PART TWO : The Self-Education of a Free-Spirited, Not-Quite-Novice Filmmaker

For those of you whom have already read PART ONE, the introduction may seem repetitive, but it's to keep everyone on the same page moving forward.

As a only child, I've been an observer of human behavior and interaction all my life. Such a self-imposed role has a way of leading one to believe themselves more knowledgeable than those who live through the scenarios being observed. Debatable, sure, but I believe my continued education cannot contain simply absorbed information; I must also digest the concepts and put it back out into the world. Any of my professors would tell you that I was always very engaged in class discussions, with no shortage of opinions and unsolicited advice. With no classroom currently available to me, however, I've decided to record my thoughts in this blog based on certain recommended TED Talks.

An article in the Business Insider claimed these 10 TED Talks are worth more than an MBA. Seeing as I love listening to TED Talks and desperately want to pursue my graduate degree, I figured what do I have to loose? Also, while the content I'm reflecting on is geared towards those seeking a Masters in Business Administration and I am simply a Filmmaker seeking a Masters... of something... eventually... I fully intend to own and run my own studio during my lifetime, so I figure the free online education should supplement my aspirations nicely.

To keep a homework-like structure, I'll respond to each video as I see them. Please assume that I will be writing as if you, the reader, have already watched the video.

Today, we start with...

4) Srikumar Rao: Plug Into Your Hard-Wired Happiness

Photo courtesy of pkmenon.com

 My first thought while watching this video was: I'm sure I've seen this before. Like I said, I love TED Talks, and some of the first ones helped me to recognize how I could make the leap to go back to school. At the time, I had taken a couple of community college courses, both in subject matters I was passionate about - film and psychology. I did remarkably well, which encouraged me to seek my degree in Colorado (which was a huge leap from Northern Virginia). But to my surprise, and the delight of most, it was exactly what I needed. I discovered, or perhaps rediscovered, my vitality by diving into this process, this "journey", as Mr. Sao puts it. And I wished I could say I was so energized by my current "journey". With my medical issues - Borderline Ovarian Cancer has required three surgeries in the past four years and a round of egg extraction for my husband and I to attempt implantation in the near future - and the financial burden that accompanies them, it's been difficult to say, "I'm happy with the process". I'm quite done with this process, thankyouverymuch, and I'd like to switch to a different path now. It is assuredly one of the reasons I assigned myself this reflection blog task; I had to do something to embrace where I am right now, no matter how many other things suck about it. It's a bit like how the coldest part of the day is right before the sun rises - I know change is on the horizon, but as change approaches, I'm only getting colder.

As it applies to what an MBA might teach you, I think it's meant to keep the typical competitive mindset of business people in check, as that "If, then" logic can degrade one's emotional satisfaction. I wonder if that is why the discussion and evolution of "corporate culture" has become the focus of so many burgeoning companies. 

5) David Marquet: How Great Leaders Serve Others

Photo courtesy of Pinterest.com

Oh, man... this is a great story, but I sincerely wonder how it currently influences the hierarchical workflow for the military. Let me explain. I trained in martial arts intensely for about 6 years, starting before high school when I thought I wanted to be a law enforcement officer, stretching beyond high school when I had begun working as a professional theater technician. Understandably, most of the people I trained with were military or police, due to being raised in the D.C. area. Even my Grand Master was/is/will always be a Marine. On several occasions we'd take class time to discuss concepts surrounding the physical discipline, and often it would reflect the mindset imparted by the military. The lesson that stands out to me as I listened to Marquet's talk was one about how "the shit falls down". That is to say, when something goes wrong, everyone from the position that made the decision and below them will be held responsible. This is why a commanding officer will allow his subordinates to make the decision, so if s/he's wrong, then there would still be someone above them, a higher ranking officer, who can solve the problem and clean up the mess. However, Marquet's assertion is even more radical - let your subordinates make the decisions because it innately invites them to step up their game, encouraging critical thinking instead of compliance. This is revolutionary for the traditional military commander.

