Fight Evil!

I had a great time chatting with the House people last night about this spiffy new weblog. Quite a few had questions and some of those questions dealt with how to make links and images appear in the entries. Have no fear, my assistant and I will help set things straight!
(Update: Since comments also support HTML, this is applicable to commenters, as well as the privileged posters.)
Lesson one – links. Links to other sites and pages are really easy. All that is needed is what’s called an Anchor tag in HTML-land. For example, if I wanted a link that looked like this:

My assistant, the incredible dancing hippo, loves to teach people how to make links.

looks like this in HTML-speak:

My assistant, <a href="http://homepage.mac.com/cjkarr/daddy.gif">the incredible dancing hippo</a>, loves to teach people how to make links.

The stiff < and > characters are used to form tags. Typically, there are two types of tags, start tags and end tags. An opening tag would look something like this:

<tag name="value">

A closing tag looks like this:

</tag>

The name="value" bit above is called an attribute. Not all tags have attributes, but the anchor (<a>) tag does. The href attribute tells the web browsers where they should go once someone clicks the link.
In addition to anchor tags, there are tags for bolding and italicizing text. For example:

This is bold text, while this is italicized text.

looks like this in HTML-speak:

<b>This is bold text</b>, while <i>this is italicized text.</i>

Please be careful to close these tags after use. If they are not closed, the text below will continue being bold or italicized until the browser hits a closing tag.
If you would like to center text, there is also a tag for that:

<center>This is centered text.</center>

Pretty easy, no?
Finally, to post an image, there is an img tag. To post an image into the page like this:

the code looks like this:

<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/cjkarr/daddy.gif" />

Note that this does not have a close tag and that the tag ends with />. This slash at the end of a tag tells the browser not to expect a closing tag. Since there is no real concept of a closing tag with an image, this works okay.
Images can also be links. To take our assistant above and make him clickable:

use this code:

<a href="http://kozo.apparitiondesigns.com/"><img src="http://homepage.mac.com/cjkarr/daddy.gif" border="0" /></a>

Any questions?

the following fabulous offer for FREE THEATRE has now expired
stay tuned to The House for our next fabulous offer…
FREE PANTS! (or something)
Hey Super Fans!
What’s better than a House show?  A FREE House show!Next weekend, on Friday, March 4th and Sunday, March 6th, The House is offering you a chance to see some Free Plays!  [...]

Well, Hello, Hello. My name is Chris Mathews. I’m the other half of this play-wrighting duo, along with the casual executive, Jake Minton.
For about two weeks now, Jake has been all the rave about the new House Theatre Weblog. He keeps telling me about how “awesome” it is and how I should get in there and “whip up the mashed potatoes.” I don’t really know what he means by that last part, but I just keep nodding and grinning skeptically. Plus, I’ve been busy. Doing what? I dunno, hard at work WRITING THE PLAY that Jake is so excited to talk to everyone about.
Truth be told, I’ve never blogged. And I feel a little bit like the kid at the swimming pool who still has his shirt on. And is afraid of the Ghost of Marco Polo.
But I’ve promised Jake an entry, and since he’s off being the daimyo of Kyoto for the night, here I am, dabbing my feet in the water. (My bathing suit’s orange, by the way.)
But it comes not just from the obligation, but even more the spurring I’ve gotten from reading some of the comments on time travel theory and how those can be/have been used to weave stories that keep us fascinated far beyond the sheer telling. Wait a minute, read that back out loud; is that even a sentence? And I’m writing a play?
It seems that there are two basic avenues a time-travel theory/story can stroll down:
1. Events in time are subjective and the time-traveler has influence over those events, their actions affecting the time-line as a whole. (BTTF) 2. Events in time are objective and the time-traveler has no other influence over those events than the role he/she is already playing (or will play) in their occurence. (12 Monkeys)
And then of course there are all sorts of other thorough-fares and alleyways the storyteller gets to trot down to tell the story it wants to tell.
Please tell me if I’m leaving a fundamental out. I think the story pretty much has to work as one or the other, right?
I’ll post my comments…now:
Quantum Leap was, in guise, a strict #1, but they liked to keep you guessing sometimes by dipping into the #2 category. The show’s entire premise necessitates an adherence and belief that things can be changed (“wrongs can be righted”), but oh they liked to getchya when they’d reference pop-culture we already know as having happened. Are you telling me my ten-year old socks weren’t blown clean off my feet in the JFK episode with the line “No, Sam, you did it. She lives.” HE WAS THERE ALL ALONG! (Or, IN THEIR UNIVERSE JACKIE GOT SHOT TOO!) It’s hard not to resist indulging in that kind of schweet, schweet corn. I mean, thank God, Marty re-unites his mother and father on the dance floor, but thank the even Mightier God that he invents rock n’ roll for Chuck Berry. But if we apply #2 ethics to watching Back to the Future, that’s no fun because he causes a huge problem, and what’s the fun of thinking, “He fixes it, I know he does because they’re eating peanut brittle in that earlier scene.”
I can’t believe I’m blogging.
#2 can seem very pessimistic, it’s certainly fatalistic. Perhaps so because the most potent example is 12 Monkeys where the consequences of understanding that theory are so devastating. Back to the Future had such a pop-impact on how we all viewed “event-adjustment” and hoped it could be, the recognition/reveal of the contrasting theory in 12 Monkeys had that much more of an advantage on us in blowing our freakin’ minds. To begin watching it now, with the mind-set that we’re living in a world where #2 is the rule, you can know instantly, “Well, they’re all screwed.”
The enjoyment comes from the thrill-ride of the script’s story and Gilliam’s story-telling. It’s not the destination, it’s the journey, or something. It’s the HOW it unfolds, and ultimately, what the story’s about. Cole is not trying to have adventures time-travelling, he’s trying to gain his freedom. Back to the Future isn’t about a crazy car and the hijinks it causes, it’s about a kid trying to save his parents’ marriage. The world of The Time Traveler’s Wife lives by the #2 rule, but the story is about two people’s love for each other and is woven in such a way that it defies its sci-fi roots. I agree with my co-author about the back-drop comment.
I suppose we’re always hoping that the rules of #1 will prevail, or that we’re living in a #1 world. Of course we are, why else does one invent a time machine. And we should, continue to hope.
Time-travel buffs are going to see elements of all of our favorite time-travel stories present in our humble story. Quantum Leap, Back to the Future, 12 Monkeys, The Time Traveler’s Wife–A-Right-On! As to which theory we’re ascribing to, I can’t promise that we’re re-defining the rules, attempting to play out of the ball-field of any pattern with which we’re not already familiar, or even that you’re going to see cheap time-travel clauses that you haven’t seen before. I can only ask that you put yourselves in Dave’s shoes as he figures it out along the way. Besides, who wants to know how a play is going to end in the first five minutes, anyway?
MARCO! Chris
P.S. Did you see Don Knotts’s face? What’s happening to him?

