comparative experience at first, but it is more than that!

At first I streamed as many shows as I could find (and I found many more than I expected).  Streaming a play is never the same.  Red and the Incident at Vichy stood out to me – they managed to catch my attached through the screen while the others didn’t.  I managed to feel emotionally connected.  A few feel good musicals did the same like Kinky Boots and Billy Elliot.  At home there are too many distractions.  And if it doesn’t grab your attention there are too many other entertainment options. 

Some theatre folks had switched to making masks or face shields – or even shields to install in companies for checkout areas and stuff like that.  We did what theatre does – keep moving and adapting.  But theatres were dark…  Academic theatres were dark but still trying to teach hands on skills in an online environment. 

Social distancing in theatre I think is a problem.  For patrons and backstage.  It just doesn’t really work.  There isn’t room backstage, and the shows require a certain intimacy between cast and crew.  For the audience, part of the experience is the other audience members.  The tension or laughter.  It makes theatre, well theatre.  Streaming theatre loses that – but a mostly empty house might as well.  Plus there is profitability.  Losing all those seats either means increased ticket prices – more shows (which actually also effects costs), or decreased show budgets and scopes and a different level of performance quality – lowered production values.

As an introvert, in many ways, I have not minded some of the changes.  I like all of the virtual content available – though that is another post.  I like being about to do things online or on the phone instead of going in and doing it.  My life is a different pace than before.  But what I found that I missed the most was connection.  As an introvert I could go out and my connection meter would go up simply by being around others with inadvertent or surprising short conversations.  Just running into people and saying hi.  With no one going out, social connection had to be a conscious choice.  To call.  To text.  To respond to a post or send an email.  And, nothing was the same – many people were out of work – many people had their job, now at home – plus educating kids, nothing was quite the same so there was a lot to navigate.  Zoom became the new google. 

So I inadvertently set out on a bit of a quest after streaming tons of Broadway shows to try to find more interactive content.   One of the first stops on that was an interactive episode on Netflix – which is also worthy of its own piece of writing.  I’ve done things on zoom, phone calls, texting games, escape rooms, tours, some “theatre”, some music…  and a wide variety of Immersive theatre.  Good and bad.  It’s not really that new – and it’s been around for a long time in many forms.  But I think, that it is one of the key ways for theatre to continue in today’s world.  And that will be the subject my next post!

On Teaching 3 – Online Learning

I wrote the first two of these after a bad online teaching experience.  During the last quarter I had an OK online experience.  Most of the classes I take are online.   It isn’t necessarily because I prefer them – but they are typically more convenient.  As with any class there are many differences between classes and schools, even within a college or university.  I consume a fair amount of content – much of it online.  Obviously it varies in the way that it is conveyed, but it is clear to me that online learning – actively with enrollment, semi actively via online sites like Lynda.Com, or open source university classes, or just casually with many of the articles and white papers available.

Generally speaking, most of this learning occurs much more passively than traditional classroom learning. 

Generally speaking online learning is typically not as effective as classroom learning and retention is lower.  Considering the fact that online learning, in my opinion will only grow, finding a way to fix this is important.

My online classes have generally been 1 of three types. One is a live recorded actual class, in which the online portion participates asynchronously with the rest of the class.  One class gave you the option of watching it live (this was a fairly good online class).  One type provides pre-recorded lecture materials.  One of the best classes I ever took online had this - his lectures were full length, insightful, and on point.  The third, may have online recordings but they are short and no where near lecture length.

The other differences in classes of course is the assignments.  To "mimic" in class discussion, many (poor) online classes require an absurd amount of reading and writing posts relating to the topic and the commenting on other posts. Hopefully, they at least provide a rubric on what these posts should include to be meaningful, but they often don't.  And the amount of work that goes into this far exceeds that of a normal classroom discussion and sometimes equals a paper (some require resources).  I understand that it is more difficult to see what students are doing in a virtual world.  I find that discussion groups work better than doing whole class discussions, and that case studies and actual papers and analysis also work well.

Also what I find is that not only is the lecture material not the same as an in class discussion, but neither is the reading material.  When I first started taking online course it seemed like teachers just simply made their in class course into an online version (minus maybe the video).  I'm not really sure of that though - just as students seem to put less work into an online course - so does, it seems the professors do.

I realize that all of these thoughts on teaching may seem off topic to theatre, but frankly, especially in areas like Cad, I feel like there are things that could be taught online.  and I don't think that online courses will go away, because ultimately they do save time, even if they are made to be high quality.

So here are my thoughts :
1. Provide lectures.  I am taking a class to gain specific knowledge, but I am paying someone for that opportunity and feel like I deserve some sort of personalized experience and that includes relevant, and full length lectures.  I can find a list of books to read on my own, and probably even fine a discussion group.  The teacher aspect is lost in online learning and needs to front and center.
2. provide meaningful books, articles, etc.  not overwhelming, unless it is clear what is required and discretionary and check that the links are active.  (providing does not mean that we won't purchase materials, just in terms of choosing resources).
3. have meaningful assignments.  do case studies.  Have small groups discuss issues.  Busy work isn't productive, takes alot of time, and is meaningless for long term learning.  Focus on projects or papers. realize that while we are all using technology that group projects are still painful (not that I ever expect them to go away).
4. Use other technology.  There are spaces for virtual collaboration where people can put up PDFs and text chat, or mark up what is on the screen.  Resources are constantly changing, stay up to day.  have virtual office hours.  Be responsive.  Give students feedback.  Be clear what you expectations are.
5. tests and quizzes vary from class to class. i don't typically find them effective (they are usually from the text book company and are "tricky" just to be more difficult.  Though in one of the best classes I had we did have an in class essay final.  Obviously this will depend on the type of class being taught, but projects and papers can be viable options.  Don't make choices because they are easy, and don't use the teacher questions out of the text book because it is also easy for you to deal with.