Interestingly, I've seen it in action in theatre as well. My high school theatre program was extraordinary, due to, in large part, the standards we were held to by our director. She engaged each department by making them do everything themselves. The set, lighting, and costume designs were all done by the students. We made costumes instead of renting or buying them. We built and painted our own sets, including extended stages, sometimes with multiple levels, which means it had to be weight-bearing. We had so many extras that we filled the stage, and students as the choreographers. We even gave the heads of departments the liberty to solicit the classes for extra advice or labor when the art department or costume department needed help, which fostered collaboration - the relinquishing of power to us was then passed on to others outside the theater, which strengthened our performance through collaboration. We were given responsibility and opportunity as if we were already legal adults, and we not only met the challenge, but exceeded it. The last spring musical we did was Oliver!, where we had all three shows sold-out, which is no small feat for a house that seats 1100 people, and the most common question was, "Who did you hire to be your lead actors?" because they couldn't believe they were students. You see, we knew even then that if we all did our parts to make the production the best it could be, it would improve every other aspect as well. And it did.

But all that changed my senior year when a new director took charge. It was night and day. She could not conceive of high school students doing anything we had already demonstrated that we could do, so she started making rules that revolved around the idea that she knew better. Suddenly, following orders was more important than encouraging leadership in each individual. And you know the worst part? We, the seniors, came back three years later to see the students we knew as freshman, now as seniors for the spring musical. It was pitiful - unfinished sets, basic lighting schemes, poor use of stage areas, and, worst of all, the actors seemed dispassionate. When every single person on stage is not engaged in the façade, then no one in the audience can suspend their disbelief long enough to enjoy the show. The results of poor leadership was obvious, and it was heartbreaking to witness how quickly our beloved theater had unraveled.

My experience in business often reflects this time in theater. The best managers I've ever had were more interested in empowering me by using my strengths rather than discipline my weaknesses in order to have me fit every aspect of the job description. When I was in massage school, I worked at Borders Books. After the first three months, it became obvious that my strength was not shelving but establishing an order of my own. So, my supervisor decided I should help the marketing department with displays, sidelines, and its inventory. I went from what appeared to be a problem child to an integral part of the team, whom they relied upon to know my area. I'm not sure I have a desire to receive an MBA, but I am totally on board with this idea. I've seen it in practice time and again, and I can attest to the benefits of empowering employees.


6) Ramsey Musallam: 3 Rules to Spark Learning

Meme courtesy of thewiredhomeschool.com

Yes, yes, and yes. I was raised by an educator. My mother, even before her Masters in Adult Education, was a great educator and orator. And I can tell you, hands down, the best way to engage a hungry mind is to ask questions and invite them to FIGURE IT OUT. That's not to say they can't have help or ask questions of their own. But encouraging the learning process (bouncing off of what Mr. Rao) and not the outcome, can render unexpected results, sometimes to an amazing degree.
During my philosophy class this past summer, it came up several times that to ask questions is far more powerful than to provide answers. This concept also seems to be geared more towards the philosophical mind, and not the aforementioned "fixed mindset" that became commonplace with the industrialization model of education (refer to the first TED Talk with Ms. Dwerk and the previous BLOG Post where I discuss her ideas). Truth be told, I have such a passion for this mentality that I both want to pursue my Doctorate beyond the Masters degree and then teach on the collegiate level. It is very possible that most students need this kind of engagement early on, but I'm not sure I'm the one who can do it. I feel I'm better suited to adults, young and old.

It's very possible, however, that this advice is also geared towards educators for themselves. That is to say that the process of educating, not just learning, is itself not a static process. It must change and adapt to the students, and therefore educators must embrace their own mess, not just the mess their students bring. This all seems to add up to something that I advocate to everyone everywhere just as often as I can - keep your feedback cycle active. That is to say, don't just open yourself up to learn something and then shut down your ability to listen and respond afterwards. You must be able to listen and respond continuously so that what you do and how you educate is appropriate for each situation. This feedback cycle is necessary in any relationship, including manager/employee, intimate relationships, and teacher/student. As for reflection, well that just makes sense. Once you're done with the process, it's nice to have a summary so you can absorb the lesson and move on to the next one. Yep... I'm all sorts of on board for this one.

7) Linda Cliatt-Wayman: How to Fix a Broken School? Lead Fearlessly, Love Hard

Photo courtesy of Pinterest.com

It's the only one so far for which I had to pull out a tissue. But let's skip straight to my reactions and my thoughts before I pull out another hanky.

