text:
« Biocontrol of Asian fruit fly, Drosophila suzukii.
Silencing horizontally transferred genes for the control of the whitefly Bemisia tabaci »
Missouri USA: Scouting for spotted lanternfly in grapes
March 23, 2022 by IAPPS
Missouri ag department scouts for emerging grape pest
Lana2011/Getty Images; Lawrence Barringer, Bugwood.org
WINE INDUSTRY CONCERN: Missouri's grape growers should be on the watch for the spotted lanternfly, which was detected in a neighboring state last year. It can decimate vineyards. The Missouri Department of Agriculture continues to scout for this invasive insect.
With spotted lanternfly found in the heartland, state officials are ramping up reporting efforts to protect wine industry.
Mindy Ward | Mar 23, 2022
SUGGESTED EVENT
Aug 30, 2022 to Sep 01, 2022
At the end of 2021, a Kansas 4-H member turned in his bug collection project. There, pinned to the Styrofoam board, was an invasive insect only thought to be along the East Coast — the spotted lanternfly.
The young man found the spotted lanternfly — a unique spotted bug that feeds on grapevines and fruit trees — in his backyard. First detected in Pennsylvania in 2014, it sucks out the nutrients in the plants causing them to die.
https://8918c177c2874a52fd263ab3b2696e5e.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-38/html/container.html
"They did not find any large population of spotted lanternfly in Kansas, but that doesn't mean it's not there," says entomologist Kevin Rice with University of Missouri Extension. "You're looking for a needle in a haystack really."
But he adds it is pest everyone needs to look for to protect the state's wine industry.
Missouri is home to more than 1,700 acres of grapes, with more than 400 vineyards. There are 127 wineries producing more than 937,850 gallons of wine. This industry alone adds $3.2 billion to the state's economy. According to Missouri Partnership data, the state welcomes 875,000 wine-related tourists each year, resulting in 1.16 million gallons of wine sold annually.
"We're very concerned for our vineyards, and those that might have grapevines in their backyard as hobby crops," says Sarah Phipps, Missouri Department of Agriculture plant protection specialist. She recently sat in on a Spotted Lanternfly Summit hosted by the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture and heard from an affected vineyard owner.
A grape grower's experience
Phipps says the owner had two vineyards, one at ground zero, about 2 miles away from where they found the initial infestation of spotted lanternfly in Pennsylvania in 2014. By 2017, his vineyard was overrun by the insect. "His vineyard was unfortunately gone," she says.
Once this invasive insect appears in a vineyard, it is difficult and costly to eradicate. The same vineyard owner had a second location where spotted lanternfly showed up in 2017. Two years later, it too required chemical control options.
Fortunately, Phipps says research over the last seven years provides some management options; however, they are expensive.
In 2016, growers reported using 4.2 pesticide applications to rid vineyards of spotted lanternfly, but by 2018, it had increased to 14 pesticide applications just to keep the insect in check. "So that was a $54.63-an-acre cost in 2016 to a $147.85-an-acre in 2018. That's a pretty significant increase of dollars spent," Phipps adds.
Worse, patrons at wineries in the impacted states had to deal with the fly. The insect was on tables, in wine glasses and individuals' hair. Many owners reported placing fly swatters at tables to help kill the spotted lanternfly. The impact to the wine industry's tourism is also a concern.
Stories like these strengthen Phipps and the Missouri Department of Agriculture's drive to protect the wine industry by taking a proactive approach to this pest.
Scouting for spotted lanternfly
"We have surveyed a little over 30 counties," Phipps says. "We have surveyors located across the state and have asked them to take some time and survey tree of heaven to see if there is any spotted lanternfly on those plants."
Eric R. Day, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Bugwood.org
The spotted lanternfly feeds on tree of heaven, which can be found on Missouri's roadways and railroad tracks. It also has been known to appear in urban settings around commercial buildings, which is concerning since the female can lay eggs on metal making it easy to transport across the state.
According to Phipps, the tree of heaven is a food source for the spotted lanternfly. This invasive tree species can be found growing alongside roadways, railroad tracks or industrial buildings. Phipps also warns that the spotted lanternfly females lay their eggs on rail cars and trucks, increasing the potential for the insect to spread rapidly throughout the entire U.S. Already in Pennsylvania, trucks must be inspected and certified that they are not carrying spotted lanternfly.
The Missouri Department of Agriculture is working with USDA surveyors to combine data sets to create a yearly account for the movement, if any, of the insect. The state is also looking for any individual, landowner or farmer to help in identifying and reporting spotted lanternfly.
Identifying the enemy
The spotted lanternfly is an invasive planthopper, similar to a large aphid, with a straw-like mouth that sucks the sap out of plants. The adult is about 1 inch long and a half-inch wide with its wings expanded.
It resembles a moth but has distinct markings. The forewing is gray with black spots, and the wing tips are reticulated black blocks outlined in gray, according to Rice. The back wings have distinct patches of red and black with a white band.
The legs and head are black; the abdomen is yellow with broad black bands. The insects during their immature stages are black with white spots, and develop red patches as they grow.
"We don't have a whole lot of native insects that really look like this," Rice says. "So if you see this, we ask that you call the Department of Ag and report it."
Rice stresses that spotted lanternfly is not creating economic damage in field crops now; however, Pennsylvania reported it in soybean fields in 2017. "It's not going to affect corn or soybeans, but it does have such an impact on the vineyards that we want to report it," Rice says. "So if you see it, we ask that you call the Missouri Department of Agriculture and report it."
Rice says it is important to eradicate a small population rather than let it go unchecked and grow into a larger problem for the state's ag industry.
Posted in Emerging/invasive pests, Insects, Monitoring | Leave a Comment


about the idea of purchasing an adapter for a Canon body. If your source is correct then this might be the time to consider a Nikon body and then pick up the 14-24 for those occasional very wide angle landscapes.
Thanks much for posting this information ... well, I should say "rumored" information.


I built a drag racing Christmas tree using 4 led touch sensors. I want to play a note each time the light changes, but I can't get the VEX IQ to play a single note. Instead the note repeats 9 times. Honestly I don't fully understand the code to create the note. Please help!
Here is the full program. I don't have the sound playing after each light change yet. It just plays at the beginning.
When you say that the note repeats nine times, do you mean nine times per warningsound() call, or nine times per program execution?
Thanks for the reply. The note repeats 9 times each time the right down button is pushed. Increasing or decreasing the time argument in the playNote function just speeds up or slows down the repeating note. The sample code doesn't show it, but the goal is to play a short note each time an LED lights up.
That's strange. Have you tried using a different function to play the note? Maybe if you try playTone(frequency, duration), then it would work. I believe that Note E3 is frequency 165.


text:
Radio Stuff
Slotkin Letter
Reviews: Henry IV Part I (or Hotspur) and Part II (or Falstaff)
by Lynn on July 14, 2019
in The Passionate Playgoer
At Shakespeare's Globe Theatre, London, England.
Written by William Shakespeare
Directed by Sarah Bedi and Federay Holmes
Designed by Jessica Worrall
Composed by Tayo Akinbode
Cast: Sarah Amankwah
Philip Arditti
Nina Bowers
Jonathan Broadbent
Leaphia Darko
Steffan Donnelly
Colin Hurley
John Leader
Sophie Russell
Helen Schlesinger
Michelle Terry
Toy Theatre. Theatre for people who don't go to the theatre. Shakespeare for people who don't go to Shakespeare's plays.
The Stories. Henry IV Part I or Hotspur concerns the wayward Prince Hal, his wily, opportunist friend Falstaff, Hotspur and the politics of the court. Henry IV, Part II or Falstaff concerns Falstaff and his opportunistic goings on, trying to curry favour with Prince Hal and when Hal becomes Henry V all bets are off. The wayward prince becomes a thoughtful, smart-thinking king cutting off his former drinking buddy, Falstaff. The reason for the two subtitles of or Hotspur and or Falstaff is to focus on who the play is really about. I'm knitting my eyebrows here, but never mind.
The Productions. Sarah Bedi and Federay Holmes direct these two Henrys. The productions are big, boisterous and play almost always to the audience, most often to the groundlings. Those close to the stage or with their arms folded on the stage are very involved. Lines are directed to specific people in the crowd. There is little character development and certainly no depth of investigation in the text.
Often characters are on either end of the wide stage bellowing at each other, I guess to give a sense that the space is being used. The acting is uneven and that's being polite. Michelle Terry is a swaggering, forceful Hotspur (in Henry IV Part One) but strangely her voice is a monotone of gushing dialogue. I have seen her much better elsewhere and I don't mean Shakespeare's Globe.
Helen Schlesinger as Falstaff has a field day in Henry IV Part I and II. Schlesinger is by far the best actor in this ensemble. She knows how to speak the language and has a voice that is full of colour, nuance and shading. As a slim woman in a fattish costume she scurries all over the stage. And she knows how to play the audience like a pro, especially the groundlings. Over the two parts she takes a can of pop or beer from one person close to the stage and takes a swig and gives back the can. She goes to the other end of the stage and takes a glass of beer from another patron and takes a swig of that. She tries the cans of several young people leaning on the stage, and finds the cans empty. She says as an aside, "the youth of today….." A man in the groundlings took pity on her and poured her a glass of wine and gave it to her. She downed it in one. She goes to another groundling and takes the long can out of her hands and reads what's on it and says: "What on earth?!" and gives it back (huge laugh). She high-fives several people close to the stage.
I am grateful for her presence but then she does something that makes me groan, cover my eyes and lower my head in despair. She climbs down a ladder from the second level of the stage to the stage singing: "Alexander Hamilton. My name is Alexander Hamilton." Sigh. I'm thinking, "Oh please, you have to be better than that." And the interesting thing is that no one in the audience laughs or titters or gives any indication they know this is a reference to the mega-hit Hamilton. Of course in Shakespeare's Globe this is a 'theatre' for people who don't go to the theatre, so how would they know or care about Hamilton?
Finally, finally, I know I cannot come back to this place. I can't do that to myself anymore and be angry at seeing such shoddy work of such a brilliant playwright.
