Hi there. Today on Typical Books we're going to be talking about my top books for 2023. I read 30, 31 books and I have 30 that I can rank and it is painful because I did read quite a few books by authors I know and authors that I got to meet. So it's painful taking some books away from this list. Goodbye 2023. Hello 2024 and my reading list is off to a really good start this year but I'll say that for a future video. Right now we're talking about the things that I had read in 2023. Now no doubt you have seen other people's ranked videos. I'm a little bit behind in getting to this but it takes a little bit to get this glorious tableau ready for consumption. Yes 30 some books. I'll probably pop in and out through this video as I normally do if you've watched my ranked videos before. I think this is the third or fourth year that I've been doing this and I really do like doing them. It's a little bit lazy in that I get to open up Photoshop and play around, move pictures of books around. A huge thanks to Goodread because I took all of these from that website and I track everything. Now notoriously I don't give star ratings to every single book so if you see something that you're interested in hearing me talk more about here let me know if I don't already have a review on the show about it. I know there's quite a few here I did talk about in depth on the show already so I'm not going to review everything in depth as we go but I have a copy of the video playing. I'll talk through it as we discuss every single book I read in 2023. Now as we can see here the 30 books arranged thus I have a couple other books I think that I'd forgotten to add to this list odd as it is but yeah we'll go through them one by one. They are all arranged randomly and I do go through rearranging them quite often throughout this video so yeah I just think it's fun to think about my reading in this manner and try and figure out what the top 10 were because if you were to ask me on the street I would be dumbfounded and I may choose something that doesn't fit. You'll notice that the Richard layman book the woods are dark the background I find matches this glorious background that I have chosen. It's tough to not keep it in the running just because of that. There are two non-fiction books. Create Something Awesome by Roberto Blake and Naomi Klein's doppelganger which I'll talk a little bit more about in a minute but I'm taking them out of the running not because they weren't enjoyable because they are massive outliers. Next year there will probably be more non-fiction books in the running but since there's only two I will just say I enjoyed the heck out of both of them. Now in no order I will go through each book one by one as they appear randomly on this page. First up of course the woods are dark by Richard layman. Pogging Holes by Juan Valencia and it's a short story collection. There's a couple of those on this list as well more outliers where the ocean was a collection by Nathaniel Giles and The House on the Borderland by William Hope Hodgson. Closer by Dennis Cooper you could talk to one for more Dennis Cooper really but yeah uh enjoyable read very enjoyable read. Bad Blood by Tobin Elliott I've been sleeping on the rest of this series and I really need to get to it sooner than later. Playground by Aaron Beauregard very popular book I've been seeing a lot of fan art from that lately online. Boom by Duncan Ralston an amazing reach this book has had a lot more reach than you would suspect. Brian Keane's Darkness on the Edge of Town. I loved this. I loved this book and it is a new read for me I should have read it ages ago. Allure by Tim McGregor loved this. Dead of Winter Darcy Coates it's the Dead of Winter right now it's quite fitting. Nothing but black and teeth I have an in-depth review about that and it's mixed reviews. Shadow Dancers of Brixton Hill by Nicole Wilson absolutely enjoyable highly recommended novella. Wasp in the Ice Cream another really highly recommended novella by Tim McGregor. There's another Tim McGregor on this list too and Richard Lamons Island I have a video about that particular book as well same with Wasp in the Ice Cream. The Spite House by Johnny Compton really fun I have really enjoyed this. Most of these are just really good picks this year. The Bat by Yonezbo you may recall I talked a little bit about that in review and depth but I did enjoy it quite a lot. Grey Noise by Marcus Hawke I have other Marcus Hawke to get to as well really enjoyed Grey Noise a novella and The Devil's Promise by Celso Hurtado highly recommended YA but like edging into adult horror fiction demonic horror fiction too. The Grimmer by Naban Ratnam and I am probably mispronouncing his name yet again really good book. Yonezbo's Night House. The Night House was great. I loved that. It's weird that there's two Yonezbo's in this list and I just realized that sign by side at that. Dark Harvest by Norman Partridge we reviewed that on the show and watched the film that just came out so huge highly enjoyable Exquisite Corpse by Poppy C Bright also known as Billy Martin hugely enjoyable this was a reread quite a few of these were rereads actually especially the Richard layman stuff of course Samantha Kloss Nix Lonesome Haunts I enjoyed that it's a collection of three short stories Alex E. Harrow's Starling House a new book and The Hobbit by Tolkien that very old book and I read that right at the end of the year that was like one of the last books that I read so there's two gaps here for the non-fiction books that I'd read create something awesome by Roberto Blake if you don't watch a lot of gurus and you have a youtube channel you know I caution people against watching those types of videos but Roberto Blake's really pretty good there's a Brian Johnston guide as well that talks about youtube is a youtube guru but if you're not into watching those videos read Roberto's book I know Cyn from Cyn's book nook has read it because she talked about this book and I saw her in the chat of Roberto Blake at live stream once so yeah helpful interesting good book if you like that DIY stuff sort of self-help-y kind of stuff then create something awesome fun and a different kind of fun we have Naomi Klein's doppelganger and I enjoyed that immensely as well this year now you'll know it's not you know that light hardened it's kind of a dark