As I mentioned, I dont  think this trend will go away, but I think it can be much better if approached differently!

Below are a variety of sites that talk about online learning in more depth.

http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/changingcourse.pdf

http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring141/boston_ice_gibson141.html

http://elearningindustry.com/7-tips-elearning-professionals-enhance-knowledge-retention

http://lytics.stanford.edu/datadriveneducation/papers/lindseyetal.pdf

http://uscgboating.org/assets/1/AssetManager/NASBLA.1002.17.pdf

http://er.educause.edu/articles/2010/12/enhancing-student-learning-and-retention-with-blended-learning-class-guides

http://scholarworks.uvm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1103&context=hcoltheses

http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/changingcourse.pdf

http://info.shiftelearning.com/blog/bid/247473/18-Mind-Blowing-eLearning-Statistics-You-Need-To-Know

Online Research

I write about many things here, but one topic that I like to engage in, and write about is research.   Usually my first step is Google Scholar.  You can configure it in many different ways, and even provide your school information to help make the process smoother (you typically have to log into many research databases with an ID, which you do through you school log in if you have one). Otherwise, some of these site will require payment (or sometimes they have a certain number of free articles allowed).   Google Scholar is also very useful in terms of looking up patents for theater technology.

I also frequently use the New York Times.  I was reading a book about a murder in NYC, and it dawned on me while reading the book that the reason I could not get earlier information about technical direction, technical theatre, and such from the times (late 1890's I think is the earliest that I have), is because they were not the dominate newspaper in NYC before that time.  The others that were are not as easily searchable, but I have not spend a significant amount of time following those leads.  I will say that newspapers and trade magazines are helpful in terms of tracking down industry trends and shifts.  For instance, many of the large scene shops switched hands over the years.  It is published that Variety was purchased by Showman Fabricators, but following the trail back can be tedious.  I have been looking at this history trying to trace the historical changes in the technical side of theater in the US.

New Mexico State University has a variety of PDF's available about doing research and using the library.  I know that all of the schools that I have attended have the same.  Connection to a college or university is nice because you often will have access to digital copies of articles that you may not otherwise have access too.  Many articles will not be available electronically though, so you still have to use the actual library!

Internet Scout Project  seams to be an online content knowledge management system where users can create their own database, but also provides databases to the public.  One such site is the Electro-Mechanical Library available which has a large collection of knowledge about devices.  This particular source is not necessarily research in terms of academic writing, but very helpful in terms of looking up information on specific electrical and mechanical devices.

Obviously, there are many, many, many more sources out there, but these represent a few that I have been using.

Job Data Notes

Budgeting from historical data is one of the best ways to price future work.  There are many of caveats of course, something might be more because there is no scrap, or a job may come in under because it used scrap, but theoretically it should even out for the company - but this may not track out in jobs. Also, how much use you can generate depends on your ability to track.  Where I work now can tell you how a project did - but it is much harder to track how one element within that job did.  At that point it is tracking done by hand based on time sheets and the way you broke out the budget. Budget breakouts are important in terms of reconciliation, and tracking history so that apples can be compared to apples.

At any rate, I have have been a PM for 8.5 years with my company and during that time I now have back 184 completed / reconciled files.  Approximately 22 projects a year is an interesting statistic too many - on the higher side for theatre (but certainly not off the chart).  But the flip side is that completed projects only, I think probably accounts for about 50% of my time - it doesn't account for any of the smaller jobs that go through as primarily rental jobs, and even more time consuming - it doesn't count the time I spend bidding projects for which we are not awarded the work in the end.

I used to be better about tracking jobs I sent in a proposal on in which we did not get the work - thus creating a "hit rate" of jobs won versus jobs lost.  But I have not really kept up with that - and it is a little loose as some are very low probably jobs in the first place, and we provide budgets that are more generalized.  If we chose to be more targeted on what we provided proposals for we would have a better "hit rate", but we could also lose potential customers.

I also track the cost difference between what we sold the project for, versus our actual cost and review those over time.  Tracking it over times helps me to identify trends to see what the causes may be if the proposed totals make more or less money than expected over a specific period of time.  Interestingly enough, one variable to consider, in my case, is that when the shop is busier jobs take less time than when the shop is slow.  And it doesn't mean that when we are busy quality suffers (though it can happen).  Rather time and projects have a way of expanding and contracting to fill the available time.  If you have nothing else to do, a task may take a long time - where as the same task n a busy day could be done twice as fast because you have a list of other things that need to get done.  (this is referred to as Parkinson's Law; specifically that 'work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion).  (this concept is actually one interesting for further date as it actually works within the triangle of fast, good, cheap).

Artistic Direction - Frosh Bites

I was reading howlround.com's article on Eleventy-One Nuggets for Being a Successful and Ethical Artistic Director, and thought that there was many interesting topics and thoughts that were worth passing on - and not just to artistic directors, but TD's designers, project managers, and basically anyone else that desires a successful life.  

I really like 111 - the comment on change management.  Change management is a difficult topic, and frequently is problematic to implement.  

Take a look at the article, book mark it - it will be worth coming back to. 