Comment. The actors are listed in a clump under 'Actors' in the program not according to the character(s) they play. Not helpful. Only in the actors' biographies do we see the characters they play. One excuse from a person selling the programmes is that actors play many characters across the plays and might take up too much room. Really? Those characters are listed in their biographies. Is it part of this 'ensemble' sensibility, that there are no stars here, that they all bow together? What does that have to do with the audience's need to know who is playing whom, as it's done in every other theatre in the free world? Maddening.
I have been going to Shakespeare's Globe every year but one since it re-opened in 1997. I usually see two or three productions there. I did the proper thing in the beginning, standing in the Yard as a groundling. The first production I saw there was Henry V with Mark Rylance as Henry. It was thrilling.
I looked up at the people sitting in the seats on the first level and saw a man who could not possibly have been there. I saw Sam Wanamaker. He rested his chin in his cupped hand, the elbow was on the railing and he was smiling broadly. It could not have been him—the savior, the force, behind the creation of the place, because Sam Wanamaker died 18 months before Shakespeare's Globe opened. But there he was, same face, same white hair, and same smile. I wrote to Zoë Wanamaker, his daughter and said I saw her father's ghost. She wrote back. It was her uncle, her father's twin brother. Spooky, but still moving.
Mark Rylance was the first artistic director of the re-opened Shakespeare's Globe Theatre, acting in many of the productions in his quirky, odd way, playing way up to the top balcony and the groundlings in equal measure. The productions always ended in a dance (a tradition that has carried on) and the joy on his face was wonderful. People flocked and packed the place out for his 10 year tenure, setting that popular attendance for most performances.
He had productions acted by an all-male cast with men playing the women's parts. Memorable was the all-male version of Twelfth Night, as it was suggested might have been done in Shakespeare's day. It looked beautiful. (It was directed by Tim Carroll, now the artistic director of The Shaw Festival.) Rylance played Olivia in a black gown, curly auburn wig and ruff like Queen Elizabeth I. He was mesmerizing and the star of the show. But as my learned friend Robert Cushman wisely said, "But Lynn, you know that Olivia isn't the star of the show?" So true. But when Rylance is in a show, no matter the part, he becomes the star. Hmmmm. And of course having a 45 year old man play a woman in a Shakespeare play has nothing to do with how it was in Shakespeare's day because teenage boys played the women's parts. Teenage boys. Tim Carroll talked of "Original Practices" as they were in Shakespeare's day—candle light, lights on for most productions (at night), men playing the women's parts. He added that we actually didn't know how productions were in Shakespeare's day and he could be making it up. Hmmm.
Rylance hired young actors out of drama school. The direction varied in quality as did the quality of the productions. Interestingly the costumes were exquisite and made with meticulous care as they might have been done in Shakespeare's day. The music was wonderful. There was/is a person in charge of text. Why then were the productions so lacking in attention to good acting and direction?
The next Artistic Director was Dominic Dromgoole who was a better artistic director than he was a director. He hired better actors and directors. The productions were an improvement but nothing that knocked my socks off.
Then came the brilliant Emma Rice, the iconoclastic director with a vivid imagination to head the place. She directed two stunning productions I saw during her tenure: Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night's Dream, that were beautifully acted (Meow Meow played Titania and Zubin Varla played Oberon) smartly realized, thoughtful, cheeky, inventive and eye-popping. Glorious theatre. But she had the audacity to want there to be a different lighting plot for every production. The powers that be wanted the place to be pure, that there be the same simple lighting plot for all productions as they said it was in Shakespeare's day. Really? Huh? Middle-aged men playing women was ok, but varying the lighting plots was not. So they fired her shortly into her contract. Disgraceful.
Then last year came Michelle Terry as the present Artistic Director. She has acted at the Globe and elsewhere. She has always been a memorable actress when I saw her at the National so choosing her was interesting. She is not a director but she is an actress with an affinity for Shakespeare.
In her first year she created a repertory company of actors including herself (and Schlesinger) that would be separate from the regular company. They did a few productions (Hamlet and As You Like It) in which the men played the women's parts (for the most part) and the women played the women's parts. 'Why?' is a question I will always ask regarding this silly decision—silly because for the most part, the acting was dreadful. A six foot tall actor played Rosalind and screamed everything. Orlando was played by a five foot tall woman who had no clue about the character. There was also an actress who was hearing impaired who either could read lips or not depending on who was talking to her and who signed to others who might sign back. There was supposed to be a screen that indicated her dialogue that did not show all of her speeches. Ridiculous. What is to be gained by this gender bending just for the cheeky sake of it? And this year we have Henry IV Part I and Part II.
Much has been written in the programmes of the rehearsal process of this ensemble. They have been working for ten weeks on the plays, doing games and exercises in the rehearsal hall, a place that is sacred for exploration, discovery and delving deeply. But when I read stuff like this from an actor who plays various small roles, I knit my eyebrows: "It's like a laboratory for the text—we do textual exercises in the rehearsal room without necessarily making massive decisions about the scenes or the set. That's one of the main principles of the process."
Another actor is quoted as saying: "I suppose the overriding idea is that of discovering and starting with nothing: with conventional theories you start with an idea of where and how you're setting it with a particular vision and direction, but we started with nothing. The only thing we knew was that we were going to put on these plays and discover them all together as a whole group." The general feeling reading this stuff is something like "touchy-feely-fuzzy-drivel."
The result from this audience member is relentless bellowing, barely scratching the surface of the characterizations and little sense of the plays.
Over the years I have gone to the Globe out of duty it seems to me. I realize that many people (actors etc.) talk about how seeing theatre there changed their lives about Shakespeare, the theatre etc. Not me. I can't recall any other theatre anywhere where for performance after performance I've never seen another actor in the audience. Never. I have spoken to too many actors who say they have never gone there and never will. It's the lack of quality they resent. And perhaps expecting quality is the problem. It's the experience that seems to be the thing.
One doesn't go to Shakespeare's Globe Theatre to see Shakespeare done properly or done well. It's not one of the world's great theatres, or one of London's great theatres. Rather, Shakespeare's Globe Theatre is a tourist attraction like Madame Tussaud's or the National Gallery that you 'tick' to prove that you 'did London.'
Shakespeare's Globe is a place that fools people into thinking that they are seeing theatre as it would have been done in Shakespeare's day. Yes, fooling. The acting in Shakespeare's day would have been good enough to hold the attention of the rabble in the Yard (the groundlings). In that rabbling would be people selling all manner of goods including themselves. The sword-play on stage would have to be masterful to convince the experts in such activity in the spiffy, 'rich" seats.
Now we get often barely adequate actors barking, bellowing and screaming their lines to give the impression they want to be audible to the audience, rather than making the audience listen to them. After all they do have an attentive audiences now who are silent as they listen.
But I can't do this anymore. I've had enough. After considering all the productions I've seen here I can count on one hand the number of memorable productions that thrilled me. That's not good enough. The rest are either forgettable or annoyingly dreary.
I won't miss the uncomfortable seats (even when one rents a cushion). I won't miss broiling in the sun, even in the seated second row. And definitely I won't miss the toy theatre, the disappointing productions and the lack of detail in realizing the plays, the depressing lack of acting and directing ability.
Shakespeare's Globe Theatre presents:
Began: May 11, 2019.
Closes: Oct. 11, 2019.
Running times: about 2 hours, 30 minutes each.
www.shakespearesglobe.com
Review: BITTER WHEAT (London, England)
by Lynn on July 8, 2019
At the Garrick Theatre, London, Eng.
Written and directed by David Mamet
Designed by Christopher Oram
Lighting by Neil Austin
Cast: Alexander Arnold
Teddy Kempner
Ionna Kimbook
Doon Mackichan
Matthew Pidgeon
Zephryn Taitte
Dreadful and irrelevant.
The Story. A day in the life of Barney Fein– a hot-shot Hollywood film producer. He begins by chewing out a writer for writing a terrible script and then refuses to pay him the agreed upon fee of $200,000 because the work is terrible. Then he spends a lot of time trying to coerce an actress, Yung Kim Li, to his hotel room so he can have his sexual way with her. She has submitted a screenplay to him to produce but he will do it only if she has sex with him. He says he can make her a star in exchange for the sex stuff.
Much of the play is Fein trying to deal with all manner of complications: his mother is sick and doesn't like him; he thinks people don't like him because he's fat and he can't help it because it's glandular; his film business is a money-laundering enterprise with money from countries and other sources investing in his films to cleanse their dirty money; the actress is charging him with sexual assault; and his mother dies, breaks up the company and leaves him nothing.
I've given away all the spoilers because I need to show how ridiculous the play is and besides you are not going to see it.
The Production. We are in Barney Fein's office. Christopher Oram has created a stylish, modern office of big leather chairs, a desk with little on it, and no sign of any awards even though the script says there is a wall somewhere that has plaques and citations etc. Part of the office is a sunken sitting area you get down to by two steps.
Barney (John Malkovich) sits in one of the big leather chairs. He wears a black fat suit, that is to say, a black suit and white shirt that is obviously a fat suit to add lots of poundage to the slim Malkovich. He is talking to a meek man standing two steps up, clutching his shoulder satchel. The man is The Writer (Matthew Pidgeon, Mamet's brother-in-law) and is being pilloried with invective about the screenplay he has written for Barney and which Barney calls 'a piece of shit.' Malkovich is in his element here. Mamet's bristling words pour out in an almost stream of consciousness gush, delivered in Malkovich's colourless whine of a voice with little inflection. It's as if Barney is always talking explaining a scheme or coming up with another thought that just occurred to him, be it a string of insults, or a wild idea for a film, or another scheme to get a woman up to his room to take advantage of her.
Malkovich's arms flip out and his hands flutter in the direction of the person being 'talked to' as if to get their attention. How could one not be paying attention to such a torrent of invective? In any case this hand fluttering is a trait of Malkovich's acting. He does it to every character he talks to. He did it almost 30 years ago when I saw him in London in Burn This—arms jut out, hands flutter, flutter, flutter.
The Writer meekly says that Barney owes him $200,000 for the work and Barney counters that he would be paid when the work was acceptable. The Writer says he will sue and Barney says he will have him tied up in court for 15 years.