horrible thing especially if like me like people in Ottawa you lived through the brunt of the convoy and a lot of like COVID lockdown hysteria in larger cities for long-form journalism though I like it and I'm going to get to no logo sooner than later so we'll take the non-fiction out of the running entirely for the purposes of this scramble so we shall begin removing books properly and like the hobbit I want to just take out but I did enjoy it it's a it's a fantastic read so even though it was a reread lots of these were reread I'm going to leave it in for now and we'll begin the call the first cut is the deepest we're going to uh eliminate Samantha Kloss next a little some haunts it just wasn't for me it is a sapphic collection and although I do enjoy all of her other work that I've read so far and want to read more it's just not for me so yeah that one goes forgive a few of these is flashing I'm just trying to see where they are right like night and long some October that was a reread but it's staying next to go will be the grimmer it is a YA story and it just not entirely for me I did enjoy the fact that it was a twist on the drug use problem in fiction in that it was the father with the drug problem and not the son but it was just a little too YA for my taste next to go will be the bat by Yonezbo and I'm not just being cruel because it's true crime it's just not for me entirely I'm not super memorable so I liked it I liked it quite a lot looking forward to reading the french version sometime this year if I'm lucky but yeah now the the bat is out of here up next will be the paul bearer's club I liked it again it doesn't really stick with me I don't think about it often I mostly forgot that I read it but I would love to see a film of this very much very very much so yeah it's just not top 10 material and I try and think of these eliminations as would this be in my top three and then think down from there paul bearer's club wouldn't be in the top three and not top 10 subsequently next to eliminate is playground by Aaron Beauregard I didn't not enjoy it like I'd fun reading it I don't really get the hype I mean it was an interesting read but it had so many weird turns of phrase and I hesitate to say not good writing because I'm not here to pick on it but there were like 10 things that I highlighted while reading that that were just absurd and not absurd because there's a lot in the book that is absurd but just not like writing that trip me up and it was just very awkward but yeah it was fun it was just not certainly not top 10 not top three next to go is the house on the borderland by William Holp Hodgson again just not a super enticing read for me the first third of the book or the first like fifth of the book I really liked and I like the last few pages that tie into that but everything in the middle is just the time of cosmic horror that does not work for me I'm pretty picky I can read any slasher in the world but cosmic horror there's a small handful that really works for me and this is not one of them next to go would be Richard layman's the woods are dark I just not a huge fan I like wrong turn and wrong turn the original film where they follow a lot of the family in the woods not the survivors or victims and I found that this was that sort of story that really follows the survivors and victims far too much not as strong as work really it's really not and there were some like chunks in it that made very little sense I like the alternate ending because there was like a missing ending to this particular book but yeah it's just not top 10 material so next the spite house Johnny Compton I saw Johnny Compton talk I really like this not super memorable though and I'm looking forward to his next work for a debut was really good though I will say um but yeah spite house just not for me because I mean if unless somebody asked me do you have any good books about spite houses I don't know who I'd recommend it to next to go in the great cull of 2023 is nothing but blackened teeth by Cassandra Caw I liked it it was fun not top 10 material it's the cover that really speaks to me but we're not judging covers here today if it was top cover competition they would win but no it's not in the top 10 and what we'll say the 11th cut is the deepest the Hobbit by Tolkien it's great it's a fantastic book but I read it for a utilitarian purpose and it was just a reread that I do so very often and I it would just be so weird to have it rank so as much as I love the Hobbit it's a great book this isn't the great books of all time though this is the greatest books that I read in 2023 Hobbit is out of the running and back to another layman night in the lonesome october I liked it it's great it's just not that great of a book you know it's not his strongest book in my estimation I liked it it was a good reread but not in the top 10 dark harvest this is kind of a tough one you know I liked it I would recommend it and I do look forward to rereading it but there's so many other great books here up against it it's out of the running this time and we'll eliminate two kind of quickly it's uh it's tough for me it's getting tough especially when we're getting into Canadian authors or authors that I've talked to authors that I really appreciate uh Marcus Hawk has sent me quite a few books I'm looking forward to reading the rest Grey Noise is excellent it's made it this far but I will eliminate it and Devil's Promise by Celso Hurtado really great really great book not as I didn't like it as much as uh Ghost Tracks I guess because I think Ghost Tracks made my list last year but here we are I think I just read a lot more powerful books this year as all and another painful one poking holes Juan Valencia really great book a really really strong book and I highly recommend his short stories to everyone especially if you're looking for something well quite a bit darker uh yeah definitely check out Juan's book not in the top 10 and hey you know what if I'm not going to include Juan Valencia in my top 10 Dennis Cooper can't be in it either so really excellent novella long novella short novel really liked closer it's out of the running as is Island by Richard layman because it's not the top 11 it's top 10 so in no particular order we have Alexi Harrow Starling House Wasps in the Ice Cream by Tim McGregor Exquisite Corpse by Poppy