Sometimes certain things may surprise you and may come to you out of the blue. However, these surprises may really be helpful to you in the long run and can really turn you into a better person. Like life, the production “The Love Letter You’ve Been Meaning to Write New York,” experiences the same situations and may be swayed by its surrounding environment.

Claudia Lo Rocco, in her article “Just Can’t Say Goodbye to Gotham,” discusses the production.  She begins by bringing down some peculiar aspects about the productions such as the hackneyed script, the amateur performers and the strained concept and plot. However, she states that there is something about this production that draws the audience in.

The reviewer then brings down the location of the play which is at the 3LD Art & Technology Center in Lower Manhattan. however, it is not really inside the center, rather it takes place outside on Greenwich Street, making the play all the more exhilarating. The audience sits inside the theater, along with the composer and musicians, as they watch the action unfold through floor to ceiling glass windows.

Lo Rocco continues to give us a little background of the play and provides some information as to her experience of watching it. She explains that the play is about and “young romantic” who’s proposal was rejected by his girlfriend. He contemplates whether or not he can bear to stay in New York. She explains that most of the play is scripted, however, due to their “unpredictable stage” some parts are improvised or come about as a result of traffic flowing through the street. Lo Rocco explains that these moments were her favorite part of the production. Throughout the play many pedestrians strolling the street, stop by and watch as the play goes on and react in different ways. Some passer-bys are confused and bewildered, while others are delighted to see what will happen next.

While reading this article, I was immediately intrigued by the production. The actors of the play are almost in the same position as the audience. Just like us, they are waiting to see what will happen next and don’t really know how it will play out. They must react to certain things going on around them and must be prepared to act out a change in their environment.

When anyone goes to google news, which millions of people do everyday, they get a huge list of links to relevant news stories. However many people are suggesting that google should edit the news so that people get more important news. In Clair Millers article Should Google Tweak the News We Consume? she raises the point that google could decide which kind of news people will read every day. She mentions that many people followed the Casey Anthony trial when they should be reading about life and death situations in Africa.

This article defiantly raises an interesting point. Since google basically decides what millions of people read everyday do they have an obligation to make people read important news. If they were to alter the algorithm used so that it put world news over entertainment then many people would read these articles and be more worldly. I for one think that they should, when I go to google I am always drawn to the cool or funny articles and ignore the important ones. However if there was only important ones I would read those. Google however would lose business doing this so it is not likely to happen. I think that google being the multi billion dollar organization it is could afford to lose some money to make the world a more knowledgeable place.

A lot has been said and written about the ‘addiction’ to technology that the current generation is said to have. Repeatedly, studies are conducted which apparently prove that people can become addicted to social networking sites and gadgets and that separation from these devices can cause people to exhibit ‘withdrawal symptoms’. But I have always been skeptical of these studies simply because I am reluctant to apply a decidedly negative term such as ‘addiction’ to the way I feel about my iPhone.

But Martin Lindstrom’s intriguing article “You Love Your iPhone. Literally”  offers an interesting take on the subject that I am very much inclined to believe. Mr. Lindstrom contends that our relationship to gadgets, specifically Apple gadgets, is not accurately described by the term ‘addiction’ and in fact, more resembles ‘love.’  He bases his argument on an experiment he conducted using fMRIs or functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Subjects in his experiment showed increased activity in the region of the brain associated with love and compassion when they heard or saw their iPhone. I personally own an iPhone 4 and alarmingly, I find that Mr. Lindstrom’s thesis is quite plausible. I feel that this discovery makes iPhones more dangerous than previously suspected because being in love with our phones suggests a deeper emotional impact than in the case of an addiction which may be purely chemical and more shallow.

In his thought-provoking article, Mr. Lindstrom accurately infers that just because ‘love’ is a positive emotion under other circumstances, it is not a good thing that we love our phones – I agree. ‘Love’ is an extremely powerful emotion – one that we should limit to living beings, in my opinion. Other findings Mr. Lindstrom mentions, including the ‘separation anxiety’ that iPhone owners may be experiencing when they accidentally leave their phone at home, have started me thinking hard about my relationship to my phone. Hopefully, the situation is not as alarming as the article suggests.

A common aspect of contemporary theater is innovation. New directors stray from the traditional forms of plays by incorporation interactivity and altering essential parts of a play like the stage and music. The play “The Love Letter You’ve Been Meaning to Write New York” by Jonathan Solari is a prime example of the unconventional methods of a contemporary play.
In her review, Claudia La Rocco paints a vivid description of the play by describing the novelties surrounding this play. She starts the review stating that the play is lacking on “conventional levels,” meaning that the plot, script, and acting are subpar. However, she points out that the real success of this play is the creative stage. “The Love Letter You’ve Been Meaning to Write New York” is obviously about New York, but what makes this play so unique is that the audience sits inside a building looking out a glass wall, and the actors take their roles on the streets. The unpredictable occurrences in the streets make this play very enjoyable.
La Rocco does not describe any further than the stage located on the streets. She leaves out information regarding music and plot, making this review weak at explaining all the facts. But, perhaps it was her intent to say that the creative stage is the only thing worth mentioning.
Even though this play sounds extremely interesting to watch and the review makes it sound very cool, I wonder whether or not the stage method is a gimmick. The review said that it lacked in plot and acting; if you take the actors out of a play what is left? I don’t feel confident that a production would be enjoyable solely based on a trick. I remember watching a 3D movie – Sure, it’s great and novel, but if the movie were bad, would I marvel at the 3D effects? I hope not.
Will “contemporary theater” just be an excuse to try gimmicky techinques? I plan to keep on the lookout for new shows that tread new grounds (like audience-actor relationships) and figure out whether this is just a trend or a viable method for a play.