First - As someone who often assumes a leadership role, I totally identified with the idea that you must be consistent, no matter how people may or may not like you. "If you're gonna lead, lead." Hell yes. Your role in their lives has little to do with whether or not they like you. Hell, when I went to college the first time, I told my roommate that I didn't know how to share a room because I was an only child, but that it was my intention, regardless of whether or not we could become friends, to at least not become another burden on her, and I asked she do the same for me. It became the best foundation for a friendship I've ever had because it was okay if we messed up or pissed each other off as long as we listened and tried to make it better. A relationship based on respect than on misplaced gestures of "niceness". However, at this moment I find myself weakened from life based on how inconsistent my work has been as a filmmaker. Even now, I have a film that I'd like to continue editing, but I can't bring myself to do it. I can't even move on to my next project because I feel like I've lost the confidence of all of those who helped me on previous films. So, how do I earn someone's respect when I've lost respect for myself? In a way, I wish I had a mentor like her. I could really use someone (other than my husband) who says to me, "In case no one has told you they love you today, know that I do. And I always will." Instead, I find myself continuing to fall into the role of caretaker and counselor, just as I was as a Massage Therapist, and not lunging towards the leadership role I desire and thrive upon when making films. If anyone has any advice on how to purge the caretaker role and breakout into a leadership role (or reclaim my leadership role), please share!
Second - I think it makes me teary because this kind of story exemplifies intense involvement on the part of the leader. This kind of involvement ignites my vitality, but I cannot see a way for me to get involved right now. And I hate waiting... in any case, I cry because I am simultaneously inspired, afraid, and inhibited. I want so much to feel strong again, and I don't, both physically and emotionally. Perhaps that's what being a caretaker for too long does to you - it slowly breaks you until you cannot muster the strength to recover from it. But I will recover... I just hate waiting.

As for business administration, I think this is a call to arms for managers and leaders. This talk puts into stark light that you cannot assume a leadership role when you do not believe in what you do or who you do it for. You must believe in it, you must believe in your ability to affect the situation, and you must be willing to fail, so that you may be willing to try. You must be willing to get your hands dirty and be an example to those who might follow you, remembering that every moment is a teachable moment. What she is describing is a role model. I was one once, and I strive to be one again.

Well, this is the end of PART TWO. With 10 TED Talks to watch, I'd like to pace myself, and you, dear readers, with all of this lovely reflection. But let me finish with these questions for you:
1) What was your reaction to these videos?
2) Could you identify with the concepts? Why or why not?
3) How is this relevant to Business Administration or Entrepreneurship?
Leave your comments below! As Liz Gilbert would say, "Let's keep the conversation going!"

Cheers,
*~K~*

A Fan's Tribute to Robin Williams: Find Your Light and Share It

I'm writing this evening in loving memory of Robin Williams. Of course, it's not as if I knew him personally. I never shook his hand. He never sat next to me at a diner booth and discussed world politics. No hugs or gestures of appreciation were ever exchanged.

Yet he touched me. His presence in this world has touched me so entirely that I can't stop weeping every time I see another tribute video. His daughter's letter, fellow actors and comedians posting their condolences, even a poignant quote from one of his many inspirational films just brings those big, puffy-eyed tears crashing down.

Well, here's my tribute. You suck, Robin. All your life, you've given to others. Your heart and soul laid bare in your work, your words, and your hidden moments of charitable kindness. But as your twilight years crept up on you, knowing soon it would mean that others would have to give back to you, you wouldn't allow it. Couldn't you give the world a chance to redeem itself? But for all your well-meaning, sir, I understand. I just wish I could have given even an ounce of that back to you.

I understand your dedication for helping others, even if all you can do is cheer them up. I understand your compassion for the underdog, and your passion for wisdom. Ultimately, it's possible I even understand your depression. I think it comes down to a very simple intention: pay it forward.