Barney says he knows shit when he sees it and quality when he sees it. Why? Because his ability to see quality has afforded him the ability to buy five houses. Barney's success is equated with money. As an afterthought he has a wall of citations and plaques, and presumably all sorts of other awards for his films that prove he knows quality when he sees it. The Writer slinks off defeated.
The Writer is just one in a group of surrounding characters who seem lifeless hangers on in Barney's world. David Mamet directs Matthew Pigeon as The Writer (he isn't important enough to have a name) to stand there stalk still, a terrified target, and to give his lines in a droning whimper Because other characters (Doctor Wald who gives Barney his various medications for sexual performance, Roberto, some kind of assistant and Charles Arthur Brown who has a script in which Barney is interested) speak in the same dispassionate way, I know that Mamet is directing them precisely in how to give the line readings.
After Barney dispatches The Writer he goes into overdrive with Yung Kim Li (a demur Ioanna Kimbook) in trying to get her into bed, or at least a compromising sexual situation. She has a script and he has indicated to her he wants to produce it. He says he will make her a star. She is a Korean-British actress (writer) and will star in the film. All she has to do is give him sexual favours. After a 'delicate' cat and mouse game of getting Yung Kim Li up to his room, and his assistant and other hangers on conveniently leave, she is trapped. We don't see him sexually assaulting her. We hear about it after he has been released from jail.
When Barney does have Yung Kim Li where he wants her—in his hotel room—Mamet's direction is rather gripping. She wants to escape. We want her to escape. How will it end?
There is also a comment that one of his investors will give him money to produce the film if Barney can get Yung Kim Li to sleep with him. (Shall I pause now for us to go off to our respective homes to take a shower?)
Keeping Barney on schedule is Sondra (Doon Mackichan) his personal assistant. Ms Mackichan is dressed in black, is accommodating without fanfare and knows everything about Barney's shady doings and his despicable behaviour without comment or conscience. She is an enabler as are the others. Her dialogue is given in an even, uninflected voice without reaction. Perhaps the only indication that she has any 'attitude' about Barney's behaviour is the frequent looks/stares she gives him with the subtlest of pauses when he makes a despicable comment about something.
In the end when Barney is left with nothing, not even his company (it was his mother's and she died during the play and left it to others), Sondra announces that she is going home. There isn't a company anymore and so she is leaving to go home. She doesn't have any other comment. Her leaving to fend for herself is all that is needed.
I'm always intrigued when a slim actor wears a fat suit to portray a character. How then does that actor act? Do they act like a fat person would or do they act like a slim person in a fat suit? A fat person doesn't move very often I've observed because it's too tiring. Yet there is Malkovich flitting around the large set, up and down the stairs of the sunken sitting room; getting in and out of the chairs with effort, even sitting on the steps leading down to the sunken seating area, which left me wide—eyed with disbelief because in a thousand years a large character would not be able to get down or up with any kind of ease. But of course this effort of Barney rocking back and forth on the ground to give him momentum to get up, is supposed to be funny. Sigh. I saw it done much better and with more humour at my Stratford Festival with Geraint Wyn Davies as Falstaff in The Merry Wives of Windsor recently, but I digress.
Comment. The programme states: "This is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places and incidents either are products of the author's imagination or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to actual events or locales or person, living or dead, is entirely coincidental." So any similarity to the actions, behaviour, accusations, people surrounding disgraced Hollywood mogul, Harvey Weinstein, who enabled his behaviour and the exhaustive media coverage are purely coincidental? And I'm the Queen of Romania.
Ok, I can appreciate that catch all phrase in the programme protects the playwright from slanderous, libelous accusations. Barney is echoing the behaviour and actions of Weinstein almost to a 'T'. In Bitter Wheat Barney is surrounded by 'yes' people who acquiesce to his despicable behaviour. Sondra, his dutiful personal assistant, knows his intentions when he wants to bed any woman and is there to help arrange it. She arranges for the doctor to give him his drugs and sexual performance enhancers. She's there for the money laundering—Barney says that he gets investors from countries who want their money 'laundered' so they invest in his films. She knows everything. Money enables bad behaviour.
Michael Coveney writes in his programme note that "Mamet doesn't condone or condemn. He writes the problem and exposes flaws in arguments and humanity as only theatre, perhaps, can.' He also writes that Mamet has a 'penchant for playing devil's advocate in the court of public opinion.' An interview with both Doon Mackichan and Ioanna Kimbook state that Mamet said the play "was not about rape—it's an examination of power and how power is abused within that industry." But hasn't Mamet examined power before in his examination/dissecting of Hollywood in Speed-the-Plow? Hasn't he always examined the abuse of power in all his plays? It seems to me that Mamet always celebrates the powerful overcoming the weak without condemnation.
So what happened here with Bitter Wheat? The flaws, information, behaviour and the problems regarding this situation with Barney Fein/Harvey Weinstein, his enablers and victims have all been hashed and rehashed, revealed and examined in the various media both print and social. There is nothing new that is said in the play. There is no devil's advocate comment here in the court of public opinion. There is no other way of thinking about the flawed, hideous character known as Barney Fein. So besides being dreadful in its spin and sloppy writing, the play is irrelevant.
So why write this play? I'm mystified at the point. Mamet has not revealed an argument either way. He has written a character who is without moral compass or conscience about right or wrong, only that if he wants something then all is fair game to get it. He believes people/women don't like him because he's fat and it's glandular not because he's a glutton. He fluctuates between being in complete control and confident of his actions and whining because he's not understood. The latter is just another way of avoiding responsibility of his actions. Is the point of the play that finally Barney gets his comeuppance? Really? Does he? Is the point of the play then that now all will be great for women in any workplace run by men? Really? You're kidding me, right?
Also in the programme is an essay about the vulgar, belligerent, distasteful men who created Hollywood and perpetuated this behaviour over the years. Harvey Weinstein seems to be the person who is finally caught and accused (for the time being) suggesting matters will change.
In her programme interview Doon Mackichan says that in a career of 30 years she has been subjected to sexual harassment and lost jobs because she questioned nude scenes and other matters that she found distasteful.
And for Bitter Wheat she says: "The lesson we've had from Mr. Mamet is to not comment. And in not commenting, the play swells in the depravity of the male protagonist and what these women have put up with—and continue to put up with in the culture that has allowed this behaviour to thrive for so long. It's almost the end of the movie mogul era, so now maybe we can tell some different stories and hear from more female writers and directors. This play will open up discussions—and that's what theatre should do."
In your dreams Ms Mackichan, in your dreams.
Began: June 7, 2019.
Closes: September 21, 2019.
Running Time: 2 hours, 15 minutes. Approx.
www.BitterWheatPlay.com
Review: WIFE (London, England)
At Kiln Theatre (Formerly The Tricycle).
Written by Samuel Adamson
Directed by Indhu Rubasingham
Designed by Richard Kent
Lighting by Guy Hoare
Sound by Alexander Caplen
Composed by David Shrubsole
Cast: Richard Cant
Karen Fishwick
Pamela Hardman
Calam Lynch
Sirina Saba
Samuel Adamson re-imagines Ibsen's 1879 classic of A Doll's House as it pertains to various modern applications of three different couples.
It begins in 1959. Suzannah (an intriguing Sirine Saba) and Peter (Richard Cant) are playing in a traditional production of A Doll's House. She is playing Nora and Peter is playing her husband, Torvald. It's the scene where Nora tells him why she is leaving him, when he didn't give her the miracle she was looking for—that he would take the blame for her forgery. And so she leaves 'slamming' the door-a slam heard around the world, as it's been described. Who says she slammed the door? Really? Perhaps it was a big door and the closing sounded like a slam. Nora doesn't strike me as a woman who slams anything. And why slam it. She's not angry. She's disappointed. Anyone out there know Norwegian and can look up the play in the original language and describe what it says? Of course the original reviews were written by men, so perhaps that's where the idea comes from. In any case, I'm anxious to know that the stage direction really says.
After the performance, Suzannah is visited by a couple: Daisy (Karen Fishwick) and Robert (Joshua James). Daisy is all gush. Robert is barely interested. He finally explodes. He hated the play because he feels that Nora has everything including a dutiful husband. He completely ignores why she did what she did and why she feels she has to leave.
What Robert doesn't know is that Daisy and Suzannah know each other better than just they let on. They met at a garden party and then formed a relationship. They have been lovers for a long time. And Daisy is pregnant by Robert and not at all happy about it. In this iteration the idea of marriage, relationships, society's conventions and other attitudes are explored. Fascinating. Here we have the wounded husband who can't see passed his own blinkered attitudes.
Skip to 1988. Ivor at 28 years old (Joshua James) and Eric—much younger—(Calam Lynch) are gay lovers having a pint in a straight pub after seeing a Norweigen production of A Doll's House. They are reveling in their sensual connection and simulate having sex there. Ivor is in his element flinging insults to the straight clientele. Ivor and Eric talk about their lives and how society has closed-minded ideas about gay life. Here Samuel Adamson's dialogue wizzes through the air. It bristles and pops. It's blazing with colour and expression. It's delivered by Ivor (Joshua James) with glee, passion and cynicism.
I don't believe one word of it. Samuel Adamson is stretching a point when he is trying to equate society's attitudes towards gays as an iteration of society's attitudes towards women and marriage from the point of view of A Doll's House. Gays must go underground to live their lives. A woman in Ibsen's day and even after could not do that that easily. Nope, I don't believe a word of it here.
The last iteration is 2019 and the various stories are connected. A young woman, Clare (Karen Fishwick) is about to be married but needs to find out about her father who moved to Australia when her parents' marriage broke up. Clare is connected to the first story (1959). Her father had an intense relationship in Australia with Ivor (from the second story). Ivor is now 58 (Richard Cant). Clare needs to know about her father—the missing part of her life. Ivor says he doesn't know what she is talking about. Ivor is now in a relationship with a twenty-something smart-mouth named Cas (Calam Lynch). They've gotten married but not in the conventional way. Cas has that caustic speech that sprays contempt on everything, especially Clare. Finding the truth of this third part was perhaps the most satisfying. There are comments from the caustic Cas about how far women have come in society but not necessarily gays. Clare sets that misguided idea right.