Z Bright Duncan Rolston's Womb Where the Ocean Was by Nathaniel Agiles Bad Blood by Tobin Elliot Yonezbo's The Nighthouse Dead of Winter by Darcy Cotes Brian Keen Darkness on the Edge of Town and Lure by Tim McGregor it's fantastic to me that I have two Tim McGregors on this list so I'll just straighten these up these books here and I'm trying to arrange them a little bit better so we can get a sense of where they fit into the books that were eliminated now rearranged everything behind them including the nonfiction books just so we can have a real sense of where these 10 are chosen out of 30 it might seem like a pretty easy thing to do to choose 10 of your favorite things out of 30 things but they're all really strong reads I really curated a good reading list I think this year so if you're interested in horror at all of any sort here's something for you I'm sure out of these 30 books now the really tough part is arranging this line of 10 books that are still random into what I really like 1 through 10 and rank these this is tough but you know I'm gonna just start with some of these middle books where the ocean was and by blood that sort of sits where I would suspect they would sit Lure I enjoyed a lot you know I enjoyed where the ocean was more styling house dead of winter like all these really fantastic strong books this is so tough like picking your favorite children the one book I know that goes at the end of this because it's not a top nine list because it's a top 10 you and I's both the night house made it in so it goes there dead of winter I enjoyed so very much and this is really kind of about where it would sit I think we'll see it may move all this might move the books that are left over are pretty sharp books though we might move some stuff around here I don't know womb I know I enjoyed it I enjoyed it so very much did I enjoy was with the ice cream more yes I did exclusive corpse that's oh my it's in the top three that's one thing for sure same with starling house now there we go much better yeah there is our ranked list top 10 books of 2023 exquisite corpse by poppy c bright fantastic stuff brian keen's darkness on the edge of town I absolutely loved it shocking stuff alexie harrow's starling house beautifully written sort of fantasy book really wasps in the ice cream for fans of old steven king and wishing he can get back to it it's okay you have tim mcgregor and this particular book duncan ralston's womb if you're exploring some uh extreme horror definitely check that out where the ocean was by nathaniel a child's short dark kind of odd horror stories that I think you would really enjoy if you like quieter stuff or if you're a chuck palinac fan that wants to get into a horror and ghost stories that aren't really like ghostly ghost stories yeah more modern quiet horror you'll enjoy nathaniel a giles bad blood by toben elliott if you're looking for some updated modern stuff and you really enjoyed reading something like steven king's green mile that was told in like novellas then bad blood and that series is for you there is a full length novel within the series but as far as I recall the rest of novellas so yeah definitely start with bad blood though lure by tim mcgregor the second tim mcgregor and quite a few canadian authors on this list as well uh yeah mermaid horror I don't think I'm spoiling it from the cover you can see there's a mermaid on there quite clearly uh very dark very cool seaside cosmic horror Darcy coats dead of winter now she may not be canadian she may be from down under I got to meet her she handed me the copy of this book which I think is fantastic but yeah this particular book speaks to me as a canadian because it takes place in the dead of winter as advertised and of course yo naspo's the night house super fun it is kind of twisty and I can see the twist throwing a lot of people off and some people may not have enjoyed it but yeah I enjoyed the night house very very much so looking at these 10 top reads of 2023 and seeing how they fit into the largest scheme of these 30 other better books out there yeah probably did I read them this year no I didn't so the 2023 list as we have it with a reread exquisite corpse by poppy z bright topping the list I mean who to guest I wouldn't have guessed it's like one of those things a reread you often forget you read them in the year not that I could ever forget reading exquisite corpse but it was the most enjoyable reread it had been so long and I had probably been stoned when I read it as a teen so it was like a whole fresh thing I don't think I really knew all the details of Jeffrey Dahmer's crimes when I read this I certainly had no idea of the other murderer from across the pond that it is based on so like I have a way better grounding of understanding I probably had just as many gay friends back then so I don't think that I have much more deeper understanding of the drive there maybe a lot more compassion as I've aged but you know that was always kind of there anyway but you know that the murder the serial murder the cannibalism within this book really speaks to me even more so as an adult maybe it just strikes me as a shade darker but yeah beautifully written wonderfully written book and always will be looking at these 10 books again I'm struck by just what a cool list of books I got to read throughout the year and I'm always struck by how many people read way way way way more than me and how they keep it straight and how they rank what their favorite books are if a lot of them even bother to rank them if they can even remember so you can check me out on good reads where I'll be tracking as usual the books that I read throughout the year I don't typically rate or review on good reads but I talk about the books here if there are books that you think I ought to be reading in 2024 definitely let me know in the comments below and if there's anything in this list that I didn't talk about enough for your liking let me know and I'll gladly offer a full review on the show of something that I maybe didn't talk enough about but thank you so much for watching and reading along in 2023 happy new year and happiest of 2024s hope your reading has started off on a great page and have an oaky spooky day


