Read-throughs can be fun to attend as a reader or gopher but when you’re the writer, you can only gird your loins and approach it as an instructive exercise.<\/p>\n
One of the nice things about a closed read-through is that the atmosphere is collegial: it’s okay to say, This dialogue sucks<\/i> because it’s understood that the speaker will then say why<\/i> it sucks, and maybe even suggest how<\/i> it can be made to suck less, all in a thick fug of We’re here about the work<\/b><\/i>.<\/p>\n
A public reading – well, that’s a different kettle of hedgehogs. There’s the possibility – no matter how remote in these ever-so-polite South Pacific isles – that someone in the crowd will say, That sucks!<\/i> and hide in the mass of unfamiliar faces. And I suspect that stalking up and down the stage eye-fucking every suspicious-looking audience member and yelling WHO SAID THAT?<\/i> is not really the look I want to promote.<\/p>\n
Saturday’s public reading<\/a> had no such impromptu drama – all the drama was scripted, there was polite applause, and at the end of each reading, there were questions and comments that forced the writers to think and consider<\/i>.<\/p>\n Ah, humanity: how I love thee at times.<\/p>\n With just over four weeks to go<\/a> (30 days, to be precise), the production<\/a> exudes a quiet confidence while the writer goes through 250 grams of cocoa product<\/a> a day and worries at the script, desperately trying not to think that any day now, he will have to let go of it and trust in the director and actors.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Read-throughs can be fun to attend as a reader or gopher but when you’re the writer, you can only gird your loins and approach it as an instructive exercise. One of the nice things about a closed read-through is that the atmosphere is collegial: it’s okay to say, This dialogue sucks because it’s understood that … <\/p>\n