Art is eclectic, with artists getting ideas anywhere from within their own home to another continent. The dance “Toot Is Loot”, a collaboration between Jennifer Lacey and Wally Cardona, is just that. I think it would be interesting to see a dance show that has not just one theme, but many themes involved because it keeps the show captivating.

In Brian Seibert’s review, “With the Help of Unusual Outsiders, Find Love in Strange Objects”, he gives us a good idea of what to expect from such an eclectic piece. He starts off with some background information about both how this dance came to be and about the choreographers, which is always an interesting read. He knows this particular story is interesting and unusual so he does a good job of grabbing the reader’s attention. He goes on to inform the reader about how Lacey and Cardona each added a piece of themselves into the dance, keeping it unique and original. Even though this review is heavy on the background of the choreographers, it really allowed me to understand why Seibert feels the way he does about this dance.

Seibert covers everything from the dancers’ performances to the musical score of the dance. His review is holistic, and doesn’t spend too much time explaining to us just one aspect (such as the plot of the dance) of “Toot Is Loot”. He is also very honest with the reader in his review, telling us that the ending was confusing for him.

I feel this was a successful review because it told me most of what I needed to know about this dance. The tidbits of information about the background of this dance kept me intrigued and Seibert is not biased.

Last year I had the privilege to attend a flamenco show in NYC. From the distinct music to the precise movements of the dancers, it was quite a memorable experience. Curious in drawing comparisons to the world of flamenco, I read Alastair Macaulay’s review.

“Flamenco Aflame” draws the reader’s attention from the start with a light description of Soledad Barrio, a famous NY flamenco dancer. It illustrates her eloquent technique, and reminds everyone that the true art of beauty is often forgotten, as the intensity of emotions picks up. In Macaulay’s review, a couple unique flamenco pieces are observed, including the “Oda al Amor” Mrs. Barrio performs with Antonio Jimenez. Elegant, sharp movements are executed and emotions run deep as the two struggle with love and death. Understanding and opening your eyes to the true meaning behind each flamenco dance is crucial. It transports you to a different realm where thoughts and feelings are expressed not through voice but through the body.

Also, the mood becomes an essential piece to the story. Just as a piece of poetry uses symbolism, imagery and tone to depict a particular message, different forms of dance can represent a similar notion. Flamenco takes dance to the next level and paints a visual image that can be appreciated by all. With an eye for symbolism and a love for meaningful dance, flamenco can open up your mind and heart.

Artists nowadays are trying to incorporate art in everyday life. In When Life Becomes Art Johnson talks about how artists are shifting towards art that most people can see every day. “It represents efforts by more than 100 artists to expand definitions of art and change social conditions by inventive, nontraditional means.” he says. However, he believes that even though this art is new and intriguing, some of it may not be as well thought out as the others.

His main example is that of a bathroom in a restaurant in the Lower East Side of Manhattan. This piece of art is supposed to denote an executive’s bathroom at an investment bank’s office. He believes that “It is a work of art — not just figuratively, but literally.” Another work of art is called “Palas por Pistolas” a piece made with recycled weapons from Mexico.

Johnson believes that this type of “lifelike art” is something that cannot be stopped. It is modern art’s way of changing itself. He thinks some of the other works are just as good; some even involving people doing the same things at the same time for one day. Even though it is new, Johnson believes that you have to be throughout the entire thing to see this type art at its potential.

An interesting exhibition the Infinite jest is at the Metropolitan museum. The review by Johnson describes the art of caricature, which he states as when artists make fun of other people. The artists do so through “features of the human body that most distinguish one from another: noses, eyes, mouths, chins, teeth, torsos and extremities.” In the review Johnson first describes the art of caricature but then points out the negatives of caricature. He says that as time passes it is harder to understand the caricature. Johnson explains as time goes on the paintings require more verbal explanations to enjoy its humorous deformations.

He points out the painting of Samuel Hieronymus Grimm, which display a boy and his father. In the painting the boy has an enormous wig and requires a sword to tip his hat. It is harder to understand this because such wigs as these went out of fashion a long time ago and wouldn’t be as humorous to someone during that time period than to people of the 21^st century.

Although the reviewer Johnson points out the faults of the exhibition, he believes that the exhibition is a good one and worth checking out. Johnson thinks that, because the job of the caricature artist is to draw realistic yet exaggerated paintings, they are very skilled artists. He states in the last line of the review, “The art of contemporary caricature in all its scabrous glory is as alive today as it ever was. It cries out for a show of its own.” And I agree with him. These painting that mock  political and social behaviors of society would be a wonderful exhibition to check out.