Teaching Take 2. Bad Teaching

This sounds bad, and to a certain extent I apologize for that.  On the other hand – I find it frustrating.  As a student I believe that a teacher has a certain responsibility to their students (regardless of the cost of tuition, but tuition is costly).  My belief of a responsibility doesn’t discount the responsibility of the student to be an active learner.  Just that they should be responsible not just for disseminating information, but making sure that real learning occurs.  I don’t know the answer to this question.  I know that in many cases teachers are hired because of what they have accomplished in their careers (frequently common in business).  Depending on the institution they are hired because they do research (and/or have many publications) and that in both cases, the high profile of the “teacher” can bring in funding to the school.  Neither of these situations have ANY bearing on the capacity of the individual to be a successful teacher.  It is critical that a teacher has domain knowledge.  There are theories out there where this is a debatable criteria, but let’s assume that it is true, for the sake of argument. While I know this may work in coaching, teaching and coaching are not vacantly the same thing.  I’m not an educational theorist – but I don’t necessarily need to be one to say that regardless of any of those theories, bad teaching exists.

Just to be clear, I don’t think that teachers mean to teach poorly.  I think I have seen a lot of reasons over the years for “poor” teaching.  Poorly treated adjunct professors may be working at double or triple the load of a normal professor with no benefits -   Poor teaching in this case could simply be an issue of not having time – or capacity to be as thorough as potentially them may need to be.  Maybe they are burned out from striving to teach and do committee work, publish, and chase tenure. 

But I think, in my opinion, the issue is that teachers are not hired for their ability to teach, they are not taught how to teach after being hired, and that successful teaching is not a primary concern for maintaining their employment.  And I think that it is a problem.  Teachers should be mentored, and taught (assuming they have mentors how are successful teachers) about pedagogy.  They should be able to engage with students in multiple ways.  I don’t have an issue with a class that is a lecture class – but then the lectures should be done well. 

What I see that frustrates me the most are mostly simple things:

-          Poor public speaking, not being audible (even after being asked).  Not repeating student’s questions (this is a huge issue in some online courses). 

-          Lack of clear expectations and feedback to the students.  What is a quality response?  And I spend an hour to make a quality response to a question online and another student say’s yea me too – are we graded equally?  Intrinsic motivation aside, I don’t need to spend hours doing “busy work’ for an online participation grade while have the class gets the same grade for agreeing.  (Except that I do, which is probably why I get mad). 

-          Teaching skills that you don’t demonstrate as a teacher.  If you are teaching a course about creating a learning environment, then create a good learning environment.  I have had multiple classes where slides were published with poor grammar and incorrect information.  It’s hard to learn something when the provided materials are not correct.  Then of course, how do you have any credibility in the first place….

-          Class format, topic, and online versus in person all have different costs and benefits.  Teachers probably have preferred styles, but learners do too.   I have learned a lot from classes that were all lecture.  Unless the teacher is very skilled at leading a discussion, I find learning to be more difficult when it is only discussion – seminar style – unless, the students are very vested.  But generally mixes of styles work best for me.  Discussion is valuable. I like case studies.  I think group projects can be important (though I typically don’t care for them).  But it isn’t a one size fits all situation.

-          Last, but most wrong to me are classes where the teacher tells you a certain percentage of what you need to know to be successful (and it typically occurs in classes where you cannot easily research the remaining information), and expect you to figure out the rest – because they thing that proves that you are learning.  Examples:

o   Teach someone how to draft, tell them to design a house, but expect them to design windows, doors properly without showing them what the symbols mean for those elements (as they can just figure that out on their own).  Better yet, teach someone auto cad, even if they have no drafting experience.  Technically possible – but it comes with a loss of quality.  Or teach a French class, and expect someone to know what a library is called because they know the work for book.  I’m not saying that a student should not be able to put 2 and 2 together.  Students should problem solve, but teachers need to allow that to happen, and to give them the framework to build upon (or, conversely not expect the student to come up with the teacher’s “correct answer”.  I have seen a recent trend where teachers hold back information and tell students to figure it out, and that that if they wouldn’t give them any more information it would be “cheating”.  I don’t get that.   

There are other issues at play of course.  Do students rate easy teachers more highly than hard teachers?  There a third factor of fairness at work – hard but fair is okay, but hard and unclear is different?  I have heard that easy teachers are not necessarily ranked better – but in my personal experiences, there does seem to be a correlation between easy = higher ratings.   

On Teaching v1 Why do you want to teach?

As you can see by my use of v1, I have a lot of thoughts about teaching swirling around in my head.  This comes from 2 sides.  First, my goal when I got an MFA was to teach.  I don’t mind getting my hands dirty, but I also wasn’t looking for an entry level, staff position where the best I could hope for was a stagecraft class while I was TD for all of the shows – I want to actively teach (and have a role in curriculum development).  Those positions are not as ready available, and frankly if I ever went back to teaching (which I hope, in some way that I do, eventually) I think my current work will probably help in adding to my effectiveness as a future teacher.  Second, I’m in the midst of a MS degree (middle mostly in that I haven’t applied for graduation yet, and have not completed “thesis” component of the degree.

Probably more so is that yet again, I have encountered what I believe is a fundamentally poor teacher.  Part of this problem is institutional in higher education.  Professors are hired not because they teach well, but, often, since they are “subject matter experts”.  In business especially, many professors do not have doctorates, but are successful people in their line of business.  Secondly, they are often hired based on research (as this can help fund the department).  Neither of these qualities have anything to do with the skill required to be a good teacher.