The acting to a person is terrific Each actor negotiations the different time periods with confidence and commitment. Indhu Rubasingham has directed this with flare, accomplishment, an eye to the vivid image and a sensitivity in establishing the various relationships and their hidden meanings. Just wonderful work.
Samuel Adamson attempts to tackle huge ideas of society and gender issues, man-woman relationships and how society treats women, men and same sex relationships as seen from the point of new of Ibsen's A Doll's House. All worthy ideas. But he hasn't written a strong enough or clear enough defense. Nor has he proven his point.
I think Lucas Hnath's wonderful play, A Doll's House, Part II does a much better job of exploring society's attitudes towards women when he has Nora come back after 15 years of success, for a very serious reason. No doubt about it, Ibsen has created one bracing play that has intrigued playwrights (men) for years. Now it's time for a woman to have a go at the play. Concerns aside, I was really glad to see this one.
Note: The Tricycle Theatre has gone through 'extensive' renovations—the seating is now individual and not padded benches and there might be cosmetic touches and a bigger bathroom, but it looks the same. Then when that was finished the name was changed to Kiln Theatre in honour of its new life. Their mission statement is interesting: "Make theatre for everyone. Our doors are open to all. We produce world-class theatre that provokes, entertains, and reflects our exceptionally diverse society in Brent (a section of north London) and beyond. For this first season after re-opening our building we have over 10,000 ticket priced at £12.50 or less and we are offering 2,000 free tickets to people and communities who may have never been to a theatre before.
Kiln Theatre encourages artists of all ages and backgrounds. Our ambitious Creative Learning programme aims to champion the imagination, aspiration and potential of the Brent community young and old."
All worthy. But they have the same problem as most other theatres that can't attract a diverse audience. My audience for this was predominantly white except for about three people of colour. And the cast was white too. Attracting a diverse audience continues to challenge theatres.
Produced by Kiln Theatre
Closes: July 6, 2019.
Running Time: two hours, 15 minutes, approx.
www.KilnTheatre.com
Review: BRIGADOON (Shaw Festival)
At the Festival Theatre, Shaw Festival, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ont.
Book and lyrics by Alan Jay Lerner
Music by Frederick Loewe
Original dances created by Agnes DeMille
Revised book by Brian Hill
Directed by Glynis Leyshon
Music direction by Paul Sportelli
Choreography by Linda Garneau
Set by Pam Johnson
Costumes by Sue LePage
Lighting by Kevin Lamotte
Projections by Corwin Ferguson
Sound by John Lott
Cast: David Ball
Peter Fernandes
Kristi Frank
Élodie Gillett
Kyle Golemba
Alexis Gordon
Patty Jamieson
Jane Johanson
Krystal Kiran
Madelyn Kriese
George Krissa
Julie Lumsden
Marie Mahabal
Stewart Adam McKensy
Peter Millard
Mike Nadajewski
Matt Nethersole
Drew Plummer
Travis Seetoo
Genny Sermonia
Gabriella Sundar Singh
Jacqueline Thair
Jay Turvey
Kelly Wong
Jenny L. Wright
Not Even a GPS could make sense of the geography of director Glynis Leyshon's confusing, muddy direction.
The Story. It's set in the Highlands of Scotland and New York City, 1946. Tommy Albright and his good friend Jeff Douglas have come to Scotland to have one last fling before Tommy gets married in New York City. He and Jeff fought in WWII, were shaken by the experience and are in Scotland for relaxation and some hunting. They discover the magical, mysterious village of Brigadoon. It's not on their map. They discover that it appears for one day every hundred years. Tommy also discovers and is smitten by Fiona MacLaren, a young woman of the town. They fall in love. But she can't leave Brigadoon to follow him because that would mean the town will never get up from its hundred years slumber and will disappear forever. Tommy reluctantly goes home to his fiancé where he has to consider what is more important: marrying the rich boss's daughter or follow his heart and stay in Brigadoon to be with Fiona.
The Production. Pam Johnson's set of the Scotland forest and the village of Brigadoon is surprisingly dull in browns and dark greens. There is no sense of the magic of that place. Corwin Ferguson has a projection of an animated deer appear on the scrim and then quickly flits off. The deer appears twice in succession. Then another projection of the American flag appears and dissolves into a scene of soldiers marching off to war. After that Tommy (George Krissa) and Jeff (Mike Nadajewski) appear stage right carrying rifles because they've come to Scotland to hunt and relax from the horrors of war.
Let's pause here, shall we. Tommy is shaken by war and killing. Yet he comes to Scotland to hunt. He carries a rifle to do it as does Jeff. What is wrong with this picture? We are told that a revised book by Brian Hill was needed to 'update' Alan Jay Lerner's version so that we can see how war has affected Tommy. In case we don't get that message we need projections of a deer flitting and soldiers marching to help those deficient of an imagination. I'm getting a headache from gritting my teeth. Why doesn't director Glynis Leyshon trust the audience to get it?
Miraculously Brigadoon appears in the forest. Tommy and Jeff can't find it on the map. They decide to walk towards it. And then they both walk up the aisle of the theatre away from where the image of the village has appeared on stage. Ok, I'm trying to suspend my disbelief here.
To make matters even more confusing, townsfolk walk down the aisle to the village. Honest, I am trying to suspend my disbelief.
Tommy and Jeff next appear back on stage walking towards the village where they join the folks in celebrating a wedding, meeting the citizens and in the case of Tommy, falling in love with Fiona MacLaren (Alexis Gordon). He wants to marry her but she can't follow him to New York because that will be the end of Brigadoon. Tommy returns to New York and his fate. Or does he?
Trouble arises when a young man named Harry Beaton (Travis Seetoo) is thwarted in his love for Jean MacLaren (Madelyn Kriese). She is marrying Charlie Dalrymple (Matt Nethersole) and Harry expresses his anger at being shunted aside. He threatens to leave Brigadoon and thus end its existence. So Harry rushes up the aisle away from the Brigadoon (I must confess I asked myself, "where are you going? The parking lot? The ice-cream shop? Virgil? WHERE???). A few minutes later he appears on stage in the forest. Ok, I give up. I can't suspend my disbelief, except at how inept this production is directed and staged. Ridiculous.
Travis Seetoo as Harry then dances a mournful, lovely Scottish dance—graceful and elegant. But then he turns, trips over a small ledge and well he does himself a terrible, final injury. Graceful to dance but a ledge defeats him. Oy.
Linda Garneau's choreography is one of the best aspects of this production. It's lively, joyful, romantic and sensitive. It realizes the musical's intentions every time there is dance. "Come to Me, Bend to Me" is particularly effective. Charlie wants to see Jean before the wedding. A definite no no. But she finally relents and they dance a pas de deux that is so sensitive and full of tenderness, especially the last embrace.
do have a quibble that seems to be present across many classic musicals productions. A couple begin singing a tender love song to each other. In Charlie's case he is initially singing to Jean through a closed door. But then he comes downstage and sings it to the audience and not the door, even when she comes out and stands behind him. I never understand why. Why doesn't the song get sung to the person for whom it was meant? But what we have is the person upstage being sung to and the person singing the song, downstage, so the person upstage is looking at a back instead of into the eyes of the love. Nuts.Alexis Gordon is wonderful as Fiona MacLaren who falls in love with Tommy, the American. Gordon is winsome, bright, engaging and always makes the people with whom she is acting seem better. Alas this does not apply to George Krissa as Tommy. There is not that spark of attraction between them as there is for other characters. Krissa is strapping and sings well, but seems more comfortable when he is playing scenes with Mike Nadajewski who plays Jeff Douglas. Nadajewski has such variation as an actor. As Jeff he is cynical, sarcastic, witty, perceptive and street smart.
Comment: Alan Jay Lerner and Frederick Loewe wrote romantic musicals like no others. The music was lush and the lyrics were poetic, lyrical and touched the heart. What can be more romantic and heart squeezing than a musical about two people who fall in love who are from two different worlds, and for whom one must make the ultimate sacrifice to leave everything behind to be with that one true love. For that fierce love look no further than Brigadoon. How disappointing them that the Shaw Festival's production of Brigadoon is plodding, dull, gloomy, geographically confusing and too often devoid of the tingle of romance, in spite of some fine performances.The Shaw Festival Presents:
Began: May 5, 2019.
Running Time: 2 hours and 20 minutes.
www.shawfest.com
Review: SHADOWS (from London, Eng.)
At RADA, London, England
Written by Margot MacDonald
Directed by Peta Lily
Cast: Margot MacDonald
Kelly Burke
What a lovely way to spend Canada Day, in London, seeing Shadows, Margot MacDonald's intriguing play about Eva Le Gallienne and her lover Josephine Hutchinson.
I first saw Shadows a few years ago in Toronto at a quirky theatre called Videofag (now gone, sadly). Margot MacDonald has written a play about British-American actress, Eva Le Gallienne, who was the grand dame of the American theatre from the 1920s to the 1980s. I saw her on Broadway in 1976 in The Royal Family playing the matriarch in a family of actors. Magic.
Margot MacDonald has focused her play on the years 1926 to 1935. During that time Le Gallienne was at the top of her game. She had started her theatre company and she met a young, attractive, eager actress named Josephine Hutchinson who was auditioning for Le Gallienne's company. They became lovers. Josephine also got married so Le Gallienne was in a position of sharing Hutchinson until Le Gallienne suggested that Josephine move in with her at her house in Connecticut.
MacDonald doesn't dwell on dates in her play. She doesn't note the date of the terrible fire that exploded in Le Gallienne's house and left her disfigured (but eventually healed) except for the loss of part of one of her fingers. She doesn't note the dates of the various successes and disappointments. While one naturally wants to know, I don't think it harms the play.
MacDonald focuses on the relationship between the two women; navigating society at that time and how it viewed lesbians; the spunk and grit of Le Gallienne in triumphing in the theatre and the love that she shared with Josephine Hutchinson, who had a career in films and theatre, but not as great as Le Gallienne's.