Happy after lunch session, I hope you can all stay awake if I'm entertaining enough for that. My name is Amber Bradshaw, I'm from Atlanta, Georgia. And just before I get into it, can everyone hear me okay? Is this good while you're working? Yes? Okay, thank you. So I'm from Atlanta, Georgia. I am the managing artistic director of Working Title Playwrights, which is a play incubator company in Atlanta. We do only new works, only process. We do not produce full production. So everything we do is going to be mostly playwrights that have produced, maybe have had productions, but this play in particular is not produced. So very early on in the process. And the moderation that we'll be discussing today is really based entirely on that. Although we have experienced really positive responses to this moderation structure with audiences that are not familiar with it. So I encourage you to be open about what you believe you could take from this depending on what you are using it for. I think it's very flexible. I tried to make it so because we are constantly updating it. So a little bit about Working Title Playwrights and what we do. We have about 105 member playwrights. We have an acting ensemble of 93. Our actors, we have several barter members, so our actors are also playwrights. They're very much a part of the feedback that we do. They're very much a part of the room. I would actually say that in addition to my other lists of basic successful moderation tools is engaging the actors if they consent to do so really completes the room in a lovely way. It gives the actors agency they don't often experience. So I encourage that. So in addition to Working Title being this new play development process it's given me a ground for practicing this structure and revising it and revising it again and getting a lot of feedback on it. And that's actually what I'm here today with you guys for is that this is an incredible room of intelligent dramaters and I hope that I can also learn from you guys and that you have something to offer me today. I know you do. So this isn't just a resource for you. It's also very much a resource for me. So thank you for attending. So what we're going to do today is we're going to go over together a handout that I have passed out which are our guidelines that we've created. It's a four page document. It's quite in depth. And I want to now take this opportunity to segue into introducing my associate development artist Rebecca Suella who is also here from Atlanta. And she's been a big part and a contributor to this document as well as the Working Title playwrights community, my board members and it's absolutely not something I could have done alone. So I have to acknowledge them. After we go over this guidelines and information for moderators we will do a selection from a 14 page selection from a playwright from Atlanta. Her name is Emily McClain. She just had an Ethel Wilson Live workshop with us. We'll be reading from her play Copper Angel and we'll be doing a feedback moderation session. I'll be moderating that one. And then the second selection is a little bit shorter. It's 11 pages. It's going to be a play called News from the Front by Theron Darson Patterson who is also a member and a dear friend who I've been working with a long time. Both of these selections I chose because they're quite different and I'm looking forward to the response to each of them and how that will play out in the room. And after we read through that script Rebecca will moderate that section and you guys will get a chance to see using these guidelines we've just gone over from two different moderator perspectives two different personalities because the really important part about moderation at least for me what I have learned is that flexibility is absolutely the most important part of being a moderator. You have to be able to make quick choices. You have to be brave enough to make those choices and you have to be open enough to know when to and not to engage depending on what's going on. So we'll talk a little bit more about that. So let me jump in. So we are at a website and I'll just let you guys know in case you'd like to look us up and see what we do. www.workingtitleplaywrights.com Pretty in-depth and please feel free to reach out to me if you have any questions or interested in resources and as far as these guidelines go if you are interested in using these guidelines or you would like to amend them somehow just cite us and let me know. I'm going to pass out a paper document to you if you'd like a digital copy please feel free to reach me and I would be happy to talk with you about that and discuss how you might want to use it. My email address is managing at www.workingtitleplaywrights.com So moderation is mostly improv. I could be lying if I said it was anything else. And the reason that it is improv is because we don't know who's going to walk into the audience that night. We don't know what mood they're going to be in. We don't know what part of the play they just saw or the script selection they just saw may have affected them. We don't know their back story. So there's really very little opportunity for a moderator to be in full control of anything and I would take away the idea that the moderator is in control. The moderator is really facilitating the energy in the room and making sure it moves and stays positive and stays constructive. So a lot of discussion we've had in the last few days has been well how do we moderate effectively mostly by being extremely transparent about the mission of the feedback and why we're all here. So that's how I started. You guys are all here to help me with this. Thank you so much. I'm here to be your resource. Everybody understands where they are and where they belong in the room and that makes people feel comfortable. It gives them an opportunity to say, okay, I know why I'm here and now I can be useful in this situation instead of nervous about speaking. So it actually really helps people get into a comfort zone. So I will say though no matter how much I moderate, I'm always updating my technique. I am always trying to see how I can be better and more generous as a moderator and a lot of that involves releasing power. A lot of it involves releasing power. One of those things is I don't necessarily get to be a part of the conversation. I know it's kind of sad. As dramaturgs, we all have opinions and we're really smart. We like to share them. But in this case, it's not