(Click image to enlarge.)
Sam Shepard, R. I. P.
July 31, 2017The following is one of seven blog posts that have appeared on doodlemeister.com featuring Sam Shepard talking about his craft over the years. To read all seven posts, type his name, including capital letters, into the search window off to the right.
Adapted from: The Pathfinder
By John Lahr, The New Yorker, February 8, 2010
The male influences around me (growing up) were primarily alcoholics and extremely violent. I listened like an animal. My listening was afraid.
I just dropped out of nowhere. It was absolute luck that I happened to be there (NYC, 1963) when the whole Off-Off Broadway movement was starting. I think they hired everybody. It was wide open. You were like a kid in a fun park—trying to be an actor, writer, musician, whatever happened . . . . For me, there was nothing fun about the sixties. Terrible suffering . . . . Things coming apart at the seams.
I had a sense that a voice existed that needed expression, that there was a voice that wasn’t being voiced. There were so many voices that I didn’t know where to start. I felt kind of like a weird stenographer . . . . There were definitely things there, and I was just putting them down. I was fascinated by how they structured themselves.
When you write a play, you work out like a musician on a piece of music. You find all the rhythms and the melody and the harmonies and take them as they come . . . . Break it all down in pairs. Make the pairs work together, with each other. Then make ’em work against each other, independent.
I preferred a character that was constantly unidentifiable . . . instead of embodying a “whole character,” the actor should consider his performance “a fractured whole with bits and pieces of character flying off the central theme,” . . . . to make a kind of music or painting in space without having to feel the need to completely answer intellectually for the character’s behavior.
Character is something that can’t be helped. It’s like destiny . . . . It can be covered up, it can be messed with, it can be screwed around with, but it can’t be ultimately changed. It’s like the structure of our bones, and the blood that runs through our veins.
(I was) dead set against revisions because I couldn’t stand rewriting . . . . (The plays) were chants, they were incantations, they were spells. You get on them and you go. Plays have to go beyond just working out problems. (They have to move) from colloquial territory to poetic country.
I hate endings. Just detest them. Beginnings are definitely the most exciting, middles are perplexing, and endings are a disaster.
Evolution of a “Gag” Idea
December 20, 2016The above sketch is the first sloppy glimmer of a cartoon idea, one I thought worth developing. (Click images to enlarge.) Note that in this early stage I’m already making edits to the caption. By the end of the process, the idea suggested by the doodle will become something else altogether.
Once I have a visual idea, I use tracing paper to refine the image. My goal is to sharpen the drawing without losing the vitality of the original, something I find difficult to achieve. Here I’m also using the side of my pencil lead to freely suggest a possible shading scheme for the final drawing. (I use blue pencil because it’s cleaner to work with than graphite.) Meanwhile, I’ve also begun to play with a very different idea for the caption. It’s not unusual for one of my cartoon ideas to change by a word or two, but for the caption to do a complete flip — as happened in this case — is rare.
Back to the drawing. In stage three of the process I go over the lines, this time in ink, still trying to keep the image as “spontaneous” as possible. My line work generally fails to express the illusion of volume and shape that I’m after, so I add shading with a black Prismacolor pencil. After working a bit more to sharpen the new caption, I scan the inked image into Photoshop for the final cleanup. My goal is to make the corrections, additions, deletions, size changes, etc., appear to be as “natural” — as un-computer-like — as possible.
And finally, here’s the finished cartoon. You’ll notice that I’ve decided to go with the second, “too old for me” version of the caption, which I’m convinced is the better punchline. But I could be wrong. What do you think—did I make the right choice?