Director Peta Lily has directed a simple production. Two white chairs are positioned with one facing up stage and the other close to it facing downstage. Props: a liquor bottle, a glass, books, etc. are neatly arranged on the floor, along the stage's edge. The production started with a whooshing sound and crackles. If one wasn't aware of the story, this might be confusing. I knew that was the fire. Later in the production the same sound repeated and by then we were aware.
The staging seems artificial for much of it, a character comes downstage for dramatic effect while the person spoken to is upstage looking at her back. In a way the dynamic of the two characters suggests that Eva is the power and Hutchinson is the one over whom she has power. There is no doubt there is love, but that dynamic is always there.
As Le Gallienne, Margot MacDonald is supremely confident. Her hair is short, slicked back; she wears a man's shirt, pants and shiny shoes. This Le Gallienne owns the stage, her world and anyone in her orbit. She is kind but there is a sense of the hunt for the next conquest. When Le Gallienne dallies and seeks out other younger companions, Hutchinson is naturally hurt. Le Gallienne's reply is that she needs the others. Somehow we don't question that. MacDonald is compelling in the confession.As Josephine Hutchinson, Kelly Burke initially is all feminine, flighty and demur then gains the confidence to be an equal partner with Le Gallienne in their relationship. While Le Gallienne does have the power, she is enthralled by this enchanting woman who has come into her life. And she wants to keep her there. Kelly Burke reveals the layers of feelings of Hutchinson while MacDonald makes Le Gallienne guarded. She was aware of how the press can have a field day with that relationship.
I was glad to see the play again. Eva Le Gallienne was a towering presence in the theatre. The play rekindles my interest in her and the whole world of theatre she created.
Shadows was part of the RADA Festival of plays. What a treat to see this play, written and performed by a Canadian in the hallowed halls of The Royal Academy of Dramatic Arts. The place was buzzing with young talent, all eager to act. Lovely.
Review: THE WRITER (The Foster Festival, St. Catharines)
by Lynn on June 27, 2019
At the FirstOntario Performing Arts Centre, St. Catharines, Ont.
Written by Norm Foster
Directed by Patricia Vanstone
Set and costumes by Peter Hartwell
Lighting by Chris Malkowski
Cast: Guy Bannerman
Jamie Williams
A touching play about a father-son relationship, the challenges of creating art, growing old with difficulties and the importance of telling people you love them when they are still able to know what that means.
The Story. Donald Wellner is "The Writer." He's working on a new play. His last one was about 33 years before. It was celebrated. It won a Pulitzer Prize and since then he hasn't replicated that success. He has recently separated from his wife of many years and moved into his own small apartment.
His son Blake has come to visit. Blake is also listed in the program as "The Writer" but Donald down plays the notion that Blake is a writer because he 'only' writes travel piece for newspapers. Over the many years span of the play Donald is stingy with his praise for his son but heaps praise on his absent daughter, Mandy, now a doctor. It seems that the family has learned that Donald has a secret about another woman and it was serious enough for his wife to divorce him and his daughter to cut him out of her life. To make matters more complicated, Donald has the signs of Alzheimer's Disease.
This being a Norm Foster play, his 60th world premiere, matters are not cut and dried. They are very funny and often touching, but not simple. One of its many charms.
The Production. Designer Peter Hartwell has created an efficient set of Donald's apartment. It's simply appointed. A table and a typewriter are at centre stage. There are a few mementos on the shelves. Over the course of the play Donald Wellner (Guy Bannerman) and Blake (Jamie Williams) generally wear the same clothes from scene to scene—casual shirt and pants for Donald and black jeans and shirt for Blake. There might be a change from the norm in the second act, but nothing drastic. There aren't any projections indicating the passage of time because the play does it quite nicely.
Guy Bannerman as Donald is irascible and sometimes cutting in his remarks to Blake about his writing and his place in his father's life and Donald is often irreverent and very funny. Because Jamie Williams plays Blake as a confident man Donald's cutting remarks do not wound (that much). Williams accepts Donald's dismissive remarks with good grace and a sense of resignation. Blake knows that Donald prefers his sister, Mandy, and accepts that without rancor.
Donald is losing his memory and often is not aware of it. But there is a scene that Donald is aware and Bannerman shows that in the subtlest, most understated way with a pause and a look of concern. That is resounding. Jamie Williams as Blake keeps reminding Donald that he's mis-remembered, yet it's later in the play that Blake realizes that there is something wrong with Donald.
Let me be bold here, but I believe every single person in the audience of The Writer will have a story that puts them in the world of the play. They will know somebody who is experiencing Alzheimer's Disease, or has it, or is worried about having it. Norm Foster puts us in that world with humour, seriousness, compassion, frustration and understanding. And just for fun, there is a bombshell of a revelation that will have your eyeballs popping.
Director Patricia Vanstone does an exemplary job of bringing the play to life by guiding her excellent actors to be in the moment. Both Guy Bannerman as Donald and Jamie Williams as Blake invest subtlety and nuance in their performances. Information that will stun the audience just 'drops' as an afterthought without pounding it to be noticed. The direction and the performances make us look harder rather than taking the easy way out and making moments obvious.
Foster gives Blake a speech to his father in Act II that is so true, so moving that it leaves one limp with emotion. And yet I don't think it's sentimental. Something to think about even for characters who are healthy. This is Norm Foster's 60th world premiere. An astonishing record. The Foster Festival is one of the bright presents in summer theatre. How lucky we are to have it.
Comment. I'm always fascinated how characters handle memory loss of a loved one in this age of information overload. The Writer takes place in the present. There is a reference to the death of Neil Simon who did die within the last year or two of Alzheimer's Disease. Then why wouldn't Blake know there is something wrong with his father? Surely since Blake travels so much and sees his father irregularly, he would notice a change more readily when he visited. Yet Blake doesn't quickly twig that his father's memory loss is serious. Hmmmm. I'm not sure this is a quibble with the play. It just amazes me how people don't get it that memory loss is often something that is concerning, and not just 'old age' regardless of all the information out there to inform us.
The Foster Festival presents:
Opened: June 21, 2019.
www.fosterfestival.com
Review: THE BLACK DRUM
At the Young Centre for the Performing Arts, Toronto, Ont.
Written by Adam Pottle
Directed by Mira Zuckermann
Set and props by Ken MacKenzie
Costumes by Ruth Albertyn
Sound by Adam Harendorf
Drummer, Dimitri Kanaris
Projection designer, Laura Warren
Choreographer and movement, Patricia Allison
Cast: Natashia C. Bacchus
Dawn Jani Birley
Corinna Den Dekker
Daniel Durant
Bob Hiltermann
Yan Liu
Agata Wisny
Ballet Dancers:
Abbey Jackson-Bell
Jaelyn Russell-Lillie
Sita Weereatne
The Black Drum is a huge undertaking for the Deaf Culture Centre because it is a fully signed deaf musical. You read that right. Adam Pottle's musical is part fantasy, part myth, part fairy tale with dollops of horror films dropped in.
There are eleven scenes. At the centre of this world is "The Minister" a sinister man, (Bob Hiltermann) tall, muscular, imposing and forbidding. He is dressed in black with thick-soled boots that give him even more height. His hands look like they could crush coconuts. His is a world without colour, joy, laughter, music, freedom or love. With a raise of a hand he can control the various people in his wake. One woman dutifully obeys his commands as if he was pulling her by a string, her body jerks backwards as she moves forward.
In a parallel story, Joan (a performing artist—the expressive Dawn Jani Birley) grieves her dead wife, Karen. The worlds collide when we realize Karen is the person being dragged along by the Minister as if pulled by a string.
The program breaks each scene down but those of us who are not hearing impaired are not able to read the program in the darkened theatre. The 'dialogue' is all signed by the cast. The hearing impaired in the audience can read sign language. I can't. Surtitles would have been helpful to understand the story. Some of it seems rather dense. This is a tale of good vs. evil and one is never sure who will win. Pottle keeps us unsettled. I like that.
The music is provided by the impressive drumming of Dimitri Kanaris on a black kettle drum. There is a rumble of sound that underscores the drumming and other moments.
Mira Zuckermann directs this accomplished cast with economy as well as compelling images. A deaf musical. What a huge accomplishment. It was fascinating being in that world for this production. At the end, we all waved our hands in the air, which is how hearing impaired people applaud.
Deaf Culture Centre in association with Soulpepper Presents:
Closes: June 29, 2019.
www.soulpepper.ca
Review: HELL'S FURY, The Hollywood Songbook (Luminato)
At the Harbourfront Centre Theatre, Toronto, Ont.
Devised and directed by Tim Albery
Production designed by Michael Levine
Costumes designed by Michelle Tracey
Projection designs by Cameron Davis
Lighting by Thomas C. Hase
Pianist, Serouj Kradjian
Cast: Russell Braun
Director Tim Albery has created Hell's Fury, The Hollywood Songbook illuminating the life and work of Hanns Eisler noted German composer. Eisler worked closely with Bertolt Brecht composing music for his plays. Because Eisler was Jewish he was hounded out of Nazi Germany and went to Hollywood to compose music for films, some of the films were less than stellar. He was then forced to leave the United States because of his political beliefs and he was being interrogated by the House Un-American Activities Committee. He was betrayed by his sister Ruth Fischer. He fled to East German where he composed, among other things, the National Anthem and was honoured with a stamp, but times were tough there too.
The songs that have been selected are vivid and depict a life fraught with despair and longing. They are full of emotion, observation and humility.
For some reason we are in a recording studio. There is a grand piano, a standing microphone, a recording booth and a clock on the wall. There is a small round container on the piano with pencils I guess (I was sitting at the back) and a stick with a small flag on it. On the flag was a swastika. That caught my attention. I assume we are in Nazi Germany.
Hanns Eisler (Russell Braun in fine, beautiful voice) enters wearing an overcoat over a brown three piece suit and a brown hat. He takes off the hat and drops it on the grand piano and hangs up his overcoat on a hook stage right. Then Serouj Kradjian (the accompanist) enters and takes the hat off the piano and hangs it up on another hook. He sits at the piano, sees the flag with the swastika and bunches it up and tosses it in the garbage. He begins playing and Russell Braun as Eisler begins singing. He lies on the floor as if he is in a bed in a hotel. Locations are indicated with signs ("bar") or references in the songs. A case of wine appears and both Eisler and Kradjian, the accompanist have a glass and swig from it.