Granted to get tenure (if you happen to be in a tenure track position) student assessments are taken into consideration.  Historically I have done these at the last class.  At the current institution that I take classes at the assessments are not required to be done by all, and are due a week or so before the quarter electronically.  I don’t always complete them.  I would say that typically I would expect these to come back only in highly positive or highly negative since they are somewhat voluntary, except that I know that I have missed the deadline even when I had strong opinions about a class. Thus the only student metric is not one that is reliable.

It seems to me that many poor teachers seem to want to teach because it is easy to make extra $ (as an adjunct working a full time job).  Or perhaps if they are full time, they perceive the position as having less work required than any other work since it is semester or quarter based.  It seems to be forgotten that developing course content, grading, making sure that students understand core concepts are all part of teaching, much of which happens outside of the actual onsite teaching hours that are required per course.  Granted creating and teaching a course for the first time is probably hard than teaching is subsequently, but you have to keep updated on the subject and you have to keep your content updated.  If you have a staff or faculty position there is often advising and committee work on top of teaching duties.  Further, you need to stay current on industry trends, go to conferences, potentially speak at conferences and such, and so forth.  In short, teaching is not any easier than any other line of work.  How good you are at what you do is directly related to what you put into it.

The issue however, is that I am not sure how much universities really care if the teachers they hire (especially as adjuncts) are good or not.  Part of this is the predatory trend that I think colleges have been headed down (another topic of discussion).  Maybe there are a glut of unqualified individuals.  Maybe there are a lack of positions available in all of the different specialties required, and these are reasons behind adjuncts.  What I know, are that professors who have little investment in teaching are often very poor. 

As a student – I don’t pay any less to have a poor teacher than a good one.  It doesn’t serve employers down the road you expect to hire a graduate if they were taught by poor instructors and didn’t learn what they needed to.  And ultimately this gives the college or university a bad reputation. 

None of the above is rocket science.  While being a professor is a lot of work, to be fair putting together a life as an adjunct is also a lot of work.  The pay is very poor compared to a full time position, you need to string together a variety of courses (taking on a much higher course load) to equal out to the income a full time professor might make (on the low end), and they don’t receive benefits. 

Since it is not easy to be an adjunct, and it isn’t necessarily easy – it comes back to why are they doing, and probably more to why I am writing this) why they are often poor teachers.  Is that they are too busy to do the job successfully?  Are they just looking for an extra boost to their normal full time employment and don’t feel obligated to go above and beyond what they see their duties are (showing up for class and grading?)?

I think the situation is getting progressively worst – in that it seems to be more and more common that a teacher is given 2 courses to teach – one section in person, and one online.  In my personal experience this seems to equate out to the teacher giving a lecture (which online students later have access to via a recorded session) and grading assignments (which are the same) for both groups of students.  In reality this doesn’t work.  What works well in a classroom does not work well online.  Obviously there are differences dependent on class type (discussion versus lecture), but in either case an online class should be taught differently.  Secondly, no one at the university level seem to be giving instructors information on how to teach effectively online (or at least insuring that they know).  For instance – they should speak towards the microphone.  They shouldn’t block the board that they are writing on with their body.  They should repeat student questions. These seem basic to me, but I see countless times that I have issues understanding an instructor because of one of the above reasons.  There is also technology that some professors use that allow you to join their class live (if you want), and / or that that have virtual office hours where they are online in an environment with a  white board where you can draw, message back and form, and even share documents and mark up the document live.  I know that even attending live classes that skill and teaching style varies, so of course it doesn’t online.  But the best teachers, in either location also get that students also have different learning styles.  I guess the bottom line is why colleges and universities are so lax in their regulation of quality teaching (or why it’s not a priority on the first place).

Labor Power and Organization

I read an interesting article today called Labor Power and Organization in the Early U. S. Motion Picture Industry by Michael C. Nielson.  It is located in Film History, Vol 2, No 2.  It generally is more about how theatrical workers created IASTE and that stage mechanics typically either worked on the road or specialized in building the scenery for the combination tours.  Film is a more economical model than live theatre.  I assume that it is mostly true today.  After all million dollar movies still cost 8 bucks (or so) plus concessions at a movie theatre.  Any touring show has a range of price points, but you can barely see a high school play or community theatre production for the price of movie ticket today. 

Another quote from the article stands out to me:

It occurred to us that we could use Bill (Bill Bowers was a prop man that had toured in vaudeville attractions) at the studio to take charge of obtaining all the odds and ends needed to dress the sets.  I think Bill established the principle upon which the props departments function today, namely that a director gets whatever he asks for without argument, no matter how crazy or impossible the request.  …early film craft workers set a tone of “doing the impossible” for the sake of creating whatever illusion the director wanted to produce. 

I also thought it was interesting how the article brought up that the unions were based on industrial lines (film and theatre) versus the trades like carpenters and IBEW.  It’s a conflict that still played out in some projects that I have worked on, and we end up working along beside the trades on some jobs depending on jurisdiction.  

On Being a Linchpin

First, to all Happy New Year.  My hope is to bring you many more posts this year!

I recently read Seth Godin’s book Linchpin Are You Indispensable.  I thought it was an interesting read.  It hit on a lot of items that bother me with today’s society – how people are replaceable, how schooling spits out compliant individuals that have lost their creativity and ability to think and create. When I was young I think there was still this idea that if you worked hard (doing what you were told) that you would be taken care of in return.  That isn’t true.  When I was young I worked at a lot of small theatres, many of which paid poorly. But they also operated almost like a family.  There was a community.  Once I hot larger theatres, and corporate theatre, the factory model became much more apparent. 