P.S.S. Now that you’ve read this post, don’t re-read the title and think that it has any connection to the body. It was just an impish point-counterpoint to my friend, Jake. But seriously, the script is in shambles.

Wheeee-oooh! (Texas style) Chris Mathews and I just finished a rough, rough, diamond in the rough draft last night and shot it off to the design and production team.  Here at The House, we’ve introduced the phrase “poop draft” to denote a very rough rough draft.  Our second production meeting  for Dave DaVinci Saves the [...]

They fight. They fly.

These were the final stage directions in the original draft of Curse of the Crying Heart. Four words that took almost 9 weeks to fully realize on stage.

Lets see, where do I begin. Shawn Pfautsch, Matt Hawkins and myself started hand to hand combat training way back in October practicing [...]

This is Chris, the blog guy here. I just wanted to post a quick note that will help readers and writers on this site. When a post is made on a particular topic by a House member, it helps greatly if readers try and stay on topic with their comments.
As a fellow fan of the company (I have only started helping them with their blog in the past few weeks), I also understand that there are a lot of questions that fans have for the actors, writers, and everyone else in the company. An “open thread” is a place where someone from the blog basically posts an invitation for the readers to sound off on whatever they would like. If you have something to say about a particular play or piece and there isn’t a post, the open thread is the place to do it. If you want to chat with other House fans, and it’s not entirely on topic, the open thread is your virtual water cooler. Ideally, there’ll be regular open thread postings that will be accessible via the front page.
That said, post away and ask questions below. The company members have been interested in getting started blogging, but some wonder what they would write about. Here’s a chance for us fans to give them a bit of help.
Update: I’ve been monitoring the visitor stats to see how people are finding the weblog. As anticipated, Google is a big part of this, but I didn’t expect the House appeal to be global until I found someone coming in via translated links. Now, I’m not up on my Italian, but this is pretty cool stuff.
In particular, this made me laugh:

Nelle parole del Chris grande Mathews… Mettiamo Sopra I Nostri Capes!
(English: In the words of the great Chris Mathews… Let’s Put On Our Capes!)