about your opinion. It's really about engaging the response of the audience and allowing that to be something that the playwright can take as an active form of feedback. So there's a lot happening in the audience where people feel like the same thing is being commented on or maybe there are links in comments. That is a useful thing to potentially refrain or clarify so that the playwright has that as an observation. But as a moderator, you really kind of need to be someone outside of the conversation. Otherwise it becomes the amber show. And it's really important in power shifting that I can say, you know what? This isn't my show. This is the show. This is for the playwright. And if it's for community engagement, well then that's what it's for. It's not a showcase for the moderator. It is a place for the moderator to give what they have and to make this energy better. So the feedback is only useful if we're listening. So the goal of a successful moderation needs to be to give playwrights an environment that allows them to be brave and to listen actively. So this is a good segue into our next section. What are the basic tools for successful moderation? So I've gone through why are we here? I've gone through flexibility, transparency, and then opportunities to connect is also why we're here, right? So giving people an opportunity in the moderation structure to have chances to talk to one another. So can you break and encourage the audience to meet one another? Can you break during the comeback from the break and let everyone introduce themselves and say a little bit about what they do? This is a huge opportunity and as much as we can give artists the chance to connect with one another, we should. The environment of the moderation, what's the space like? Is it well-lit? Can people hear? Is the parking free? Is it a central location? These are all really important things. Is the temperature stable? Is there an air conditioning in the room? All of these things matter and should be taken into account when we're moderating. So this idea of sort of the feng shui of the space, it's very important. So, and then I wanted to throw a question out for you guys because my next, the next thing is after environment is equity and inclusion and brave space and I wanted to see if anybody in the audience would be interested in defining brave space. Anybody need takers? Because I can do it if there's no takers. Okay, great. So brave space is different than safe space. The idea is that if you're in a safe space, potentially you can feel like you don't need to speak because it makes you feel safer and you don't say something because it would be safer. And this idea that potentially a safe space might be coddling people that are unwilling to consider another option. And when I define brave space, I just want to say it's a very loose term. Everybody's going to define it slightly differently. But in fact, both of those. But brave space is really more about creating an environment that allows people to be open and to take risks and to say the things that are courageous and challenging. And so when we do that, we are being brave and it's brave space. So that's a lot of what we're trying to do with working title is give people that chance to say the hard things and say them in a way that can be heard by the playwright and by everyone in the space. So one of the things about moderation that is always hard is something that Rebecca and I call don't feed the trolls. So this is really all about how to stop, correct, or somehow re-wrap the damaging train, the derailer, the disruptor. And I would like to first say that disruption is not necessarily a bad thing in a feedback session. But the nature in which you are disrupting and the intent of the disruption is where the concern comes from, right? Is the disruption coming from a personal opinion that is actually voiced in a way that is not useful to the playwright and maybe the criticism is not constructive, it is in fact damaging. So let me give you an example. Somebody says, well, I didn't like why that character did that and I thought that was not possible or not plausible, right? Well, that's not very useful, right? There's a lot of questions you can ask. My question would be, why did that character do that? And that's it, that's the feedback to that, right? And that's useful, the player who knows the question and can go back to it and answer it for themselves. So really being aware and teaching your audience by doing and how to do that constructive criticism. So in some cases, Rebecca and I will both reframe statements. If we feel like they're somewhat unclear, we will say, did you mean to say or are you saying that reframe a statement in a way that is useful to the playwright? And sometimes that's using Stanislavski method, sometimes that's just pulling out whatever you want. Sometimes it's to create a specificity where there's sort of a macro statement because specificity is really important for rewrites and we need to be specific when we talk about plays and talk about the things that resonated with us, right? So a few of the examples of this, and I'll go through these quickly, are the derailer, the classic derailer who always has nothing positive to say. If you can get the derailer to give positive statements, then you have one, right? And it's doable and we've done it at working title, but it is a constant process of learning because what you don't want to do is argue with them. You do not want to argue with them. That is not helpful and it will make the situation worse, right? So if somebody says something and you're like, wow, okay, that's not useful. How do we work with that? Thank you so much and move on. I do an actual physical shift and I always stand when I moderate because sometimes sitting makes people feel like everyone's on equal footing and it can be that way. He did a beautiful job moderating yesterday and he sat and he stood, right? So I think that's an option as well, but generally if you want to be leading the audience, physicality can be useful, okay? Other people that are sort of classic in moderation derailer, I love everything. Everything was great. You guys are awesome, okay? Yes, we know those people. That's a good thing. Thank you so much. And then there's the chatterbox, you know, people that raise their hands too often and they may be