There are many demons of varying degrees in my family's past. Among them is alcoholism, thyroid disease, bipolar disorder, and depression. Yet, so many who have met a Walker Woman would say she "lights up a room whenever she walks in". This light is beyond enthusiasm or optimism; it's unabashed happiness, and it penetrates all armor. It's an inner glow unlike any other, and I instantly saw it in Mr. Williams. When I first saw him as part of his stand-up routine A Night at the Met, I knew then how he must suffer. We all see how he shines; how can you not? If ever there was an appropriate application of the term "whizz-popper", it would be proudly bestowed upon the crown of the late Robin Williams. But the nature of life is 'balance in all things'. Someone who knows and shares such abundant light must also know equal depths of darkness. Only the closest to him would see his darkness, of course, as the Walker Women know all too well. But we know no other way to suffer. We cannot suffer in silence. We must shine, and the consequence is unthinkable darkness.

Each of us suffers in this life, and Robin sought to ease that suffering in others. In the end, I think he didn't want help because he wanted our efforts to be redirected. Just as he shared his light with the world, so should we. Everyone has that light inside of them, by the way. It's the light that shines when your defenses are down, and you approach the world without fear of judgment or ridicule. You walk through the world with a sincere belief that you can make the world a little brighter; and it's contagious.

So, when you're done mourning, as I'm seven ten tissues on my way to doing, find your light. Breathe in that light, walk boldly up to a gloomy face, and make their day. Talk to a family member just to let them know you miss them. Even if you don't miss them now, you will miss the opportunity to tell them when they are gone. Visit a nursing home just to listen to stories long forgotten. Touch their hands and remember what it's like to risk embarrassment for the sake of someone's delight. Volunteer at a hospital, or, if you're really keen on feeling the love of Robin's legacy, volunteer at a homeless shelter. I'd suggest more drastic measures, but this isn't meant to be a social or political call-to-arms.

Or is it...

Yes, a social call-to-arms. For us to connect with compassion and laughter again. For us to include the aging in our young, turbulent lives. Most importantly, for us to live with integrity and compassion. Don't be afraid of caring too much! Don't be afraid of your light going to dark! Be afraid that your muted glow will never touch another.

And don't be afraid of crying. I'm sure Robin wasn't. I'm quite sure he knew all about crying. It's why he preferred to laugh. After all, doesn't laughter make crying worth it?


As a personal note to the late Mr. Williams - you don't really suck. I'm sorry I said that. And I'm sorry I never got to see What Dreams May Come (though, I laughed so hard in the theater when I saw Death to Smoochy that I swear my mother moved seats so no one would know we were related). I knew I was going to cry like a baby, so I've just been avoiding it for years. I think it's time to see it now.

Reflection Paper: Is Film Art?

*This is reposted from one of my older BLOGs. Also, adult language is included, please be aware.

I had to write this for my Film Theory class, and enjoyed it so much, I thought I'd share it with you, readers!

Please know that it is four pages, double spaced, so it will take a little while to get through. But I'll put some pictures in to break it up. Also, please note that I cut my comparison between the experience of theater for an audience versus the experience of film to shorten the page count, but I could easily go on. And may later on... Hope you enjoy!

Initially, when I began fleshing out my opinions of art as they apply to the cinema, I was reminded of a pivotal time in my theater career when funding for the “arts” was being cut from public schools. It was junior year of high school (approximately 1997), and I had just begun to tackle community theater as well as our rigorous high school productions. Luckily, I had time for both because we were able to do work on our productions during theater class time. We were asked to write letters, petitioning to the state to not eliminate classes for the arts. If work could only be done after school, we’d either loose valuable sleep or do a subpar job. It’s amazing how hard teenagers will fight to be able to slave over something they feel passionately about.

The above is a definitive high school theater mentality, especially during "hell week".

Later as a young adult, I explained this plight to a friend, who promptly responded that taxpayers shouldn’t be supporting attention-starved teenagers who just end up getting “real” jobs anyway. As the daughter of a professional actor and an educator, who thrive on public speaking and presentation, I was appalled. Is this how the layman sees the arts? A waste of money?

As a result, I began to philosophize about the function of science in society versus the function of art, and yes, I did so long before this class. This may sound very high-brow, but the truth is, I was looking for a simple answer that reflected my own experience in theater; functional and inspirational.

Here’s what I came up with: “Science is the fine art of answering questions. Art is the science of questioning.” If we don’t allow ourselves to question, then there is no room to grow, or invent, or discover. I always like using the example of the original Star Trek series. Long-range personal communicators had never been seen before Star Trek, and in the 60’s, it sparked the question – can we make those? How would we use them? Who would use them? Decades later, cell phones are almost mandatory, and those questions, from the creativity of a science fiction television show, are now answered.