At one point Eisler sits on the end of the piano bench with Kradjian behind him. While Eisler sings or talks Kradjian leans over past Eisler to take the wine glass on the piano and drink deeply. I roll my eyes because this movement pulls focus from Eisler. Kradjian does it a few times. Then I get it. These two 'characters' are alter-egos of each other. Both men wear the same glasses and blown suit. I recall that they don't acknowledge each other when they first enter. There is nothing in the program that notes that they are alter egos of one another. We have to pick that up on our own. Why, is the question? Why are they alter egos of each other? What purpose is served?
While I found Russell Braun's singing to be superb and his acting is convincing and Serouj Kradjian's playing to be excellent and attentive, so much of this production is unsatisfying because of Tim Albery's fussy, obtrusive direction or his unclear storytelling.
Why are we in a recording studio, pristine and perfect though it is in Michael Levine's design? Eisler spends lots of time going from location to location (those signs indicated the places) but he's in this recording studio for some reason.
Too often projections upstage the singing. A small photo of Stalin grows larger and larger in a projection that overtakes Russell Braun altogether. Mystifying and annoying.
Where are we in the first scene if there is that flag with the swastika in that little round container?
Too many questions. Loved the singing but the production is a self-indulgent exercise by a fussy, self-serving director.
Played at Luminato and closed June 23.
Presented in partnership with Soundstreams, Luminato and Pinkhouse Productions with Opera North, UK.
Began: June 19, 2019.
Closed: June 23, 2019.
Running Time: 70 minutes,
www.luminato.ca
Review: OBEAH OPERA (part of Luminato)
At the Fleck Dance Theatre, Harbourfront, Toronto, Ont.
Creator, writer, composer and performer, Nicole Brooks
Directed by Lezlie Wade
Musical director, Melanie DeMore
Choreographer, co-director, cultural consultant, Anthony 'Prime' Guerra
Set and costumes by Robin Fisher
Lighting by Bonnie Beecher
Sound by Emily C. Porter
Cast: Uche Ama
Nicole Brooks
Krystle Chance
Amanda DeFreitas
Saphire Demitro
Michelle Fisk
Trudy Lee Gayle
Arinea Hermans
Jamila S. Joseph
Shelly Ann McLeod
Aisha Nicholson
Debbie Nichols
Skerritt Tu Nokwe
Melissa Noventa
Dana Jean Phoenix
Michelle Polak
Tringa Rexhepi
Teisha Smith-Guthrie
Irene Torres
At last!!
Obeah Opera has been 10 years in the making and along the way I've seen a few incarnations of it. Now it comes to Luminato at the Fleck Dance Theatre in its full, 'finished' incarnation.
At the centre of it is Nicole Brooks, the stalwart creator, writer, composer and performer of the piece. She held on in spite of comments that it was an impossible task; that it was too big a project; too diverse; too unconventional; too women centric; too controversial. But art is made by people who believe in their project and hear but ignore the nay-sayers and soldier on.
Obeah Opera is Nicole Brooks' homage to the ancestors of the 1692 Salem Witch Trials, and in particular those from the Caribbean who were involved. "Obeah" means 'witchcraft' in the Caribbean. "Opera" is a play that is entirely sung.
Brooks has written songs that not only tell the stories of these women and their experiences, but also incorporates religions and music of resistance from the Caribbean, Africa and the Diaspora. Also Brooks incorporated elements of from the Caribbean such as Orisha spirituality and Carnival Arts to represent each and every character in the opera. The music is as rich as these characters' histories.
Tituba (a proud, regal Nicole Brooks) is a Caribbean woman who is a slave to a family in Salem, Massachusetts. She has abilities to heal a sick child and for this she is looked on with suspicion. Matters get out of control when it is thought that Tituba and her fellow-women slaves are witches and are tried and hanged. The story is told through the Black woman's voice.
All the creative elements—Robin Fisher's simple set of benches and a huge church cross, her costumes (severe black for the New England pilgrims and colourful for the black slaves), Bonnie Beecher's stark, moody lighting, Anthony 'Prime' Guerra's intoxicating choreography and resulting rhythms, and Lezlie Wade's effective direction—produce a show full of compelling images, stark scenes and pulsing rhythms.
The singing by the cast of women is glorious. They stomp their feet and clap their hands in a compelling beat. A simple sway of the hips is seductive as is a subtle flip of the Caribbean women's voluminous skirts.
Michelle Fisk as the Captain and Doctor and Michelle Polak as the Reverend Samuel Paris and Massah Bradshaw are buttoned up, stiff and humourless. From them we learn of the endless cruelty of a white society over the black slaves. Reverend Paris also seems to have a problem with all women as he condemns them as being wanton. I thought that inclusion a bit odd, if not out of place in this narrative.
One has endless admiration for Nicole Brooks and her tenacity in seeing that her vision finally made it to the stage. Her efforts were Hurculean in creating, writing and composing the work. But I do find that perhaps after 10 years she became possessive of the piece and wouldn't let anyone touch it or suggest judicious cutting. It needs it. Songs repeat ideas and aspects that don't need to be repeated. Sometimes songs established ideas that are outside the main focus—Reverend Paris' rant about all women for example. The running time listed on the ticket is 2 hours and 15 minutes. The running time when we get to the theatre is now 2 hours and 45 minutes. Should there be another incarnation of Obeah Opera I suggest that the added 30 minutes of playing time be carefully removed. After a while repetitious songs, though gloriously sung and even compelling images outlast their welcome.
Luminato presents:
Running Time: 2 hours, 45 minutes.
Review: FORGET ME NOT (part of Luminato)
At the Joey and Toby Tanenbaum Opera Centre
Created and performed by Ronnie Burkett
Music composed by John Alcorn
Dramaturge, Matt McGeachy
Puppets designed and created by Ronnie Burkett
Costumes by Kim Crossley
A new Ronnie Burkett show is cause for anticipation, certainly because he hasn't played Toronto in a few years. It's been too long.
Forget Me Not is Burkett's latest show and it is his most ambitious. It takes place in the Joey and Toby Tanenbaum Opera Centre and at the best of times, when there is proper seating, it's vast. For Forget Me Not the room is bare except for some benches in a semi circular configuration, with the occasional chair scattered around the benches at one end of the space. That makes the space seem even larger.
We are allowed in the space at 7 pm which should have been show-time. We leave our backpacks etc. at tables close to the entrance then wend our way to the other end of the space for a seat on a bench or a chair. We are told that the audience will be moving around the space during the show. At 7:10 pm the door at the other end of the room opens and a large-cloaked, hooded figure slowly walks to our end, reciting a story in rhyming couplets about a knight and a fair maiden. As the person gets nearer we see that the face is obscured by a black veil. He is our narrator. He is Ronnie Burkett.
With a few passes around the benches and the chairs Ronnie Burkett takes off the cloak and reveals himself in khaki pants, a black shirt and shoes. The puppets he uses appear from a large wood structure. Many are hand puppets, some are marionettes manipulated by wire.
He gives willing audience members a hand puppet with the understanding they will take care of it and give it back at the end, or if they don't it will prevent the show from 'being true.' One daren't disappoint him by keeping the beautifully made puppets.
The audience raises their hands, some with the puppets when asked. Nearly the whole audience participates by following him around the space like a pied piper with his followings, and engaging in the activities that are suggested by Burkett. But one wonders what is to be gained by involving the audience in this way? Are they part of the dark world?
From the press information: "Welcome to "The New Now", where written words are forbidden and an underground movement of hand-drawn love letters is a powerful act of defiance.
Those determined on composing or reading a written declaration of love must first make a treacherous journey to a secret and illegal camp to find She, The Keeper of the Lost Hand, and one of the last people to retain the knowledge of reading and writing in cursive.
While pilgrims brave the harsh conditions to find their way to She, the tale of Zacko Budaydos and His Dancing Bear unfolds in parallel, illustrating the turmoil of "The Before" when all the travelling performer had to rely on was his wit, love and knowledge of the outlawed language of Polari to survive.
Unlike anything you've ever seen, Forget Me Not is a tender, absurd, romantic, and provocative call-to-arms for poetry and the enduring power of love."
And for all Burkett's mastery and artistry of the puppets etc. this story is so confusing that one tends to lose the thread too often. It doesn't help that the space is unforgiving. The acoustics are lousy if Burkett is facing away from you. You can't hear what he's saying. And while Burkett has a dramaturge in Matt McGeachy the piece needs judicious cutting to tame the meandering story and focus the intent. It's a problem I have found with a lot of his shows, masterful though they are. At times there are conversations between characters that seem like an endless loop of one accusing and the other denying something and moving forward seems impossible.
As with all Ronnie Burkett shows, Forget Me Not is funny, dark in nature, thoughtful, brooding and full of Burkett's conscience and heart. I just wish it was clearer.
Produced by Ronnie Burkett Theatre of Marionettes
Opened: June 5, 2019.
Running Time: 1 hour and 45 minutes.
www.luminato.com
Copyright © 2011 The Slotkin Letter. All rights reserved.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


A glittering evening of festivities awaits you as the Jack London Square Lights Up for the Holidays! There will be musical entertainment, snow flurries, live reindeer, tap dancing holiday trees, America's Children's Holiday Parade float previews and a lot more at the annual family tree lighting ceremony on Friday, December 6 at the Foot of Broadway. Visit http://bit.ly/1eFBtqf, for other details.


text:
maxwell collins
Cross Country: Another Successful Season
Coach Chris Kowalewski lead the cross country team to a successful season this year, with the girls team qualifying for semi-state. The boys team fell short in regionals, but still had a productive season. "It was rough ending for the boys at regionals and it sucks because they're such tight, hard working group," Kowalewski said.
The girls team finished ninth out of twenty teams in semi state, with senior Faith Quintana finishing just three spots away from qualifying for state. "With sectional champion Faith Quintana leading the way, I'm very happy how their season came along," Kowalewski said.
Teams have multiple ways they judge their seasons.