Godin claims that most people around us are “bureaucrats, note takes, literalists, manual readers, TGIF laborers, map followers and fearful employees.”  I want to think that I don’t see it in the places I have been in theatre, but I do.  It’s there lurking. Yes, certain individuals create – designers, directors.  Theoretically the rest of us have opportunities, but either we don’t exercise them, or they are minimized by the organization. 

When I left the world of theatre, I went to education then to corporate work.  Every place I went to I thought the grass would be greener in terms of experimentation, testing, and R&D.  What’s the difference between the 20 different ways that I know of to cover foam (foam coat, super 88, muslin cover, sculptor coat, urethane hardcoat, and so forth).  What is cheapest, what is most durable?  What is best for rocks versus trees?  Many there is no right answer.  But if you don’t look at things like this, then how do you discover something innovative, new and different?

I often hear discussions about shop standards.  I don’t necessarily disagree that these should not be developed.  I think sometime that once you have a functioning wheel, and you know how and when it works, then using it in the situations in which it applies should be done.  But that doesn’t mean that you should think about a better wheel.  But that costs money.  And it is easier for your folks to just follow instructions on using the first wheel.

At the same time as reading Seth Godin’s book, I read an article on facebook about suicides rates for kids in the Silicon Valley.  Their parents are rich.  They can afford to give the kids everything to give them a good life – lessons and schooling, and connections to give them a leg up.  But they can’t necessarily get them a job, or make sure that they are successful in the future.  So there is stress, and the kids are literally opting out at an alarming rate.

At this point, for decent paying work, you can’t just show up.  There is no miracle job.  You need to contribute and make a difference. Godin asks you to “be remarkable, be generous, create art, make judgement calls, connect people and ideas”.  I’m not good at doing this all the time, but I would like to.  I think that Godin has a lot of good things to say about stepping up.  I think there are parts where (and perhaps it is my own insecurity) that he indicates that the reader could be the next Steve Jobs, or some other similar famous entrepreneur.  But that’s beside the point. 

I also read an article on Forbes Called “Seth Godin’s Linchpin Theory: Sound advice or Career Suicide”.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikemyatt/2011/11/29/seth-godins-linchpin-theory-sound-advice-or-career-suicide/

It was an interesting comparison.  This article, to me over states the idea that to be a linchpin the entire company pivots around you – and that you are in a position in the company that is not at perhaps the CEO level (since at that point most entrepreneurial businesses often revolve around the creator, at least for a time).  The key, that this article makes that is very important (and very important theatrically) is that organizations need a way to manage knowledge.  When person A creates something, what happens with the knowledge that they have learned?  Without managing that knowledge, and somehow sharing it with others, that individual becomes valuable, but also problematic.  Historically that person doesn’t want to share information because that makes his job less stable.  But sharing that knowledge, is to me, pivotal with moving forward in our industry, as well as many other industries. 

Excel is a typical program to be using as a TD.  I am surrounded by users who have all used it for over a decade.  In the past month – I have had at least 4 moments where I or someone else learned a random things that you can do in excel by watching someone else.  All of us (in my example) thought of ourselves as pretty decent users of the program – but there is always something to learn.

Knowledge management, allowing people to share information, and providing space to experiment and test ideas, techniques, and so forth are critical things that I believe are necessary to cultivate in our world today.

Museum Men

I have been watching a new show on the History Channel called “Museum Men”.  It’s about a small custom fabrication (design/build) shop in Florida that builds (at least primarily) museum exhibits.  In some ways the shop is very much like what I work in, and it is interesting to see how projects play out in their shop. 

On the flip side, the show brings up a number of concerns (which I am sure is true for every industry that is boiled down to a short reality tv series).

                -Their timeline from project initiation to installation is about a month.  At times it seems as though they have a month of fabrication time, either way, this isn’t very realistic or practical.

                -How the content is developed seems a little odd.  Perhaps we just aren’t seeing the nuts and bolts here, but the show goes from a conversation about an element, to going forward full steam.  In fact in an episode about building Chuck Yeager’s Supersonic Jet, they were half way through building the piece when the owner comes in with goods news and bad news.  Good – they client was spending more money, bad – they jet is too large and a new piece needs to be built and installed with only the remaining 2 weeks that had been previously scheduled.  Seems like the client is paying extra to have the jet redone- but this seems like a pretty major detail that should have been worked out on paper before anything was built. 

                -Drawings and research, as well as what is being delivered seems to be at the owner’s discretion.  Once thy wondered if the jet could be installed upside down?  Even if the unit is a design build contract, the client should be signing off on something – including what it will be and look like once it is installed.  It seems like they move forward into construction before they even know all of the details about what they are constructing.

                -Perhaps a few all night work calls still exists in the industry – but showing the tight timelines and then encouraging these work practices doesn’t really help clients understand what we can reasonably accomplish. 

                -And a 1 hour load in is just a little crazy. 

I can only hope that the bigger picture is edited out, but I am left with a connotation that it shouldn’t take more than a month to design, build, and install a major piece of exhibition scenery, which is not really feasible.  Now there are a couple of things to note – they do mention not taking on much additional work – it does seem like they primarily work on one project at a time.  Whether bad or good it is interesting to see some of their processes and get an inside look!

Creative Arts Tampa Bay Times

PM Tools and Time Management

I recently listed to a few webinars online that was about managing projects.  Based on the title, I had expected something very different from the actual content that was given.  The content of the webinar focused on managing time, getting organized, and managing your overall effectiveness.  While the webinar did refer to Pert and Gnatt charts – they used them as a way of seeing your own personal schedule and obligations, not necessarily as a project tool.  I thought that it was an interesting point of view.