I am so excited to have a place to talk about The Valentine Trilogy with the fans!
In the category “The Valentine Trilogy”, I’ll be writing mainly about the trilogy and whats going on in our process for finishing it next season. I’d love to hear more about what people think of the story and what you’d like to see in part 3. I’ve also heard some rumors that a few of you are writing some stories of your own around the characters. Prequel stuff to San Valentino and The Melancholy Kid? Please post it! I’d love to read it!
We’ve had some really fascinating talkbacks and a lot of questions have been asked about the conflict of reincarnation and continuity in the trilogy. I’m still figuring a lot of it out myself so the questions are totally helpful, and I’ll do my best to explain the general concept of how it works here…
The Valentine Trilogy (originally titled The Valentine Tragedy) follows one story across three independent incarnations of the characters. It is a basic hero-myth triptic ala Star Wars or Lord of the Rings, and to my knowledge is the only such story intended for the modern theater. (Please tell me if there are more).
Part One: “San Valentino and The Melancholy Kid” begins the hero journey as an American Western and deals in themes of Revenge and Forgiveness.
Part Two: “Curse of the Crying Heart” reincarnates the few surviving characters in fuedal Japan to witness our young hero’s fall from grace while exploring themes of Love and Sacrifice.
Part Three: tentatively titled “The Revenge of Valentine” will move our broken Superhero to 1930’s Chicago where he will fight Mobsters, Nazis, and Robots to win his Redemption. You can check out Valentine in this form at http://www.thehousetheatre.com/valentine/
Continuity works in strange ways between each part. The Hero has a different name but still carries the brand in Part 2, even if it is a slightly different mark. And was Angeline the Princess of Mexico? Of course not. The Gun is then a Sword, and will be the A-bomb. Who knows what holes we are creating in the universe! But somehow the story is traceable by the character’s relationships, and ultimately by the impending battle for the weapon between the hero and the demon. Please share your ideas for how each of the stories can work in each of the different realities. The potential fan-fiction is potentially Hugo-award winning!
So let me know what you think of it all! I can’t wait to hear your ideas. And for the music fans, Ill be posting some of the music and notes about what im listening to under the Music category in the future.
In the words of the great Chris Mathews…
Let’s Put On Our Capes!
Nate

Hi Friends,
Just wanted to make the first Blog entry in the Dave DaVinci category here at The House’s new Blog site.  Dave DaVinci Saves the Universe is The House’s next show, opening in May at the Viaduct.
Chris Mathews, fellow company member and my DaVinci co-author/roommate, and I are hard at work finishing what will, no [...]

Rock Rock On!
The House has its own blog! A big thanks to our blog-guide Chris Karr for helping to make it possible.
We learn so much from our fans and it is our hope that this is a step towards building a stronger sense of community with the folks who see our shows. We hope to offer our fans and friends a direct connection to The House in a forum that allows for instant feedback on our shows, and our artists.
Rejoice! Complain! Tell us what to do! Criticize the music! Tell an actor why they sucked last night! Or why you want to date them! Write fan-fiction! Start an underground rock-theatre revolution! This is your chance to be heard and to have your questions answered!
In exchange we’ll be posting top secret news, photos, video clips, invitations to House events, company member profiles, junk we like, and questions for all of you on the kind of stuff you’d like to see!
Go Computer Go!
Nathan Allen
Artistic Director

Review by Nina Metz of Newcity.
“For cows and sage and land that’s fenceless/Ropes and spurs and horse’s dances/For whiskey, when Captain grants us/But most of all for second chances.” There’s a certain perfection to that toast–a cowboy’s prayer of simple beauty–delivered by Ben Lobpries as Sal, a schoolteacher turned cattle rustler whose droopy mustache alone is enough to break your heart. There are many such moments in The House Theatre’s latest original production, “San Valentino and the Melancholy Kid,” a rock ‘n’ roll Western with wit and heart and plenty of big aspirations, the brainchild of the company’s artistic director, Nathan Allen. Set in the years after the Civil War, the story follows a group of cowboys herding cattle across desolate, unsettled prairie land. The Melancholy Kid (Allen) joins up with the crew, in search of the man who killed his father. The scenes are punctuated by songs sung by Allen (who also wrote the words and music) with the onstage band, and while this setup tends to stop things in their tracks, the tunes are impressively catchy–Allen has an Adam Duritz-like wail that gives the rockabilly score real texture. The show itself has an unruly, bursting-at the-seams quality that all but screams ingenuity, but it actually detracts from the experience as a whole, something director Dennis Watkins might have sidestepped by eliminating an idea or three. Then again, the philosophy of this young theater troupe has always been more is more, and if you’re going to resurrect Western iconography, you might as well go all the way–though it prompted multiple snickers from the couple next to me. But the ensemble pulls it off (aided by Michael Griggs’ topnotch sound design) with the aforementioned Lobpries, Jake Minton, Stephen Taylor and Matthew Hawkins as the saddest bunch of cowpokes you’ll ever see–and I mean that in the best way possible.