Tom Stoppard said one thing that's been bugging me all day. The play he was discussing "Night and Day", which was written in 1978, has a scene where a woman feels guilty for committing adultery in a hotel room. Stoppard said that in 1978 adultery was shocking, but that in 2002 adultery is more or less acceptable. When has adultery ever been acceptable? I was so shocked he said this. I supposed he's right when he says, we're not shocked, but he was sort of saying that a one night adulterous affaire in a hotel was okay in 2002.

Maybe I'm old fashioned but I would be freaked out if my husband told me he had a one night stand in hotel. I was freaked when boyfriends fooled around, and promptly broke up with them, telling them if you can't be faithful to me when we're exclusively dating and there's no pressure, you're not going to be faithful to me when we're married and we're fighting, bored or sometimes sick of each other. Plus with all the diesease going around, the guy was not on jeapordizing their health but mine as well.

I watched my mom go through this with my dad, and grew up watching her go to pieces every time this happened. My dad was severely old fashioned and european and thought it was his right to have affaires, as long as he didn't leave the marriage. I remember hearing him tell my brother that fooling around for men was perfectly acceptable, but not for women. I saw first hand how infidelity destroys people. My parents never divorced but spent the rest of their lives, until my dad died, torturing each other over my father's infidelity. The things my mother went through were gross, sordid and dirty. I'm not sure how my mom survived my father's history of affaires, but my mom is strong and I know I inherited my strength from her.

Maybe adultery is acceptable in London and other places, but never in my world. The woman in his play has line which goes something like "hotel rooms have another morality". Stoppard said that there's an interrupted clap that happens in the audience. Some people clap, but then then stop themselves since they know to clap is wrong. It makes me wonder if those people clapping have had one night stands in hotel and are in committed relationships?

What's interesting about watching Ken Burns' Civil War documentary is that the issues of the civil war still exist in our society today. What Burns fails to show in his documentary is what the south believed about the civil war. I believe that a a person from the south would say that the civil war was fought over state's rights, and not slavery. Slavery was essential to the southern economy, and the south was trying to protect their economy and their way of life. I'm not saying that slavery was right, because it was and is so incredibly wrong, but at the time of the civil war this was not the prevailing view.

It would have been more thought provoking if Burns had shown what the Union and Confederate's reasons for the civil war, and then tried to reconcile both points of view, or have the scholars who speak in the documentary reconcile the two viewpoints. State's rights is still a hot button issue today, as it was in civil war times. I'm not even sure if the two sides can be reconciled. I think it's like everything else in life, that it's a spooky high wire balancing act, and that there are good reasons for state's rights and government's rights. And depending on the issue, I find myself on either side.

I know it's important to try to simplify issues to understand them, and to say it's black and white, that it's either this or that. But I don't think that's possible. I think it can be this and that. This must be my classic post modern situational ethics coming through.

It's important to me to see both sides of any issue, because I think that's the only way to understand something. I'm not sure that Ken Burns' Civil War documentary does that. His documentary is fantastic. I just think he shrank from confronting the very serious issues of the civil war, issues that still haunt american society today and probably will forever.

My blog is acting all wonky again. When I click on my blog, it doesn't even show up. What is going on?

I am in a oddly silent mood today. I didn't feel like posting last night either, but here's a recap. Tom Stoppard was great. He sat on stage with Carey Perloff, the ACT head chick, for about an hour and talked about his play. The last 15 minutes was devoted to questions from the audience. Tom Stoppard has delicious english accent. I think my dialect acting teacher would have called it a "regimental accent". He rolled his r's, he said "um" and paused before every sentence, as if every word and thought mattered to him. He used big words, which is rare in celebrity type interviews.

Other things of note. He spend three years researching before he writes a play on a subject that he knows nothing about. He said that "narrative structure or the architecture" of his plays, is the most important thing to him and allows him to create stories. Perloff said he was the one of the few writers, who neatly and seemlessly ties up all the details and loose ends in his plays.

I ran into two people I know, but decided not to speak to them. On the way to the theatre, I saw this guy whom I met in acting class. I had to do a scene with him, and he flaked out on me. He's a nice, and has even been in a few plays, but he's very strange, and I didn't want to deal with him.

At the Tom Stoppard event, I saw this woman who I used to work with at my last job. She used to always put on airs about how rich she was, and how she and her husband went to symphony and just did all these great things. No one in my group could stand her. She was also a serious food nazi, as she seemed to be allergic to every food on the planet, so eating out with her was so unpleasant to say the least. I spent to many lunch hours hearing her torture waiters, and then complain endlessly about the food when she got it. A friend in the office told me that she was spreading vicious rumors about me in the office. I didn't want to speak to her either, even though she was sitting two rows from me. She's the type of person I don't feel guilty about ignoring. She kept looking at me, but I just looked the other way. It's mean I know, but I don't see why I should be civil to someone who was spreading a vicious rumors about me in our former place of employment.

The Tom Stoppard event was kind of like a who's who in SF Bay Area theatre. There were many actors there I recognized from plays, who were part of the audeince. I think that the man who played King Lear in a production last year, was sitting in my row. This man is a great actor, and always gets cast in a major role every year.

Then I watched the Civil War series. The Battle of Gettsburg was so interesting. If Robert E. Lee hadn't miscalculated the strength of the confederate army, I wonder if the civil war would have gone on longer. Gettysburg was such a turning point in the war. I sat watching the events unfold on the third day of the Battle of Gettysburg, and said "God, the Union army was so lucky!"

Shelby Foote mentioned that Willaim Faulkner wrote in his novel "Intruder in the Dust", that every southern boy could envision himself at Gettyburg on the morning of the third day feeling that the South still had a chance to win. Pickett's Charge was a tragic disaster, and I cannot imagine what the common confederate soldier must have thought as he marched into what he knew was his certain death. The confederate army was slaughtered, literally and emotionally. The narrator said that whole regiments were wiped out during Pickett's Charge.

I would like to watch that movie "Gettysburg", but the Blockbuster I rent movies from has the box for it but not the videos. I should probably ask one of the clerks where the movie is.

I saw a blue bird on the way to the work. Whenver I see a blue bird, I always say to myself "it's the blue bird of happiness and it's a good sign". Blue birds are so rare here.