brilliant, but they take up a lot of space and I actually asked Lucas Garcia, what would you do in this situation? He said I would acknowledge that I appreciate their feedback and that we're going to find space for other people who have not spoken in the room, right? So there's a very kind and generous way to actually hold people's hands through this because it is work that is hard to do and it's really important to be compassionate to your audience and to the people that are there sharing because they're there to make things better and they're there to contribute and that is extremely valuable. So the salty dog, the person who's interrupting you to remind you you forgot something or maybe you said the wrong thing and they wanted to correct you or they say something that like has nothing to do with what is going on in yourself. Okay, well thank you and we'll just keep moving and all those situations are a matter of really kind of affects the room, the way you respond to that. If you say oh well I don't agree with that let's say the moderator decides to challenge and say I don't agree with that then you're going to get a back and forth that I do not recommend to me, okay? Because also then the moderator becomes part of the discussion and that is a place where power gets really confusing. So again transparency and understanding where we all belong in the room is very valuable here. So I want to take this time to pass out the handout that I have on these golden rules. So as they pass them out I'll get started. So these guidelines have been something that I've been developing for quite a long time and have in the past year really clarified, revised and felt pretty strong about with a lot of Rebecca's help and feedback on this. So we start out with thank you for joining us as a moderator, okay? Remember that you are in charge and your energy leads the road, be empowered, be efficient, be upbeat. And this is key for moderating. If you're like, so you guys this is great, it's nice to see you tonight. Thank you. No, we need to be like, I'm going to just give a shout out to Michael on hot topics because that is exactly exactly the kind of moderating that I hope to see. It should be fun, you guys, it should be really fun. So I'm sorry to say I have a limited amount of documents but if you would like a copy, please let me know, I'd be happy to email you one. And maybe people could share the document as well.  How are you to train yourself in this space? Because that's really important to the power dynamic that we're discussing here. So let's go over the golden rules because the golden rules are here are actually, I'm not used to microphones, you guys. So okay, so the golden rules as it says here the goal for them is to create professional supportive and a creative environment for girls. These are the principles we found key in maintaining this atmosphere. So as hopefully we can see from here these are the golden rules and they are always displayed at our primary feedback events. So not some of the readings but most of our events, these are here. So at all times the audience can see the rules that they are being engaged in. If they forget what those are they can look at them and I've actually found this to be incredibly helpful for making the audience feel brave and clarify what it is that we are asking them for in the mission of this feedback. So here's how I introduce these. All right, so raise your hand to speak and I will call on you. Snap if you agree and we will see how many people in the room agree without repeating comments. It's very much more efficient. Be constructive, be courteous. The people that have submitted scripts tonight are courageous sensitive artists and in order for them to hear you we must be constructive. All right, so avoid using the words like and dislike. Like and dislike is extremely valuable but in this space what we want is your response and a lot of that is because your likes and dislikes may not actually be active and useful feedback for this playwright but the things that resonate for you and the things that distract you are extremely useful to the playwright. In addition to that occasionally I remind the audience that it is a very diverse group of people and not every play is written for everyone. So this idea that we all need to like everything we hear is misleading. So we need to stay open, that's the idea. So avoid suggestions on how to rewrite the play. Well this is a classic one. We all know this one. I would say it's still a hard one for people to understand but that's the kind of thing where you just need to call it out. Actually that's a suggested narrative. I'm going to stop you there and suggest that perhaps you change that into a question. Can you make that into a question please? And then be respectful to your fellow artists. This is similar to number three but we would just like to run it home. It is very important because it's not just about the playwright. It's about everyone in the room.  And so respect is absolutely imperative to this work. So next we talk about moderating the session and embodying and enforcing the principles of these goal rules. So this part is pretty important. We've covered some of it. Here's some good stuff. Okay so you're not a full participant and referee is a great word for it. So limiting the personal feedback and we did discuss that you can add personal feedback at the end of each section but just make sure it's at the end so that everybody has spoken their opinion before you have given yours. You don't want to influence the room. You're really trying to get an authentic response. So the second thing would be avoid reframing individual comments and this goes back to the idea of arguing with people that potentially derail. There can be a bit of a if you reframe an individual comment they potentially will say it again in a different way because they feel like it's not in their words and I think that's important that they do get to speak in their words. So if you are reframing make sure it's an overall statement of reframing unless it's damaging and you need to shift and not be in that moment, right? Let's see. So we talk about that in the back of each section. So then session schedule. So arrival prep and setup. So the moderators are asked to arrive at 6.45 so that they can kind of get ready. Every moderator has a production