"We judge our success on how we finish the season. The girls were third in the conference, second at sectionals and an impressive third in a very tough regional. The team got better as the as season when along," Kowalewski said, "The boys started strong placing second in the pre-season conference meet but placed fourth in conference meet, but bounced back to place second at Sectionals, but had a rough day at regionals to place eighth and end their season. Our expectations are high for both team, and advancing to semi-state with the chance to qualify for state is our yearly goal."
Each coach has a different idea of the kind of people they want on their team, and they have certain expectations.
" We try to produce a fun competitive atmosphere that people want to be a part of. We're trying to make running cool. We want runners, no matter what their talent level, who have a desire to get better. They should be self-motivated and supportive teammates," said Kowalewski, "we try to recruit not only talented runners, but good people, character wins championships. Our camping trip to Warren Dunes to start each season builds a tight team bond and culture of high expectations."
The MHS Dance Team
The HSDA
Teenagers and the Coronavirus Impact


text:
A defining moment in photographs: the 1959 elections that propelled the PAP into power
Thanks to LIFE Magazine's John Dominis, we are able to get an interesting look back to a defining moment in Singapore's history – the momentous 1959 elections that saw the People's Action Party propelled into power.
The elections, held on 30 May, was to elect the first Legislative Assembly of a fully self-governing Singapore. The PAP claimed 43 of the Assembly's 51 seats. While their victory was not unexpected – with the PAP the only party contesting all 51 seats – the manner and margin of its victory had alarm bells ringing with many, especially in Britain, concerned about the PAP's leftist leanings.
Mr. Lee Kuan Yew speaking at an election rally outside Clifford Pier.
The crowd at the same rally.
Mr. Lee Kuan Yew addressing the crowd.
The PAP team at the rally – including Mr. Lee and Mr. S. Rajaratnam.
On the campaign trail.
Election day crowd at Orchard Circus.
A voter arriving at the Tuan Mong School voting centre by trishaw.
A view of Tuan Mong School at Tank Road.
Mr. Lee Kuan Yew arriving at Tank Road.
Mr. and Mrs. Lee arriving at Tuan Mong School.
Joining the queue.
Waiting in queue.
A section of queuing voters at Tuan Mong School.
A view down Tank Road.
Tuan Mong School – with a view towards the steeple of the Church of the Sacred Heart.
The queue of voters at Ai Tong School in Telok Ayer Street (Singapore Hokkien Huay Kuan Building). A queue can also be seen across the street at Chong Hock School (at Chong Wen Ge) next to the Thain Hock Keng Temple.
Outside the Chong Hock School (Chong Wen Ge) at Telok Ayer Street.
The scene at the PAP's Tanjong Pagar Branch Office.
An enterprising vendor through the crowd.
The crowd at Anson Road opposite the counting centre at Gan Eng Seng School.
Another view of the crowd at Anson Road.
A bus carrying ballot boxes arriving at Anson Road.
An election officer carrying a ballot box.
The agonising wait.
A garlanded Mr. Lee being carried by supporters.
Supporters gathering around the victorious Mr. Lee.
Jubilant PAP supporters.
Photographs: © Time Inc. for which Personal and Non-Commercial Use is permitted.
Tags: 1959, 1959 Elections, Chong Hock School, History, John Dominis, Lee Kuan Yew, LIFE Magazine, Old Singapore, PAP, Photographs, Self-Government, Singapore, State Legislative Assembly, Tank Road, Telok Ayer Street, Tuan Mong High School
Categories : Forgotten Places, Photography, Reminders of Yesterday, Significant Moments in Time, Singapore
Reflections on the morning after
Many had thought, or at least hoped that Singapore's General Elections held on the 7th of May 2011 would be a watershed for politics in Singapore. With the dust now settling after what must have been one of the most exciting campaigns for a long time, the scorecard of 81 to 6 does make it look as if nothing much has changed, with the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) holding an overwhelming majority, and the opposition left to contend with an ineffective representation in Parliament. We do have to look a little further than the headlines on the front page though, to realise that the elections is indeed a watershed for Singapore in many ways.
81-6 read the front page of the Straits Times on the morning after, but what should really have been on the front pages of the news was the erosion of support for the ruling party.
Besides the PAP which retained its hold on power, the other party that perhaps had a victory of sorts was the opposition Workers' Party, adding five more seats from winning in a Group Representation Constituency (GRC) beyond the Single Member Constituency (SMC) that they previously held in Hougang. In that we also saw a big shift in the positions of the opposition parties, with the Workers' Party (WP) increasing their share of the votes and giving a good a good account of themselves; while veteran politician Chiam See Tong's decision in his twilight years to contest in a GRC and have his wife Lina stand in Potong Pasir, a seat he has held for some 27 years, saw him and his Singapore People's Party (SPP) lose their previously held seat by the narrowest of margins. There is no doubt that all that is significant and does show that there is a huge shift in the political landscape, with the WP showing that it is a force in politics, and with the PAP losing a GRC the first time since their introduction in 1988, but also a senior member of the Cabinet, Foreign Minister George Yeo. The GRCs, which account for the majority of constituencies in Singapore's electoral map, is a grouping of three or more constituencies in which its MPs are voted in as a group, the purpose of which is to ensure adequate representation of minorities with at least one member of the group being from an ethnic minority group. The system has been much criticised by opponents on the grounds that it serves as a huge barrier to what were previously fragmented opposition parties who had difficulty in putting together a large enough group of candidates to contest in the GRCs.
Despite strong support on the ground for Mr Chiam and his wife Lina Chiam, his gamble to stand in a GRC leaving Mrs Chiam to contest in Potong Pasir, saw the Chiam's long association with the ward end. Mrs Chiam lost by the thinnest of margins of less than 1% of the valid votes.
One of the important statistics related to the outcome of the elections would be the 6% fall in the ruling party's share of votes to some 60.14%. The party had up until 1981, enjoyed 13 years of absolute control of Parliament, and had long had strong support from the population. Of late, voter disaffection and the increased awareness of a hitherto apathetic electorate, plus a desire to have greater representation for alternative views in Parliament has seen support eroded from over 75% of the popular vote at its highs to a historical low of close to 60% this election. While this and the huge majority it has in Parliament does indicate that there is still popular support for the party which has ruled Singapore since its independence, the fact that support is being eroded so much so that now 4 out of every 10 Singaporean voters have voted against the ruling party, signifies a worrying trend for the party.
Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam of the Workers
The lead up to the General Elections saw the largest crowds attending the Workers' Party's rallies. Despite the rain and the muddy conditions on the ground - the crowd that gathered on the penultimate day of campaigning at Ubi Avenue 2 resulted in traffic jams in the area.
This time around, the social media provided a powerful platform for an airing of the opinions of the disaffected, where previously there was none. It was in fact with the social media that the rules of engagement had changed. This was recognised by all parties as a means to reach out to a new generation of social media savvy voters, with a fifth of the electorate below the age of 30. Where in previous elections, the airing of opinions did not go beyond exchanges within one's circles of friends and relatives, and perhaps on the backseat of a taxi, the social media was able to extend the reach much further to many who shared similar views. This in a sense provided a previously apathetic electorate with a platform for a political awakening and in a collective desire by like minded people to perhaps challenge the status quo. One factor that may have played a part in the small but noticeable swing of votes may have been the platform not being understood well enough by certain quarters of the ruling establishment.
A Worker's Party election campaign banner seen outside Parliament House on Election Day. Many Singaporeans want to see an wider representation in Parliament.
Whatever it was, the election was a watershed for me. I am one who believes that all voices should be heard and that the task of running the country I was born in shouldn't be left to one group of people who belong to a single party, no matter how well qualified they may appear. I do not dispute that the ruling party which has ruled Singapore since independence has done an excellent job in transforming Singapore into an economic success that many at the point of independence would not have imagined, as well as in addressing the needs of a population that has steadily risen from some 1.9 million during independence to just over 5 million at the end of last year. I don't think for a moment that I, or for that matter many other like minded voters who cast a vote for change, are being ungrateful, or have forgotten what the previously leadership has done as some would like to think. There is certainly no doubt in my mind that as of today, there is no party that is better positioned to manage a nation that has been so well managed. What I did was, to cast a vote for a future which will include a voice for what has long been a voiceless minority; for a system that has the capacity to address the genuine concerns of the many on the ground who have fallen by the wayside; and for some sensibility to return to the leadership of a country that has become so consumed by their success that they have forgotten what the party had stood for all those years back, It is only by having an alternative voice in Parliament that can engage the ruling party as equals, not just for now, but for time to come that this can ensure that this happens. I am proud to say that I am one of the four out of every ten that said yes to this, and while this on a National level hasn't translated to more than a handful of alternative voices in our next Parliament, it has seen what I hope is a new dawn – a "shift" as Prime Minister Lee put it in politics that I hope will also transform those in the ruling party to recognise what the people of Singapore are asking for. The signs so far are positive and as PM Lee himself has indicated in his post victory speech: "We hear all your voices" and that it was a "time for healing and for acceptance of the people's decision, not just for the PAP but for all Singaporeans". I was there to celebrate the victory of the WP team of Aljunied, and when the official announcement was made that the WP had been successful in winning Aljunied GRC, I found a cause to celebrate, as I did with that by-election victory in Anson all those years back. It did take 30 years to arrive where we are, but with what is recognised as a new political climate in Singapore, what I hope comes out of this is the start of a shift towards a more open and inclusive political system, one that Singapore as a first world country should ultimately have.
Sunset on Election Day brought bright colours - perhaps signifying the optimisation many had for a mature democracy in Singapore.
A historical moment? The celebration at Hougang Stadium in the wee hours of 8 May:
A large crowd of Workers' Party faithful gathered at Hougang Stadium streaming in from as early as 5pm on Election Day in anticipation of the election results.
The crowd holding a poster of the WP candidates for Aljunied GRC.
Mr Yaw Shin Leong, WP's candidate for Hougang SMC who won with a margin of close to 30%, after his victory speech.
Lawyer Chen Show Mao - part of WP's team in Aljunied waving to the crowd.
A supporter trying to get a good view of the winning team's departure from Hougang Stadium - certainly not one who sat on the fence.