As if you didn't pretend your first flip-out phone was a Star Trek communicator. Please.

If that was not evidence enough for my skeptical friend, then I’d like to add that Gene Rodenberry, who created Star Trek, served in World War II and was a police officer for the LAPD for years before Star Trek ever aired. It is more likely, in fact, that “normal” people just have something to say, and find a way to express it.

*There is a great quote from a recent film "Anonymous" (2011), when Ben Johnson meets Oxford for the first time and Oxford explains that all art (and writing) is political because all artists have something to say. You'll have to watch the movie to see/hear the quote.

But I think that very simple definition of art also simply explains the purpose of art in society – to make us question. Through art, we are made to question ourselves, our perceptions, our morals, and our priorities. So, while it is arguable that Star Trek might not be the most cinematic or “beautiful” expression of a possible future, it certainly did implore its audience to think and to question.

            But perhaps these “questions” seem more relative to the “fine arts”: sculpture, painting, literature, each seemingly only evoking higher ideals. Or so we assume. Isn’t film made for the entertainment of the same layman who thought it was a waste of money to train the youth who would become filmmakers? O, so ironic.

*By the by, this same jackass tried friending me on Facebook recently. Some people, I tell ya...

            There should be a distinction made, however, between the artistic ability to present something – a scene, a person, an ideal – and the fully expressed art form that is film. I believe the balancing factor between the artistic execution and the art form is entertainment. Entertainment, from the artist’s viewpoint, means that the “art” was created with the audience in mind. Entertainment, from the audience’s viewpoint, means that the “art” is an original presentation of old information; a sort of comfort zone where the audience can enjoy the technical skill (which is part of the definition of “art”) without the highbrow concepts interfering with its “entertainment value”. If a film is to become a form of art (not just expressed artistically), then it must allow the artist’s intentions to out-weight the artist’s need to “entertain”.

This film was discussed in class because it is extremely artsy, but does it loose its entertainment value because there is not enough story for the audience to relate to? I say no.

            This is very similar to the balance between art and science I theorized about earlier. It is not a black and white distinction, but rather – entertaining films can be artistic and art films can have commercial value.

            However, it could also be stipulated that because film synthesizes so many aspects of the other arts, that if one aspect is employed that audiences enjoy, the whole will, thus, be entertaining. For example, someone may say they don’t like foreign films, but they love dance in film, so a film about Russian ballet would still be “entertaining” for them. Also, by virtue of the fact that film can do some things other arts do and also employ techniques that other arts cannot, the “art” of film is unique, and thus, entertaining. The same ability to become immersed into a fictional world in theater because of sets, costumes, and acting is amplified with locations and the ability to come closer to actors in film.

My boyfriend was inspired to read the Lord of the Ring series after obsessing over the movies, but even with the details of the books, he prefers the vision and the excitement of the films.

As I have a strong theater background, I would argue that theater is unparalleled with its ability to express fictional, narrative stories. But, perhaps that is because when deciding how to present theatrical productions, a director must remember that the audience is an interactive part of the performance. With film, a baby crying, or a lady laughing a little too long does not interrupt a director's vision. With theater’s single, stationary audience perspective, the “artist” must engage the audience in creative ways so that they continue to “suspend reality”. It could be said that film requires the audience to suspend reality moreso than theater, because we do not see forty-foot faces in reality. But emotionally, film duplicates a human experience more accurately. In theater, instead of a close-up, we’d make the stage dark and put a spotlight on the single actor, but we still have to relate to the actor at a distance. Not realistic. But regardless of the criticism of film as an art form, whether it be more entertaining or more artistic, if it evokes emotion, then it is effective.

The film, while entertaining, does not do justice to the energy and performance the stage can provide. Of course, theater enthusiasts still enjoyed the film ;-)

Interestingly enough, as much as film has become the most recent art form, a friend of mine did her senior thesis at University of Texas in Austin about how comic books will become the new modern art form because they read like storyboards of a film. And as we know from class – the human mind has a way of “filling in the gaps”. People can now read films through comic books. Talk about irony.