stage manager that helps them out with the room so they're not doing everything and they can really focus on casting and focusing on the playwrights and the scripts in front of them. And then the playwrights bring in the scripts and they remain not going to read the script as the moderator ahead of time but there is a form on each script that gives you breakdowns of cast to make it pretty easy for you and we will go through that once we get into the script selection. I'll hand out the form and you guys can look at the structure of that document. And then let's see. And then you distribute the scripts to the cast of actors that are there. You start the session, we usually start a little bit late when people are in the space so that there's not a lot of disruption. Make sure to welcome everyone, introduce yourself, and let everyone know exactly how the night is going to go. We will have four pieces. We'll read the first piece, take a moment to reflect and gather thoughts, then we will have a feedback session. After the second piece, we will take a 10 minute break. Then we will do introductions and plugs and then we'll go back to the last two pieces. We will have a little Monday night critique session is set up. And at the beginning of every single one, this is said. We have a lot of new people that come to these sessions so there's often somebody new in the space that needs to know what's about to happen. They've walked into a room of people they don't know. So putting them in a place of knowing means that they are much more comfortable in the space. So before each round of feedback, not each round, before the first round of feedback or right at the beginning, go over the golden rules, as I just did with you guys. And then in addition to the golden rules when we're doing new work moderation, it's really important to acknowledge that the playwright also has a responsibility to know that while we have all of this in place to protect and support you in your work, we want to remind you that no room is perfect and no feedback is going to be useful. It's up to you to filter and process what you hear tonight, use what works and take nothing personally. So there's also a part of this that says I challenged the playwright to come prepared and to learn for themselves what those self-care needs are in order for them to be able to listen. And they can also provide questions. So if they have pointed questions, we will ask those questions. So that's a really important factor. So, on we go to selections and moments of silence. So we talk a little bit about how to cast. We cast four to six actors for four different scripts. A little bit challenging. We're not always going to have it exactly right. If things need to be clarified, the moderator needs to say let me explain that this character this and so on. If ages are important, all of these things are important to hearing a script and giving feedback. If you don't know how old someone's supposed to be, that can be a really important factor. So consider the specific needs of the script as well. So I won't go through these specific raise your hand all that stuff. Let's see. So moderator questions are very based in Liz Lerman technique, but they're not really Liz Lerman. They're really just the ways that I found it most useful to to moderate. So the questions that we specifically use and have actually recently updated to pull out like and dislike are what stuck out to you, what resonated with you, what made you feel connected.  Where do you need more clarity? The third is what questions might you have of the playwright? The playwright will not answer these questions. This is really important. The playwright does not need to answer any questions and does not need to have that labor. Most of the time our playwrights are anonymous. So they're sitting in the room and everyone knows they're there, but they don't necessarily know who wrote the script. And this gives them an opportunity to not have as much pressure on them. And in addition to not asking them to do that, answering those questions as a labor, it's also really important to note that the questions are about what the audience has yet to know and that is very useful feedback for the playwright. If the audience has that question and the playwright already thought it was answered, then I would hope the playwright would potentially consider that maybe it is not already answered, right? And that's the goal of the questions. It is not to get answers. I get laughs every time I say that, but I could not be more truthful about the importance of that. And then go through the questions that the playwright has provided as long as you haven't already covered them. This is important that if this is something pointed for them, prioritize it. So when we're answering the questions we do have a lot of time of 35 minutes for each script and when I first started with working title in 2016, we had more playwrights on the docket each night, and I found that it just wasn't enough time to get through the feedback in a way that I thought was useful. So I cut it from 5 to 4 and I've had a really positive response. So I think the value of enough time is also really, really important. If somebody brings in a script that is 20 pages long their feedback session is going to be 5 minutes. So I ask that the script selections are 18 minutes or less. And people don't always adhere to this, but I would have to say that generally I think every feedback needs at least 10 to 15 minutes. I think it's really hard to get everything accomplished in less time than that. And then as far as the feedback time goes, that's another place to be flexible. If you're ahead of schedule let somebody have 40 minutes if you really feel like that's valuable to them. Being open to the idea of shifting and not being too put in any box is again the flexibility factor. Let's see. The plugs and introductions we discuss and then ending the evening, thank everyone for attending and then pay your actors and let everybody stay for a little while and chat. That's the time when the audience gets to tell the actor how great they were or the play rate how awesome that was or give feedback that was maybe there was a time for so those are really valuable moments in a moderation session. And then at the end of this we again reiterate that the role of the moderator is cultivating