I started viewing shows as projects prior to going to grad school and prior to obtaining any professional training in project management.  Projects include many different things – many things that we all do regularly – even planning a vacation could be defined as a project.  I think that when a show is defined as a project it is subtly handled differently than when it isn’t.  Seeing project management tools applied to time management reminds me of how versatile PM tools really are.

Management by Exception

I recently realized that a common management technique that I see every day (and do for better or worse) is called management by exception.  I didn’t really think of it as a style, or even having a name, though I had actually been thinking about it in the last few months because I saw that the technique was causing problems to develop.
Essentially this technique assumes that employees know what and how to do something, and corrections are applied when something blows up or, if being watching more carefully, mistakes are seen.  This makes sense in many ways.  For instance – when building flats, most carpenters I work with know how to build a typical flat & I would not expect to have to teach them this skill (generally, there are of course situations where this would not be the assumption).  If the carpenters are in the middle of building flats and I see an error in construction (perhaps the plywood corner block has the grain going the wrong direction) then I would stop and correct it, and hopefully the carpenter would not make that mistake in the future.  The technique makes sense because it is difficult to know what someone else knows and doesn’t know.  At the same time people don’t always know what they don’t know – which could prevent them from asking question.  The system streamlines a particular workflow, and only stops when there is an observable issue.
Management by Exception is a transitional model of leadership – it is based on tasks and does not really consider needs of the subordinate or personal development – just the job at hand.  It can be done actively – when the manager watches closely for mistakes and then corrects them, or passively, when corrections only occur after a problem has arisen. The issue is that it always a negative transaction – interactions always happen after mistakes have occurred (there is no focus on catching people doing things right).  In my experience, and what made me think about this style before I even realized that it was an actual style, is that when corrective action is applied frequently it creates a situation that is not very positive.  While avoiding the transactional leadership style completely would create the most positive experience – I think that there is still room for management by exception as long as there is focus on catching good behavior not just problems.  

Leadership Development

The class I am currently taking is about different leadership styles.  While I have taken other leadership courses, they usually come from the point of view of a particular style and attempt to develop leadership potential from only that point of view.  This class has been interesting because it talks about the history of leadership and how different theories of leadership have evolved, as well as exposing me to styles that I have not really considered before.  I think that leadership typically calls to mind particular traits – visionary, charismatic, authenticity, for example, and those traits are parts of many theories, there are other theories that are much more behaviorally based, and can be easily learned and used to improve leadership skill.  In particular there are several that I thought were relevant to technical theatre environments.

Leader-Member Exchange Theory.  Have you ever noticed that in some environments there is an in and out group – and that some people are more likely to stay than others, and that the “in” group has more information than they others?  This theory talks about that phenomenon.  I don’t think that this environment is ideal – I think it should be avoided, but understanding what is happening will help you identify what is going on and possibly move into a position where you will receive more information, or would help you break the cycle if you are the leader in this situation.

Path-Goal Theory assumes that subordinates will do a good job and be motivated as long as they believe that they can do a good job (capable of performing their work), and that the reward for doing the work is worthwhile.  The leader here seeks to motivate his/her employees.  This style also emphasis removing obstacles, clarifying goals, and supporting the people doing the work.  I identify with this style of leadership most closely because it is such a close fit to how I see myself and my responsibilities as a project manager.  This theory identifies 4 types of leader behaviors (directive, supportive, participative, and achievement orientated) that can be used based on the task and the subordinates needs to provide proper motivation and support.  Finally, the theories include subordinate characteristics (need for affiliation, structure preference, control, and task ability) that must be considered by the leader when choosing their own leadership behavior.  While somewhat complex, it is a situational approach that focuses on removing obstacles and clearing the way for your staff to do the best work possible.

Contingency Theory attempts to match leaders to specific situations creating a match where they will be most successful.  Obviously this doesn’t work in all situations, but can be used in looking at what approach would work best.  The theory looks at leader-member relationships, the task structure, and the leader’s positional power, as well as the leaders preferred leadership style.  A chart shows what situations the preferred leadership style is most effective in.  The leader’s style is based on an assessment on the LPC scale (least preferred coworker) which separates leaders based on relationship versus task motivations. 

Situational Leadership.  I have encountered this several times before & I find it useful for determining behavior in a situation.  This approach looks at the skill of the followers, and has a chart based on two factors – supportive behaviors and directive behaviors.  This creates four styles: Delegating, Supporting, Coaching, and Directing.  Based on the skill of the employee and the task, a leader can determine which role would be most effective for the situation. This approach assumes that the leader should adapt to the abilities of their subordinates.

I think that I struggle with seeing leadership qualities in average situations.  I tend to associate leadership with great people (Lincoln, Roosevelt etc).  I think that it is very easy to see leadership flaws in people that I interact with, and I needed to take a step back and view these interactions from a grander viewpoint.  Leadership and change are linked – and change is hard, especially organizational change, which I think also minimized leadership accomplishments of those I know.  I also have started to consider that leadership often happens in small moments – not large ones.  For instance, I had a hard time talking about transformational leadership because I viewed it only in terms of large transformations.  Yet I work in an industry that frequently mentors others, and these mentors are exhibiting transformational leadership. 