With 6 MPs now in Parliament, will the WP hammer away at the PAP's overwhelming majority in the future?
Tags: 7 May 2011, 8 May 2011, Aljunied GRC, Anson By Election 1981, Chiam See Tong, General Elections 2011, George Yeo, Hougang Stadium, J B Jeyaretnam, Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam, Lina Chiam, Newspaper Headlines, PAP, Parliament House, People's Action Party, Potong Pasir SMC, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Singapore, Singapore Election Results, Singapore Parliament, Singapore People's Party, Singapore Politics, SPP, Workers' Party, Workers' Party Assembly Point, WP, WP Celebrations
Categories : Events, History, Observations, Politics, Reflections, Significant Moments in Time, Singapore


text:
Attorney Resource Center
Bus Accident Lawyers
[Ventura Personal Injury Lawyers]
Ventura Personal Injury Lawyers
Relentlessly Advocating for Victims of Catastrophic Personal Injuries
When catastrophic injuries like paralysis, traumatic brain injuries, and loss of limb happen because of another person's negligence, you may assert a claim or file a lawsuit against the responsible person or persons.
At Greene, Broillet & Wheeler, LLP, our skilled legal team represents seriously injured accident victims in Ventura, California. When it comes to serious injury cases, our lawyers have built a reputation for success. We have obtained more money in settlements and verdicts than any other law firm in California.
Our stellar reputation in the community increases the likelihood that insurance companies and their legal counsel will take your case seriously, and we do not shy away from taking cases to trial, if necessary. To find out how we may assist you following a serious accident, please call us today at (310) 576-1200, or contact us online.
Billions of Dollars Recovered for Accident Victims
We are proud of our accomplishments at Greene, Broillet & Wheeler, LLP. Our experienced lawyers have an unparalleled record of success when it comes to securing favorable settlements and jury verdicts for severely injured accident victims. Some of these past results include:
Jury verdict of $4.9 billion against General Motors, where two adults and four children sustained severe burn injuries due to a defective fuel system in a vehicle.
Settlement of $32.5 million following a motor vehicle accident where a passenger suffered serious intestinal injuries, including loss of digestive tract functioning.
Jury verdict of $8.8 million on behalf of a client who sustained a traumatic brain injury in a motor vehicle crash that resulted from another driver's negligence.
Settlement of $2.5 million on behalf of two deceased children who died after a truck with a defective filler neck system and gas cap caught fire.
These are just some of the settlements and jury verdicts that our lawyers have secured on behalf of our injured clients. At Greene, Broillet & Wheeler, LLP, our legal team understands the serious impact that catastrophic injuries can have on accident victims and their loved ones. We can review your case, explain all of your legal options to you, and if we take your case we can use our resources to pursue maximum compensation for your injuries.
Contact Us for Help with Your Personal Injury Case
Choosing the wrong lawyer to represent you in your case can lead to lost compensation—and victims of serious injuries, who are facing millions of dollars in expenses, need every cent. Unfortunately, the law only gives you one opportunity to seek monetary redress for serious injuries sustained in an accident. Therefore, when you hire a law firm or lawyer, you want someone advocating for you with the necessary knowledge, experience, and commitment to excellence to obtain the full compensation you need.
Knowledge and experience – Many lawyers do not have the knowledge or experience to effectively handle catastrophic personal injury cases. Some lawyers settle too quickly and do not take any cases to trial. Although settling a case may be the best option available under some circumstances, at Greene, Broillet & Wheeler, LLP, we are not afraid to take a serious accident case to trial. Given our strong track record of success, insurance companies are more likely to take our cases seriously and offer our clients favorable compensation from the beginning.
Awards and honors – When you sustain serious injuries in an accident caused by someone else's negligence, you want a strong legal team that has earned more multimillion-dollar results than any other California law firm. At Greene, Broillet & Wheeler, LLP, we have earned the distinction of being named the #1 personal injury firm in California from Best Lawyers. The National Law Journal has also rated us as one of the best plaintiff law firms in the country.
Catastrophic Personal Injuries Will Change Your Life
When someone else's negligence causes you or a loved one to suffer catastrophic injuries, a lifetime of medical care, treatment, and rehabilitation may result, costing millions of dollars. You deserve to recover compensation, not only for your injuries, but also for the pain and suffering and trauma that you have gone through. You may also be eligible for compensation for future medical procedures related to your accident.
Catastrophic injuries that your personal injury case may compensate you for include:
Brain injuries – Traumatic brain injuries can occur in a motor vehicle accident, boating accident, or slip-and-fall accident, among others. These injuries occur when the accident victim sustains a blow to the head, or strikes his or her head on something, causing the brain to hit the inside of the skull. This impact can cause the brain's axons and neurons—the brain's "internal wiring"—to malfunction. The resulting problems may include partial or permanent memory loss, inability to function, comas, and even death, depending upon the size and scope of the impact.
Spinal cord injuries – Spinal cord injuries can occur from a serious car or motorcycle accident. These injuries may result in full or partial paralysis, as well as an inability to function or care for oneself.
Burn injuries – Burn injuries can occur in a serious motor vehicle collision, such as when a car catches fire or a product malfunctions. Treating a severe burn injury may involve painful and costly skin grafting, resulting in long periods in a burn ward.
Amputations – In some serious accidents, the accident victim may lose a limb or injure it so severely that it requires amputation. Amputation victims may require ongoing medical care, as well as the need for a prosthetic limb to function.
If you are suffering from a catastrophic injury like one of those listed above, contact Greene, Broillet & Wheeler, LLP, as soon as possible.
Types of Personal Injury Cases We Handle
Some types of catastrophic personal injury cases we regularly handle include:
Car and truck accidents – When a careless, reckless, or distracted car or truck driver collides with your vehicle, especially in a head-on collision, you can often hold the negligent driver and/or his employer (if the driver was in the course and scope of employment) accountable for your injuries. The same holds true for the vehicle owner.
Slip-and-fall accidents – Property owners and business owners have a duty to maintain their property and to warn of known defects. When those defects cause you to suffer a serious injury, you may be able to seek compensation.
Boating accidents – Boat operators have a duty to follow the rules of the water and to operate their watercraft in a careful and safe manner. When they fail to do so and cause you serious injuries, you may have legal recourse.
Product defects – Product manufacturers, designers, and distributors have a duty to ensure that their products are safe for consumer use. They also have a duty to ensure that products, including drugs, are properly tested before they make them commercially available. When manufacturers, designers, and distributors fail in this regard, they can and should be held accountable for serious injuries that result.
We also represent people in public transportation accidents (including bus and school bus crashes), aviation and helicopter accidents, and victims of nursing home abuse and construction accidents.
Depending upon your circumstances, you could recover compensation for medical damages, lost wages, and lost earning capacity, as well as damages for permanent disfigurement and permanent disability. If a loved one died as a result of someone else's negligence, you may pursue a wrongful death claim.
Call Our Knowledgeable Ventura Personal Injury Lawyers Today
If you or a loved one suffered a catastrophic injury in Ventura, please call Greene Broillet & Wheeler today to schedule a free consultation and case evaluation. You can reach us at (310) 576-1200, or contact us online.
Take action and contact us today
*submit and get your free case review
Public Transportation Accidents
Dangerous Property Conditions
Why Hire GBW?
We've obtained more million dollar verdicts and settlement than any other firm in California Even one as high as $3.3 billion. These speak for themselves & show our commitment.
We are credible, respected, and taken seriously by the opposition. We have been named by Best Lawyers "#1 Personal Injury Law Firm in California."
We invest in our clients. This means full-time investigators on staff. Our own evidence warehouse to store and preserve evidence.
Ventura Personal Injury Attorney
During 2+ years of preparing for and going through trial, Bruce Broillet, Scott Carr, and Taylor Rayfield exceeded my expectations. They were impeccably prepared, dedicated to my case, and compassionate. Anytime I had a question or idea, or needed help with anything, they immediately made time for me. I always felt listened to and an integral part of the team. I could tell that they cared about me and my family as people, not just as a "case". All of the experts and consultants that they brought in, (as well as their support staff and additional attorneys from the group that assisted with our case including Aaron Osten and Alan van Gelder) were just as wonderful - the best and brightest AND genuinely caring.
Written by: Leslie M.
$4.9 Billion Defective Products
$3.4 Million Mass Transit Accident
$3.3 Billion Tobacco industry case
$78 Million Industrial Injuries
$73 Million Auto Defect
$58 Million Defective Products
$55 Million Business Litigation
$45.6 Million Legal Malpractice
$33 Million Civil Rights
$32.5 Million Personal Injury
$32.5 Million Auto Accident
$36.1 Million Motor Vehicle Injury
$25.9 Million Auto Defect
$25 Million Construction Injury
$22 Million Motor Vehicle Injury
$21 Million Burn Injuries
$20.7 Million Sexual assault of college student
$17.9 Million Tire Defects
$17.8 Million Burn Injuries
$16.1 Million Construction Injury
$16 Million Vehicle Accidents
$13.8 Million Head Injury
$12 Million Business Law
$12 Million Wrongful Death
$11.3 Million Business Litigation
$10 Million Child Injuries
More Million Dollar Verdicts & Settlements Than Any Other Firm in California See more Results
Susan Santoro "I really believed that God put certain people in my life after Tom was killed, Christine is one of them."
Stella Tommasi "Mark, Thank you so much for all your advice and support, the dedication and efforts that you put into our cases and for really caring."
Meet Mark
Leslie McLaughlin "Their [Taylor's] efforts have changed my life for the better. Two years later I am honored to call them friends and to still be in touch."
Laura Kieffer "They [Ivan] were dedicated to my case and willing to go to trial if necessary. Their experience, confidence, and expertise helped me through one of the most stressful times in my life."
Meet Ivan
Take Action & Contact Us Today
Greene Broillet & Wheeler, LLP. Where Success Is a Tradition®. Let's work together to continue that tradition.
Los Angeles Law Office
100 Wilshire Blvd 21st Floor
Santa Monica, CA 90401 get directions Phone: (310) 576-1200 Fax: (310) 576-1220
© 2020 by Greene Broillet & Wheeler, LLP. All rights reserved. Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Site Map