energy positive and useful development experience. So I can't say enough that that's really the key to this. So I've gone through my guidelines and I think I'd like to open it up if anybody has any questions. I wanted to make sure there were plenty of opportunities for people to ask questions as we continue through this. Yes, absolutely. So the play rate is never present with you for the conversation. Is that correct? Oh, they're always present. But I'm sorry, on stage with you. Only when we do not for Monday night critique sessions, when we do our other programs, like our reading programs, they are but they're usually with actors and dramaturgs and directors. And do you ever allow the play rate to ask the audience a question? Yes. And does that go over well? It's sometimes I think that that's a great question because I think it depends on the play rate. I think that if you have the experience with the play rate, which ideally if you've worked with them in a reading hopefully you do, as what kind of question would they be asking and would it be useful to them? But generally it's I think it's useful to trust the play rate in that situation. I do think sometimes it's also a good idea to discuss the questions that the play rate might want to ask before you go into feedback. One, you don't want to put them on the spot, which could make them very, very uncomfortable. And two, you also it would probably be smart for you as a moderator to know what those questions are going to be, right? Just for your own knowledge. And if the play rate feels really compelled to answer an audience question, do you go ahead and let them or do you shut that down? No. Not a lot. That's the place where I draw the line. Yes. Thanks for this. One of the things that I often ask people to resist is making comparisons. And I wonder if you have experience around that as well. I certainly know what I did, but I wonder whether you've considered that as one of the golden rules or I've had experiences of positive or less positive way around comparative comments. That's a great question. I would say that we don't deal terribly with comparisons and I think that's because we're dealing with playwrights who probably hate those already. I think that would probably happen more with a theater audience of people that go to the theater and I've definitely seen it happen. It's not something we've had to directly address, but if it came up I would probably discourage it. And I think instead of comparisons like qualities of the work it's far more useful. This whole idea of well you're kind of like Tony Kushner but you're kind of like da da da and sort of a myth. It's not very useful, right? It's not active. I usually remind people that comparisons usually say more about the person making a comparison than about the piece that they're listening to. It usually gently encourages people to reconsider it because you know what I mean. But I think it's awesome. Thank you. I'm just curious to clarify, so I'm here to thank you for joining us as a moderator. So the moderators for these discussions are not people that have been working on the play or with the playwright. They're not people from within the institution. Actually a lot of the time they are. Rebecca and I moderate the majority of the work that we do with feedback. We do have a couple of other moderators that I've hired that I'm actually in the process of getting together another training session so that we can go over the guidelines as I've corrected them. But if we're doing a reading, the moderator has worked on the script. In the case of MNCS, which is sort of how we base to this, we're doing four different scripts each night. So it's a little bit of a different process. Thank you. Sure. Anybody else? I just have a quick question. Forgive me if you've already sent this, but you do feedback immediately after the piece is read or at the end of the evening? We actually and I just realized I missed this part. We do feedback and then we do a moment of silence with Insight Timer Bell and then we jump into feedback. So it's once you do a script it's about 20 minute script you do feedback then you do another script you do feedback then you take a break and do the same thing at the end. Thank you. Yes, I forgot to mention the Timer, the Insight Timer. We use Insight Timer as an app and I actually got this idea from the LM Data Conference in 2017 and I believe I got it from Mian Tao who is an amazing moderator and she talked about how after listening to a script it's really useful for people to just have a moment to collect their thoughts so we take just one minute and we ask the audience to just sit still and don't move and you'll have a minute and after that minute is up a bell goes off and we jump up and we do our feedback. We've got a lot of really positive responses to it and to be honest working in the south I wasn't sure if people were going to think it was some silly California stuff you know what I mean? No, people talk to it really really nicely and very much enjoy it and all kind of use it for different reasons. So yes, sorry about forgetting that. Any other questions? And you can ask a question if there's something in the document you want to clarify as well because I went sort of slew through some of that stuff. Alright, great. Okay, cool. So now what we're going to do is we are going to read some scripts. Okay, so the first script as I said is Copper Angel by Emily McLean. Emily just had it at the Wilson Lab so she just did a big workshop and Rebecca directed it and she's love the cleric. She really likes doing history plays so this is sort of a history play and the next play is more of a sort of mystical or magical realism style. So, but before we go into that actually I forgot to have one more thing you asked me to do. I want to make sure. So now that we're going into the part of the workshop where we read script selections and do feedback I'd like to thank Hal around for covering the first half of this workshop and being amazing thank you so much Hal around. Yes, let's give them a round of applause because it's such an incredible resource. So at this time we are going to stop recording because these scripts are new plays in process and because it's important that this feedback space be brave as I said before in order to do that we need to have freedom to speak without.