While most leadership books (at least those that are meant to develop leadership abilities) assume that leadership is a skill that can be developed, many rely on personality and traits, that I fee are more difficult to change.  The approaches above, to me, provide very concrete concepts of ways to increase leadership ability based on context.  In some ways, I think that had I taken this course prior to some of the other classes I have taken; I would probably have viewed them differently.  On the other hand, I don’t think that a single exposure to a thought or concept allows full development of the idea – the more often ideas are thought about and developed, the more concrete and meaningful they become, and the more they become woven into your practice.

Images are from Leadership Theory and Practice by Peter G. Northouse.

Getting Organized in the Google Age

I have been reading “Getting Organized in the Google Age by Douglas Merrill and James Martin. I picked it up because it seemed like the tools for staying informed and organized today is different from what it used to be, and Google is certainly one of the reasons or indicators of that change.
The start of the book talks about how our brains work, what are real constraints are and how to work with those, and the importance of goals. I enjoyed this section because I do think that we often try to uphold systems or an idea of what we should be capable of doing that just doesn't match with how our brains work. Primarily that we can only hold small bits of information in our short term memory, and that information can be challenging to remember. The section on constraints is interesting because he asks you to really consider if the constraints you identify are legitimate and real or imposed. These are important because these will help you chose methods that will work for you, working around your limitations. I think the section of goals is intriguing because I don’t think that organization is often thought of from the perspective of having a goal. The goal is the organization itself. Yet, the purpose of organizing information is so that it can be retrieved later.
This blog for example, exists to share information with others about tools, techniques, and ideas. But I also use it to store thoughts I have, which I think will be of later use, with the assumption that it may help others. And when I am looking for a prop or material that I have encountered here I often search here first. Obviously sometimes a Google search is all you need to do, but often times I want to remember more particulars about an item, or the differences between websites. The down side to this blog is that as it is about 6 years old, some of the links don’t work, and terms that I think of to search under are not what I originally indicated in the title or text, and the keywords have many entries within each one. For example, the other day I needed a 5” radius wood column. I finally found what I was looking for in my blog, but I had called it a cylinder. Had I recognized search difficulties in the beginning, I might have included additional tags in each blog that would later help me find that entry. The last drawback of this blog versus a private forum that does the same is that a private depository of info would not need to have fully formed (or written) ideas. I do posts with links and minimal texts, but there are often ideas I think about while commuting that would really be good to post, but thinking while driving and finding time to write out those thoughts don’t always go together.
The point being that understanding the goals might lead you to a different process – and I think it is a question that we often don’t think about before forging forward with a system.
The book talks a lot about specific technologies and how to use those technologies. Something that is probably out of date now that it is a few years old. However, the basic ideas that he puts for is using “search” to find things, using the cloud for storage, ways to store information in email, and sharing information. He also talks about filtering, getting things out of your head, and contexts.
I will start with filtering, because the author proposed a high level of filtering out information. Since the brain can’t focus on too much at once, the more that you filter out, and don’t really think about in the first place, the less your brain has to work. To do this effectively you need to know what is important and what isn't. We all do this naturally when driving, as an example. If your goals are off, you may inadvertently filter out the wrong information. While I agree with this concept, my concern is that just because you may not want the irrelevant information now, it could be useful later.
This book would propose that you stop using file folders, sorting your email, and so forth and dump everything into a central place and search for the info that you need. Yet he talks a lot about sharing information, which I feel is somewhat incompatible. Where I work we have a very defined system of organizing project related information that allows anyone to go into any job and find particular information. It doesn't matter what the job is, or if it is titled something odd, it should be easy to find. Conversely, on a job where there are literally a 1000 emails, using search to find what you need is helpful.
Using email was also talked about quite extensively as a way to basically keep a private archive that is personal and searchable. Obviously, he talked about Google and tools within Gmail to do this, but most web based email with large amounts of free storage would work. If I wasn't interested in sharing the information I blog about – I could write it up and email it to myself, with key words and categories. I would have a searchable index of technical theatre information. He proposes emailing himself copies of documents, perhaps indicating where the printed version is filed. He can then copy anyone that might also need that particular document. He uses emails as a to do, but he codes them differently. Once the emails are all coded, he can use filters to only see things that he wants to see. I see ways that this works, but doesn't seem any less time consuming than other methods.
Perhaps the benefit of this is “free” cloud storage, though he talks about using drop box and other cloud storage programs that can keep your information readily available on a range of devices. In addition many of these services allow collaboration and document sharing. A good way to share information, but a whole different beast in terms or organization and making sure that people have the information that need to have and understand that info.
Sharing information is obviously very important. Obviously having information on a shared drive makes that easier. On the other hand it is hard to know when new or updated information appears on the drive. In my drop box, a little message pops up, but I only see it if I am sitting at the computer. When dealing with lots of info, it’s unrealistic to get a notification for every change. Yet when info is publicly available some people will assume that you know about the changes because they are available, but this is also unrealistic without some sort of notification.
Getting things out of your head is definitely something that interested me about the book. Not sure that I learned much here. Paper is fast, but how do you find that info later? It’s also unorganized. Redoing notes is time consuming. And perhaps I could use a voice to text app to let me record thoughts on the run. Digital technology is great, as is search, but many of the PDFs of research that I have do not have readable text within the pdf – so it’s all about either folder organization or documents title.
Contexts were particularly interesting to me. We all shift contexts regularly. It did bug me that he actually shifted contexts within the book frequently – particularly with song quotes. But it did emphasize that when you shift contexts you forget parts of the first context to think about the new context.
Ultimately I think he is a little too specific about technology in terms of products instead of product categories, but there is obviously a lot of food for thought within the book.

Misc tips:
Calling yourself to leave notes (like while driving), particularly if you subscribe to a service that transcribes these notes and sends it to your email.
Paper vs computer – sometimes it is easier / faster to get things on paper. He has ideas on when each is better, but I think there are personal choices involved. There are also pluses and minus of each. Obviously what is on paper can be scanned (word recognition preferred) and stored.
Within his reading / scanning, he proposes to read and mark. Star whatever stands out, and keep moving forward. Then come back to what is starred and read it – then sort it into whatever applicable categories that had previously been determined. (Perhaps, a color for something you don’t understand, one for quoting, etc.)
Lastly, I have thought a lot recently that in a 1000 or so years people will look back on today as a dark age. Why? Because they will be unable to read what we write, or see what we do. As people write real letters, publish paper books, and print less photos, there is less of a “permanent” record of what we do. I don’t have the software to open files from my undergraduate work in the early 90’s, I’m sure that will only get much, much worse. Obviously this last bit is just food for thought, but it does make me wonder.

Drywall Finishing Spec's

A couple of the places I have worked in the past refer to scope in terms of the level of production value a certain show is going to be produced at. For instance a season may have 1 or 2 A scope shows (high budget), a couple B scope shows and a C scope show that will round out the season. Sometimes shows are an A for costumes, and a C for scenery. But this system was used as a way of giving the production team an indication of what was expected and what budgets were available for productions.On one hand it certain aid production planning as you can plan out time and resources according to a scope a year or so out without knowing the specific show, and when it comes time to production, it is well known about what is available.

Scope is also frequently talked about within projects. Scope often creeps as a project evolves, and goals shift slightly, slowly, and turn into something that they weren't originally. It is necessary to define scope of any given project because without an agreement of scope, you can't determine success or completion. Then, on top of the easy scope definitions (size, paint treatments, general construction and material notes) it gets even trickier. For instance we use flats to build sets, yet seams can get pretty ugly. While there aren't industry standard for every finish, drywall does have a finishing schedule. While different than what we typically do, it is insightful for calling out the differences. now, the next challenge is for people to understand the cost difference between levels of finish...

What is Project Management

I have been reading Changing the Way We Manage Change bu Ronald R. Sims, and it is is interesting because the author refers to many things that I have not previously related together. He talks alot of high involvement organizations, which I think we often strive to be in theatre, but don't always accomplish. He also talks about Peter Senge's work on creating learning organizations, again something that are important within theatre's but not always fully successful. But the premise of the book is about change. And its about looking at change differently as changing an organization isn't very easy, yet I think most of us can see areas where the places we work could make improvements.

I thought it was interesting that the author looks at project management skills as a basic responsibility of a change agent. He defines project management in a way that I haven't done before, but in which I like:

Above all else, project management is a way of thinking; a process of keeping desired results in focus. Project management involves planning and identifying objectives and activities that produce a desired result. It also includes organizing people to get the job done and directing them by keeping them focused on achieving the results. Project management requires change agents to measure the project team's progress and give them feedback to keep the project moving ahead, constantly monitoring progress toward, and deviation from, the project's goals. This monitoring activity allows change agents to make decisions that redirect the project and provide corrective action to narrow the discrepancy between stakeholder expectations and actual performance.

Arcitecture and the Lost Art of Drawing

The New York Times ran an article called Architecture and the Lost Art of Drawing. out of that article I particularlly liked the following:

For decades I have argued that architectural drawing can be divided into three types, which I call the “referential sketch,” the “preparatory study” and the “definitive drawing.” The definitive drawing, the final and most developed of the three, is almost universally produced on the computer nowadays, and that is appropriate. But what about the other two? What is their value in the creative process? What can they teach us?

The referential sketch serves as a visual diary, a record of an architect’s discovery. It can be as simple as a shorthand notation of a design concept or can describe details of a larger composition. It might not even be a drawing that relates to a building or any time in history. It’s not likely to represent “reality,” but rather to capture an idea.

These sketches are thus inherently fragmentary and selective. When I draw something, I remember it. The drawing is a reminder of the idea that caused me to record it in the first place. That visceral connection, that thought process, cannot be replicated by a computer.

The second type of drawing, the preparatory study, is typically part of a progression of drawings that elaborate a design. Like the referential sketch, it may not reflect a linear process. (I find computer-aided design much more linear.) I personally like to draw on translucent yellow tracing paper, which allows me to layer one drawing on top of another, building on what I’ve drawn before and, again, creating a personal, emotional connection with the work.

I have never really thought about the three different types of drawing before - but it is true that when I first start to look at how something goes together, there is often a series of napkin sketches that puts some preliminary ideas onto paper. I also commonly see people sketch on one drawing about opposing views of construction - or elaborating on others sketches - and I think that these steps are important in the technical design process.

I think that with computers it is occassionally too easy to make something work on paper that really isn't practical to do in real life.

Finally, I thought this was interesting:

As I work with my computer-savvy students and staff today, I notice that something is lost when they draw only on the computer. It is analogous to hearing the words of a novel read aloud, when reading them on paper allows us to daydream a little, to make associations beyond the literal sentences on the page. Similarly, drawing by hand stimulates the imagination and allows us to speculate about ideas, a good sign that we’re truly alive.

It is true that upon reading, I occassionaly (or even often) pause and reflect - or skim a statment over again. Either to make the idea more firm in my mind or to think about the implications. While this is certainly true when reading educataional or informative information, it is also true in fiction. Sometimes its interesting to pause and think about what is next, or what might relate to the story outside of the book. And, while I like to listen to audio books - for convienence, it is harder to replicate that - you have to think more about actually stopping the process to reflect.